Posted on 02/11/2006 5:52:00 PM PST by gobucks
NEW YORK -- Nearly 450 Christian churches around the country plan to celebrate the 197th birthday of Charles Darwin on Sunday with programs and sermons intended to emphasize that his theory of biological evolution is compatible with faith and that Christians have no need to choose between religion and science. "It's to demonstrate, by Christian leaders and members of the clergy, that you don't have to make that choice. You can have both," said Michael Zimmerman, dean of College of Letters and Sciences at University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, who organized the event.
(snip) "Evolution Sunday" has drawn participation from a variety of denominational and non-denominational churches, including Methodist, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Unitarian, Congregationalist, United Church of Christ, Baptist and a host of community churches, including at least 16 congregations in Illinois.
The event grew out of Zimmerman's The Clergy Letter Project, another effort to dispel the perception among many Christians that faith and evolution are mutually exclusive.
..the project has drawn 10,000 Christian clerics to sign a letter that concludes, "We urge school board members to preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge. We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth."
Zimmerman said the letter project and the Sunday event were designed to educate Americans about two things. "The first part was to demonstrate to the American public that the shrill fundamentalist voices that were demanding that people had to choose between religion and science were simply wrong," he said.
"The second part was to demonstrate that those fundamentalist leaders that keep standing up and shouting that you can't accept modern science were not speaking for the majority of Christian leaders in this country."
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
Figure 4.4.1. Human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K) insertions in identical chromosomal locations in various primates (Reprinted from Lebedev et al. 2000, © 2000, with permission from Elsevier Science).
It is my understanding that comparisons of ERV insertions between species is not done at the nucleotide level, but at orthologous positions (assuming the species have a common ancestor).
The reference cited:
Lebedev, Y. B., Belonovitch, O. S., Zybrova, N. V, Khil, P. P., Kurdyukov, S. G., Vinogradova, T. V., Hunsmann, G., and Sverdlov, E. D. (2000) "Differences in HERV-K LTR insertions in orthologous loci of humans and great apes." Gene 247: 265-277.
Looking at the text below, Where does it make reference to identical chromosomal locations?
"HERVs are different in their sequences and can be grouped according to sequence similarities, but the various systems of HERV classification are rather confusing and no one is universally accepted. The classi- fications are principally based on sequence homologies to exogenous retroviruses or preexisting ERVs, or on the type of reverse transcriptase putative primer binding sites (PBS). Briefly, HERVs can be classified into two broad groups: class I including HERVs related to mammalian exogenous type C retroviruses, and class II comprising all HERVs related to retroviruses of mammalian A, B and D types, and avian type C. The mutation rate of the exogenously replicating retroviruses is at least 104 times higher than that of a typical cellular gene or integrated endogenous retroviruses, hence finding extensive stretches of homologous sequence between endogenous retrovirus sequences and currently existing strains of replicating retroviruses is unlikely. Therefore, a classification based on the type of PBS located close to the LTRs is probably more reliable. By this method, HERVs can be divided into groups designated as HERV-E, HERV-H, HERV-I, HERV-K, HERV-L, HERV-R, etc., following the one-letter code for the amino acid transferred by the priming tRNA."
"The majority of HERVs have been altered, for instance truncated or mutated in such a way that they have lost the ability to produce fully functional proteins. Some of the HERVs, however, are transcriptionally active and code for viral proteins that even form retrovirus-like particles. The LTRs that flank proviruses in the genome have frequently recombined, leading to the accumulation of tens of thousands of solitary HERV LTRs with no retroviral genes attached."
Funny, this is not stated anywhere in the Bible.
And because of this, even today many ardent believers still cannot bring themselves to condemn slavery.
Even here on FR. Last October, a poster wrote "My position on slavery? I don't consider it is wrong to have slaves."
I would hate to try and defend that position. You aren't defending it, like this previous poster, are you?
And the more recent column here...
And this excellent site:
It doesn't take much to realize Kwanza was created to further splinter black Christians into angry, Christ-denying interlopers in their own country.
It doesn't
However, the following paper does. The first phylogenetic signal (bolded) is the identical insertion points.
(from the abstrasct)
. Endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) provide phylogenetic information in two ways: (i) by comparison of integration site polymorphism and (ii) by orthologous comparison of evolving, proviral, nucleotide sequence.
