in the beginning

Nudism raises lots of questions about body care. It is a healthy way of life in many ways, but it also presents certain concerns that we don't face when clothed. Here you can ask all your questions, and post about the health benefits of nudism / naturism.<P>Only Residents and higher may post here.

Moderators: jochanaan, MatthewNeal, jimmy, natman, Senior Moderator, Moderators

in the beginning

Postby DaveT » Wed Jan 18, 2017 1:05 am

I keep thinking about it. God's ideal health plan. We have our first grandparents, who would have been just like us except for the 6000 years of deterioration we suffer from. Placed in a perfect garden to live and work it, naked of course. No temperature or precipitation problems so they just made a "shelter" or arbor out of grape vines to be their home. They would have spent their days with a mixture of sun exposure and shade. An occasional or daily swim in a river. Would have picked and eaten from the trees and plants which would have been in abundance of every variety we have and likely some we don't. We could safely assume the soil fertility and minerals were perfect. After they sinned and were banned from the tree of life, mortality set in.

From my study of soil fertility I begin to understand how it might have worked back then. And there are hints of what wonderful health and vitality it can produce in us if we could grow and eat it somewhere near the quality they had. It seems a certain amount of that mortality can be reversed for a while. Is it worth striving to duplicate? I think it is. What would it be worth to add 30 or 50 years of good healthy working life to our time? How about an extra 100 years? I guess it depends on quality of life if it would be worth it. But if it means boosting quality of life significantly as well. I want it. Bad enough to work for it.
User avatar
DaveT
Native Resident
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:29 pm
Location: TN

Re: in the beginning

Postby Maverick » Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:30 pm

I recently read two books by Hugh Ross, one called Hidden Secrets in the Book of Job and another called Why the Universe is the Way It Is. Ross argues that God shortened mankind's lifespan to about 120 years (Genesis 6:3) as a result of the immense and perhaps unfathomable evil that was on the earth at the time, when people were living to nearly one thousand years. The shorter lifespan permits one person to only accomplish so much evil in his or her natural life.

I'm not sure if I agree completely with his argument but it's food for thought.

In high school, I remember reading about Larry Page (co-founder of Google) and his interest in immortality: http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/19/4748594/understanding-calico-larry-page-google-ventures-and-the-quest-for
In nuditate veritas.
User avatar
Maverick
Native Resident
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:14 am
Location: DFW, TX

Re: in the beginning

Postby DaveT » Wed Jan 25, 2017 1:07 am

I think the 120 years is not a designation of life span but referring to what happened a few verses later. God commissioned Noah to build the ark 120 years before the flood happened. God was saying He was giving mankind 120 years of probation before destruction. Since according to the age records mans lifespan didn't reduce to the vicinity of 120 until about the time of Jacob's sons.

The Bible states that "only God has immortality" Adam and Eve forfeited it when they sinned, but Jesus came to restore it to us if we comply with his conditions. He is the source of true immortality and what a wonderful thing he has offered, a home forever with God in His home. Restoration to the Garden of Eden. We are told by a prophet that the original garden was extracted from earth by God before the flood as a sample of His original work of creation. Placed in the Holy City awaiting Adam and Eve's return when they are resurrected. While it seems eating food grown as close to Eden style as possible does have definite anti aging effects, and might even double expected life span if consumed raw. It can't entirely stop aging and death. The benefits seem well worth pursuing. We shall see. I intend to try it myself soon as I can get enough food growing to eat. And see what it will do for me physically over the next year. It's the only way I know of to get myself feeling better and fix the little problems that are overtaking me.

As for exposure to the sun. Al Wolfsen was a natural healing "doctor" we learned from. He quoted certain studies that were done on sunshine for health and one point was that plenty of sun on the skin actually increased the volume of blood in the body by 20%. More blood would mean better circulation and better oxygen and CO2 transfer. A benefit of nude life outside. He recommended nude sunbathing.

Looks like those people are completely overlooking the real answer to aging. Jesus and what He offers. They probably haven an evolutionary basis for their thinking. Start building on a faulty foundation and you won't get a solid structure. And cancer is mentioned as if it were not yet solved. Cancer was solved long ago but the medical system refuses to use the solution or admit it exists. Because the cure is just way too cheap. People can do it themselves without a dollar going to the drug companies. RAW FOOD! And there are some good healing herbs that will help a lot. And oxygen therapy. But raw vegetables is the main thing. A 100% raw diet will knock out cancer of every kind. Eat food the way God designed it to be eaten and health is restored. And then there's the lack of minerals in the soil that makes food taste poor and not create the health it should. It needs to be grown on heavily mineralized and carbon rich soil to do the job.

