Jerusalem pre flood remains

[dad]

Then it is not a very good description of people's lives being cut short.

Why compare Paul or some no Moses psalm to the time in the wilderness, where God was dealing with His people? The percections are another story. Apples and oranges.



[/quote]But we have only your claim that it is specifically referring to Sinai.[/quote]
Not if one thinks about it. See, Moses never left the wilderness alive, so his "our" had to be that. Elementary.

70 or 80 does not fit, The youngest to die in Sinai, the ones who were 20 at the census lived only to 60 years old,

They don't count! They are not in that number of the day, when the saints came marching by to be numbered.

the oldest reached at least 123. We find out who Moses is talking about in the first verse: Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations. When Moses uses the first person plural 'our' it refer to all generations.

No, because the "our" he talks of have all their days in wrath. Adam befoire the curse had no wrath, and Christians of many generations have never been appointed to wrath. So, God has been our place of refuge always, yes, but the group later spoken of as "our" cannot have been any other than the group with Moses.

There was a whole new generation growing up in the wilderness, all those under 20 at the time of the census and all the children born in the wilderness that Moses was teaching and preparing for the promised land, and Moses was teaching them that they might teach their children.

Doesn't matter, no one says they were not alive, they just didn't count in the count that was counted as it was. The numbers are in, and the under 20 are out.

70 or 80 does not describe a range from less than 60 to 120.

If the under 20 crowd is not included, then all that were in that number were over 20. If the count was soon after they left, that means that we are talking older folks here. If an older guy, was, say 30 at the time of the exodus, then we add 40, and we get 70! Some were older, so we add another 10 years and get 80! On average, that was a good general number to use for the group that was numbered! It was not meant to be some law or commandment, simply an observation, in general poetic terms, about a certain group at a certain time.

Moses, his father and grandfather show us the natural lifespan at that time if the ages are literal. ''Our'' included Moses who died at 120 and any Israelite 80 year and older at the time of the Exodus who could have lived out their natural days in the wilderness and reached the normal 120. 70 year olds could have lived to 110, 60 year olds could have lived to 100, and 50 year olds made it to 90, all well above the Psalm's 70 or 80. Even a 45 year old could make it to 85.

No. Moses used the our for the people, it didn't mean it applied to him. If he was on the mount, and God said the group was to be judged, Moses could say something like 'have mercy on us' That did not mean Moses set up the calf!!! Context.

 

[Assyrian]

Why compare Paul or some no Moses psalm to the time in the wilderness, where God was dealing with His people?

I thought I answered this? I was comparing it to your Marines analogy. Of course it is alright for you to compare your uncle Jack or the US Marines to psalm 90 even though God was not dealing with the marines, or your uncle Jack as far as I know.

The percections are another story. Apples and oranges.

percections?

the oldest reached at least 123. We find out who Moses is talking about in the first verse: Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations. When Moses uses the first person plural 'our' it refer to all generations.

Not if one thinks about it. See, Moses never left the wilderness alive, so his "our" had to be that. Elementary.

Moses died in the wilderness at 120, his ''our'' still does not fit the '70 years or 80'. You completely avoid dealing with any of my points about who the 'our' is i the context as well as all the contradictions between the 70 or 80 and the wilderness.

You have also completely avoided tackling the question of why Moses says 'or by reason of strength 80', though I have brought it up three times already. Being killed in the wilderness of earthquake, fire, snakebite or plague is not a situation where you can extend you lifespan by ten years if you have a strong constitution. The only reason to describe a life span of '70 or if you are stong 80' is if this is describing the normal lifespan when a strong healthy constitution can give you an extra 10 years life expectancy.

70 or 80 does not fit, The youngest to die in Sinai, the ones who were 20 at the census lived only to 60 years old,

They don't count! They are not in that number of the day, when the saints came marching by to be numbered.

The 20 year olds were counted in the census. And just because Moses did not count the number of Israelites under 20 in the census of men fit for military service, does not man 'they don't count'. It was the people under 20 who entered the promised land, of course they count.

the oldest reached at least 123. We find out who Moses is talking about in the first verse: Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations. When Moses uses the first person plural 'our' it refer to all generations.

No, because the "our" he talks of have all their days in wrath. Adam befoire the curse had no wrath, and Christians of many generations have never been appointed to wrath. So, God has been our place of refuge always, yes, but the group later spoken of as "our" cannot have been any other than the group with Moses.

So that just leaves the 'all generations' from Adam's sin to the crucifixion. A bit broader than just the Israelites who died in the wilderness and it includes all the generations before the flood who are said to have lived for around 900 years.

Again you never answered my point about wrath when you brought this up before, just snipped the whole section out. And as usual, not being able to to defend your argument doesn't stop you repeating the claim. Incidentally the context of God's wrath in the psalm, as I mentioned before, was returning the children of Adam to the dust v3. You mentioned before how the 70 or 80 refers to labour or toil, Psalm 90:10 The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty; yet their span is but toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away. Not only does this not fit the wilderness after they had been freed from salvery, it is also a very Adamic curse. Gen 3:17 And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. 19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."

Doesn't matter, no one says they were not alive, they just didn't count in the count that was counted as it was. The numbers are in, and the under 20 are out.

For the military census in Numbers 14 and for the curse to die in the wilderness. Doesn't mean Moses wasn't speaking to them about their shared humanity, doesn't mean he did not give them a Psalm to pass on to their children. You know, unlike the Israelites who rebelled at Kadesh Barnea and had their lives cut short in the wilderness, Moses, Joshua, Caleb and the under 20s were all able to live out full 120 year lifespans.

70 or 80 does not describe a range from less than 60 to 120.

If the under 20 crowd is not included, then all that were in that number were over 20. If the count was soon after they left, that means that we are talking older folks here. If an older guy, was, say 30 at the time of the exodus, then we add 40, and we get 70! Some were older, so we add another 10 years and get 80! On average, that was a good general number to use for the group that was numbered! It was not meant to be some law or commandment, simply an observation, in general poetic terms, about a certain group at a certain time.

Averages are meaningless when you have such a wide range of life expectancies. The 70 or 80 describes the lifespan of very few of the Israelites, in fact only those aged 40 at the Exodus had a life span of 70 to 80 years and the only time they had this life expectancy was after they spent 30 years in the wilderness. It is interesting you try to play with the numbers here, but neglect to deal with the much more detailed analysis I gave in the next section.

Dad: If an older guy, was, say 30 at the time of the exodus, then we add 40, and we get 70! Some were older, so we add another 10 years and get 80!
​

So 30 years old could live to 70(!) and 40 year old could live to 80(!) But you ignore the age range at the census which ran from 20 to 120. Those under 30 could never make it even to seventy, while anyone over 40 could live past 80. Anyone over 80 at the time of the census had already made it past Moses' upper limit. This includes Moses. Of the wide span of ages of Isrealites from 20 years old to 120, only the small group between 30 and 40 fit your interpretation, and only the 40 year olds could make it to 80 by reason of strength. Hardly a good basis for your average.

Moses, his father and grandfather show us the natural lifespan at that time if the ages are literal. ''Our'' included Moses who died at 120 and any Israelite 80 year and older at the time of the Exodus who could have lived out their natural days in the wilderness and reached the normal 120. 70 year olds could have lived to 110, 60 year olds could have lived to 100, and 50 year olds made it to 90, all well above the Psalm's 70 or 80. Even a 45 year old could make it to 85.

(snipped...)On the other hand, the 20 year olds died in the wilderness between age 20 and 60 and you had to be 30 at the time of the census to be able to make it to Moses' 70. But Moses says 70 or by reason of strength 80, to live that long you had to be at least 40.

So basically your interpretation of ''our'' is narrowed down to Israelites who left Egypt when they were about 40 years old. And Moses who lived to 120.

No. Moses used the our for the people, it didn't mean it applied to him. If he was on the mount, and God said the group was to be judged, Moses could say something like 'have mercy on us' That did not mean Moses set up the calf!!! Context.

It is of course quite biblical to identify yourself with those who have sinned. It is after all what Jesus did for us. But you are talking about Moses identifying himself with people's ages. I don't know any biblical basis for that. But Moses who live a normal lifespan of 120 identifying himself with a lifespan of 70 to 80, is a metaphor. Your argument against metphorical lifespans in the bible is a metaphorical lifespan, and a very badly fitting metaphor when very few of the Israelites had a life expectancy of 70-80.

 

[dad]

Moses died in the wilderness at 120, his ''our'' still does not fit the '70 years or 80'. You completely avoid dealing with any of my points about who the 'our' is i the context as well as all the contradictions between the 70 or 80 and the wilderness.

Most were not as old as Moses, I would gather. Maybe slaves lived less on average, regardless of their normal life expectancy. Like in WW2 I hear that the life expectancy of a gunner in a Lancaster plane was only minutes. They had to get new ones in the glass bubble thing, and pull the dead one out in a battle. Point being, that the hard life of slaves easily reduces the age average. Especially when they got older, I doubt they put them out to pasture, with food, and a retirement suite. Moses if you recall, was not a slave! Again you compare apples to oranges. It is very realistic that, if we don't count the under 20 crowd, the average age of those in the exodus from Egypt was 30 or some such number.

However, in agreement with the bible, is the average Egyptian life span.


"
And yet, one hundred-and-ten years seems to be the ideal Egyptian life-span. There are 27 places in documents where this figure crops up, and it had its widest acceptance during the 19th and 20th Dynasties. King Pepi II of the 6th Dynasty certainly came close, since we know of events that took place in the 94th year of his reign. Ptahhotep, who was vizier to King Djedkare Isesi of the 5th Dynasty, and two others individuals, are reputed to have lived to that age as well. An Old Kingdom nomarch during the reign of Pepi II was named Pepiankh. He is referred to as Neferka in his tomb, where the following text is found:
I spent a lifetime until a hundred years among the living, in possession of my faculties.


Old Age in Ancient Egypt

"The age-sex structure of slaves in Harris County, Texas is investigated using the 1850 and 1860 slave schedules. Median ages for black and mulatto slaves suggest that the population was young. Population pyramids exhibit a narrow base and top with a broad middle. The high proportion of slaves between 10 and 30 years of age"
Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies


"In 1799, for example, the average age of a slave on the four working farms was 20.94 years. Only a little over 8% of the people were 60 years old or more, while 58.45% were under the age of 19. Fully 34.7% of the total population of the outlying farms were younger than 9"

http://www.mountvernon.org/pdf/The Lives of Enslaved Workers.pdf


That proves that slave life was less. Now, in the hot desert of ancient Egypt, under the kind of conditions described for Hebrews in particular, we can assume a young average with certainty. No need to rely just on a bible interpretation of a lone verse! Although my interpretation happens to agree with history, and the bible as well here, unlike yours.

You have also completely avoided tackling the question of why Moses says 'or by reason of strength 80', though I have brought it up three times already. ...

If a SLAVE, as these people were, except Moses, lived 80 years, you bet great strength was involved. If a slave left Egypt at 50 years old, and made it 30 years in the wilderness of sin, you bet they were tough. We are not talking normal condition, or people here! The certain group of which Moses includes himself (yet he was not a slave, nor had sinned as the rebels, and likely was older than most slaves when he led them out, because he lived a more pastoral life). Now, consider it answered.

The 20 year olds were counted in the census. And just because Moses did not count the number of Israelites under 20 in the census of men fit for military service, does not man 'they don't count'. It was the people under 20 who entered the promised land, of course they count.

Well, if Moses numbered them a certain way, I have to feel that he regarded that way as something real. But, as just demonstrated, the slave life can dampen the average more than enough, so, there is no need to quivel over additional factors!

So that just leaves the 'all generations' from Adam's sin to the crucifixion. A bit broader than just the Israelites who died in the wilderness and it includes all the generations before the flood who are said to have lived for around 900 years.

If we are talking about God's mercy, it is to all generations, including future ones. If we are talking about the days of the "our" group, that is another matter. By the way, Adam was not here 'before the mountains'! Neither was any other generation.

Again you never answered my point about wrath when you brought this up before, just snipped the whole section out. And as usual, not being able to to defend your argument doesn't stop you repeating the claim.

Your posts are so long I sometimes miss some things, because I need to send off the reply. Some people can't sit around all day.

9 For all our days are passed away in thy wrath: we spend our years as a tale that is told.

This is not true of us. Nor of most people in history. It is true of the wilderness of sin, especially some of the time, possibly when this was written.

Incidentally the context of God's wrath in the psalm, as I mentioned before, was returning the children of Adam to the dust v3.

Not at all is that possible. All our days are not spent in wrath. Our bodies turn to dust after death, if you notice.

Also, some feel it actually is the reverse of what you claim.


"Literally, Thou shalt turn dying man, enosh, to the small dust, dacca but thou wilt say, Return, ye children of Adam. This appears to be a clear and strong promise of the resurrection of the human body, after it has long slept, mingled with the dust of the earth. "
Psalm - Chapter 90 - Adam Clarke Commentary on StudyLight.org

You mentioned before how the 70 or 80 refers to labour or toil, Psalm 90:10 The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty; yet their span is but toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away. Not only does this not fit the wilderness after they had been freed from salvery, it is also a very Adamic curse...

The 'our' were freed from being slaves. But the slavery and toil, as we could put it, did take it's toll.


In fact, looking at the last part of the verse, it almost looks like they were still in slavery, waiting to be delivered, rather than already having seen the mighty hand of God deliver them? Apparently there is a natural division in the chapter around there. Could this be like Gen 2, and looking back to Egypt?

