Living 900 Years Old…Really?

Living 900 Years Old…Really?

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, August 22, 2025 (Donate)

I looked at this subject a number of times in the past and I’m going to pool together some of that information here under one article.

When we look at the ages of the patriarchs, like Adam who lived 930 years or Noah who lived 950 years, we tend to look with our “eyebrow raised”. Did people really live this long? Today, hitting 80 is an accomplishment—and that is above the average!

Exhibit of an aged Methuselah in the Creation Museum; Photo by Bodie Hodge

So, was this even feasible? In our secularized culture, they teach that we evolved from animals whose lifespans were quite short. In light of this, it is assumed in our distant past, man also had short life spans. So, when non-Christians see the biblical data that reaches to 900+ years old, many think these ages were quite fanciful and false. But was it?

God said they lived this long. That should settle the issue. Nevertheless, let’s dive into this subject in more detail.

Ages Dropping Off

Let’s start by considering something else right up front—a God of life created man in a perfect world where they should never have died if they hadn’t sinned! I sometimes think we are asking the wrong question—it should be why did they live such short lives of only 900 years or so, and why do our lives tread even shorter?

Man was designed to live forever, but sin destroyed that perfection and death now reigned as of the third chapter in the Bible. From Adam to Noah, people lived around 900 years old—with the exception of Enoch who was taken to heaven without death (translated) at 325.

	Patriarch	Age	Bible reference
1	Adam	930	Genesis 5:4
2	Seth	912	Genesis 5:8
3	Enosh	905	Genesis 5:11
4	Cainan	910	Genesis 5:14
5	Mahalalel	895	Genesis 5:17
6	Jared	962	Genesis 5:20
7	Enoch	365 (translated)	Genesis 5:23
8	Methuselah	969	Genesis 5:27
9	Lamech	777	Genesis 5:31
10	Noah	950	Genesis 9:29
11	Shem	600	Genesis 11:10–11
12	Arphaxad	438	Genesis 11:12–13
13	Shelah	433	Genesis 11:14–15
14	Eber	464	Genesis 11:16–17
15	Peleg	239	Genesis 11:18–19
16	Reu	239	Genesis 11:20–21
17	Serug	230	Genesis 11:22–23
18	Nahor	148	Genesis 11:24–25
19	Terah	205	Genesis 11:32
20	Abram (Abraham)	175	Genesis 25:7
21	Isaac	180	Genesis 35:28–29
22	Jacob (Israel)	147	Genesis 47:28
23	Joseph	110	Genesis 50:22, 26

Table 1. Ages of the Patriarchs from Adam to Joseph

Noah’s father Lamech died at 777—he was a young pup compared to the other patriarchs. In fact, Lamech’s father was almost 200 years older than him when he died. After Noah, the ages dipped down through Shem’s line. Since all are descendants Noah’s three sons, and none live to 900 today, then all three lines dropped off in great ages.

Although we are given Shem’s line, it is possible that Ham’s and Japheth’s line could have been slower or faster in their decline. For instance, Japheth or Ham could still have lived 800-900 years old and then the ages drop off. We simply don’t know. We just know that Shem lived to a mere 600 years old, though he surely expected to live about the ages of his father, grandfather and great grandfather.

The ages did drop off over the next millennium or more. Over the years, several people have proposed ideas as to why this happened. 

 

Diet

For example, some thought it had something to do with diet. People were first permitted to eat meat after the Flood (Genesis 9:3) so some thought the original vegetarian diet (Genesis 1:29) would help them live to such great ages. Some have further pointed toward Daniel and his request of a temporary vegetarian diet (Daniel 1:8-16) so that he didn’t have to eat the king’s food that was sacrificed to false gods.

However, vegetarian diets never allowed people to live to such ages as 900 years even today. In fact, vegetarians do not attain a life span much different than those who retain meat in the diet.

