6 ms·
Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” -Genes
by mgh2 5y ago
Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” -Genesis 6:3
- melling 5y ago120 years would be a great start. Imagine the world 120 years ago in 1900. The airplane hadn’t been invented. Cars were still a novelty. Special Relativity hadn’t been discovered.
- throwawaygh 5y agoThe image in the article is of a woman who died at 122.
- stfp 5y agoMedian scenario: so you grow up in that world, then go through 2 world wars, a few pandemics, the loss or death of most of your friends and family, gradually disconnect from the rest of society, just so you can see what amazing thing humanity will invent next (spoiler alert: it's more phones and huge cars and maybe a dozen folks living in tunnels on mars), while the forests are ripped out and the oceans boil and nature is paved over and your body turns to crap. Amazing, sign me up. My grandma is 105 years old and is pretty much waiting for it to be over. If you live a full life it's not about how old you get, 90 is more than enough to experience the world and see your grand child grow up.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- clpm4j 5y agoAgreed 100%. I hope that medically assisted suicide becomes more widely legal and acceptable by the time I get towards my end. I didn't ask to be brought into this world and when my body and mind start to really deteriorate, and I can no longer enjoy life the way I want then I'd like to check out on my own terms.
- rantwasp 5y agolol. let me ask you this: if your life quality was the same as 90 as it was at 50 would you still look forward to death? it’s not living 120 or 150 or 200 that matters. it’s the quality of your life. i think working to improve that vs some arbitrary number (that by the time you hit you see death as a release) is what we should target. the term for this is healthspan vs lifespan.
- Larrikin 5y agoThis comment assumes that improvements in longevity will come by themselves with no quality of life improvements. There were plenty of people in their 60s and 70s riddled with cancer and decrepit old bodies from back breaking labor before our lifetimes that probably were waiting for death too. Now that's the age of retirement and a time to explore hobbies and the world for large portions of the population. Personally the one thing I fear is that it will be discovered that it's possible to pause/slow aging but not effectively reverse it. If you start taking the aging pills in your 20s maybe you look and feel 50 when you're 100 but if you start the pills when you're fifty maybe you're feeling like a current 100 year old by your 150th birthday.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- bcrosby95 5y ago> My grandma is 105 years old and is pretty much waiting for it to be over. I'm curious - are those her words or yours?
- optimalsolver 5y agoI seriously feel pissed about all the wonders of the future I'll never get to witness. All the things the human race is going to do. All the places it will go. Of course, that's assuming our species doesn't suffer a biotech apocalypse before then.
- koolba 5y agoIf you reverse that and think about all the wonders and scientific progress that’s been made up till now, it’s easy to say that’s it never been a better time to be alive.
- WJW 5y agoIt's pretty interesting how people are always upset about not living forever or getting to witness the future while nobody ever seems to be bothered that they were born too late to see incredible sights like dinosaurs or getting to see the Incan empire at its peak or something.
- optimalsolver 5y agoIf you think about it, the further you're born into the future the more likely it you'll be able to see the things you're talking about.
- booleandilemma 5y agoBut also think about how jealous future generations are going to be of us, born in space, never being able to walk on a beach, always having to worry about their space station’s life support systems failing.
- rowanG077 5y agoGrass is always greener... Beside they can easily walk on a beach with the Valve Index 3000.
- felipemnoa 5y ago
- golergka 5y agoOd meyah esrim!
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mLuby 5y agoIs that created universe in 6 "days" time or modern calendar time?
- duckfang 5y agoSorry, but I dont base my worldview on what a bunch of bronze-age people said. It's a good mythological story, though. We have science. -------------------------------- Edit: I really don't understand the downvoters. This specific passage was written 6000 years ago, give or take. It's from a religious holybook that has no bearing on technology, medicine, or science. Germ theory was nonexistent, most forms of medicine were in their most rudimentary levels. They didn't even have the technology or know-how for basic ironworking. If you're an adherent to a religion, good for you. Its simply that - a mythology, a belief. And we should be bearing no credence to the writings of religion in our sciences, unless it stated physical fact (think anthropology, geology, architecture - sciences), or if you're a religious historian and trying to understand how human religions change. I thought we worked with sciences here, not superstition.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mgh2 5y agoI get you, HN has a general anti-religious view on things. However, as with any information, bias hurts any analysis (in any form data is presented). A quote is just that, a quote. No matter your beliefs, information is neutral and should be inquired for curiosity purposes in HN, not personal opinion.
- duckfang 5y agoNo. That's called bible-thumping. In our world, it's trivially easy to get hold of any major religion's works, and only moderately difficult to get hold of smaller religion's works, primarily due to translation issues. And in light of context, you weren't comparing the writings or showing different religions' thoughts on human longevity - you were implicitly stating that your choice of religion was the right one, by stating it matter-of-factly.
- 5y ago
- dwaltrip 5y agoHow is this relevant?
- kijin 5y agoIt could be evidence that ancient people knew from their own experience that the natural upper limit was somewhere around 120 years. Which, in turn, would mean that this limit hasn't really changed much over the millennia.
- cecilpl2 5y agoWhat's with all the bible quotes around here lately?
- duckfang 5y agoGood question. My guess is, since your text is pretty gray, that the downvoter brigade also hit you too. I didnt go to news.somereligion.com . And being biblethumped is not indicative of a good time.
- fortran77 5y agoIt's interesting to note that people long ago contemplated whether there was some physical limit to longevity, and what number they thought that was. Nobody's attacking you. Calm down.
- astine 5y agoSo says the Bible, right before talking about Noah who goes on to live many centuries, apparently.
- lurquer 5y agoThat was years until the Flood. Had nothing to do with lifespans. (Biblical characters — contemporary with when the passage was written — were living past 120.)
- dotcommand 5y ago"And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died." - Genesis 9:29 You can argue that Noah was "grandfathered in" since he was born before the 120 year rule. But.. "And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah four hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters." - Genesis 11:13