12 So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom. 13 Return, O LORD, how long? and let it repent thee concerning thy servants. 14 O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days. 15 Make us glad according to the days wherein thou hast afflicted us, and the years wherein we have seen evil. 16 Let thy work appear unto thy servants, and thy glory unto their children.

By the time they left Egypt He HAD appeared and delivered! They HAD seen His glory. I mean this makes little sense, camping in the desert, looking at the pillar of fire, with all the gold of Egypt they wanted, and manna from heaven..! God afflicted them with slavery to Egypt for a certain time.


22 And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said, Lord, wherefore hast thou so evil entreated this people? why is it that thou hast sent me? 23 For since I came to Pharaoh to speak in thy name, he hath done evil to this people; neither hast thou delivered thy people at all.

I do not think that they saw evil in the desert? I mean they were evil, and did evil, but God had shown mercy, and delivered them by then.

...You know, unlike the Israelites who rebelled at Kadesh Barnea and had their lives cut short in the wilderness, Moses, Joshua, Caleb and the under 20s were all able to live out full 120 year lifespans.

But the point is some did have their lives cut short. For example, the slaves had a lesser lifespan. Those that obeyed, of course would not have that problem after being delivered. Either way we look at it, the shorter than usual lifespans for either the slaves in Egypt, or the former slaves in the desert, not allowed to enter the promised land, are quite expected.

Averages are meaningless when you have such a wide range of life expectancies. The 70 or 80 describes the lifespan of very few of the Israelites, in fact only those aged 40 at the Exodus had a life span of 70 to 80 years and the only time they had this life expectancy was after they spent 30 years in the wilderness. It is interesting you try to play with the numbers here, but neglect to deal with the much more detailed analysis I gave in the next section.

No, they are not meaningless. They are meaningful to include in a psalm, or a song, or poem. Part of a sad package. It was of note that the life spans were as generalized. Why? Because it was not normal, or why would it be part of a lament?



"Verses 1-6 It is supposed that this psalm refers to the sentence passed on Israel in the wilderness, ."
Psalm - Chapter 90 - Matthew Henry Concise Commentary on StudyLight.org


So, if this was written within a year or 2 of the exodus, we are talking slave life spans! That is all they were. That makes a lot of sense.


So, I think that the slave life span there actually, for Hebrews, was 70. The average life span was more like 110 for people in general. That solves the mystery.

It is of course quite biblical to identify yourself with those who have sinned. It is after all what Jesus did for us. But you are talking about Moses identifying himself with people's ages. I don't know any biblical basis for that.

He identified himself with the people, that is confirmed in several instances. And, in all, or most, Moses was an exception. He was not a slave, he was not a great sinning rebel, and idol worshiper, etc.

Therefore, Moses, who identified himself with the slaves, very soon after they left, or sometime before, perhaps, we don't really know....would include himself when referring to his people. One thing we can say for tough old Mo, was that he really considered himself part of his people.

That's a win.


Now, Jerusalem happens to be where God was leading them. How topical! It also likely was where the garden was, the sacrifice of Abraham was, and the sacrifice of Christ was. In summary, some have agreed, and no one has anything to say against it. The thread has come to the end of it's logical conclusion. As an added bonus, we solved the old age mystery of Ps 90.


Piece o cake.

 

[Assyrian]

Moses died in the wilderness at 120, his ''our'' still does not fit the '70 years or 80'. You completely avoid dealing with any of my points about who the 'our' is in the context as well as all the contradictions between the 70 or 80 and the wilderness.

Most were not as old as Moses, I would gather. Maybe slaves lived less on average, regardless of their normal life expectancy. Like in WW2 I hear that the life expectancy of a gunner in a Lancaster plane was only minutes. They had to get new ones in the glass bubble thing, and pull the dead one out in a battle. Point being, that the hard life of slaves easily reduces the age average. Especially when they got older, I doubt they put them out to pasture, with food, and a retirement suite. Moses if you recall, was not a slave! Again you compare apples to oranges. It is very realistic that, if we don't count the under 20 crowd, the average age of those in the exodus from Egypt was 30 or some such number.

Your analogy with WW2 rear gunners is funny it would certainly reduce their life expectancy if the Egyptians were shooting at the Hebrew slaves! Oddly enough the link you post in the next section shows a very different picture to the one you imagine about slavery and old age in Egypt. Old people were respected and provided for. Add to that, it was Israelite foremen who were responsible for quotas and it would have been their decision to send the old folk into the brick fields which I find unlikely. In contrast with your presumptions about life expectancy, the bible shows a very different picture, if the ages are literal anyway. Moses' father Amram was a slave but lived to 137, Aaron was a slave for the first 83 years of his life, and lived to 123, not your your presumed life expectancy of 30. Miriam was about 85 at the time of the Exodus and live to about 125. Remember how Moses and Aaron at 80 and 85 gathered the elders of Israel before going to see Pharaoh? Look who Moses told Pharaoh would be going out of Egypt Exodus 10:9 Moses said, "We will go with our young and our old. We will go with our sons and daughters and with our flocks and herds, for we must hold a feast to the LORD."The word means aged or ancient. Numbers 4:2&3 and 8:24-26 assigned the Levites over 50 years old with guard duty This was before Kadesh Barnea. We have over 50s, people over 80s, and then we have the really old ones, all leaving Egypt in the Exodus. Joshua lived to 110, Caleb was a slave for 40 years and lead Israel after Joshua died at 110.

You are still completely ignoring my points.

However, in agreement with the bible, is the average Egyptian life span.

"And yet, one hundred-and-ten years seems to be the ideal Egyptian life-span. There are 27 places in documents where this figure crops up, and it had its widest acceptance during the 19th and 20th Dynasties. King Pepi II of the 6th Dynasty certainly came close, since we know of events that took place in the 94th year of his reign. Ptahhotep, who was vizier to King Djedkare Isesi of the 5th Dynasty, and two others individuals, are reputed to have lived to that age as well. An Old Kingdom nomarch during the reign of Pepi II was named Pepiankh. He is referred to as Neferka in his tomb, where the following text is found:
I spent a lifetime until a hundred years among the living, in possession of my faculties.
Old Age in Ancient Egypt

Actually, what your link tells us is that Pharaohs and important men were described as living to 110 back in the 5th and 6th dynasty when the Sumerian and biblical genealogies ascribed multi-century lifespans. They all agree in exaggerating the life spans but they differ widely in how much the lifespan should be exaggerated. It is interesting that Joseph would be ascribed the Egyptian lifespan of 110, though the Israelite norm was 130.

"The age-sex structure of slaves in Harris County, Texas is investigated using the 1850 and 1860 slave schedules. Median ages for black and mulatto slaves suggest that the population was young. Population pyramids exhibit a narrow base and top with a broad middle. The high proportion of slaves between 10 and 30 years of age"
Wiley InterScience :: Session Cookies
"In 1799, for example, the average age of a slave on the four working farms was 20.94 years. Only a little over 8% of the people were 60 years old or more, while 58.45% were under the age of 19. Fully 34.7% of the total population of the outlying farms were younger than 9"
http://www.mountvernon.org/pdf/The Lives of Enslaved Workers.pdf
That proves that slave life was less. Now, in the hot desert of ancient Egypt, under the kind of conditions described for Hebrews in particular, we can assume a young average with certainty. No need to rely just on a bible interpretation of a lone verse! Although my interpretation happens to agree with history, and the bible as well here, unlike yours.

According to you statistics, the majority, almost 60%, were under 20 so most of the people Moses was speaking to would have crossed into Canaan and lived out their full 110 or 120 years. Of the rest, those in their 20s who would have formed the largest group, could only have lived into their 60s, not 70 which Moses gives as a lower limit for normal old age. Those in their 30s could have live into their 70s, but not '80 if they were strong', no matter how strong they were. Only the ones in their 40s could fit Moses description of 70 years or 80 if they are strong. Whereas everyone from 50 up are into life expectancies of 90s and for the older Israelites life expectancies extend into 120s.

But as I said before averages are meaningless when there is a such a range of life expectancies, especially when such a small proportion actually had the life expectancy Moses describes as normal experience. Moses reference to '80 if they are strong' make absolutely no sense with such a wide range of life expectancies, when the deciding factor for your upper age limit is not how healthy you are, but how old you were at Kadesh Barnea, and not being bitten by snakes.

You never deal with this.

You have also completely avoided tackling the question of why Moses says 'or by reason of strength 80', though I have brought it up three times already. ...

If a SLAVE, as these people were, except Moses, lived 80 years, you bet great strength was involved. If a slave left Egypt at 50 years old, and made it 30 years in the wilderness of sin, you bet they were tough. We are not talking normal condition, or people here! The certain group of which Moses includes himself (yet he was not a slave, nor had sinned as the rebels, and likely was older than most slaves when he led them out, because he lived a more pastoral life). Now, consider it answered.

I am sure most of them were tough. But for Moses statement to make sense it has to give a meaningful comparison, why pick out 50 year olds out of the wide range of ages? Why say that a 50 year old could make it to 80 if he is strong, when stronger 50 years olds could make it to 90? Why suggest a 50 year old was being really strong to make it to 80, when a strong 60 year old could make it 100 and you had 80 year olds and over living to 120. Your 50 year old who makes it only as far as 80 is only living 2/3 of his natural life span. Not anything to make a song and dance over.

Well, if Moses numbered them a certain way, I have to feel that he regarded that way as something real.

For military service sure, but not for teaching about God our refuge in all generations.


xxx

But, as just demonstrated, the slave life can dampen the average more than enough, so, there is no need to quivel over additional factors!

There is plenty to quibble about if the statement makes no sense in the context you try to force it into. Incidentally, if slave life dampened their life expectancy, then you can hardly describe as living long by reason of strength. Especially compared to the full lives we see lived out by people in their 80s.

If we are talking about God's mercy, it is to all generations, including future ones. If we are talking about the days of the "our" group, that is another matter. By the way, Adam was not here 'before the mountains'! Neither was any other generation.

Psalm 90:1 A Prayer of Moses, the man of God. Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations.
2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
The first verse is talking in the past tense, you have been our dwelling place, all generations refers to all generations in the past. This is of course limited to generations that actually existed. Saying there were no generations before the mountains is irrelevant. Anyway in verse 2 Moses is saying God was there before the mountains. All generations found refuge in a God who existed long before there were generations or mountains.

To be continued...

 

[Assyrian]

Continued...

Again you never answered my point about wrath when you brought this up before, just snipped the whole section out. And as usual, not being able to to defend your argument doesn't stop you repeating the claim.

Your posts are so long I sometimes miss some things, because I need to send off the reply. Some people can't sit around all day.

I don't have a problem with people not being able to answer everything in a long post, that is par for the course in internet debates. But you avoid addressing the point, even when you quote the post.

9 For all our days are passed away in thy wrath: we spend our years as a tale that is told.

This is not true of us. Nor of most people in history. It is true of the wilderness of sin, especially some of the time, possibly when this was written.

Not at all is that possible. All our days are not spent in wrath. Our bodies turn to dust after death, if you notice.

So Genesis 3 is Just talking about what happens after we die?

Gen 3:17 And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."
We don't just turn to dust when we die. This is a sentence that is hanging over us all the days of our lives, we are mortal perishable flesh on our way back to dust.

Also, some feel it actually is the reverse of what you claim.

"Literally, Thou shalt turn dying man, enosh, to the small dust, dacca but thou wilt say, Return, ye children of Adam. This appears to be a clear and strong promise of the resurrection of the human body, after it has long slept, mingled with the dust of the earth. "
Psalm - Chapter 90 - Adam Clarke Commentary on StudyLight.org

A dubious interpretation. The word 'return' is the same Hebrew word used in the first part of the verse for returning to dust, and is the same word used twice in the Genesis passage Moses is referring to.
Psalm 90:3 You return man to dust and say, "Return, O children of man!"
Gen 3:19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."
Moses is expressing God's command that returns us to dust.

But even if there was the promise of resurrection, that is in the future and we still living under the judgement of Genesis 3, living a life of toil until we return to the dust.

The 'our' were freed from being slaves. But the slavery and toil, as we could put it, did take it's toll.

Moses didn't say slavery and toil would take it's toll on their lifespans, but that their span is but toil and trouble. Great as a general description of humanity under Adam's curse, but it simply doesn't fit people whose most distinguishing characteristic was being set free after spending the first part of their life span in slavery.

In fact, looking at the last part of the verse, it almost looks like they were still in slavery, waiting to be delivered, rather than already having seen the mighty hand of God deliver them? Apparently there is a natural division in the chapter around there. Could this be like Gen 2, and looking back to Egypt?

12 So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom. 13 Return, O LORD, how long? and let it repent thee concerning thy servants. 14 O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days. 15 Make us glad according to the days wherein thou hast afflicted us, and the years wherein we have seen evil. 16 Let thy work appear unto thy servants, and thy glory unto their children.

By the time they left Egypt He HAD appeared and delivered! They HAD seen His glory. I mean this makes little sense, camping in the desert, looking at the pillar of fire, with all the gold of Egypt they wanted, and manna from heaven..! God afflicted them with slavery to Egypt for a certain time.


22 And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said, Lord, wherefore hast thou so evil entreated this people? why is it that thou hast sent me? 23 For since I came to Pharaoh to speak in thy name, he hath done evil to this people; neither hast thou delivered thy people at all.

I do not think that they saw evil in the desert? I mean they were evil, and did evil, but God had shown mercy, and delivered them by then.