(from the body of the paper)
Endogenous retrovirus loci provide no less than three sources of phylogenetic signal, which can be used in complementary fashion to obtain much more information than simple distance estimates of homologous sequences. First, the distribution of provirus-containing loci among taxa dates the insertion. Given the size of vertebrate genomes (>1 × 109 bp) and the random nature of retroviral integration (22, 23), multiple integrations (and subsequent fixation) of ERV loci at precisely the same location are highly unlikely (24). Therefore, an ERV locus shared by two or more species is descended from a single integration event and is proof that the species share a common ancestor into whose germ line the original integration took place (14).
[snip]
Second, as with other sequence-based phylogenetic analyses, mutations in a provirus that have accumulated since the divergence of the species provide an estimate of the genetic distance between the species. Because, for any given provirus, it is highly unlikely that there will be selection for or against any specific sequence, it is safe to assume that the rate of accumulation of mutations approximates the rate of their occurrence
[snip]
Third, sequence divergence between the LTRs at the ends of a given provirus provides an important and unique source of phylogenetic information. The LTRs are created during reverse transcription to regenerate cis-acting elements required for integration and transcription. Because of the mechanism of reverse transcription, the two LTRs must be identical at the time of integration, even if they differed in the precursor provirus (Fig. 1A). Over time, they will diverge in sequence because of substitutions, insertions, and deletions acquired during cellular DNA replication.
Sounds like the Indianapolis Star since the Gannett takeover.
When you STEAL another person car; it is.
When you go to the lot and BUY one, it isn't. I imagine it's the same with 'slavery'.
INDIANA is fixing to sell a toll road 'into slavery' for 75 years. We (the state coffers) will get 3.75 BILLION dollars, up front, and this foreign consourcium will get the money from the road.
In the past, one could sell themselves into 'slavery' if they wished.
Today, we do almost the same, get paid weekly (weakly?) or whatever.
SALARY = paid in salt; worth their salt, etc.
But...
..the things it STANDS for SOUNDS sooooo good!
lol.
I saw Dave Chappelle last night on "The Actors' Studio" where he came out and stated clearly "I am a muslim."
Very sad. Hoodwinked again, only this time the hood is black instead of white.
shoot ... and I was HOPEFUL!! thanks! :)
I finally got through all of it. Gee whiz ... talk about chewing a cud.
But, it is digesting nicely now, and I can report that all the more do I understand the urgency behind last year's announcement from Harvard, that they were throwing millions into a independent new lab there to discover, eureka!, the origins of life. There was a thread about it I posted some time ago.
I found that one story to be very, very encouraging, and this commentary piece by D.Inst fellow is all the more compelling.
Thanks again.
I said don't even bother. We can''t accept your explanation
as the definitive answer.
1.) Other scholars seem to think that this refers to Angels
consorting with men.
2.) How is your explanation not incest?
3.) How did men increase in number in Genesis 6:1 before
they chose wives in Genesis 6:2?
4.) Your newfangled modern translation (NIV) hints of
perhaps the greatest problem. None of us has a fluent
grasp of ancient Hebrew or Greek to really understand
what the true meaning of the passage actually is.
Furthermore, The original text does not even exist.
If we accept it in an allegorical fashion as we must with
many other passages. Then we would understand that
Adam is the first human that surpassed thinking like an
animal and understood God. The rest naturally follows
that his progeny that knew and accepted God's Supremacy
were the "Sons of God." The "Daughters of Man" were the
children of the man-beasts that had no spiritual awareness.
It is possible that the Nephilim (Giants) in Genesis 6:4
could refer to a few remaining Neanderthals that may
have existed as humanity was beginning to create history.
In this way we can accept the Bible, accept Genesis and
know that Evolution was the natural process that God
used to create life on Earth.
In this same way we can see the proof of the existence
of God through Science. Ask anyone what existed before
the Big Bang. The answer is nothing. How did the Big
Bang occur from nothing? The answer must follow that
God made it occur and this circles right back to an
allegorical acceptance of the story of Genesis. Then
everything becomes clear!
The Bible is the owners manual of life. Attempts to force
others to accept one persons narrow-minded view of their
understanding of God's nature or plan goes against all
that the Bible presents to us.
You might be tempted to reject this explanation out-of-hand
but consider that the highest spiritual authorities once said
the Sun revolved around the Earth, the Earth was flat and
Witches regularly practiced magic to vex, hex and perplex us.
1.) Other scholars seem to think that this refers to Angels
consorting with men. Yup, they sure do! *
2.) How is your explanation not incest? Never said it wasn't.
3.) How did men increase in number in Genesis 6:1 before
they chose wives in Genesis 6:2? Adam and Eve were doing that MULTIPLY thing???
4.) Your newfangled modern translation (NIV) hints of
perhaps the greatest problem. None of us has a fluent
grasp of ancient Hebrew or Greek to really understand
what the true meaning of the passage actually is.
Furthermore, The original text does not even exist. You are right.
Ecclesiastes 11:5
As you do not know the path of the wind, or how the body is formed in a mother's womb, so you cannot understand the work of God, the Maker of all things.
You might be tempted to reject this explanation out-of-hand
but consider that the highest spiritual authorities once said
the Sun revolved around the Earth, the Earth was flat and
Witches regularly practiced magic to vex, hex and perplex us. All true.....
2 Corinthians 1
13. For we do not write you anything you cannot read or understand. And I hope that,
14. as you have understood us in part, you will come to understand fully that you can boast of us just as we will boast of you in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Attempts to force others to accept one persons narrow-minded view of their
understanding of God's nature or plan goes against all that the Bible presents to us. Who is being forced???
I report; you decide.
*
|
The Nephilim are the offspring of intercourse between fallen angels and women. They are angelic/human hybrids judged in Genesis 6, confined in Tartarus, and depicted on stone tablets in Egypt and elsewhere. They are mentioned in the Scriptures in Jud
Well... not exactly...
NIV Genesis 1:26-27 26. Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. NIV Genesis 5:1-5
Genesis 5 1. This is the written account of Adam's line. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God.
2. He created them male and female and blessed them. And when they were created, he called them "man. " 3. When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4. After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5. Altogether, Adam lived 930 years, and then he died. NIV Genesis 6:1-8
1. When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2. the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3. Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years." 4. The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown. 5. The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. 6. The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. 7. So the LORD said, "I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth--men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air--for I am grieved that I have made them." 8. But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD. This verse...
...says NOTHING about the N being the OFFSPRING of the SoG and the DoM: they were ALREADY there!
SoG are the offspring from the early Adam/Eve lineage and the DoM are the offspring from the LATER Adam/Eve lineage, nothing more.
NIV Numbers 13:33
We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them." EVERYTHING got wiped by the flood: there was NO WAY for these supposed 'angelic' offspring to have survived to THIS point in time.
NIV Jude 1:6
And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home--these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. Nothing HERE about angels MATING with humans, either. |
Simple question, the one that gave you this Repubic, that most here seem hell bent on destroying.
I wasn't saying that I think this refers to Angels either.
3.) How did men increase in number in Genesis 6:1 before
they chose wives in Genesis 6:2? Adam and Eve were doing that MULTIPLY thing???
I don't agree that Genesis 6:1 refers to children born by
other sons and daughters of Adam and Eve. Genesis 6:2
states that "the sons of God" took any of the "daughters of
men" that they chose. It is clear to me this indicates that
other men existed in addition to the children of Adam and Eve.
SoG are the offspring from the early Adam/Eve lineage and the DoM are the offspring from the LATER Adam/Eve lineage, nothing more.
I can't agree with this either. Why should we need to
note the difference between older or younger children of Adam
and Eve by saying the first were the SoG and the later DoM?
...says NOTHING about the N(ephilim) being the OFFSPRING of the SoG and the DoM: they were ALREADY there!
I agree and that is why I said that Genesis 6:4 refered to Proto-
humans [Neanderthals] that were once on the earth but went extinct.
And which now thousands of years after the Bible was written
have been found in the fossil record as stocky brutes with several
times the strength of Modern [Cro-Magnon] Man.
"They were the heroes of old, men of renown."
The Bible doesn't bother to tell the tales of the Nephilim but they
could also be Titans of the Greeks or the Sumerian hero Gilgamesh.
Notice how your passage from Numbers fits right in to illustrate that
they were not like men but we also have agreed they were not Angels.
NIV Numbers 13:33
We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim).
We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them."
Attempts to force others to accept one persons narrow-minded view
of their understanding of God's nature or plan goes against all that the
Bible presents to us. Who is being forced???
If the government is used to put stickers in Science books or in any
other manor gives a dictum to influence the teaching of Creation or
Intelligent Design, that is force. If an individual continuously resists any
government edict or directive in any way the government will always
escalate the degree of force until the individual conforms or is killed.
That is the force of government.
That is the force of government.
We just had a holiday in honor of a man that proves these statements false.
You are in denial of who and what the Founding Fathers were. Hint, they were not Muslims, or Budhists.
How is anyone here trying to do that?
There is no answer that would satisfy you because you don't get it, in the first question.
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.