Epigenetics

[dethl]

Maybe you read it differently Mike. I am open for different interpretations as I have never had a strong feeling about this particular verse.

 

 

Exd 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation].

 

This seems to be talking explicitly about the nature of sin though, so unless sin has a genetic quality it is probably not easily correlated with the study of epigenetic systems. Now, one thing that I can think of (which is somewhat related to the topic) that might be considered a "generational curse" would be any variety of heritable diseases such as Sickle-Cell anemia. The traits of sickle-cell anemia, low O2 carrying capacity in erythrocytes, is actually beneficial in regions where malaria parasites are endemic. However, this tends to decrease the fitness of any population with this trait outside of such an environment. Would it be considered a "curse" in a conventional Christian sense? Probably doubtful, unless you're an athlete with sickle-cell who is struggling to compete with the everyone else who may not have that trait.

 

In biology there is no right or wrong, only the pursuit of survival. Ergo it is probably not accurate to map anthropomorphic human cultural ideas to physical or biological systems where there is no analogue.

 

Fetal alcohol syndrome?

 

 

http://en.wikipedia....lcohol_syndrome

 

Not a "genetically inherited" disorder. The alcohol is literally attacking the fetus.

[Ouroboros]

http://en.wikipedia....lcohol_syndrome

 

Not a "genetically inherited" disorder. The alcohol is literally attacking the fetus.

Actually, End is right. The concept behind epigenetics is exactly like that. Inherited traits that are non-genetic. Genetic traits are genetic, and epigenetic traits are non-genetic.

 

So in a sense, FAS is kind of an epigenetic trait; however, epigenetics is going one step further, it's traits that are caused by parents, but then goes in one or two more generations.

 

Generations of obesity might fall into epigenetics: http://www.bcm.edu/news/item.cfm?newsID=1166, and it's not only blamed on culture or diet, but chemical changes outside of DNA.

 

I think this quote states it best “DNA is just a tape carrying information, and a tape is no good without a player. Epigenetics is about the tape player.”

Bryan Turner (Birmingham, UK) (Source: http://epigenome.eu/en/1,1,0)

[dethl]

I was gathering from the article that these understandings are relatively new and that they might mean re-thinking some established ideas about evolution.

 

What caught my eye was the statement that said that the changes migrated back to their original settings over three or four generations......very much like the bible had stated 1500+ years ago.

 

If anything it seems like these new findings would complement current understanding about evolution. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can think of at least a few scenarios when epigenetic mechanisms might prove useful to an organism: Say an certain population has a biological function that operates correctly by activating genes and this mechanism enhances the fitness of the organism. It would be advantageous for that population to constantly activate those genes even though no alteration to the base DNA is performed.

 

Where in the bible did you see biological changes resetting over time? I don't think I've ever run across a passage like that.

 

Maybe you read it differently Mike. I am open for different interpretations as I have never had a strong feeling about this particular verse.

 

 

Exd 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation].

 

Some mercy there...

 

Exodus 34:6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,

 

 

Never mind that this particular part of Exodus was talking about Moses going up Mount Sinai to meet with god and receive the Ten Commandments. It's a really far stretch to take something like Exodus 34:7 and equate it to genetics/epigenetics as "sin", not to mention that the "iniquity of the fathers" can have a different meaning for everyone. The Ten Commandments had yet to be written in the timeline of Exodus 34:7 - what were the iniquities set forth by god before? He had already let loose ten plagues upon Egypt, culminating in the supposed death of every first born of Egypt, and then hardened the Pharaoh's heart after he had already given the Hebrews their freedom. It's a double-standard for god to punish people for deeds that god itself had done before without retribution.

[dethl]

http://en.wikipedia....lcohol_syndrome

 

Not a "genetically inherited" disorder. The alcohol is literally attacking the fetus.

Actually, End is right. The concept behind epigenetics is exactly like that. Inherited traits that are non-genetic. Genetic traits are genetic, and epigenetic traits are non-genetic.

 

So in a sense, FAS is kind of an epigenetic trait; however, epigenetics is going one step further, it's traits that are caused by parents, but then goes in one or two more generations.

 

Generations of obesity might fall into epigenetics: http://www.bcm.edu/n...cfm?newsID=1166, and it's not only blamed on culture or diet, but chemical changes outside of DNA.

 

I think this quote states it best “DNA is just a tape carrying information, and a tape is no good without a player. Epigenetics is about the tape player.”

Bryan Turner (Birmingham, UK) (Source: http://epigenome.eu/en/1,1,0)

 

FAS isn't epigenetic in the fact that alcohol literally destroys the body and its DNA - the genetics of a baby born with FAS will differ from its parents (birth defects) as a result. FAS is a mutation more than an epigenetic expression - a mutation caused by alcohol destroying or altering DNA.

 

Same goes for ionizing radiation, though it is much more efficient at destroying DNA. The end result is a baby born with birth defects but not caused by genes expressing themselves differently because of the destruction of DNA. Genes can't express themselves if they're not there to be expressed upon.

 

Ultimately there are so many variables that can cause genes to express themselves differently from person to person and even two different people whose genes express a common disorder could have come about this disorder via different routes. Any attribution of a parent's inequities (or "sins") to the disorder is a false dichotomy.

 

EDIT: I'm understanding this a bit better - though epigenetics is the study of how genes express themselves differently via non-genetic means. The point I was trying to make is that if you alter the genes themselves the alteration is not epigenetic as the original genes are not being expressed but changed or destroyed. Of course I could be trying to keep mutations and epigenetics separate and failing.

[Ouroboros]

FAS isn't epigenetic in the fact that alcohol literally destroys the body and its DNA - the genetics of a baby born with FAS will differ from its parents (birth defects) as a result. FAS is a mutation more than an epigenetic expression - a mutation caused by alcohol destroying or altering DNA.

Except for:

Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders: The Epigenetic Perspective1

 

1. Philip C. Haycock2

 

+ Author Affiliations

 

1.

Division of Human Genetics, University of the Witwatersrand and National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa

 

 

Next Section

Abstract

 

Ethanol is a classic teratogen capable of inducing a wide range of developmental abnormalities. Studies in animal models suggest that differences in timing and dosage underlie this variability, with three particularly important developmental periods: preconception, preimplantation, and gastrulation. These periods of teratogenesis correlate with peak periods of epigenetic reprogramming which, together with the evidence that ethanol interferes with one-carbon metabolism, DNA methylation, histone modifications, and noncoding RNA, suggests an important role for epigenetic mechanisms in the etiology of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASDs). In addition to a number of testable hypotheses, an epigenetic model suggests that the concept of a “fetal alcohol spectrum” should be expanded to include “preconceptional effects.” This proposal has important public health implications, highlighting the urgency of research into the epigenetic basis of FASDs.

 

From: http://www.biolreprod.org/content/81/4/607.full

 

So, sorry, but FAS is an epigenetic question.

 

 

Same goes for ionizing radiation, though it is much more efficient at destroying DNA. The end result is a baby born with birth defects but not caused by genes expressing themselves differently because of the destruction of DNA. Genes can't express themselves if they're not there to be expressed upon.

 

 

 

The ionizing radiation is studied in the epigenetic field, and should be, because that's exactly part of what it's about.

 

http://epidna.com/showabstract.php?pmid=10576026

http://www.epidna.com/showabstract.php?pmid=15821925

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100201091628.htm

and more...

 

 

Ultimately there are so many variables that can cause genes to express themselves differently from person to person and even two different people whose genes express a common disorder could have come about this disorder via different routes.

That is exactly what epigenetics is about.

 

Any attribution of a parent's inequities (or "sins") to the disorder is a false dichotomy.

Well, yeah, "sins" as in Biblical sins like lying or disobedience to God or whatever not, or killing someone and it goes in some spiritual and supernatural punishment for the kids in generations... That's not what epigenetics is about.

 

But, did you read the article about obesity? Bad lifestyle choices can have epigenetic effects in generations after. That's what the studies show. Not "sins" as Biblical/Christian sins, but "sins" as in bad choices in lifestyle and diet, etc. It's a secular version of "sin."