The bible certainly describes God afflicting the Israelites in the wilderness, and describes their behaviour as evil. Remember Psalm 90:15 only describes God as afflicting them, and the years of evil are what they have experienced. But it certainly would fit a psalm written before the Exodus. The problem there is no one had rebelled at Kadesh yet and they had not been condemned to die during the 40 years in the wilderness.

But the point is some did have their lives cut short. For example, the slaves had a lesser lifespan. Those that obeyed, of course would not have that problem after being delivered. Either way we look at it, the shorter than usual lifespans for either the slaves in Egypt, or the former slaves in the desert, not allowed to enter the promised land, are quite expected.

Having you life cut short by earthquake, plague or snakes does not fit the description of being able to live an extra ten years if you are strong, while if we are talking about lives cut short by the rigours of slavery, Moses' father's life wasn't, he lived to 137. Aaron and Miriam were still going strong in their 80's and had another 40 year or more in them, and they weren't even the old ones. Joshua lived to 110 and Caleb outlived him though he had been a slave 40 years. Moses description of being able to live to 70 or if they are strong 80, does not fit the Israelites in Egypt if the ages given are literal.

No, they are not meaningless. They are meaningful to include in a psalm, or a song, or poem. Part of a sad package. It was of note that the life spans were as generalized. Why? Because it was not normal, or why would it be part of a lament?

You cannot generalise a range of lifespans that run from 20 to 120 where very few had that range you claim as an average, especially if you talk of people living to 70 or 80 if they are strong, when the maximum age they could live to depended on how old they were leaving Egypt and not getting bitten by snakes. Being poetic still means the description should be relevant. Why a lament? Because toil and mortality are part of the curse.

"Verses 1-6 It is supposed that this psalm refers to the sentence passed on Israel in the wilderness, ."
Psalm - Chapter 90 - Matthew Henry Concise Commentary on StudyLight.org

Supposed. But we have seen this fits neither the context of the psalm drawing on Genesis, the lifespans described if biblical longevity is literal, or the Israelites being freed from toil rather than it filling their lifespan.

So, if this was written within a year or 2 of the exodus, we are talking slave life spans! That is all they were. That makes a lot of sense.

Slaves like Miriam and Aaron or even the old people?

So, I think that the slave life span there actually, for Hebrews, was 70. The average life span was more like 110 for people in general. That solves the mystery.

Apart from the mystery of completely failing to fit Moses description of 70 or 80 years or the lifespan of every Israelite we know of from that time.

It is of course quite biblical to identify yourself with those who have sinned. It is after all what Jesus did for us. But you are talking about Moses identifying himself with people's ages. I don't know any biblical basis for that.

He identified himself with the people, that is confirmed in several instances. And, in all, or most, Moses was an exception. He was not a slave, he was not a great sinning rebel, and idol worshiper, etc.

Therefore, Moses, who identified himself with the slaves, very soon after they left, or sometime before, perhaps, we don't really know....would include himself when referring to his people. One thing we can say for tough old Mo, was that he really considered himself part of his people.

That's a win.

In the sense of all completely failing to deal with the point. Identifying with sin if one thing, and quite biblical, identifying with people's age is not. And you conveniently snipped out the bit about identifying yourself with people's age being a metaphor.

Now, Jerusalem happens to be where God was leading them. How topical! It also likely was where the garden was, the sacrifice of Abraham was, and the sacrifice of Christ was. In summary, some have agreed, and no one has anything to say against it. The thread has come to the end of it's logical conclusion. As an added bonus, we solved the old age mystery of Ps 90.

Yes, the ages in the genealogies aren't meant literally.

Piece o cake.

Yes please, I'll have a slice of gingerbread.

 

[dad]

Your analogy with WW2 rear gunners is funny it would certainly reduce their life expectancy if the Egyptians were shooting at the Hebrew slaves! Oddly enough the link you post in the next section shows a very different picture to the one you imagine about slavery and old age in Egypt. Old people were respected and provided for. Add to that, it was Israelite foremen who were responsible for quotas and it would have been their decision to send the old folk into the brick fields which I find unlikely.

Never mind what is likely, what do you know? Have you any facts of history to bring to bear? Can you demonstrate some retirement plan for Hebrew slaves in Egypt?

In contrast with your presumptions about life expectancy, the bible shows a very different picture, if the ages are literal anyway. Moses' father Amram was a slave but lived to 137, Aaron was a slave for the first 83 years of his life, and lived to 123, not your your presumed life expectancy of 30. Miriam was about 85 at the time of the Exodus and live to about 125. Remember how Moses and Aaron at 80 and 85 gathered the elders of Israel before going to see Pharaoh? Look who Moses told Pharaoh would be going out of Egypt Exodus 10:9 Moses said, "We will go with our young and our old. We will go with our sons and daughters and with our flocks and herds, for we must hold a feast to the LORD."The word means aged or ancient. Numbers 4:2&3 and 8:24-26 assigned the Levites over 50 years old with guard duty This was before Kadesh Barnea.

No doubt that they would take whatever older people there were, not an issue. I do not have any 'presumed life expectancy of 30', that is silly. I did suggest that the average age of slaves was less than the general populace. That is quite reasonable. The Levites, by the way, were NOT numbered with Israel at all. So we don't care about their ages. The place where a shorter expected life would apply, is while a slave was a slave, not after they were freed. Therefore Some older former slaves are no issue at all.

Actually, what your link tells us is that Pharaohs and important men were described as living to 110 back in the 5th and 6th dynasty when the Sumerian and biblical genealogies ascribed multi-century lifespans. They all agree in exaggerating the life spans but they differ widely in how much the lifespan should be exaggerated. It is interesting that Joseph would be ascribed the Egyptian lifespan of 110, though the Israelite norm was 130.

Actually, not at all, the dates are fiction, based on same state presumption dating. Nothing else in the world but that either! So this goes toward evidence that their dating is way off.

According to you statistics, the majority, almost 60%, were under 20 so most of the people Moses was speaking to would have crossed into Canaan and lived out their full 110 or 120 years. Of the rest, those in their 20s who would have formed the largest group, could only have lived into their 60s, not 70 which Moses gives as a lower limit for normal old age. Those in their 30s could have live into their 70s, but not '80 if they were strong', no matter how strong they were. Only the ones in their 40s could fit Moses description of 70 years or 80 if they are strong. Whereas everyone from 50 up are into life expectancies of 90s and for the older Israelites life expectancies extend into 120s.

No. I do not know the average age of slaves at the time. If it was 70, or 80, that fits perfectly. The only possible issue is when the psalm was written. They don't really know. They assume it was at the rebellion and verdict on the people that they would die in the wilderness, I think. If it was at some point before that, then there would not be much to debate about. It clearly has to do with the life span of slaves.

But as I said before averages are meaningless when there is a such a range of life expectancies, especially when such a small proportion actually had the life expectancy Moses describes as normal experience. Moses reference to '80 if they are strong' make absolutely no sense with such a wide range of life expectancies, when the deciding factor for your upper age limit is not how healthy you are, but how old you were at Kadesh Barnea, and not being bitten by snakes.

I do not see how any meaning was meant to exist relating to lifespans in that little verse of a psalm! Looks like a simple lamenting over how their life was short. I don't see how one would imagine it was meant as some great hidden truth, that opposes the overwhelming continuity of the bible. --Unless, of course one had an agenda, a pet theory they wanted to prop up, at the expense of the bible as a whole.

I am sure most of them were tough. But for Moses statement to make sense it has to give a meaningful comparison, why pick out 50 year olds out of the wide range of ages? Why say that a 50 year old could make it to 80 if he is strong, when stronger 50 years olds could make it to 90? Why suggest a 50 year old was being really strong to make it to 80, when a strong 60 year old could make it 100 and you had 80 year olds and over living to 120. Your 50 year old who makes it only as far as 80 is only living 2/3 of his natural life span. Not anything to make a song and dance over.

The slave lifespan was apparently 70. That makes sense. Not that some didn't live less, or more, as it even clearly says some lived longer.

There is plenty to quibble about if the statement makes no sense in the context you try to force it into. Incidentally, if slave life dampened their life expectancy, then you can hardly describe as living long by reason of strength. Especially compared to the full lives we see lived out by people in their 80s.

Yes, I would. That is exactly how one would describe a hard life of an Egyptian slave, especially the ones that did hard labor, like building, or farming. If a group of men and women in hard labor situations, lived less than they would otherwise, of course one would look at the hard life as a cause. If the life killed you by 70, usually, I would think referring to an 80 year old as due to great strength would be very fitting indeed.

Psalm 90:1 A Prayer of Moses, the man of God. Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations.
2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
The first verse is talking in the past tense, you have been our dwelling place, all generations refers to all generations in the past. This is of course limited to generations that actually existed. Saying there were no generations before the mountains is irrelevant. Anyway in verse 2 Moses is saying God was there before the mountains. All generations found refuge in a God who existed long before there were generations or mountains.
...

Yes God has always been a refuge. So?

 

[dad]

So Genesis 3 is Just talking about what happens after we die?

Gen 3:17 And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."
We don't just turn to dust when we die. This is a sentence that is hanging over us all the days of our lives, we are mortal perishable flesh on our way back to dust.

No, why? Point?

A dubious interpretation. The word 'return' is the same Hebrew word used in the first part of the verse for returning to dust, and is the same word used twice in the Genesis passage Moses is referring to.
Psalm 90:3 You return man to dust and say, "Return, O children of man!"
Gen 3:19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."
Moses is expressing God's command that returns us to dust.

Well, I didn't make up the interpretation, but I like it, applying the concept of reteun, to eternity, and returning to God. That is, after all, exactly where we do go when the body dies. The Jews were in captivity, but they had a return. I don't think the concept of going back someplace has to be as morbid as some think.

But even if there was the promise of resurrection, that is in the future and we still living under the judgement of Genesis 3, living a life of toil until we return to the dust.

Our bodies go in the dust, like a seed does. We go to be with the Lord, however. Not like we are going to wait in the ground as dust!

Moses didn't say slavery and toil would take it's toll on their lifespans, but that their span is but toil and trouble.

All WITHIN the context of who and what he was talking about...slaves! So if one lived past 70, they might expect more toil.

The bible certainly describes God afflicting the Israelites in the wilderness, and describes their behaviour as evil. Remember Psalm 90:15 only describes God as afflicting them, and the years of evil are what they have experienced. But it certainly would fit a psalm written before the Exodus. The problem there is no one had rebelled at Kadesh yet and they had not been condemned to die during the 40 years in the wilderness.

So, when it was written becaomes an issue, and we don't know that. So, we are left with the task of seeing what shoe it best fits. We can rule out the average lifespans of the day. They are known to be higher. That leaves the slave life. Elementary.

Having you life cut short by earthquake, plague or snakes does not fit the description of being able to live an extra ten years if you are strong, while if we are talking about lives cut short by the rigours of slavery, Moses' father's life wasn't, he lived to 137. Aaron and Miriam were still going strong in their 80's and had another 40 year or more in them, and they weren't even the old ones.

Joshua lived to 110 and Caleb outlived him though he had been a slave 40 years. Moses description of being able to live to 70 or if they are strong 80, does not fit the Israelites in Egypt if the ages given are literal.

Moses wasn't a slave. We are talking, apparently about a slave life. Not after one is freed, and eats manna, and is near God, etc. The simplest application to the context of the text is to the life of slavery of Moses people.

You cannot generalise a range of lifespans that run from 20 to 120 where very few had that range you claim as an average, especially if you talk of people living to 70 or 80 if they are strong, when the maximum age they could live to depended on how old they were leaving Egypt and not getting bitten by snakes. Being poetic still means the description should be relevant. Why a lament? Because toil and mortality are part of the curse.

We can generalize about the life traits of a certain group. In this case, it is about the people of Moses. It is about slaves. I would lean to applying it to the life of slavery, rather than after being freed, from all I see. After all, it is evident that the psalm was not written at the end or even middle of the 40 years. It was early on, and possibly even before for all I know! After all, He sat around tending sheep and whatnot for 40 years. Sounds like he had lots of time to write a psalm. Seems to me, that when he was leading people out of Egypt, the army on his tail, and the deep blue sea ahead, he may have had less time.

Slaves like Miriam and Aaron or even the old people?

Miriam seemed to get a cushy job, nursing Moses! This was an exception to the normal life. I doubt that a taskmaster would be waiting to beat her if she didn't have enough milk one day. As for Aaron, he was a levite, so they were not numbered with Israel. But I notice he was not some downtown pyramid street slave, as you seem to have insinuated?

" While Moses was receiving his education at the Egyptian royal court and during his exile among the Midianites, Aaron and his sister remained with their kinsmen in the eastern border-land of Egypt (Goshen). Aaron there gained a name for eloquent and persuasive speech; so that when the time came for the demand upon the Pharaoh to release Israel from captivity,"
Aaron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sounds like he was more worried about debating, rather than making bricks. None of this changes a thing about the general life of a slave.

Apart from the mystery of completely failing to fit Moses description of 70 or 80 years or the lifespan of every Israelite we know of from that time.

None of the lifespans we know apply to active slaves, do they?

Yes please, I'll have a slice of gingerbread.

Hmm, maybe you need to build a house with it, in your fablized version of bible stories?

 

[Assyrian]

Never mind what is likely, what do you know? Have you any facts of history to bring to bear? Can you demonstrate some retirement plan for Hebrew slaves in Egypt?

Do you have any evidence for the life expectancy for Hebrew slaves in Egypt? The bible still gives their life spans in the 110s and 120s, if this is literal. Don't blame me if the articles you quote give a very different attitude to old age in Egypt than we see in American slave plantations. This is your evidence, it should at least say what you claim.

No doubt that they would take whatever older people there were, not an issue. I do not have any 'presumed life expectancy of 30', that is silly. I did suggest that the average age of slaves was less than the general populace. That is quite reasonable.

You suggested the average age of those above 20 was around 30. "It is very realistic that, if we don't count the under 20 crowd, the average age of those in the exodus from Egypt was 30 or some such number. " Older people skew the average ages they have a lot of decades under their belt, it takes five 20 year olds combined with an eighty year old Moses to have an average age of 30. The only way to have an average age that low is for them to be dropping like flies even in their 20s. An average age of 30 for the over 20s would mean a life expectancy of less than 30.

The Levites, by the way, were NOT numbered with Israel at all. So we don't care about their ages.

You keep using this strange argument. Just because they were not numbered in the military census does not mean their ages don't count. You just seem to be looking for an excuse, any excuse to ignore them. In fact Moses counted all of the Levite males above one month old. Num 3:15 "List the sons of Levi, by fathers' houses and by clans; every male from a month old and upward you shall list." 16 So Moses listed them according to the word of the LORD, as he was commanded.

The place where a shorter expected life would apply, is while a slave was a slave, not after they were freed. Therefore Some older former slaves are no issue at all.

Of course they are an issue if the all the given lifespans from this period show the same extended lifespans we have from Genesis without the slightest dip in the curve while the Isrealites were slaves. We are not just talking about accidental death because of working conditions. We are talking about how long you can live before your body wears out. If slavery wrecks your health enough to reduce you life expectancy as a slave, then you are no going to live out a normal lifespan when you have been freed. Living your 80s as a slave and then going on to live another 40 years does not fit a lifespan of '70 or by reason of strength 80'.

Actually, what your link tells us is that Pharaohs and important men were described as living to 110 back in the 5th and 6th dynasty when the Sumerian and biblical genealogies ascribed multi-century lifespans. They all agree in exaggerating the life spans but they differ widely in how much the lifespan should be exaggerated. It is interesting that Joseph would be ascribed the Egyptian lifespan of 110, though the Israelite norm was 130.

Actually, not at all, the dates are fiction, based on same state presumption dating. Nothing else in the world but that either! So this goes toward evidence that their dating is way off.[/quote]I didn't mention any dates. But the 5th and 6th dynasties are long before any of the Pharaohs I have heard of being ascribed as Exodus Pharaohs, yet their 110 year lifespans are quite at odds with the Biblical lifespans before the Exodus. I was quoting Sumerian lifespans from around their flood account. But If you have actual dates for the Sumerian flood as opposed to Noah's, or for the reigns of the Sumerian kings and Egyptian Pharaohs and can reconcile Sumerian Hebrew and Egyptian lifespans, please let us know. It would be much better than simply handwaving it all away with 'presumed dating'.

No. I do not know the average age of slaves at the time. If it was 70, or 80, that fits perfectly.

Not if you have slaves dying at 137 and slaves in their 80 going on to live another 40 years.

The only possible issue is when the psalm was written. They don't really know. They assume it was at the rebellion and verdict on the people that they would die in the wilderness, I think. If it was at some point before that, then there would not be much to debate about. It clearly has to do with the life span of slaves.

No it does not. The is nothing in the Psalm that suggests he is talking specifically about slaves. Moses himself wasn't a slave and is said to have lived 120 not 70 or 80. The Psalm is talking about all generations and the ages he gives fits what we know of normal human life expectancy.

The fact you haven't been able to figure out whether the Psalm was written about the Isrealites when they were slaves, after they had been freed, or after they had been freed but condemned to die over the next 40 years in the wilderness shows how much you are struggling to make the psalm fit the reading. Even worse is the fact that all the lifespans recorded from this time simply do not fit the "70 or 80 if they are strong".

I do not see how any meaning was meant to exist relating to lifespans in that little verse of a psalm! Looks like a simple lamenting over how their life was short. I don't see how one would imagine it was meant as some great hidden truth, that opposes the overwhelming continuity of the bible. --Unless, of course one had an agenda, a pet theory they wanted to prop up, at the expense of the bible as a whole.

The meaning of the verse is quite plain. It gives the normal human life expectancy as 70 or 80. It is not talking about accidental death or dying of disease, but how long we will normally live before our bodies wear out. The fact that it contradicts the life spans ascribed to the Patriarchs, including Moses, and it was written by Moses himself show that Moses did not take the extended lifespans literally. And the fact Moses also shows us God's creation days are not to be taken literally either explaina the discrepancy. Neither the ages of the patriarchs or the days of creation are meant literally. Is it "some great hidden truth" that God speaks to us in metaphor parable and allegory? That should be obvious to anyone who reads the bible. What Moses shows us in Psalm 90 is that the ages of the patriarchs are just another of the many metaphors in the bible. It makes sense of the strange lifespans but I wouldn't call it "some great hidden truth". I would think that the great effort you put into trying to fit Moses '70 or 80' with the extended lifespans show much more of an 'agenda'. Literalists go to such great length to make contradictory literal meanings fit.

The slave lifespan was apparently 70. That makes sense. Not that some didn't live less, or more, as it even clearly says some lived longer.

Basically you have to ignore all the lifespans ascribed to these slaves. Amram lived to 137 as a slave, Aaron lived 83 years as a slave and then lived another 40 years. Miriam lived even longer. This is not living 70 or if they were strong 80. And the ones Moses and Aaron considered old folk would have been well over 80. Why did Moses think 80 was the upper limit and only for the strong? Joshua and Caleb's lives were unaffected by slavery in the first part of their lives either.

Yes, I would. That is exactly how one would describe a hard life of an Egyptian slave, especially the ones that did hard labor, like building, or farming. If a group of men and women in hard labor situations, lived less than they would otherwise, of course one would look at the hard life as a cause. If the life killed you by 70, usually, I would think referring to an 80 year old as due to great strength would be very fitting indeed.

No I would think both the 70 and 80 year olds weak and sickly compared people well into their 80s year old who can live on another 40 years, or compared to slaves who die at 137.

Yes God has always been a refuge. So?

So, you tried to wriggle out of the context Moses gives for his Psalm but your arguments fell apart. Moses was talking about all generations up to and including his own when he said: "The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty".

 

[Assyrian]

No, why? Point?

The point is Moses statement all our days pass away under your wrath fits the Genesis curse, as does their span is but toil and trouble. This ties in beautifully with Psalm 90's study of Genesis and the creation and God turning man back to dust. On the other hand, you tried to tie in the wrath with the 40 years in the wilderness, but you seem to have abandoned that for a context while they were still slaves Egypt because the 70 or 80 does not fit the wide range of lifespans in the wilderness. But while the 40 years was the wrath of God too, the Israelite's slavery wasn't.

Well, I didn't make up the interpretation, but I like it, applying the concept of reteun, to eternity, and returning to God. That is, after all, exactly where we do go when the body dies. The Jews were in captivity, but they had a return. I don't think the concept of going back someplace has to be as morbid as some think.

We need to distinguish between interpretations we like and one that are a good exegesis of the text. Doesn't mean the reading we like isn't a true deeper meaning hinted at in the text, but it is not a good basis for deciding the context of passage. Stick to the plain meaning of the text for that. And even if you read the resurrection onto the psalm's poetic parallelism, you still have the context of the Psalm talking about God turning mankind back to dust.

Our bodies go in the dust, like a seed does. We go to be with the Lord, however. Not like we are going to wait in the ground as dust!

True but irrelevant to our discussion.

All WITHIN the context of who and what he was talking about...slaves! So if one lived past 70, they might expect more toil.

Apart from verses 13 & 16 where Moses includes himself and his readers as the Lords' servants, there is no mention in the psalm of slaves, Egypt or Pharaoh. However Adam was mentioned in the psalm and a life of toil was what Adam expected too. Gen 3:17 cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. 19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."

So, when it was written becaomes an issue, and we don't know that. So, we are left with the task of seeing what shoe it best fits. We can rule out the average lifespans of the day. They are known to be higher. That leaves the slave life. Elementary.

Except you can't rule out the lifespans ascribed to these slaves. They were much longer than the 70 or 80 describe in the psalm. You have been desperately trying to shove your feet in the shoe like one of Cinderella's sisters, but nothing fits. The answer is in the Psalm itself which shows us how to read God's description of time figuratively.

Having you life cut short by earthquake, plague or snakes does not fit the description of being able to live an extra ten years if you are strong, while if we are talking about lives cut short by the rigours of slavery, Moses' father's life wasn't, he lived to 137. Aaron and Miriam were still going strong in their 80's and had another 40 year or more in them, and they weren't even the old ones. Joshua lived to 110 and Caleb outlived him though he had been a slave 40 years. Moses description of being able to live to 70 or if they are strong 80, does not fit the Israelites in Egypt if the ages given are literal.

Moses wasn't a slave. We are talking, apparently about a slave life. Not after one is freed, and eats manna, and is near God, etc. The simplest application to the context of the text is to the life of slavery of Moses people.

I didn't quote Moses' age there, though he is clearly talking about himself too the years of our lives. But you wanted to limit this to actual slaves. So I gave you lifespans of people who had been slaves in Egypt and lived between 110 and 137 years. Not 70 or 80. It is fascinating though, not too long ago you were arguing a diet of Manna shortened their lifespans, now you are claiming it extended them.

We can generalize about the life traits of a certain group. In this case, it is about the people of Moses. It is about slaves. I would lean to applying it to the life of slavery, rather than after being freed, from all I see. After all, it is evident that the psalm was not written at the end or even middle of the 40 years. It was early on, and possibly even before for all I know! After all, He sat around tending sheep and whatnot for 40 years. Sounds like he had lots of time to write a psalm. Seems to me, that when he was leading people out of Egypt, the army on his tail, and the deep blue sea ahead, he may have had less time.

And he wrote how many books in that time? If Moses wrote this during his time as a shepherd in Midian, what makes you think he was describing slavery in Egypt? There is nothing evident about when Moses did or did not write the Psalm. What is evident is the context.

Miriam seemed to get a cushy job, nursing Moses! This was an exception to the normal life. I doubt that a taskmaster would be waiting to beat her if she didn't have enough milk one day.

That job would only have been open until Moses was weaned and Moses was 80 at the time of the Exodus. Besides that was Moses' mother, not Miriam.

As for Aaron, he was a levite, so they were not numbered with Israel.

I don't think the Israelites had an army when they were slaves in Egypt, so the Levites not being numbered for the military census in Sinai is even less relevant.

But I notice he was not some downtown pyramid street slave, as you seem to have insinuated?

" While Moses was receiving his education at the Egyptian royal court and during his exile among the Midianites, Aaron and his sister remained with their kinsmen in the eastern border-land of Egypt (Goshen). Aaron there gained a name for eloquent and persuasive speech; so that when the time came for the demand upon the Pharaoh to release Israel from captivity,"
Aaron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Umm the bible does not say anything about the Israelites building pyramids... Exodus 1:11 Therefore they set taskmasters over them to afflict them with heavy burdens. They built for Pharaoh store cities, Pithom and Raamses. As far as we know the city of Raamases or Avaris, is in Goshen. As for being able to speak well, you don't need a life of leisurely study for that.

Sounds like he was more worried about debating, rather than making bricks. None of this changes a thing about the general life of a slave.

Maybe he debated about about all the bricks he had to make and the conditions of the downtrodden proletariat in Goshen.

None of the lifespans we know apply to active slaves, do they?

Apart from Amram, Aaron, Mirian, the old folk, Joshua, Caleb....

Hmm, maybe you need to build a house with it, in your fablized version of bible stories?

Come on, you are the one with the Alice in Wonderland manna, one type makes your life shorter and the other makes you live longer.

 

[dad]

Do you have any evidence for the life expectancy for Hebrew slaves in Egypt? The bible still gives their life spans in the 110s and 120s, if this is literal. Don't blame me if the articles you quote give a very different attitude to old age in Egypt than we see in American slave plantations. This is your evidence, it should at least say what you claim.

Not for slaves in slavery. If that was when Moses penned the psalm, that woulld be the average in mind. Even if it was right after they left, he would not have new averages to work with. Either way, it makes perfect sense that hard labor slaves had a shorter lifespan.

You suggested the average age of those above 20 was around 30. "

It is very realistic that, if we don't count the under 20 crowd, the average age of those in the exodus from Egypt was 30 or some such number. " Older people skew the average ages they have a lot of decades under their belt, it takes five 20 year olds combined with an eighty year old Moses to have an average age of 30. The only way to have an average age that low is for them to be dropping like flies even in their 20s. An average age of 30 for the over 20s would mean a life expectancy of less than 30.

I think what we have gratitated to be talking about is an average life of 70 years as a slave. In other words, the number Moses was using. It sure did noot fir into the other people of the time.

You keep using this strange argument. Just because they were not numbered in the military census does not mean their ages don't count. You just seem to be looking for an excuse, any excuse to ignore them. In fact Moses counted all of the Levite males above one month old. Num 3:15 "

List the sons of Levi, by fathers' houses and by clans; every male from a month old and upward you shall list." 16 So Moses listed them according to the word of the LORD, as he was commanded.

Listed, but not counted. So it depends on what count or list we want to assume relates. But, since I am looking at the simple take that 70 was the average slave life time, it doesn't matter any more.