Al Wolfsen was approached once by a woman who had been diagnosed with cancer. She was working supporting a daughter and couldn't afford to stop work. He didn't know what to tell her. So sent up a quick prayer for wisdom. The answer came to him immediately. He told her, "you've eaten your last bite of cooked food" She said "I'll do it" and left. He didn't hear from her for awhile, but a couple years later she saw him in a store and introduced herself. She said the cancer vanished, but she stuck with the raw food and after awhile she got to looking younger than her daughter.
User avatar
DaveT
Native Resident
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 10:29 pm
Location: TN

Re: in the beginning

Postby Jim » Wed Jan 25, 2017 8:01 am

Interesting, Dave.

I was trained scientifically. I would like to see peer review and controlled experiments rather than unverifiable stories. Anecdotes can be the start to a hypothesis, but then one needs to design experiments.

References to unnamed prophets also do little for me. I am drawn to the Berean attitude, who "searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
User avatar
Jim
Native Resident
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:36 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: in the beginning

Postby Bare_Truth » Fri Jan 27, 2017 2:12 pm

DaveT wrote:...... Since according to the age records mans lifespan didn't reduce to the vicinity of 120 until about the time of Jacob's sons.......

I think you might find the following useful in illustrating this point. I made it up on a spreadsheet:
Years of the Patriarchs Adam Jacob.jpg
From Adam to Jacob. Note the steady shortening of life span after the flood


Showing just the time after the flood when life spans were shortening we get this:
Years of the Patriarchs After the Flood Noah to Jacob.jpg
This provides a focus on the shortening of life spans.

Being born before the flood seems to be advantageous and being born after the flood cause the first abrupt reduction in reported age.
Note that:
from Shem to Arphaxad there is a 162 year decrement
but also:
Eber (aka Heber, the original Hebrew) to Peleg, the decrement is 225 years

Just as an aside Abraham was called a Hebrew as he was a descendent of Eber, but then since the Arabs count their descent from Ishmael son of Abraham, that makes them Hebrews too. (but you might not want to stress that point with them :wink: )

Of course you might not want to stress the point with Jews that Moses wasn't a Jew! Jews are the descendants of Judah son of Jacob but Moses was a Levite, and Levi was a different son of Jacob, son of Isaac, son of Abraham.

But back to the graphs: The graphs show that apparantly there was a steady degradation of reported life span after the flood. Suggesting that something changed before to after that event.
I never met anyone that I could not learn something from.
User avatar
Bare_Truth
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 10:07 pm
Location: Ozark Plateau, Southwest Missouri

Re: in the beginning

Postby Ramblinman » Fri Jan 27, 2017 3:29 pm

Take a closer look at the Years of the Patriarchs Chart:
First a steep decline in lifespan:
Shem was 350 years younger than his father Noah was at the time of his death.

Then a plateau:
Arphaxad, his son Salah and grandson Eber all died at roughly the same age approx. 433-464 years with no discernable decline.

Then another steep decline:
Peleg lived half the lifespan of those preceding three generations.

Then another plateau:
But Peleg's son and grandson also lived about the same lifespan as Peleg.

The pattern, (if there is one), gets harder to decipher after Peleg's grandson Serug...
Serug's son Nahor died at age 148 and his great, great grandson Jacob died at almost the same age.
But Nahor's son Terah, grandson Abram (Abraham) and great grandson Isaac all lived more or less the same lifespan.

Going off the chart (but still in the book of Genesis)...
However, Ishmael, Isaac's half-brother, died at age 137, some 43 years younger than Isaac.
Could the bloodline of Abraham, Sarai, and Rachel have contributed to Isaac's greater longevity?
Perhaps Ishmael's mother Hagar didn't come from as vigorous stock.
Isaac's son Joseph died at age 110

So what is going on here?
Ramblinman
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2631
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:22 am

Re: in the beginning

Postby Bare_Truth » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:46 pm

Ramblinman wrote:Take a closer look at the Years of the Patriarchs Chart:
First a steep decline in lifespan:
Shem was 350 years younger than his father Noah was at the time of his death.

Then a plateau:
Arphaxad, his son Salah and grandson Eber all died at roughly the same age approx. 433-464 years with no discernable decline.

Then another steep decline:
Peleg lived half the lifespan of those preceding three generations.

Then another plateau:
But Peleg's son and grandson also lived about the same lifespan as Peleg.

The pattern, (if there is one), gets harder to decipher after Peleg's grandson Serug........

Your point about the Noah to Shem abrupt decline is a good call. I was fighting with an uncooperative computer and was actually focusing on the decline after the flood. So I could have made my point perhaps a bit better. So I will offer the following graph which I have just made from the same data I had previously used.
---------------
Years_of_the_Patriarchs_Adam_to_Jacob-Degredation.jpg
Curve fits to the data


What I have done is to first plot the whole set of data which is represented by the centeral little blue dots in the points.
Eyeballing that result it really looks like two different curves so I then performed a least squares regression first to the data for the life spans prior to the prior to the flood and then to the Data that was post flood. I left out the data point for Enoch because the scripture indicates that God intervened in his recorded life.

