Welcome to Gaia! ::

Now I could be wrong, but I have the theory that in today's years Sarah would be forty-five years old instead of being ninety but in that day would be ninety.

Now here is why I think so. Last week I saw a play about Abraham and Sarah. During one scene when the Pharaoh took Sarah he kept saying how beautiful she was. I kept wondering how beautiful could a seventy-five year old be. I got to thinking and I remembered when I was listening to the commentary on the ten commandment DVD and they talked about that the calendar year was only half as long as what we have now since the crops could be harvest two times a year. Today the calender year is based on how long the earth travels around the sun but back then it was different. She would still be considered old in those days to have a child.

What do you think?

Why?

It's not changing the story or the meaning. To them it was ninety years and I may in fact by wrong. Sarah was old when she has Issac and Issac was a miracle.

They could have used a different calendar before the flood. Besides I have never said the bible was wrong. The only thing I'm saying is that we may have a longer year then they did.

Technically we are living in the year we think we are in (or close to it) the modern calender isn't that old. and we have some physical evidence just not much.

That makes sense. The calander changed a million times back then, and society was different. That's something we have to take into consideration when reading the bible. everything may not be literal, especially since Jesus used parables to teach lessons in a figurative way. Like in genesis when God says he created the world in six days time. God doesn't live in time, so it could be six years or six milleniums, or six hours. we won't know until we get to heaven, and maybe not even then. However, I do want to say that there are some things that are meant literally in the bible. But your theory could be true.

Homosexuality Is NOT A Sin: What Christ Said And More, by Linaloki.

On Christianity and Central-Western European witchcraft:

During the Bronze Age, Northern European magic was similar to other cultures during that time; a burial site of one Bronze Age woman contained a claw-joint of a lynx, the bones of a weasel, spinal joints of snakes, horses' teeth, a rowan twig, a broken knife blade, and two pieces of iron pyrite, all of which were apparently believed to possess magical abilities. Similarly, the folk-magic of the early Christian period was common sorcery, not involving demons or devils. Some examples include Teutonic sorcerers working magic on figures of wax or dough, and charms to hurt or heal (some of which persisted into the 19th century as folk remedies). Anglo-Saxon magic involved spells and simple mechanical remedies, sometimes mixed with Christian religious elements (such as saying the Lord's Prayer while brewing a potion).

In folklore, a Witch (far from the later diabolic meaning of the term) is a mere sorcerer or magician, associated with the spirits of nature; the tales themselves reflect both a fear of the witches and a sense of their power. Though the meaning, like the meaning of any symbol, changes from tale to tale, the witch usually (in these tales) represents an elemental natural force possessing enormous and unexpected powers that are, while not necessarily evil, so alien and remote from the world of man that they constitute a threat to the order of the cosmos. This gut terror of witchcraft may explain the excesses of fear and hatred that welled up during the witch craze.

The advent of Christianity suggests that potential Christians, comfortable with the use of magic as part of their daily lives, expected Christian clergy to work magic of a form superior to the old Pagan way. While Christianity competed with Pagan religion, this concern was paramount, only lessening in importance once Christianity was the dominant religion in most of Europe. In place of the old Pagan magic methodology, the Church placed a Christian methodology involving saints and divine relics — a short step from the old Pagan techniques of amulets.

Augustine, an influential Christian theologian, argued that all pagan magic and religion were invented by the Devil to lure humanity away from Christian truth; he argued that while some of the effects were illusion and some real, both were workings of the Devil. Shortly thereafter, theologians identified the pagan gods of old, such as Jupiter and Diana, as demonic servants of Satan that sorcerers would call up to do their bidding; later such claims extended to northern gods such as Odin and Freyja.

In the seventh and ninth centuries, the Church began to influence civil law to create anti-witchcraft legislation. The Latin 'maleficium', which originally meant wrong-doing, now came to mean malevolent magic, presumed to be associated with the Devil. Not only was magic now a crime against society, but heresy and a crime against God. The Council of Leptinnes in 744 drew up a "List of Superstitions" which prohibited sacrifice to saints and created a baptismal formula that required one to renounce works of demons, specifically naming Thor and Odin.

Although I don't know much about that. I'm more of an Isles person, myself.

I was just posting for information's sake. *shrugs* I thought the people involved in this debate might appreciate the 411.

"611's phone repair!" xd