Increased Oxygen

Some proposed that increased oxygen prior to the Flood (and changed significantly due to the Flood) would allow the body to better heal, and eliminate disease and thus, reach such ages. And although there are some benefits to temporary increased oxygen in some cases (e.g. hyperbaric medicine), in other cases it is detrimental to your health (e.g., birth defects such as blindness in children due to supplemental oxygen, oxygen toxicity, swelling of lenses in the eye causing blurred vision, etc.). 

Increased oxygen can cause a host of other problems because oxygen is extremely reactive causing oxidation where your body doesn’t want it. People often eat foods that are high in antioxidants to reduce these extra “free radicals” of oxygen. Regardless, the simple fact is that such experiments have not permitted people to live to ages remotely close to 900 years.

Environmental Changes

It is true that the world changed significantly due to the Flood. Vegetation, as well as land and sea life, were drastically reduced and made to virtually “start all over again”. But did this cause aging to significantly drop off?

Noah, who was already 600 years old, stepped off the Ark into this new world as well. If the environment was the cause massive reduced aging, why did Noah live 350 more years?  The new environment didn’t seem to touch him!

Model of Noah in the Creation Museum; Photo by Bodie Hodge

Noah was the third longest living person recoded in the Bible (after Methuselah and Jared)! If the environmental effects were the cause, then this does not make sense, unless these environmental effects were more gradual. Though, this is not to say environmental changes did not do something, but its effects were not the primary cause of ages dropping about 9 times.

Some have suggested that carbon 14 was greater in the post-Flood world and that might have a detrimental effect on aging.[1] Again, Noah was subject to this, yet lived 950 years old, 350 of those years post-Flood.

Genetics

Genetics were likely the prime culprit. Dr. David Menton and Dr. Georgia Purdom look specifically at genetics and resulting functions of anatomical features with regards to aging.[2]

We need to keep in mind that there were two major genetic bottlenecks:

1.         At the Flood

2.         At the Tower of Babel

Flood Bottleneck

Genetic bottlenecks cause a significant loss of access to other people’s versions of genes (called alleles) that are essentially lost. The obvious loss of pre-Flood people reduced the alleles in the gene pool in humanity to only 8 people, but really only 6.

Scripture reveals that Noah and his wife had no more sons after the Flood (Genesis 10). Thus, this leaves Shem, Ham, and Japheth and their wives, and, of course, these three men each inherited their genes from the same two parents.

So, early generations after the Flood, like early generations after the Garden of Eden, saw marriages between people who were close relatives. Of course, such close intermarriage was not forbidden until the time of Moses. Regardless, this bottleneck saw the loss of a great many alleles from the gene pool of those who died in the Flood.

Tower Bottleneck

If you look at the ages of people born after the Flood, the ages do a sudden drop but are stabilized at about 445 years or so:

1          Arphaxad        438      Genesis 11:12–13

2          Shelah             433      Genesis 11:14–15

3          Eber                464      Genesis 11:16–17

The ages seem to drop in half, where Shem, who was born prior to Flood, lived to 600. After the Tower, ages suddenly drop from about 450 to about 235 or so for three generations:

1          Peleg   239      Genesis 11:18–19

2          Reu      239      Genesis 11:20–21

3          Serug   230      Genesis 11:22–23

Even 2 generations after this Terah lived to 205.  But these ages trickle down from here.

The Flood and the Tower bottlenecks did something significant to cause ages to suddenly drop. In both cases, there is a loss or splitting up of the gene pool. Consider also how mutations can affect age with an extreme example: One tiny flaw, and 50 years lost!

With these bottlenecks, a host of alleles will be filtered out and lost. Consequently, immune systems may not be as good, or a host of other functions, resulting in more infectious disease and so on.

Shem An Intriguing Clue

Another interesting clue comes from Shem. The bottleneck at the Flood would not have affected Noah as his genetics were not bound by that event. And he lived 350 years after the Flood and died at 950 years.

Again, Ham and Japheth’s ages are not recorded in Scripture. But Shem was 600 years. Either bottleneck, the Flood or the Tower would not have affected Shem’s genetic longevity, in the same way it didn’t affect Noah, which was prior to the Flood as well.

And yet, his age was significantly dropped off too, by 300 to 350 years. The Bible does not record the cause of death, so it is possible that something caused a premature death. However, it likely just the age of Shem in his old age. And this is a clue that there may have been a genetic problem that passed through Noah to Shem (and perhaps Ham and Japheth too) to trigger a drop in ages.

Consider Lamech again. Noah’s father, only lived to 777. In the reality of his day, he was young when he died!  Methuselah, Lamech’s father, lived nearly 200 years longer than Lamech! So, is it possible that there was a genetic mistake hidden within Lamech that occurred between Methuselah and his son Lamech?

If this defective gene was passed to Noah from Lamech, and yet masked by a good gene from Noah’s mother, it may not affect him and hence, he still lives to a ripe old age of 950 years. But Noah could still pass this defective along to his sons, such as Shem, who lived to 600 years. But why couldn’t this have been masked by a good gene from Noah’s mother…unless she too had a defective gene?

The Bible reveals that Noah was the only one righteous among his generations (Genesis 6:8-9). Yet he failed to have been fruitful and multiply until he was 500 years old (Genesis 1:28; Genesis 5:32); which may signify that Noah had to wait for a long time to find a godly wife (as opposed to intentionally ignoring God’s command).

Perhaps like Isaac, he went back to common relation to find a wife who was godly as opposed to finding a wife among the ungodly (Genesis 24:37-38). Methuselah and Lamech (Noah grandfather and Lamech’s father), who were trained by Enoch, who walked with God as well and was translated without death to heaven (Genesis 5:24), seems to be strongest candidates whose families could offer a godly wife. But with this, the same defective gene could be in her genes as well if it also passed to Lamech.

After the Flood in Genesis 9 [prior to the assembly at Babel while Noah and his descendants were still living in tents west from Shinar], righteous Noah became rather drunk, so drunk in fact, that he lay naked in his tent and failed to recognize that his son Ham had gazed into the tent and observed him and then proceed to spread the raunchy words about his father (Genesis 9:21-22).

It was Shem and Japheth’s responsibility to walk in backwards, not looking at their father’s nakedness, and lay a covering over him (Genesis 9:23). Did you ever stop and ask, why was it their responsibility to cover Noah? Where was Noah’s wife? And why would Noah get so drunk in the first place?

Could it have simply been that she had already died…perhaps even recently to warrant Noah’s act of getting drunk? According to Archbishop Ussher, the events at Babel occurred about 106 years after the Flood (according to the Bible about 3-4 generations had been born, so this is in the ballpark but may be off a little.) This means that this event occurred in less than this time, which is enough for Canaan to be born (Ham’s youngest) and cursed by Noah when he awoke.

If this were the case, then Noah and Mrs. Noah could have had defective genes that were passed to their sons and this could explain why Shem only lived to 600 years, Noah’s wife is missing in Genesis 9, and why ages began dropping.

Further, this explains one aspect of how this could have coupled in subsequent generations to drop the ages even further.

Common Denominator Of All People Today

All people today go back to Noah and his wife (Mrs. Noah). So, something with reduced aging has to come through them. Consider the name of Noah and the prophecy associated with it:

And he called his name Noah, saying, "This one will comfort us concerning our work and the toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD has cursed." (Genesis 5:29)

Noah’s name literally means “rest”. This is obviously looking back to Genesis 3:17-19, where the “ground was cursed” due to sin, “by the sweat of your brow” and “through painful toil will you work” the ground.

How can we have rest or comfort in this? It is by either better ways to doing the work…or not doing it as long. Commentators have long stated many ideas on this such as Noah comforting us in being a type of Christ with the Ark. Others have pointed out that this relates to the post-Flood statement by God that He would no longer curse the ground with new curses due to man’s sake, among other comments too.