As is the usual case to do a regression fit one must know something about the process driving the data or at least try to make a shrew guess.

Two things influence the quality of the fit achieved.
A. Just plain old randomness in the data
B. How appropriate the selection of the mathematical model was that was chosen for the type of regression. The goodness of the fit of the regression is represented by the R^2 term. I.E. does the mathematics fit the underlying process driving the array of the data. An R^2 value of 1 means the data all fall exactly on the line and is a perfect fit without random error, and hence is almost if not always bogus.

I think that the red diamonds do look very much linear and they only got an R^2 term of about 0.3
What is almost freakish is the the post flood data earned an R^2 of 0.78.
A value that high only comes about if the originator of the data fudged it
OR
There really is a physical phenomenon driving the process.

This really puts a crimp in the idea that that sequence of ages was the random musings of a bunch of writers picking numbers at random. As no known writers of that time had a grasp of exponential functions . It does not at all look like that, and very much looks like there was indeed a physical phenomenon driving the data, and the scatter in the post flood degradation of life span is just person to person differences overwhelmed by a much stronger physical phenomenon.
I never met anyone that I could not learn something from.
User avatar
Bare_Truth
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 10:07 pm
Location: Ozark Plateau, Southwest Missouri

Re: in the beginning

Postby bn2bnude » Fri Jan 27, 2017 9:40 pm

Bare_Truth wrote:Showing just the time after the flood when life spans were shortening we get this:
Years of the Patriarchs After the Flood Noah to Jacob.jpg

Being born before the flood seems to be advantageous and being born after the flood cause the first abrupt reduction in reported age.
Note that:
from Shem to Arphaxad there is a 162 year decrement
but also:
Eber (aka Heber, the original Hebrew) to Peleg, the decrement is 225 years

I would like to suggest that the sample size used to determine this is quite small, maybe small enough to make any sort of conclusion statistically invalid

Bare_Truth wrote:Just as an aside Abraham was called a Hebrew as he was a descendent of Eber, but then since the Arabs count their descent from Ishmael son of Abraham, that makes them Hebrews too. (but you might not want to stress that point with them :wink: )

Sources?
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1 NLT)



If I speak with the tongues of men and angels but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. (1 Cor 13:1)
User avatar
bn2bnude
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:09 am
Location: Denver

Re: in the beginning

Postby Bare_Truth » Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:05 am

Bn2BNude
As for Eber = Heber, you could compare various common translations such as Gen 10:25 KJV vs Douay-Rheims or for a quicker rundown you might read at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eber

For a quick memory jog that Moses was not a Jew but rather a Levite, most know that Aaron was Moses brother and any reader of the old testament should know that Aaron was a Levite!

Certainly 14 data points for post flood lifespans is DEFINITELY small sample statistics but a coefficient of determination, R^2 = 0.783 Is certainly good enough to suggest that there is something here. At the time I did not have the time to pursue this for a few more generations. to solidify it, but time permitting I will try to see if I can extend that.

(Apologies for the bad composition on the Moses-Aaron Jew-Levite part above I was rushed and made a mess of it, but I think it is clear now.)
I never met anyone that I could not learn something from.
User avatar
Bare_Truth
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 10:07 pm
Location: Ozark Plateau, Southwest Missouri

Re: in the beginning

Postby Ramblinman » Sun Jan 29, 2017 3:08 pm

Bare Truth,
Two criticisms of your graph:
1. Shouldn't the x axis be a function of generation (Adam = 1, Seth = 2, etc.) rather than time?
Reason being: the number of generations from Adam someone sired a child is more important than the time elapsed since the creation of Adam, assuming that except for the drastic change in environment following the Great Flood, most of the change in lifespan is a function of the number of copies of the genetic material made. (Ever tried to make a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy?)
Time may be only tangentially related to longevity, generation # directly related.

2. We are rarely given the lifespan of those outside the prophetic line. It is possible that Abraham and Sarah came from a very unusual genetic line, one prone to longevity compared to humanity at large.
For example, witness the greater longevity of Isaac, child of Abraham and his half-sister Sarah, versus the shorter lifespan of Ishmael, who was not Sarah's son, but Hagar's. The two boys only had Abraham in common. Isaac may have gotten a double dose of a pair of longevity genes from his closely related parents.

Not a criticism, but an additional observation: In the case of Terah, his grandson Abram (Abraham) and great grandson Isaac, they all lived more or less the same lifespan.
But Serug's son Nahor died at age 148 and his great, great grandson Jacob died at almost the same age.
One possible way to make sense of this is the possibility that Terah, Abraham and Isaac were homozygous, supposedly having both of two genes that expressed a trait that promotes longevity.
But Nahor and Jacob were heterozygous, supposedly having only one of two genes that express a trait that promotes longevity and one gene that results in shorter lifespan.
Ramblinman
Native Resident
 
Posts: 2631
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:22 am


Return to Nudism and Health Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest