Fwd: [asa] Re: Ages of the patriarchs

From: David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
Date: Thu Feb 22 2007 - 14:07:15 EST

This sounds similar to Hugh Ross' idea that the Vela supernova, which
occurred about 20kya, which he places as a possible date for the flood, has
bombarded the earth with radiation, resulting at least in part in decreased
life spans (see here:
http://www.reasons.org/resources/fff/2001issue05/index.shtml#long_life_spans).

I'm no biochemist, but this seems absurd to me. One would expect that a
dose of radiation from a supernova massive enough to cause some kind of
mutation that would reduce human life spans more than ten-fold would also
have similarly catastrophic effects on other organisms, particularly mammals
with biochemstry similar to ours. Were there populations of 900-year-old
gorillas and chimps before the Vela supernova too? And how is it that
the rest of the human genome apparently remained intact? And, given that
Ross rejects common descent, how did what must have been a harmful mutation
get passed along and become dominant in only a few generations? I'd guess
that it wouldn't be so simple as mutating a discrete "longevity" gene.
Given the various systems involved in the aging process, my non-biochemist
intution is that the difference between an average human lifespan of 70 and
700 would involve a massive biochemical makeover, not some discrete genetic
changes.

On 2/22/07, Iain Strachan <igd.strachan@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am currently dialoguing with some YECs who are trying to promote their
> views & one of them (who has a Phd in molecular biology!!) ventured that the
> increased UV from the sun after the flood was the cause of an increased
> mutation rate & even points to a supposed exponential decay in the
> patriarchal ages post-flood. When I asked if the idea of the increased UV
> was due to the vapour canopy (an idea now discredited even by YECs) I got no
> answer.
>
>
>
> Iain
>
>
>
> On 2/22/07, David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com > wrote:
> >
> > Dick -- but how do you account for those long ages? It simply isn't
> > possible for a human body to last that long. Most explanations I've seen
> > for how these can be literal lifespans -- from the YEC vapor canopy to Hugh
> > Ross' Vela supernova -- seem absolutely ridiculous to me. Do you propose
> > that it was a series of miracles relating only to particular patriarchs, or
> > did they have access to some sort of life-extending biotechnology that has
> > since been lost, ala John Walton's suggestion about residual effects of
> > eating from the Tree of Life (my avid science fiction fandom notes that
> > biotechnological longevity treatments have become a *scenes-a-faire *of
> > the genre)?
> >
> > In short: don't the length of these lifespans in themselves, apart from
> > any other explanations, suggest that the numbers must be fictional, symbolic
> > and/or reflective of some lost numbering system(s)?
> >
> >
> > On 2/22/07, Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Phil, you wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >>the book by Robert M. Best is _Noah's Ark and the Ziusudra Epic_ ,
> > > (Enlil Press: Ft. Meyers, Fla, 1999), available through Amazon. I've only
> > > read his chapter 7 "How Old Was Noah?," which goes through the numerics from
> > > the actual Shuruppak number system compared to the more common Mesopotamian
> > > number system.<<
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > What puzzles me about Best and Carol Ann Hill is that they both peg
> > > the flood at 2900 BC, which many others agree on as well, Davis Young, for
> > > example. Then Bob and Carol try to wrestle the patriarch's ages down to
> > > normal everyday life spans using different methods. But if they do that
> > > there is no way to cover the 900 years between the flood and Abraham at 2000
> > > BC which coincides with the destruction of the city of Ur. In short,
> > > the advertised ages in the Septuagint match pretty closely with the events
> > > and other characters in the ancient Near East. For example, Gilgamesh was
> > > the fifth post flood ruler at Uruk dated *circa* 2650 BC
> > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2650_BC>. Do you see how those dates
> > > line up nicely?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Now take the Masoretic text's ages for the patriarchs from the flood
> > > to Abraham at 292. Oops, now everything is out of whack. If Abraham's date
> > > is about right Gilgamesh lived before the flood! If the flood date is
> > > correct Abraham preceded Gilgamesh. This is only one small example why the
> > > MT is probably the odd one out. The SP puts 942 years between the flood and
> > > Abraham, and agrees in lockstep with the LXX on the ages of every patriarch
> > > but drops out Canaan which accounts for the difference.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > So anyone who derives a marvelous numbers matrix based upon the MT
> > > needs to reflect on that old IBM adage garbage in, garbage out.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Dick Fischer
> > >
> > > Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association
> > >
> > > Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
> > >
> > > www.genesisproclaimed.org
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> -----------
> After the game, the King and the pawn go back in the same box.
>
> - Italian Proverb
> -----------

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Feb 22 15:45:56 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Feb 22 2007 - 15:45:56 EST