Some have said that this was the advent of farming, however, Adam worked the ground (Genesis 3:23) and so did Cain (Genesis 4:2-3). So, this may not be the best interpretation. Consider:

Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, "Write: ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.’" "Yes," says the Spirit, "that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them." (Revelation 14:13)

This verse gives support to the idea that rest or comfort from work and labor, means that you have died and now rest in the Lord. Let’s face it, the people after Noah did not work for 900 years, but far less than that by the sheer fact that they did not live that long.

Could Genesis 5:29 mean that through Noah people would not live as long and therefore have rest concerning their work and toil? It is possible. I’m sure an entire book could be written on the subject.

Conclusion

There are goo logical reasons, starting with God’s Word, that the ages of the patriarchs are indeed really old. But the real question remains—why do they die so early? Instead of living 5,000 years old, why so young at 900?

We are in a sin-cursed and broken world where death reigns due to man’s sin. God forbid man from reaching out and taking form the Tree of Life and living forever in a sin-broken world. He even put Cherubim with flaming swords to block that path.

Man would eventually die (surely die) just as God said due to our sin. But the fact remains, that God solved the sin-death problem with His Son, Christ Jesus.

When Jesus died on the cross, God’s wrath was satisfied to punish Him instead of us. Christ, being God Himself, could endure that punishment and walk out of the grave, since He is the God of life.

In heaven, 900 years is but a blink of the eye. For in heaven, those who repent and trust in Jesus Christ, and His death, burial and resurrection, will live forever in perfection again with God and all His eternal blessings. We will, never die but have eternal life.

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council. 

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children.

Portions originally at Answers in Genesis; Edited; Republished by permission.

---

[1] Raul Lopez, Jr., Radiocarbon and the Longevity of Prediluvian Patriarchs, CRSQ, Vol. 62, Number 1, Summer 2025, p. 32-52.

[2] David Menton and Georgia Purdom, The New Answers Book Volume 2, Ken Ham and Bodie Hodge, gen. eds., Master Books, Green Forest, AR, 2009.

Did Noah Need Oxygen Tanks On The Ark?

Did Noah Need Oxygen Tanks On The Ark? 

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, June 26, 2025 (Donate) 

Why would someone ask this question? Let’s back up and look at this from a big picture. Consider what the Bible says about the voyage of the Ark (all NASB unless otherwise denoted): 

The water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered. The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered. (Genesis 7:19–20).[1] 

People then look at the earth today and note that the highest mountain is Mt. Everest, which stands just over 29,000 feet above sea level. Then they put two and two together and say that Noah’s Ark floated at least 15 cubits above Mt. Everest—and at such high altitude, people need oxygen![2] 

It sounds like a straightforward argument, doesn’t it? But did you notice that I emphasized the word today? In light of this, the solution is quite simple: the Flood did not happen on today’s earth, but rather on the earth of nearly 4,300 years ago. 

The world today is not the same as it was before the Flood, or even during the Flood. For instance, if the mountains, continents, and oceans basins of today’s earth were more leveled out (as would be expected in a global Flood), the planet’s surface water alone would cover the earth an estimated 1.66 miles deep—about 8,000 feet. Yet when I visited Cusco, Peru, which is around 11,000 feet above sea level, I didn’t need an oxygen tank. 

Andes Mountains above Cusco—well over 2 miles high—with sea fossils (closed shells, ammonites, etc.) from the Flood; Pictures by Bodie Hodge

Furthermore, atmospheric air pressure is relative to sea level. So, as rising sea levels pushed the air column higher, the air pressure at sea level would stay the same.

Psalm 104:6–9: Creation Or The Flood? 