Of course they are an issue if the all the given lifespans from this period show the same extended lifespans we have from Genesis without the slightest dip in the curve while the Isrealites were slaves. We are not just talking about accidental death because of working conditions. We are talking about how long you can live before your body wears out. If slavery wrecks your health enough to reduce you life expectancy as a slave, then you are no going to live out a normal lifespan when you have been freed. Living your 80s as a slave and then going on to live another 40 years does not fit a lifespan of '70 or by reason of strength 80'.

As I said, it depends on when it was written. There is no reason at all to assume that it was NOT written before the exodus, or right after. That means we have a bunch of slaves, who, for hundreds of years had known shorter life spans. Therefore, the psalm makes perfect sense in context.

I didn't mention any dates. But the 5th and 6th dynasties are long before any of the Pharaohs I have heard of being ascribed as Exodus Pharaohs, yet their 110 year lifespans are quite at odds with the Biblical lifespans before the Exodus. I was quoting Sumerian lifespans from around their flood account.

Here agian, we hit the unknown. Do you know what Pharaoh it was? No. I would suggest that one reliable dating method would be biblical lifespans! If we know when they lived a thousand years, and when they lived about 240 yeas, and when it got down to 120 years..etc! But that is another thread. As it is you don't know, fine..

But If you have actual dates for the Sumerian flood as opposed to Noah's, or for the reigns of the Sumerian kings and Egyptian Pharaohs and can reconcile Sumerian Hebrew and Egyptian lifespans, please let us know. It would be much better than simply handwaving it all away with 'presumed dating'.

The Sumers were some of the first off the block after the flood. Therfore we can have some idea, since the flood was something like 4500+ years ago. The flood they referred to likely was the flood, and we already have the date.

Not if you have slaves dying at 137 and slaves in their 80 going on to live another 40 years.

Par for the course if we have a normall life expectancy, and a slave in hard service average age! Those that lived more were not in slavery I notice. Therefore that is the missing link, the key.

No it does not. The is nothing in the Psalm that suggests he is talking specifically about slaves. Moses himself wasn't a slave and is said to have lived 120 not 70 or 80. The Psalm is talking about all generations and the ages he gives fits what we know of normal human life expectancy.

It talks about a lot of things, like before the mountains were! By the time it hits the sad little reference to slave life spans, it is talking about 'his' people. Clearly. "our".

The fact you haven't been able to figure out whether the Psalm was written about the Isrealites when they were slaves, after they had been freed, or after they had been freed but condemned to die over the next 40 years in the wilderness shows how much you are struggling to make the psalm fit the reading. Even worse is the fact that all the lifespans recorded from this time simply do not fit the "70 or 80 if they are strong".

That is why I narrowed it down to the slave life. 70 or 80. It fits, and nothing else does. Case solved.

The meaning of the verse is quite plain. It gives the normal human life expectancy as 70 or 80. It is not talking about accidental death or dying of disease, but how long we will normally live before our bodies wear out.

The whole people were in slavery, so for the 'our' the life span was only 70 years.

The fact that it contradicts the life spans ascribed to the Patriarchs, including Moses, and it was written by Moses himself show that Moses did not take the extended lifespans literally.

Not at all, only this people was in hard bondage. Moses was not.

And the fact Moses also shows us God's creation days are not to be taken literally either explaina the discrepancy. Neither the ages of the patriarchs or the days of creation are meant literally.

Not at all, I can win the day, and still take a month to do it. latching onto the possible applications of a word does not take away from how they were used.

Is it "

some great hidden truth" that God speaks to us in metaphor parable and allegory? That should be obvious to anyone who reads the bible. What Moses shows us in Psalm 90 is that the ages of the patriarchs are just another of the many metaphors in the bible.

Nope, it is obvious he lived long himself, as did others, and that the note worthy thing was the slave life was shorter and hard.

Basically you have to ignore all the lifespans ascribed to these slaves. Amram lived to 137 as a slave, Aaron lived 83 years as a slave and then lived another 40 years. Miriam lived even longer. This is not living 70 or if they were strong 80. And the ones Moses and Aaron considered old folk would have been well over 80. Why did Moses think 80 was the upper limit and only for the strong? Joshua and Caleb's lives were unaffected by slavery in the first part of their lives either.

No I would think both the 70 and 80 year olds weak and sickly compared people well into their 80s year old who can live on another 40 years, or compared to slaves who die at 137.

There were exceptions to the age thing, as I pointed out, Aaron (and presumably his dad, Amram) lived on the border region. He learned to be more or less a lawyer of the day. naturally such people in more cushy situations would live longer than Joe sixpack slave at the quarry. But, averaging them all together as a people comes up with 70 as an average time of death, or 80 for many. Since the average of men on the planet was still over 100 at the time, it was nothing if a few slaves had it well enough off to live normally. That did not endow the Herbrew slave people as a whole with long lives.

So, you tried to wriggle out of the context Moses gives for his Psalm but your arguments fell apart. Moses was talking about all generations up to and including his own when he said: "The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty".

No. Don't think so. He was talking about his people in that day. Not no people before mountains existed. By the time it mentions our lives, we are right their with his people.

 

[dad]

The point is Moses statement all our days pass away under your wrath fits the Genesis curse, as does their span is but toil and trouble.

I disagree. Was Enoch so cursed, that he walked with God? Or Noah, who found favor?
Ge 9:1 -And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
Ge 12:3 -And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Ge 17:20 - And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.
Ge 18:18 -Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?
Ge 22:18 -And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.
Ge 26:4 -And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;


Some curse.

This ties in beautifully with Psalm 90's study of Genesis and the creation and God turning man back to dust. On the other hand, you tried to tie in the wrath with the 40 years in the wilderness, but you seem to have abandoned that for a context while they were still slaves Egypt because the 70 or 80 does not fit the wide range of lifespans in the wilderness. But while the 40 years was the wrath of God too, the Israelite's slavery wasn't.

I do now consider that the life spans mentioned had to apply to the slaves. They sure don't apply to anyone else.

We need to distinguish between interpretations we like and one that are a good exegesis of the text. Doesn't mean the reading we like isn't a true deeper meaning hinted at in the text, but it is not a good basis for deciding the context of passage. Stick to the plain meaning of the text for that. And even if you read the resurrection onto the psalm's poetic parallelism, you still have the context of the Psalm talking about God turning mankind back to dust.

And they turned to dust in the desert as well. And we coulld whimsically think of how all men end up as dust there too. But we cannot apply a curse universally!

Apart from verses 13 & 16 where Moses includes himself and his readers as the Lords' servants, there is no mention in the psalm of slaves, Egypt or Pharaoh. However Adam was mentioned in the psalm and a life of toil was what Adam expected too. Gen 3:17

cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. 19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."

But Adam still lived well over 9 centuries, and had a big family. Compared to before the fall, yes, things sure were cursed. But within this cursed earth, there were blessing all over the place.

When I read the rest of Psa 90, right after the slave life time verse, it sure looks like ip specifically applies to slaves before they were freed.


11 Who knoweth the power of thine anger? even according to thy fear, so is thy wrath. 12 So teach us to number our days, that we may apply [SIZE=-1][/SIZE] our hearts unto wisdom. 13 Return, O LORD, how long? and let it repent thee concerning thy servants. 14 O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days. 15 Make us glad according to the days wherein thou hast afflicted us, and the years wherein we have seen evil. 16 Let thy work (deliverance) appear unto thy servants, and thy glory unto their children. 17 And let the beauty of the LORD our God be upon us: and establish thou the work of our hands upon us; yea, the work of our hands establish thou it.

Except you can't rule out the lifespans ascribed to these slaves. They were much longer than the 70 or 80 describe in the psalm.

No, a few cushy jobs were had. Maybe the real brains, or something. Naturally they woulld have a normal lifespan. That is not the group, any more than some 16 year old that was beat to death was the average age. I'll take Moses word. It was 70.

You have been desperately trying to shove your feet in the shoe like one of Cinderella's sisters, but nothing fits. The answer is in the Psalm itself which shows us how to read God's description of time figuratively.

Not really, you introduced me to a mystery that needed a little time to study the details of.

And he wrote how many books in that time? If Moses wrote this during his time as a shepherd in Midian, what makes you think he was describing slavery in Egypt? There is nothing evident about when Moses did or did not write the Psalm. What is evident is the context.

I think a chief prince of Egypt would know about slave life. Especially one that knew he was a Hebrew himself. Remember, he spent 40 long years there.

That job would only have been open until Moses was weaned and Moses was 80 at the time of the Exodus. Besides that was Moses' mother, not Miriam.

Having good connections, and references seems to help in any age.

I don't think the Israelites had an army when they were slaves in Egypt, so the Levites not being numbered for the military census in Sinai is even less relevant.

Then don't bring it up.

Umm the bible does not say anything about the Israelites building pyramids... Exodus 1:11

Therefore they set taskmasters over them to afflict them with heavy burdens. They built for Pharaoh store cities, Pithom and Raamses. As far as we know the city of Raamases or Avaris, is in Goshen. As for being able to speak well, you don't need a life of leisurely study for that.

Apparently he was real good at it. But whatever the Jews were building, took work. I already gave the average slave life for a place in the US. We know it was lower.

Come on, you are the one with the Alice in Wonderland manna, one type makes your life shorter and the other makes you live longer.

What, next thing you'll be telling us it appeared magically too? What, angels ate it as well? What, it sat around in a little ark for centuries fresh as day 1? Anyhow, I think the case of the mysterious life spans was solved. It was speaking of the slave life.

If all the slaves died within 40 years, they never lived to the normal ripe old age, unless most were old when they left.

 

[Assyrian]

Not for slaves in slavery. If that was when Moses penned the psalm, that woulld be the average in mind. Even if it was right after they left, he would not have new averages to work with. Either way, it makes perfect sense that hard labor slaves had a shorter lifespan.

I am sure slaves would have had shorter lifespans, but the bible still gives them lifespans between 110 and 137 years, really it is just more evidence the bible isn't speaking literally about the longevity, though most literalists would not take such a rationalist approach discounting what the bible says about the lifespans of the slaves because it does not make sense.

But you have yet to show that Moses would have been talking about the lifespan of a slave. Don't forget he uses the first person, the years of our life. Whose lifespan was he familiar with anyway? Apart from when he was a baby, he spend the first forty years of his life in the Egyptian court and the next 40 living with shepherds in Midian. You haven't produced any evidence Moses was talking about reduced Israelite slave lifespans, or specifically the Israelite slaves at all. Nor have you produced any evidence the Israelite slaves had a lifespan of 70 or 80 tears as oppose to the 30 years of a Negro slave in America, or the 110 to 137 years ascribed to them in the bible.

I think what we have gratitated to be talking about is an average life of 70 years as a slave. In other words, the number Moses was using. It sure did noot fir into the other people of the time.

Other people? It does not fit anybody, not Moses who claimed the 70 or 80 as his own lifespan too, not the slaves who lived from 110 to 137 years or the rest of the world's population if the take the ages in the bible literally. It is clear Moses did not take the ages in the bible any more literally than he took God's days, as he tells us in this very psalm.

You keep using this strange argument. Just because they were not numbered in the military census does not mean their ages don't count. You just seem to be looking for an excuse, any excuse to ignore them. In fact Moses counted all of the Levite males above one month old. Num 3:15 "List the sons of Levi, by fathers' houses and by clans; every male from a month old and upward you shall list." 16 So Moses listed them according to the word of the LORD, as he was commanded.

Listed, but not counted. So it depends on what count or list we want to assume relates. But, since I am looking at the simple take that 70 was the average slave life time, it doesn't matter any more.

So no attempt to justify using the census as an excuse. Neither listing nor counting has anything to do with the life expectancies given in the psalm, you are simply looking for wildly irrelevant excuses to ignore the ages given for Israelites at this time.

Anyway, even this excuse falls part when you look at the passage. Num 3:15 "List the sons of Levi, by fathers' houses and by clans; every male from a month old and upward you shall list." 16 So Moses listed them according to the word of the LORD, as he was commanded. 17 And these were the sons of Levi by their names ... 22 Their listing according to the number of all the males from a month old and upward was 7,500.

As I said, it depends on when it was written. There is no reason at all to assume that it was NOT written before the exodus, or right after. That means we have a bunch of slaves, who, for hundreds of years had known shorter life spans. Therefore, the psalm makes perfect sense in context.

'No reason all to to assume it as not' In other words you have no evidence to support it and in fact were arguing for a post Kadesh date only very recently. The psalm does not say it was written before the Exodus, or that it was written about slaves, whose lifespans in the bible run from 110 to 137 years old. Amram, Aaron, Miriam the elders and all the old folk who walked out of Egypt show the life span of a slave was not '70 or by reason of strength 80'.

I didn't mention any dates. But the 5th and 6th dynasties are long before any of the Pharaohs I have heard of being ascribed as Exodus Pharaohs, yet their 110 year lifespans are quite at odds with the Biblical lifespans before the Exodus. I was quoting Sumerian lifespans from around their flood account.

Here agian, we hit the unknown. Do you know what Pharaoh it was? No. I would suggest that one reliable dating method would be biblical lifespans! If we know when they lived a thousand years, and when they lived about 240 yeas, and when it got down to 120 years..etc! But that is another thread. As it is you don't know, fine..

So you can't support your argument or come up with a coherent dating system to fit 5th and 6th dynasties that reconciles their 110 year lifespan with biblical longevity.

But If you have actual dates for the Sumerian flood as opposed to Noah's, or for the reigns of the Sumerian kings and Egyptian Pharaohs and can reconcile Sumerian Hebrew and Egyptian lifespans, please let us know. It would be much better than simply handwaving it all away with 'presumed dating'.