 

 

though epigenetics is the study of how genes express themselves differently via non-genetic means.

Yes, but more.

[dethl]

Ah, it makes much more sense to me now - what I was explaining was merely an aspect of epigenetics. I feel silly now but am more educated.

 

But, did you read the article about obesity? Bad lifestyle choices can have epigenetic effects in generations after. That's what the studies show. Not "sins" as Biblical/Christian sins, but "sins" as in bad choices in lifestyle and diet, etc. It's a secular version of "sin."

 

Read it. Makes sense from the viewpoint of seeing obese parents giving birth to children who then become obese and so on - actually it helps explain WHY this happens in offspring.

 

But does this mean that if a healthy individual (no genetic disposition) chronically overeats and then has a child, will the child have the same problem? The study was using mice with the known genetic propensity to overeat. What were the results of the offspring for each group? What was the weight difference between the generations? Did the mice whose genes were being suppressed begin having offspring that weighed less? I don't have a subscription to Nature magazine and the report was published in 2008 (not free yet) so I can't find this out readily.

[MagickMonkey]

FAS isn't epigenetic in the fact that alcohol literally destroys the body and its DNA - the genetics of a baby born with FAS will differ from its parents (birth defects) as a result. FAS is a mutation more than an epigenetic expression - a mutation caused by alcohol destroying or altering DNA.

Except for:

Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders: The Epigenetic Perspective1

 

1. Philip C. Haycock2

 

+ Author Affiliations

 

1.

Division of Human Genetics, University of the Witwatersrand and National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa

 

 

Next Section

Abstract

 

Ethanol is a classic teratogen capable of inducing a wide range of developmental abnormalities. Studies in animal models suggest that differences in timing and dosage underlie this variability, with three particularly important developmental periods: preconception, preimplantation, and gastrulation. These periods of teratogenesis correlate with peak periods of epigenetic reprogramming which, together with the evidence that ethanol interferes with one-carbon metabolism, DNA methylation, histone modifications, and noncoding RNA, suggests an important role for epigenetic mechanisms in the etiology of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASDs). In addition to a number of testable hypotheses, an epigenetic model suggests that the concept of a “fetal alcohol spectrum” should be expanded to include “preconceptional effects.” This proposal has important public health implications, highlighting the urgency of research into the epigenetic basis of FASDs.

 

From: http://www.biolrepro...t/81/4/607.full

 

So, sorry, but FAS is an epigenetic question.

 

.

 

Perhaps FAS has both genetic and epigenetic factors.

[dethl]

FAS isn't epigenetic in the fact that alcohol literally destroys the body and its DNA - the genetics of a baby born with FAS will differ from its parents (birth defects) as a result. FAS is a mutation more than an epigenetic expression - a mutation caused by alcohol destroying or altering DNA.

Except for:

Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders: The Epigenetic Perspective1

 

1. Philip C. Haycock2

 

+ Author Affiliations

 

1.

Division of Human Genetics, University of the Witwatersrand and National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa

 

 

Next Section

Abstract

 

Ethanol is a classic teratogen capable of inducing a wide range of developmental abnormalities. Studies in animal models suggest that differences in timing and dosage underlie this variability, with three particularly important developmental periods: preconception, preimplantation, and gastrulation. These periods of teratogenesis correlate with peak periods of epigenetic reprogramming which, together with the evidence that ethanol interferes with one-carbon metabolism, DNA methylation, histone modifications, and noncoding RNA, suggests an important role for epigenetic mechanisms in the etiology of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASDs). In addition to a number of testable hypotheses, an epigenetic model suggests that the concept of a “fetal alcohol spectrum” should be expanded to include “preconceptional effects.” This proposal has important public health implications, highlighting the urgency of research into the epigenetic basis of FASDs.

 

From: http://www.biolrepro...t/81/4/607.full

 

So, sorry, but FAS is an epigenetic question.

 

.

 

Perhaps FAS has both genetic and epigenetic factors.

