Did Noah really live

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To 950 years old? Some animals do live hundreds of years - do you think humans lived that long in the past?

Yes. This was before processed meats & refined sugar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 950 years old? Some animals do live hundreds of years - do you think humans lived that long in the past?

Yes. This was before processed meats & refined sugar.

So thanks to MAHA, we will all live for hundreds of years again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is this even a thread?

Right -- who cares if he lived or not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is this even a thread?

Right -- who cares if he lived or not?

The same people who care whether Jesus lived or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 950 years old? Some animals do live hundreds of years - do you think humans lived that long in the past?

Yes. This was before processed meats & refined sugar.

You’ve got to be kidding. You think it makes more sense to believe that Noah lived to 950 because he didn’t eat processed foods than to believe the Bible isn’t literally true?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 950 years old? Some animals do live hundreds of years - do you think humans lived that long in the past?

Yes. This was before processed meats & refined sugar.

You’ve got to be kidding. You think it makes more sense to believe that Noah lived to 950 because he didn’t eat processed foods than to believe the Bible isn’t literally true?

Using the "logic" of believers, anything is possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 950 years old? Some animals do live hundreds of years - do you think humans lived that long in the past?

Yes. This was before processed meats & refined sugar.

You’ve got to be kidding. You think it makes more sense to believe that Noah lived to 950 because he didn’t eat processed foods than to believe the Bible isn’t literally true?

I think pp was kidding. I hope so. This was also before modern medicine, which keeps so many old people alive longer, these days - but not to 950 years!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 950 years old? Some animals do live hundreds of years - do you think humans lived that long in the past?

Yes. This was before processed meats & refined sugar.

You’ve got to be kidding. You think it makes more sense to believe that Noah lived to 950 because he didn’t eat processed foods than to believe the Bible isn’t literally true?

I think pp was kidding. I hope so. This was also before modern medicine, which keeps so many old people alive longer, these days - but not to 950 years!

The Bible said it happened, so it is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is this even a thread?

Right -- who cares if he lived or not?

Well, you see, I had to write a proposal but was on Twitter (X) instead and I came across a post about living longer. I told myself to get off X and work on the proposal. But when I closed X, the tab that up was not my proposal but was DCUM. At the top of Recent Posts was a post from the Religion folder. And that is how it became a thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 950 years old? Some animals do live hundreds of years - do you think humans lived that long in the past?

Yes. This was before processed meats & refined sugar.

You’ve got to be kidding. You think it makes more sense to believe that Noah lived to 950 because he didn’t eat processed foods than to believe the Bible isn’t literally true?

I think pp was kidding. I hope so. This was also before modern medicine, which keeps so many old people alive longer, these days - but not to 950 years!

The Bible said it happened, so it is true.

The above is either from a Bible believer or a low IQ person, or maybe someone mocking Bible believers and low IQ people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 950 years old? Some animals do live hundreds of years - do you think humans lived that long in the past?

Yes. This was before processed meats & refined sugar.

You’ve got to be kidding. You think it makes more sense to believe that Noah lived to 950 because he didn’t eat processed foods than to believe the Bible isn’t literally true?

I think pp was kidding. I hope so. This was also before modern medicine, which keeps so many old people alive longer, these days - but not to 950 years!

The Bible said it happened, so it is true.

The above is either from a Bible believer or a low IQ person, or maybe someone mocking Bible believers and low IQ people.

In the majority of cases, they are both low IQ and believers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To 950 years old? Some animals do live hundreds of years - do you think humans lived that long in the past?

Yes. This was before processed meats & refined sugar.

You’ve got to be kidding. You think it makes more sense to believe that Noah lived to 950 because he didn’t eat processed foods than to believe the Bible isn’t literally true?

I think pp was kidding. I hope so. This was also before modern medicine, which keeps so many old people alive longer, these days - but not to 950 years!

The Bible said it happened, so it is true.

+1 The Bible is innerant, meaning it is without error. To argue against it is to argue against God who is always truthful.

[Anonymous]

I went to Catholic school for k-12, and we were taught that a "year" was calculated differently by the people who wrote about Noah's age. "Year" did not mean the same thing then as it does today, to us.

That being said, I'm an agnostic who is 99% sure there is no God, but I still believe that yes, these myths have a basis in truth, in some way, especially because the flood story appears in many cultures. There was some person, at some time, who for whatever reasons drew enough attention to be spun into mythological status by those who repeated the tale over and over through generations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to Catholic school for k-12, and we were taught that a "year" was calculated differently by the people who wrote about Noah's age. "Year" did not mean the same thing then as it does today, to us.

That being said, I'm an agnostic who is 99% sure there is no God, but I still believe that yes, these myths have a basis in truth, in some way, especially because the flood story appears in many cultures. There was some person, at some time, who for whatever reasons drew enough attention to be spun into mythological status by those who repeated the tale over and over through generations.

And I say, so what "that these myths have a basis in truth"? There is still no God. When these myths were first started, we did't know anything about science. Now we do and still there are people who believe in these crazy myths. Why? because they are afraid to die.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In reality, the Noah story is very similar to other older myths from the ancient Middle East, so it’s likely that’s where it came from. Did those floods actually ever happen? Who knows?

Exactly. The Bible is not the only text that references the flood. It's not a real event, but no doubt a parable meant to teach the believers.

The flood was a real event--I know someone who dove in the Black Sea for a research team, and there's evidence on the Sea floor that the flood really happened.

As for Noah, as someone already said, they measured time differently back then. Sometimes by the seasons, but it really varied.

And PS, this was an entirely secular, strictly scientific, research group, in case some of you were wondering.

And their conclusion was the flood happened everywhere at the same time? My native country with over 5000 years of documented history has no such thing

So what? Why is that necessary for these stories that come down through oral tradition to be useful as entertainiment or teaching tools? Why this obsession with archeological "proof" of every story?