Posted on 03/19/2010 4:56:11 PM PDT by chessplayer
What if Darwin's theory of natural selection is inaccurate? What if the way you live now affects the life expectancy of your descendants?
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Lol!
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks fanfan! First topic of next week's Digest. ;') The reader comments in the Guardian article are a hoot! Not pinging, just adding the keyword, because there's been so much about epigenetics in the past, even in the recent past, about half of it worth a look. ;') |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Interesting. Will read it all later!
Again? How many times do we have to do this? Won't the theory of Evolution ever get it right? Seems like it changes about 10 times a year! Has the Bible ever changed?
.
Thanks SunkenCiv
LOLOL!
Yes, certainly.
It started with a few books, several thousand years ago, and kept changing, book by book, until a bunch of people got together and declared it was finished and done changing.
And then later on, another bunch of people got together and declared the earlier bunch of people didn't have it quite right, and they removed some bits the earlier bunch of people had included.
Or didn't you know this?
It took many centuries from its earliest writings for the Bible to be finalized in its current form. Forms, actually, since Jews, Catholics, Protestants (and also Mormons) all disagree on which books are included. By comparison, the theory of evolution only originated around 150 years ago. So it's had much less time to assume its final form than the Bible has had to assume its final forms.
//what about consensus? And peer review?//
Oh those tools still have their place for the evolutionists. “Science” is just a cover with them you know.
If you die early you’ll not influence them at all. ;-]
Let me be more specific. I realize that the whole Bible added books and subtracted books to what we have today, there were times when men decided which books were inspired and which were not. So let me be more specific; did they ever change the meaning of any individual book (or chapter, verse, or sentence for that matter)? I am not asking about trivial translations either; i.e., the translation from the original Hebrew or Greek, such as the difference between “thee” and “thou.” And I am not asking about a simple sentence change, such as, “As Jesus started on His way…,” vs., “And as He was setting out on the journey…;” THE MEANING IS THE SAME. I am asking if there has been any changes in the meaning of any book of the Bible.
As to the Old Testament books; has the meaning of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and all through Malachi changed? And for those who have the not divinely inspired books (Apocrypha); i.e., the books of Tobit, Judith, Additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, etc, has their meaning been changed? Has the content of the books of the New Testament; i.e., Mathew through Revelation, been changed? If any meaning of these books has changed, what meaning changed?
The *changes* that are asserted that the Bible has undergone, are changes in our understanding of some things. The original Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic documents have not changed, even though our understanding of the languages has improved and allowed for more accurate translations.
Improving a translation is not *changing* the meaning of the Scripture and is not *changing* the original documents.
The kinds of *changes* that people like to try to tear down the veracity of Scripture with are insignificant to the kinds of changes anything scientific has undergone.
Scientific theories generally go and have gone major revisions, even to the point of being scrapped. The Genesis account in the Bible has been the same for thousands of years.
I'm not quite sure what you're asking here.
If you're asking whether the TEXT has been changed, the answer to that is: little if any. The scribes who copied the manuscripts over the centuries were as careful as human beings could possibly be. From all I've seen, there were extremely few transcription errors over the centuries, and of those extremely few transcription errors, only a minuscule portion of those would have any bearing on actual meaning.
However, meaning has been "changed" and sometimes lost in the sense that modern people often do not understand the scriptures in quite the same way they were understood by their original recipients. This is inevitable because of the distances in time, culture and language between the original audience and the audiences of today. One only needs to look at the large number of denominations that disagree on various points of doctrine to realize that most people must misunderstand something about the Bible.
But the question itself isn't very meaningful. It's like asking whether the text of Darwin's Origin of Species has changed over the last 150 years. No, it hasn't. But our understanding of evolution has changed over time. So has our understanding of God. A more meaningful comparison would be to say that our understanding of the development of life is changing over time, just as we've gone through changes in our understanding of theology and the world - including some major revolutions such as the Protestant Reformation, the Renaissance, and so forth.
Yep.
Scientific theories generally go and have gone major revisions, even to the point of being scrapped. The Genesis account in the Bible has been the same for thousands of years.
True. However, the Bible was not intended to be a detailed scientific analysis of scientific processes. And, our understanding of that account has changed, at least for many of us.
Many of us now understand that account in a less literal, more allegorical way. Which, actually, I'm not sure isn't the way it was originally understood in the first place. People in the Middle East, to this day, do not necessarily speak quite as literally as we do in the west. It was and is a different culture from the European one we inherited.
It's not hard to imagine someone in the middle east threatening to swoop down on you with an army of ten million men, when what he really means is that whatever size army he does have, he's going to hit you with as hard as he can.
Please tell me in what way that will affect my grandchildren.
The point of the article was not that changes in your body after giving birth would have any effect on your descendants.
The point was that changes in your body after you were born, but BEFORE giving birth, can affect your descendants.
.
The Bible is adequate to explain things, even those scientific in nature.
Evos tend to be among the worst Bible literalists going, because demanding THEIR own strict, unbending, unrealistic interpretation of Genesis is the only way they can attempt to discredit it, so they either demand their interpretation, or a completely allegorical one. They leave on room for anything else because it’s simply not useful to them for writing God out of the equation.
************************************************************
The Age of the Universe
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1576941/posts
The creation of time.
“Each day of creation is numbered. Yet there is discontinuity in the way the days are numbered. The verse says: “There is evening and morning, Day One.” But the second day doesn’t say “evening and morning, Day Two.” Rather, it says “evening and morning, a second day.” And the Torah continues with this pattern: “Evening and morning, a third day... a fourth day... a fifth day... the sixth day.” Only on the first day does the text use a different form: not “first day,” but “Day One” (”Yom Echad”). Many English translations make the mistake of writing “a first day.” That’s because editors want things to be nice and consistent. But they throw out the cosmic message in the text! Because there is a qualitative difference, as Nachmanides says, between “one” and “first.” One is absolute; first is comparative.
Nachmanides explains that on Day One, time was created. That’s a phenomenal insight. Time was created. You can’t grab time. You don’t even see it. You can see space, you can see matter, you can feel energy, you can see light energy. I understand a creation there. But the creation of time? Eight hundred years ago, Nachmanides attained this insight from the Torah’s use of the phrase, “Day One.” And that’s exactly what Einstein taught us in the Laws of Relativity: that there was a creation, not just of space and matter, but of time itself. “
************************************************************
That does not mean, however, that even if there is an allegorical component to the creation account, that it is also not literal and true. The Bible contains a lot that has both meanings. God did create life and there is NO indication that He used evolution to do it. Scripture is clear that He used the *dust of the earth* to create mammals and mankind in separate acts of creation and that He created birds and fish in separate acts of creation.
Simply because the Bible does not mention the specific mechanism He used, does not give scientists liberty to conclude that He used their preferred method.
I find it amusing to see evos who regularly try to discredit the Bible, then try to appeal to it to win over creationists and other religious folks to the TOE by claiming that God used evolution, when the Bible itself makes no such claim.
Nothing like changing the subject because the TOE and scientific credibility (rapidly becoming an oxymoron) is taking a beating.......
So in comparison to Darwin’s book on his theory, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life"; would you say that the same kind of textual changes that would have to be made in Darwin’s book to meet the understanding we have today of his theory would have to be made in the Bible to meet our understanding of God?
In other words; Darwin’s book would go through a radical change to meet our understanding of evolution; do you think the Bible needs to go through the same change to meet today’s understanding of God?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.