The Sumers were some of the first off the block after the flood. Therfore we can have some idea, since the flood was something like 4500+ years ago. The flood they referred to likely was the flood, and we already have the date.

Yet you have no explanation why the Biblical ages had declined to 133 year twelve generations after the flood, while after twelve generations after the flood in Sumer the king managed to live 1500 years, and twenty generations after the flood a king lived to 1200. Nor have you any explanation or why the biblical ages decline rapidly while the Sumerian ages simply fluctuated up and down.

It does make a lot of sense if the early Hebrew genealogies followed the Mesopotamian system and moved to the Egyptian system of honouring their forefathers when they were in Egypt.

Par for the course if we have a normall life expectancy, and a slave in hard service average age! Those that lived more were not in slavery I notice. Therefore that is the missing link, the key.

Except you haven't provided any evidence Amram, Aaron, Miriam, the elders, the old folk, Joshua and Caleb weren't slaves. What are you saying, that it is just sheer coincidence that all of the Israelites whose age we have any indication of weren't slaves?

It talks about a lot of things, like before the mountains were! By the time it hits the sad little reference to slave life spans, it is talking about 'his' people. Clearly. "our".

I don't think Moses referred to the mountains as 'us', or God who was before the mountains, but he does refer to all generations as 'our'.

That is why I narrowed it down to the slave life. 70 or 80. It fits, and nothing else does. Case solved.

Except it does not fit the ages we are given for the slave. You abandoned the post Kadesh context because the life expectancies fluctuated too wildly, but at least their days passing away under God's wrath fit. Now you have move it to a time when the life expectancy according to the bible was 120 years, and the ones who died as slaves, their days passed away under the wrath of Pharaoh not God.

The whole people were in slavery, so for the 'our' the life span was only 70 years.

Moses wasn't a slave and he was the one who said 'our'.

Not at all, only this people was in hard bondage. Moses was not.

So why claim he only had a slave's lifespan of 70 or 80 when he had lived half his life in luxury and the rest just herding sheep? Your interpretation simply does not fit the context of the psalm, or the ages ascribed to the slaves. Of course Moses never said he was talking about slaves.

Not at all, I can win the day, and still take a month to do it. latching onto the possible applications of a word does not take away from how they were used.

It is amazing how creationists dismiss Moses' non literal interpretation of God's days as 'latching on'. Yet this is in the very same psalm where he ascribes to himself and everyone else a natural lifespan of 70 or 80. Who better to explain what Genesis means than Moses? Yet rather than follow Moses' lead, you have to insist Moses wasn't really talking about himself when he said 'our', that the psalm was about slaves when there is no indication of this, and claim all the Israelites whose ages we are given weren't actually slaves.

Is it ''some great hidden truth" that God speaks to us in metaphor parable and allegory? That should be obvious to anyone who reads the bible. What Moses shows us in Psalm 90 is that the ages of the patriarchs are just another of the many metaphors in the bible.

Nope, it is obvious he lived long himself, as did others, and that the note worthy thing was the slave life was shorter and hard.

And still you keep on ignoring what is said and and throw in some other argument instead.

There were exceptions to the age thing, as I pointed out, Aaron (and presumably his dad, Amram) lived on the border region. He learned to be more or less a lawyer of the day. naturally such people in more cushy situations would live longer than Joe sixpack slave at the quarry. But, averaging them all together as a people comes up with 70 as an average time of death, or 80 for many. Since the average of men on the planet was still over 100 at the time, it was nothing if a few slaves had it well enough off to live normally. That did not endow the Herbrew slave people as a whole with long lives.

Aaron lived in Goshen where the slave cities were and there is nothing in the bible that suggests Aaron was a lawyer, or Amram or Miriam or Joshua and Caleb or the elder or the old folk. You are making up your 70 year average out of thin air. Funny how you have to ignore the lifespans in the bible to keep your interpretation of lifespans in the bible literal.

No. Don't think so. He was talking about his people in that day. Not no people before mountains existed. By the time it mentions our lives, we are right their with his people.

First time Moses mentions 'our' he is talking about all generations. It really show how bad your arguments are that you have to keep bringing up the mountains and not counting the Levites.

 

[Assyrian]

I disagree. Was Enoch so cursed, that he walked with God? Or Noah, who found favor?
Ge 9:1 -And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
Ge 12:3 -And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
Ge 17:20 - And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.
Ge 18:18 -Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?
Ge 22:18 -And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.
Ge 26:4 -And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;

Some curse.

It is strange watching a creationist try to dismiss the curse in Genesis 3. Do you think God wasn't being literal?

This ties in beautifully with Psalm 90's study of Genesis and the creation and God turning man back to dust. On the other hand, you tried to tie in the wrath with the 40 years in the wilderness, but you seem to have abandoned that for a context while they were still slaves Egypt because the 70 or 80 does not fit the wide range of lifespans in the wilderness. But while the 40 years was the wrath of God too, the Israelite's slavery wasn't.

I do now consider that the life spans mentioned had to apply to the slaves. They sure don't apply to anyone else.

And no attempt to deal with the point.

And they turned to dust in the desert as well. And we coulld whimsically think of how all men end up as dust there too. But we cannot apply a curse universally!

People don't usually die? Incidentally, while the turning to dust is more literally applicable in the desert, being swept away in a flood isn't.

Psalm 90:3 You return man to dust and say, "Return, O children of man!"
4 For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night.
5 You sweep them away as with a flood; they are like a dream, like grass that is renewed in the morning:
6 in the morning it flourishes and is renewed; in the evening it fades and withers.

Apart from verses 13 & 16 where Moses includes himself and his readers as the Lords' servants, there is no mention in the psalm of slaves, Egypt or Pharaoh. However Adam was mentioned in the psalm and a life of toil was what Adam expected too. Gen 3:17 cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. 19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."

But Adam still lived well over 9 centuries, and had a big family. Compared to before the fall, yes, things sure were cursed. But within this cursed earth, there were blessing all over the place.

Of course. That is why the first section of you post is so irrelevant.

However, as usual you completely failed to deal with my point.

When I read the rest of Psa 90, right after the slave life time verse, it sure looks like ip specifically applies to slaves before they were freed.

11 Who knoweth the power of thine anger? even according to thy fear, so is thy wrath. 12 So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom. 13 Return, O LORD, how long? and let it repent thee concerning thy servants. 14 O satisfy us early with thy mercy; that we may rejoice and be glad all our days. 15 Make us glad according to the days wherein thou hast afflicted us, and the years wherein we have seen evil. 16 Let thy work (deliverance) appear unto thy servants, and thy glory unto their children. 17 And let the beauty of the LORD our God be upon us: and establish thou the work of our hands upon us; yea, the work of our hands establish thou it.

It applies to most people throughout history.

No, a few cushy jobs were had. Maybe the real brains, or something. Naturally they woulld have a normal lifespan. That is not the group, any more than some 16 year old that was beat to death was the average age. I'll take Moses word. It was 70.

Any evidence Amram, Aaron, Miriam, the old folk, Joshua and Caleb had cushy jobs? The only cushy job I know of was foreman, are you saying these bible heroes were collaborators?

Not really, you introduced me to a mystery that needed a little time to study the details of.

Have you got any answers that fit the text?

I think a chief prince of Egypt would know about slave life. Especially one that knew he was a Hebrew himself. Remember, he spent 40 long years there.

So now you are saying he wrote this psalm during his life of luxury as an Egyptian prince? Even less reason for saying 'the years of our life', or complaining about how he had been afflicted.

That job would only have been open until Moses was weaned and Moses was 80 at the time of the Exodus. Besides that was Moses' mother, not Miriam.

Having good connections, and references seems to help in any age.

So Miriam got a job as a wet nurse too? You keep making up more and more all the time.

I don't think the Israelites had an army when they were slaves in Egypt, so the Levites not being numbered for the military census in Sinai is even less relevant.

Then don't bring it up.

You are the one making the claim.

It is quite the bizarre world you live in, you use irrelevancies to exclude the ages of Israelites in Moses time, and you say I shouldn’t point out they are irrelevant because they are irrelevant?

Umm the bible does not say anything about the Israelites building pyramids... Exodus 1:11 Therefore they set taskmasters over them to afflict them with heavy burdens. They built for Pharaoh store cities, Pithom and Raamses. As far as we know the city of Raamases or Avaris, is in Goshen. As for being able to speak well, you don't need a life of leisurely study for that.

Apparently he was real good at it.

Again complete failure to deal with the point.

But whatever the Jews were building, took work.

You were trying to claim Aaron wasn't a slave because he lived nowhere near the pyramids. Are you abandoning that argument?

I already gave the average slave life for a place in the US. We know it was lower.

And yet slavery had no effect on the ages ascribed to the Israelites during their time as slaves. In fact Amram lived longer than his father Kohath, as long as his grandfather Levi, 137 years. All the more evidence the longevity is figurative rather than a literal description of lives of slaves or patriarchs.

What, next thing you'll be telling us it appeared magically too? What, angels ate it as well? What, it sat around in a little ark for centuries fresh as day 1? Anyhow, I think the case of the mysterious life spans was solved. It was speaking of the slave life.

Sorry, however miraculous the provision of manna, it can't be made to shorten Israelites' lifespans and then make them longer, simply on your whim.

If all the slaves died within 40 years, they never lived to the normal ripe old age, unless most were old when they left.

Exodus 10:9 Moses said, "We will go with our young and our old. We will go with our sons and daughters and with our flocks and herds, for we must hold a feast to the LORD." Sounds like a normal spread of ages to me.

 

[dad]

I am sure slaves would have had shorter lifespans, but the bible still gives them lifespans between 110 and 137 years, really it is just more evidence the bible isn't speaking literally about the longevity, though most literalists would not take such a rationalist approach discounting what the bible says about the lifespans of the slaves because it does not make sense.

No, the bible does not give them anything of the sort. Some slaves lived out to the normal span. It does not average the Hebrew slave lifespan, except in Ps 90!

But you have yet to show that Moses would have been talking about the lifespan of a slave.

He was talking about slaves. His people were slaves, remember? He helped free them..etc..Nothing else he could be talking about. That's all he had to work with.

Don't forget he uses the first person, the years of our life.

I didn't forget, and dealt with it already. He identified himself with that people. Heck, so did God! He said "Let MY people go"!!! That didn't make Him a slave!

Of course I must admit, sometimes Moses called them something like 'this' people!


Ex 17:4 -And Moses cried unto the LORD, saying, What shall I do unto this people? they be almost ready to stone me.

Whose lifespan was he familiar with anyway? Apart from when he was a baby, he spend the first forty years of his life in the Egyptian court and the next 40 living with shepherds in Midian. You haven't produced any evidence Moses was talking about reduced Israelite slave lifespans, or specifically the Israelite slaves at all.

If they were his people, who else could be the "our"?

Nor have you produced any evidence the Israelite slaves had a lifespan of 70 or 80 tears as oppose to the 30 years of a Negro slave in America, or the 110 to 137 years ascribed to them in the bible.

Look, we know the life spans from the bible. We also know them from records of Egypt. Even if we want to forget the dating of dynasties for now, at some time they did live the same length of time.

Therefore the 70 or 80 can not refer to the general population. What's left? The logical deduction to make is that the spans refer to the people of Moses.

'No reason all to to assume it as not' In other words you have no evidence to support it and in fact were arguing for a post Kadesh date only very recently. The psalm does not say it was written before the Exodus, or that it was written about slaves, whose lifespans in the bible run from 110 to 137 years old. Amram, Aaron, Miriam the elders and all the old folk who walked out of Egypt show the life span of a slave was not '70 or by reason of strength 80'.

No, they show that some pampered slaves or freed slaves, or whatever were back to normal. It has to fit. It cannot fit unless it is an unnatural life span. We know slaves have shorter averages. Elementary, really.

So you can't support your argument or come up with a coherent dating system to fit 5th and 6th dynasties that reconciles their 110 year lifespan with biblical longevity.

Yes, all dating depends on same state past belief. Take that away, and it all fits like a glove. In fact there is no choice, it cannot remain unless a same state past is proven. Forget man's dates.

Yet you have no explanation why

the Biblical ages had declined to 133 year twelve generations after the flood, while after twelve generations after the flood in Sumer the king managed to live 1500 years, and twenty generations after the flood a king lived to 1200.

Yes, I do. The ages declined, because the split happened, and new realities kicked in over time. Sumer records are only good for broad generalities, being pagan records. We just need to look at who says someone lived 1500 years..?

Nor have you any explanation or why the biblical ages decline rapidly while the Sumerian ages simply fluctuated up and down.

Yes, the Sumer records are embellished, and inaccurate as far as clean facts go. They are useful in the broad sense of long lifespans, and a flood. Not for trusted detail.

Except you haven't provided any evidence Amram, Aaron, Miriam, the elders, the old folk, Joshua and Caleb weren't slaves. What are you saying, that it is just sheer coincidence that all of the Israelites whose age we have any indication of weren't slaves?

Doesn't matter. If they were freed, they were no longer slaves.

I don't think Moses referred to the mountains as 'us', or God who was before the mountains, but he does refer to all generations as 'our'.

Well, right after that Mo talks of "them"!!!!! Then as it gets near the slave age verse, it launches into "we"!!!!!!! So the division is clear between "our, we" and "they them"!



5 Thou carriest them away as with a flood; they are as a sleep: in the morning they are like grass which groweth up. 6 In the morning it flourisheth, and groweth up; in the evening it is cut down, and withereth.