By day 150 of the Flood, mountains began overtaking the water again as the mountain-building phase had begun (Genesis 8:2–4). Poetic Psalm 104 gives further hints of this mountain building as the valley basins sank down: 

You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. The mountains rose; the valleys sank down To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth. (Psalm 104:6–9) 

This section of the psalm is obviously speaking of the Flood, as water would no longer return to cover the earth—if this passage were speaking of Creation Week (as some commentators have stated), then God would have erred when the waters covered the whole earth during the Flood. 

Consider this overview of the entire Psalm continues down through history:

Psalm 104:1–5	Creation Week
Psalm 104:6–9	Flood
Psalm 104:10–35	Post-Flood

It makes sense that, because the Psalm is referring to the earth and what is in it, it begins with earth history (Creation Week). But mentions of donkeys (verse 11) and goats (verse 18) show variation within the created kind, which shows this would have taken place after the Flood. Also, a post-Flood geographic location is named (Lebanon, verse 16) as well as ships (verse 26) that indicate this psalm was not entirely a look at Creation Week.

Lost In Translation? 

While everyone agrees that Psalm 104:1–5 is referring to Creation Week, what of the argument—made by many commentators from the 1600s onward—that attributes Psalm 104:6–9 to Creation Week? One could suggest that much of this is due to the translation being viewed. Two basic variants of the translation of the Hebrew in Psalm 104:8 read: 

1. “They went up over the mountains and went down into the valleys.”
2. “Mountains rose and the valleys sank down.” 

In fact, a variety of translations yield some variant of one of these two possibilities. 

Table 1. Translations of Psalm 104:8a[3] 

Translation	Agrees with: “They went up over the mountains and went down into the valleys”	Agrees with: “Mountains rose and the valleys sank down”
New American Standard		X
New International Version	X
King James Version	X
New King James Version	X
English Standard Version		X
Holman Christian Standard		X
English translation of the Septuagint	X
Revised Version (UK)	X
Amplified Bible		X
Good News Bible	X
New English Bible	X
Revised Berkley		X
J.N. Darby’s		X
Living Bible		X
New Living Translation		X
Jerusalem Bible	X
R.G. Moulton	X
Knox Version		X
The Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic Text (a new translation by the Jewish Publication Society)		X
Revised Standard Version		X
Young’s Literal Translation	X
King James 21st Century Version	X
Geneva Bible		X
New Revised Standard Version	X
Webster’s Bible	X
New International Children’s Version		X
Interlinear Bible		X

Obviously, there is no consensus on translation among these English versions. Looking at other languages, we see how the Hebrew was translated. 

Table 2. Some Foreign Translations of Psalm 104:8[4] 

Foreign translation	Agrees with: “They went up over the mountains and went down into the valleys”	Agrees with: “Mountains rose and the valleys sank down”
Luther’s German		X
Menge’s German		X
French Protestant Bible (Version Synondale)		X
Italian Edizione Paoline		X
Swedish Protestant		X
Spanish Reina Valera		X
Latin Vulgate (by Jerome)		X
La Bible Louis Segond 1910 (French)		X
Septuagint (Koine Greek)		X

Notice that there doesn’t seem to be a discrepancy. Of course, there are many translations, so one cannot be dogmatic, but the point is that many foreign translations agree with “mountains rising and valleys sinking down.”

Hebrew 

In Hebrew, which reads right to left, the phrase in 104:8a is literally four words. Translated into English, the phrase in question is: 

biq‘ah	yarad	har	alah
valleys	down go/sink	mountains	up go/rise/Ascend

Take note that there are no prepositions like “over” or “into.” It is literally “up go mountains, down go valleys.” It makes sense why many translations, including non-English translations, use the phrase “mountains rose and the valleys sank down”—this is what it should be.

Why Would Commentators Miss This? 

Commentaries could easily misinterpret this passage if they were based on translations that agree with “they went up over the mountains and went down into the valleys.” For example, the most popular English translation for several hundred years, the King James Version (which I love by the way), reads this way. 