7 For we are consumed by thine anger, and by thy wrath are we troubled. 8 Thou hast set our iniquities before thee, our secret sins in the light of thy countenance. 9 For all our days are passed away in thy wrath: we spend our years as a tale that is told. 10 The days [SIZE=-1][/SIZE]of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.

Moses wasn't a slave and he was the one who said 'our'.

Yes, Moses thought of them, most of the time, as his people.

So why claim he only had a slave's lifespan of 70 or 80 when he had lived half his life in luxury and the rest just herding sheep? Your interpretation simply does not fit the context of the psalm, or the ages ascribed to the slaves. Of course Moses never said he was talking about slaves.

I don't. He was talking about the people. He didn't knmow when he would die yet. Especially if this was written just before God called him to deliver them??! (80) No wonder that '80' scared him.

Aaron lived in Goshen where the slave cities were and there is nothing in the bible that suggests Aaron was a lawyer, or Amram or Miriam or Joshua and Caleb or the elder or the old folk. You are making up your 70 year average out of thin air. Funny how you have to ignore the lifespans in the bible to keep your interpretation of lifespans in the bible literal.

There were no lawyers then. But he had learned ho to be a real good speaker, and negotiator. Doesn't sound to me like something one leans being lashed, and worked 16 hot hours of the day!

 

[Assyrian]

No, the bible does not give them anything of the sort. Some slaves lived out to the normal span. It does not average the Hebrew slave lifespan, except in Ps 90!

Psalm 90 says nothing about averages, Hebrew slaves, or anything about averaging the Hebrew slave lifespan. The only indication in the psalm of who he is talking about is that it is the people of God throughout all generations and that it includes Moses himself.

He was talking about slaves. His people were slaves, remember? He helped free them..etc..Nothing else he could be talking about. That's all he had to work with.

Most of the time he was with them they weren't slaves. Nor did he limit himself to people alive at the time. Remember, our dwelling place in all generations.

I didn't forget, and dealt with it already.

You made the claim before, sidestepped my reply by simply repeating your claim rather than dealing with my response, and when I pointed this out, you completely ignored it, snipping out my reply and going on to the next comment.

He identified himself with that people. Heck, so did God! He said "Let MY people go"!!! That didn't make Him a slave!

Of course I must admit, sometimes Moses called them something like 'this' people!

Ex 17:4 -And Moses cried unto the LORD, saying, What shall I do unto this people? they be almost ready to stone me.

God saying "Let MY people go" is not identifying himself as one of them, or calling himself a slave. He is simply calling the slaves his people. Nor did God ever say he only lives 70 or 80 years. Moses did.

If they were his people, who else could be the "our"?

All generations who have God as their refuge. His father who was a slave and lived to 137. The godly Midianites whose family he married into. Humanity in general, Psalm 90:3 You return man to dust and say, "Return, O children of Adam!"

Nor have you produced any evidence the Israelite slaves had a lifespan of 70 or 80 tears as oppose to the 30 years of a Negro slave in America, or the 110 to 137 years ascribed to them in the bible.

Look, we know the life spans from the bible. We also know them from records of Egypt. Even if we want to forget the dating of dynasties for now, at some time they did live the same length of time.

Yes, but not when you want them to. There are a lot of things to do to reconcile Egyptian and biblical timelines, you need to be able to identify Joseph's pharaoh, the change in regime, pharaoh's who built cities with slave labour, the Exodus and subsequent Egyptian military interventions into Israel and Judah. It is not enough to say the 110 year life span must have been when the bible had 110 year lifespans, you have to show the rest fits too. Your biggest problem is that according to your weblink, the 110 year lifespan was found in the 5th and 6th dynasties and the 19th and 20th. Now people have argued for Ramasses the Great as the pharoah of the Exodus and he is 19th dynasty, but that leaves the 5th and 6th dynasties, long before the Exodus with 110 year lifespans while the patriarchs were enjoying many centuries like the Sumerians.

Interesting how you did not answer my point though.

Therefore the 70 or 80 can not refer to the general population. What's left? The logical deduction to make is that the spans refer to the people of Moses.

The 70 or 80 does not fit the Israelite slaves either, or Moses who included himself in the lifespan. It does not fit anybody who had lived up until then if we take the lifespans in the bible literally. The logical deduction is that Moses did not take the ages of the patriarchs literally.

No, they show that some pampered slaves or freed slaves, or whatever were back to normal. It has to fit. It cannot fit unless it is an unnatural life span. We know slaves have shorter averages. Elementary, really.

Any evidence that Amram and Aaron and Miriam and the elders and all the old folk were pampered slaves? And evidence you could spend 40 years in a slavery harsh enough to reduce you lifespan by 40 or 50 years, and because you are freed at 40 go on to live a full lifespan? How come the only people who ages we know of from the bible in this period were pampered slaves?

Of course the 70 or 80 does fit. it is our normal human lifespan. It is how long Moses expected to live himself, it is how long he expected everyone to live as long as they did not die prematurely accident or disease. It means he did not take the lifespans in the bible any more literally than he took the days of creation.

So you can't support your argument or come up with a coherent dating system to fit 5th and 6th dynasties that reconciles their 110 year lifespan with biblical longevity.

Yes, all dating depends on same state past belief. Take that away, and it all fits like a glove. In fact there is no choice, it cannot remain unless a same state past is proven. Forget man's dates.

Yeah! When all else fails wave a 'same state past belief' at it. Much better than trying to come up with an actual answer.

Yet you have no explanation why the Biblical ages had declined to 133 year twelve generations after the flood, while after twelve generations after the flood in Sumer the king managed to live 1500 years, and twenty generations after the flood a king lived to 1200.

Yes, I do. The ages declined, because the split happened, and new realities kicked in over time. Sumer records are only good for broad generalities, being pagan records. We just need to look at who says someone lived 1500 years..?

Yeah if you squint your eyes tight enough anything can be kept vague enough to fit. Why didn't the Sumerian lifespans decline like the patriarchs? Why did the multiple centuries and even thousand year lifespans continue many generations after the Israelite lifespan had declined to normal?

Yes, the Sumer records are embellished, and inaccurate as far as clean facts go. They are useful in the broad sense of long lifespans, and a flood. Not for trusted detail.

Are they embellished, or evidence of long lifespans? Why are Sumerian lifespans immediately after the flood evidence of long lifespans, but equally long Sumerian lifespans 20 generations after the flood are not to be trusted?

What the Sumerian records tell us is that embellishing lifespans was simply the common practice at the time, and what Psalm 90 tells us is that it wasn't to be taken literally.

Except you haven't provided any evidence Amram, Aaron, Miriam, the elders, the old folk, Joshua and Caleb weren't slaves. What are you saying, that it is just sheer coincidence that all of the Israelites whose age we have any indication of weren't slaves?

Doesn't matter. If they were freed, they were no longer slaves.

Wonderful they way you try to dismiss things that don't suit. So it is not coincidence they all live much longer than you claim, they simply don't count. But Amram wasn't freed. Aaron and Miriam were already in their 80s even if they were strong their worn out bodies should have been dying, not ready to go on for another 40 years. The elders and old folk should already have been dead, and Joshua and Caleb should have had their lifespans reduced by their years of hard labour.

I don't think Moses referred to the mountains as 'us', or God who was before the mountains, but he does refer to all generations as 'our'.

Well, right after that Mo talks of "them"!!!!! Then as it gets near the slave age verse, it launches into "we"!!!!!!! So the division is clear between "our, we" and "they them"!


5 Thou carriest them away as with a flood; they are as a sleep: in the morning they are like grass which groweth up. 6 In the morning it flourisheth, and groweth up; in the evening it is cut down, and withereth.

7 For we are consumed by thine anger, and by thy wrath are we troubled. 8 Thou hast set our iniquities before thee, our secret sins in the light of thy countenance. 9 For all our days are passed away in thy wrath: we spend our years as a tale that is told. 10 The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.

Psalm 90:1 A Prayer of Moses, the man of God. Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations.
Psalm 90:10 The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty; yet their span is but toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away.
Same word 'our' for all generations and the 70 or 80 year lifespan.

Moses does use 'them' when he is referring to imagery from Genesis, the sons of Adam being retured to dust, being swept away in the flood, but he links his 'them' to his 'our'. Being turned to dust refers to all of us, all our lives are swept away, all our lives are like a dream that passes away.

Psalm 90:5 You sweep them away as with a flood; they are like a dream, like grass that is renewed in the morning:
6 in the morning it flourishes and is renewed; in the evening it fades and withers.
7 For we are brought to an end by your anger; by your wrath we are dismayed.

Anyway I see you did not try to defend your mountains argument. What are the chances you will drag it up again later even though you could not support it now?

Moses wasn't a slave and he was the one who said 'our'.

Yes, Moses thought of them, most of the time, as his people.

Being his people and sharing their our lifespan are two very different things. Moses still said the days of our life.

So why claim he only had a slave's lifespan of 70 or 80 when he had lived half his life in luxury and the rest just herding sheep? Your interpretation simply does not fit the context of the psalm, or the ages ascribed to the slaves. Of course Moses never said he was talking about slaves.

I don't. He was talking about the people. He didn't knmow when he would die yet. Especially if this was written just before God called him to deliver them??! (80) No wonder that '80' scared him.

How long did his dad live? How long did everybody live at that time? If the lives of the patriarchs are literal, his father lived to 137, his grandfather lived to 133, his great grandfather lived to 137 and his great great grandfather Abraham lived to 175. Why should he think he had a lifespan of 70 or 80? Unless that really was the normal lifespan.

Aaron lived in Goshen where the slave cities were and there is nothing in the bible that suggests Aaron was a lawyer, or Amram or Miriam or Joshua and Caleb or the elder or the old folk. You are making up your 70 year average out of thin air. Funny how you have to ignore the lifespans in the bible to keep your interpretation of lifespans in the bible literal.

There were no lawyers then. But he had learned ho to be a real good speaker, and negotiator. Doesn't sound to me like something one leans being lashed, and worked 16 hot hours of the day!

You are assuming Aaron was only a good talker because of his education. Moses was the one with the education and it didn't make him eloquent. Being a slave does teach you eloquence, but it won't stop someone with the gift of the gab talking.

Incidentally, Moses seems pretty eloquent himself in psalm 90, hardly the man slow of speech and tongue who wandered out of the desert, much more like Moses at the end of his life, as we see in his poetry in Deuteronomy. The intercession and knowledge of the Lord fits Moses leading the Israelites in the wilderness much better than before the Exodus, as does his knowledge of Yahweh's name, which God revealed to him in the burning bush. He was pretty busy when he went to see pharaoh, as well as not being very eloquent. So the Israelites weren't slaves anymore when he wrote the psalm and according to you the slavery didn't effect their lifespans once they were freed Of course then we are into Kadesh and the generation condemned to die in the forty years of wilderness when their lifespan depended on their age leaving Egypt not how strong they were. They certainly don't fit. However if this is the mature man of God who has learned to know his God and has learned to intercede for his people, who had learned eloquence and how to write poetry by the end of his life, then most of the people he was leading were the new generation whose lives would neither have been affected by slavery or Kadesh. Combine that with the complete lack of any reference to slavery and we see that Moses was simply talking about normal human lifespans.

 

[dad]

Psalm 90 says nothing about averages, Hebrew slaves, or anything about averaging the Hebrew slave lifespan.

We know who the group talked about was. We know that 70 years was not meant to be some law, that all people died at 70 or 80. We know the people were slaves, and very likely at the time this was written, or, possibly just after being freed. Therefore, the whole perspective is the slave life.

The only indication in the psalm of who he is talking about is that it is the people of God throughout all generations and that it includes Moses himself.

No, I pointed out the demarcation line, where it was talking of them, (all generations)-- and then suddenly goes into we, and our, as it nears the slave average verse.

Most of the time he was with them they weren't slaves. Nor did he limit himself to people alive at the time. Remember, our dwelling place in all generations.

No really true, in the context of the psalm. If it was written, for example before he delivered the people, then nothing after matters! I don't read anywhere that it was written after 40 years in the wilderness! So, it is commonly assumed it was soon after the departure, but I lean to before they were delivered, where it would seem to make the most sense!

You made the claim before, sidestepped my reply by simply repeating your claim rather than dealing with my response, and when I pointed this out, you completely ignored it, snipping out my reply and going on to the next comment.

Not sure what your point that got ignored was, however, I suspect it may have been something from before I started to crystallize an opinion.

God saying "Let MY people go" is not identifying himself as one of them, or calling himself a slave. He is simply calling the slaves his people. Nor did God ever say he only lives 70 or 80 years. Moses did.

I know. But the point is that Moses was not really one of them either, though he identified as such. He was no slave, but a prince in Egypt.

All generations who have God as their refuge. His father who was a slave and lived to 137. The godly Midianites whose family he married into. Humanity in general, Psalm 90:3 You return man to dust and say, "Return, O children of Adam!"

I pointed out the us, we, our, as opposed to the them already.
_____

 

[dad]

Yes, but not when you want them to. There are a lot of things to do to reconcile Egyptian and biblical timelines, you need to be able to identify Joseph's pharaoh, the change in regime, pharaoh's who built cities with slave labour, the Exodus and subsequent Egyptian military interventions into Israel and Judah.

Are you suggesting you can? First of all, who even says his name wasn't stricken from the record for the humiliation and suffering he presided over? Do we even see Joseph's name there? So let it be written, so let it be done. Ask Yul.

It is not enough to say the 110 year life span must have been when the bible had 110 year lifespans, you have to show the rest fits too.

That alone zips them together in a lockstep that is enough to stand alone, I would think. Unlless actual evidence really forbad it! It doesn't, does it?

Your biggest problem is that according to your weblink, the 110 year lifespan was found in the 5th and 6th dynasties and the 19th and 20th. Now people have argued for Ramasses the Great as the pharoah of the Exodus and he is 19th dynasty, but that leaves the 5th and 6th dynasties, long before the Exodus with 110 year lifespans while the patriarchs were enjoying many centuries like the Sumerians.

No, can you eatablish that Adam was anywhere around Sumer?? Or even Methuselah, that made it pretty well to the flood? What exactly are you talking about? The lifespans took a nosedive after the split! Plummeted don to the 120 or so level in fairly short order. That happens to be close to the time Moses would fit in. All that needs a reviwe is the ages assigned to Egyptian antiquity! They are based on carbon dating, are they not? Surely you would not dare to rasie the king list!

The 70 or 80 does not fit the Israelite slaves either, or Moses who included himself in the lifespan.

I disagree. He included himself with the slaves, whose lives were greatly affected by slavery would be the more proper context.

It does not fit anybody who had lived up until then if we take the lifespans in the bible literally. The logical deduction is that Moses did not take the ages of the patriarchs literally.

I would not expect it to fit anyone but the working slaves. The evidence mounts.

Any evidence that Amram and Aaron and Miriam and the elders and all the old folk were pampered slaves?

Easy, we already know Aaron was out near the border, and had time for some apparently serious schoolin. Besides, if they were to die in the normal slave life span, that would be evidence they were hard working slaves! They didn't. It is all on my side.

And evidence you could spend 40 years in a slavery harsh enough to reduce you lifespan by 40 or 50 years, and because you are freed at 40 go on to live a full lifespan? How come the only people who ages we know of from the bible in this period were pampered slaves?

I already gave the average life of US slaves, which was very much shorter. I don't doubt the same thing would be true where real slavery existed in many places.

Of course the 70 or 80 does fit. it is our normal human lifespan.

Balderdash. That is second guessing thousands of years after the fact!
If the life span curve dropped as the bible says, using the present life span is fooliah and impossible. At best we could say that the severe slavery of Egypt, at the time when life spans were about 110, resulted in about a 33% drop in life expectancy! (or whatever the math works out to)

Quite a reasonable deduction, really, that fits with the evidence.

It is how long Moses expected to live himself, it is how long he expected everyone to live as long as they did not die prematurely accident or disease. It means he did not take the lifespans in the bible any more literally than he took the days of creation.

From the spirit of the text, I would have to go with, it was a passing notation and sorrowful thought of how the slaves lived less than normal. How would I know how long he might think he would live, I don't know how long I will! I went to the doctor, he said I only had ten to live. I said, do you mean yeasr, or months, or..? He replied, 9_8_7_6....

Yeah! When all else fails wave a 'same state past belief' at it. Much better than trying to come up with an actual answer.

That is the actual answer.

Yeah if you squint your eyes tight enough anything can be kept vague enough to fit. Why didn't the Sumerian lifespans decline like the patriarchs?

Because it was mostly embellished pagan lard. I only use it for the very general memory and reality that they knew life spans were real long, as well as knew of spirits, and a flood. For accurate records we need God's book.

Why did the multiple centuries and even thousand year lifespans continue many generations after the Israelite lifespan had declined to normal?

They didn't as explained. The Sumers weren't really even around all that long, were they?

Are they embellished, or evidence of long lifespans? Why are Sumerian lifespans immediately after the flood evidence of long lifespans, but equally long Sumerian lifespans 20 generations after the flood are not to be trusted?

Already explained. I would also take how many generations some think there were with a huge grain of salt.

What the Sumerian records tell us is that embellishing lifespans was simply the common practice at the time, and what Psalm 90 tells us is that it wasn't to be taken literally.

What modern so called science records tell us they are all fables? You need to look beyond the pagan shere for that sort of thing. They always think they are the cat's meow.

The elders and old folk should already have been dead, and Joshua and Caleb should have had their lifespans reduced by their years of hard labour.

We don't know that. I would go by the evidence of how long they lived! That speaks louder than you guessing! Also, God had purposes for them, and you know, that superce3des normal life processes, as Sarah found out.

Psalm 90:1 A Prayer of Moses, the man of God. Lord, you have been our dwelling place in all generations.
Psalm 90:10 The years of our life are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty; yet their span is but toil and trouble; they are soon gone, and we fly away.
Same word 'our' for all generations and the 70 or 80 year lifespan.

Not the same context and meaning, once we have the key to unlock what is really going on here!

You see, the 2 groups about to be mentioned, (them, and we, or our) can be written like this... A + B Now, the first set includes both sub sets! So that it looks more like this, where the first 'our' group is Z, which includes A and B!!!! So that Z = A+B! Simple math. Simple logic. Very fitting with the spirit of the rest of the psalm, and the interpretation of life spans fits nip and tuck with the rest of the bible. All is well in the universe. God was true aftar all.

 

[Assyrian]

We know who the group talked about was.

Yes 'all generations'. On the other hand you haven't come up with the slightest indication he was talking about slaves. Ever notice how Moses finishes the psalm? Psalm 90:17 Let the favor of the Lord our God be upon us, and establish the work of our hands upon us; yes, establish the work of our hands! Do you think Moses was praying God would establish the store cities of Pithom and Raamses that were the work of the hands of Israelite slaves? Moses isn't talking about slaves at all.

We know that 70 years was not meant to be some law, that all people died at 70 or 80. We know the people were slaves, and very likely at the time this was written, or, possibly just after being freed. Therefore, the whole perspective is the slave life.

Of course he wasn't talking about some law, he was describing the general lifespan. We don't know when Moses wrote this, though it fits his poetic eloquence in Deuteronomy at the end of his life rather than the time of the Exodus when he was slow of speech and tongue. Nor is there any indication Moses was speaking of the specific lifespan of slaves rather than the general human condition through all generations. Remember Moses included himself in his and he wasn't a slave and didn't have a slave lifespan. Of course even if you could show Moses was writing while the Israelites were still slaves and was talking about their slave lifespan, the bible still record the slave lifespans between 110 and 137 years, not 70 or 80. Really you just making this up with no regard for the actual text.

No, I pointed out the demarcation line, where it was talking of them, (all generations)-- and then suddenly goes into we, and our, as it nears the slave average verse.

The average slave lifespan is in fact 121 if the ages in the bible are literal. But Moses uses the same word 'our' for all generations and for the 70 or 80 year lifespan. Whether there is a demarcation line or not, Moses is speaking about the same people and includes himself in both.

No really true, in the context of the psalm. If it was written, for example before he delivered the people, then nothing after matters! I don't read anywhere that it was written after 40 years in the wilderness! So, it is commonly assumed it was soon after the departure, but I lean to before they were delivered, where it would seem to make the most sense!

If it was before he delivered the people, and if he was a lot more eloquent at that time than he claimed, and if he was talking about the reduced life expectancy of slaves rather than the normal life expectancy of all generations as he said, even though there is no reference to slavery, and if he was only being metaphorical when he included himself in the life expectancy, and if you assume the slaves' life expectancy actually was 70 or 80 years, and if you ignore the slave's life spans given in the bible, then what you end up is an interpretation based on your own wishful thinking rather than scripture. I don't see how this helps you.

Not sure what your point that got ignored was, however, I suspect it may have been something from before I started to crystallize an opinion.

There were two points. While there are plenty of examples of a person identifying themself with people's sin, we don't have any example of identify with people's age or lifespan. Moses had a lifespan of 120 his father lived to 137, but he said he shared 'our' life span of 70 or 80. Secondly, even if it were true, this is a still Moses metaphorically ascribing a lifespan to himself. you are trying to argue against metaphorical lifespans in the bible by taking Moses' lifespan of 70 or 80 metaphorically.

I know. But the point is that Moses was not really one of them either, though he identified as such. He was no slave, but a prince in Egypt.

He was a Hebrew like they were, kept flocks like they did, he was a descendant of Abraham sharing the promise of faith as they did. Moses certainly shared all the things he spoke of in the psalm with the ones he called 'we' and 'our'. They were all sons of Adam, whose shared mortality Moses specifically mentions in the psalm, he considered them servants of God as he was, he shared God as his refuge with the people he is talking about too, he claimed to share the same 70 or 80 year lifespan.

pointed out the us, we, our, as opposed to the them already.
_____

You tried but not terribly successfully. If someone talks about 'we' and then 'them' and back to 'we' again does that mean he has changed the 'we' he is talking about?
Psalm 20:7 Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God.
8 They collapse and fall, but we rise and stand upright.
Same 'we', even with a them in between.

 

[dad]

Yes 'all generations'. On the other hand you haven't come up with the slightest indication he was talking about slaves. Ever notice how Moses finishes the psalm? Psalm 90:17 Let the favor of the Lord our God be upon us, and establish the work of our hands upon us; yes, establish the work of our hands! Do you think Moses was praying God would establish the store cities of Pithom and Raamses that were the work of the hands of Israelite slaves? Moses isn't talking about slaves at all.

No, maybe he referred to the people being tired of having the work of their hands NOT benefit them! If God freed them, then their work would start to be established.

Of course he wasn't talking about some law, he was describing the general lifespan. We don't know when Moses wrote this, though it fits his poetic eloquence in Deuteronomy at the end of his life rather than the time of the Exodus when he was slow of speech and tongue.

Reference?

Nor is there any indication Moses was speaking of the specific lifespan of slaves rather than the general human condition through all generations. Remember Moses included himself in his and he wasn't a slave and didn't have a slave lifespan. Of course even if you could show Moses was writing while the Israelites were still slaves and was talking about their slave lifespan, the bible still record the slave lifespans between 110 and 137 years, not 70 or 80. Really you just making this up with no regard for the actual text.

No, individual slaves many of whom were freed from slavery is what the exception to the rule was.


It is well known that slaves tend to live less time than average. As in this example

"The very harsh manual labour of the sugar cane fields saw slaves use hoes to dig large trenches. The slaves planted sugar cane in the trenches and then used their bare hands to spread manure. The average life span of a slave was eight years. In the mid to late 19th century, many Amerindians were enslaved to work on rubber plantations. See Içá for more information."
Slavery: Encyclopedia - Slavery

So, 70 years is no stretch.

The average slave lifespan is in fact 121 if the ages in the bible are literal. But Moses uses the same word 'our' for all generations and for the 70 or 80 year lifespan. Whether there is a demarcation line or not, Moses is speaking about the same people and includes himself in both.

Nonsense. There were millions of them, what, you use four or five, that were exceptions?

If

it was before he delivered the people, and if he was a lot more eloquent at that time than he claimed, and if he was talking about the reduced life expectancy of slaves rather than the normal life expectancy of all generations as he said, even though there is no reference to slavery, and if he was only being metaphorical when he included himself in the life expectancy, and if you assume the slaves' life expectancy actually was 70 or 80 years, and if you ignore the slave's life spans given in the bible, then what you end up is an interpretation based on your own wishful thinking rather than scripture. I don't see how this helps you.

Show me this Moses was not eloquent until he died thing? I would say the toil bit in Ps 90 and other bits dovetail well with the slaves. There was no reference to belly buttons either, but all were slaves, almost, and all had belly buttons. The only slave life span in the bible I am aware of, is this 70 to 80 years.

There were two points. While there are plenty of examples of a person identifying themself with people's sin, we don't have any example of identify with people's age or lifespan. Moses had a lifespan of 120 his father lived to 137, but he said he shared 'our' life span of 70 or 80.

The life span was just mentioned in passing, as part of their condition. We know Moses identified himself with the people.

" 9 And Moses said, We will go with our young and with our old, with our sons and with our daughters, with our flocks and with our herds will we go; for we must hold a feast unto the LORD.

Secondly, even if it were true, this is a still Moses metaphorically ascribing a lifespan to himself. you are trying to argue against metaphorical lifespans in the bible by taking Moses' lifespan of 70 or 80 metaphorically.

No, no more than he was ascribing a himself to be a child when he referred to the people as our, in the verse above. Also, if he did write ot early on, he would not know his life span.

He was a Hebrew like they were, kept flocks like they did, he was a descendant of Abraham sharing the promise of faith as they did. Moses certainly shared all the things he spoke of in the psalm with the ones he called 'we' and 'our'. They were all sons of Adam, whose shared mortality Moses specifically mentions in the psalm, he considered them servants of God as he was, he shared God as his refuge with the people he is talking about too, he claimed to share the same 70 or 80 year lifespan.

Impossible. We already have the life spans of Abraham and others recorded. To try to dismiss them is to disbelieve them. There is no need to have the shorter life spans of the enslaved people of Moses mean anything other than that. It is unreasonable. It opposes the rest of the bible. And it is entirely speculation.

You tried but not terribly successfully. If someone talks about 'we' and then 'them' and back to 'we' again does that mean he has changed the 'we' he is talking about?

A lot depends on the focus and application of whom is being discussed. The them and we, and our of Ps 90, revolve around the slaves. Therfore, the years of our lives also must. They certainly do not revolve around the fathers, like Adam. Or even Abraham, etc.

Psalm 20:7 Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God.
8 They collapse and fall, but we rise and stand upright.
Same 'we', even with a them in between.

The contrast there is believers, namely children of Abraham, against them, or the unbelievers. Nothing wrong with that.

So, now that you no longer have any excuse to disbelieve the life spans of the bible, will you persist, or consider looking at the bible in a new light?