Furthermore, from a logical perspective, water doesn’t flow uphill over mountains, but rather the opposite. Given language like this, commentators likely attributed this to a miraculous event during Creation Week, when many miracles were taking place anyway; also, Creation Week was referenced earlier in the chapter. Of course, the problems came when reading the rest of the context. One excellent commentator, John Gill, regarding verse 9 and the waters not returning to cover the earth, stated: 

“That they turn not again to cover the earth; as they did when it was first made, #Ps 104:6 that is, not without the divine leave and power; for they did turn again and cover the earth, at the time of the flood; but never shall more.”[5] 

Gill was forced to conclude that the waters did return to cover the earth, and he justified their return on “divine leave and power”! Yet this would mean that God breaks promises. Because we know that God does not break promises, this must be referring to the end of the Flood. 

That said, we should understand the difficulty in commenting on the passage: it is a psalm of praise to God, and thus it is not as straightforward as literal history. It is difficult to determine where the shift from Creation to the Flood occurs and where the shift from Flood to post-Flood occurs. However, there are a few more hints in the text.

A Few More Comments 

We should use clear passages in Scripture to help interpret unclear passages. Consider that God’s “rebuke” would not exist in a perfect world, where nothing would need rebuking or correcting. (Remember, a perfect God created a perfect world—Genesis 1:31, Deuteronomy 32:4). One should expect nothing less of such a God.[6] 

Therefore, during Creation Week when everything was good, there would be no need for any rebuking. If Psalm 104:6–9 were referring to Creation Week (specifically Day 3), then why the rebuke in Psalm 104:7? This implies an imperfect, not very good creation. But if Psalm 104:6–9 is referring to the Flood, then of course a rebuke would exist in a fallen world where the judgment of water had overtaken the earth. 

Additionally, note that Psalm 104:9 is clearly referencing Genesis 9:8–16 in saying that the waters would not return to cover the earth. (Some have asked how mountains and valleys could move up and down when the foundations are identified as immovable in Psalm 104:5. Keep in mind that mountains and valleys are not the foundation, but like the seas, they all sit above the foundation. 

Lastly, note that when the land appeared in Genesis 1 on Day 3, the land that was being separated from the water was dry, not wet. The text in Genesis says that the waters were gathered into one place and then the dry land appeared. It says nothing of water flowing over the land to make it wet; otherwise, wet land would have appeared and then became dry.[7] But during the Flood, the land was indeed overtaken by water that eventually stood above the land.

Conclusion 

The Hebrew phrase in Psalm 104:8a is the basis for the correct translation of mountains rising and valleys sinking. This shows that mountains and valleys during the Flood were not the same height as they are today. Even today mountains and valleys are changing their height; volcanic mountains, for instance, can grow very quickly, such as Surtsey or Paricutin (a volcanic mountain in Mexico that formed in 1943). 

Therefore, with mountains and continents leveled out and oceans basin nowhere near the depth they are today, it makes perfect sense that Noah was not at the height of modern-day Mt. Everest. Instead, the Ark would have been at sea level, where oxygen would have been nearly the same as today at sea level. Noah and those aboard the Ark would not have required oxygen.

Originally here: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/07/06/did-noah-need-oxygen; Republished by permission.

---

[1] Scripture taken from the New American Standard Bible for this article.

[2] For cubit studies and lengths see: (for laymen) Hodge, B., How long was the original cubit?, Answers magazine, March 19, 2007. 

[3] Data was taken from two sources: (1) Charles Taylor, Did mountains really rise according to Psalm 104:8? TJ 12(3), 1998, 312–313, and (2) Looked up individually on Online Bible, Larry Pierce, February, 2009, or looked up separately.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Gill, J., Commentary notes, Psalm 104:9.

[6] It was due to man’s sin that the world is now imperfect and fallen.

[7] I understand some scientific models are built on this principle of land and water separating and then the land becomes dry. But the text of Scripture, I suggest, leans in the direction of dry land appearing as a more supernatural occurrence, as opposed to naturalistic; especially considering the context of a supernatural creation week.