 

I think what Ouroboros is trying to say is that any external influence on genes is defined as purely epigenetic as the genes themselves do not result in FAS but the action of the alcohol on those genes are.

 

EDIT: Ouroboros - does this mean that genetic mutations are considered purely epigenetic?

[MagickMonkey]

FAS isn't epigenetic in the fact that alcohol literally destroys the body and its DNA - the genetics of a baby born with FAS will differ from its parents (birth defects) as a result. FAS is a mutation more than an epigenetic expression - a mutation caused by alcohol destroying or altering DNA.

Except for:

Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders: The Epigenetic Perspective1

 

1. Philip C. Haycock2

 

+ Author Affiliations

 

1.

Division of Human Genetics, University of the Witwatersrand and National Health Laboratory Service, Johannesburg, South Africa

 

 

Next Section

Abstract

 

Ethanol is a classic teratogen capable of inducing a wide range of developmental abnormalities. Studies in animal models suggest that differences in timing and dosage underlie this variability, with three particularly important developmental periods: preconception, preimplantation, and gastrulation. These periods of teratogenesis correlate with peak periods of epigenetic reprogramming which, together with the evidence that ethanol interferes with one-carbon metabolism, DNA methylation, histone modifications, and noncoding RNA, suggests an important role for epigenetic mechanisms in the etiology of fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASDs). In addition to a number of testable hypotheses, an epigenetic model suggests that the concept of a “fetal alcohol spectrum” should be expanded to include “preconceptional effects.” This proposal has important public health implications, highlighting the urgency of research into the epigenetic basis of FASDs.

 

From: http://www.biolrepro...t/81/4/607.full

 

So, sorry, but FAS is an epigenetic question.

 

.

 

Perhaps FAS has both genetic and epigenetic factors.

 

I think what Ouroboros is trying to say is that any external influence on genes is defined as purely epigenetic as the genes themselves do not result in FAS but the action of the alcohol on those genes are.

 

EDIT: Ouroboros - does this mean that genetic mutations are considered purely epigenetic?

 

Genetic mutations cannot be purely epigenetic.

[Ouroboros]

But does this mean that if a healthy individual (no genetic disposition) chronically overeats and then has a child, will the child have the same problem? The study was using mice with the known genetic propensity to overeat. What were the results of the offspring for each group? What was the weight difference between the generations? Did the mice whose genes were being suppressed begin having offspring that weighed less? I don't have a subscription to Nature magazine and the report was published in 2008 (not free yet) so I can't find this out readily.

Yeah. I don't remember the details of the study, but the principle that is so revolutionary and controversial is that a healthy person who overeats could have real effects on the next coming generations, not only the first generation. It has a lot to do with the whole chemical mix in the ova and sperm, not only the DNA itself, but the compounds within the cell, including the environment for the fetus during the gestation.

 

Personally, it wouldn't surprise me if they one day will discover that transposition mutations of non-coding DNA into coding DNA even can be part of these things. I have a suspicion that non-coding DNA can act as a "library" of useful, but dormant, genetic code that can become active when environment changes.

[Ouroboros]

Perhaps FAS has both genetic and epigenetic factors.

It is both. If I understand it right.

 

Epigenetic is basically outer influences, other than genetic code, that either influence the development without changing the genetic code, or influence the genetic code directly.

 

The prefix "epi-" means above or additional. In the term "epi-genetic" it means things that are non-genetic, but are extra, additional, or beyond the genetic code itself, but it doesn't mean that the genetic code would be affected through epigenetic influence.

 

For instance, a mutagen would be an epigenetic factor.

[Ouroboros]

EDIT: Ouroboros - does this mean that genetic mutations are considered purely epigenetic?

If I understand it right, mutagens that would cause mutations would be epigenetic factors. The mutation itself is a genetic change.

 

Put it this way. You drive a car. You are the genetic part of the car. Someone hits your car and you start swerving. The other driver was an epigenetic factor, but you are still reacting to the impact. It's not like one thing acts or reacts devoid of all other things. All things ties together, and the borderlines are overlapping.

[MagickMonkey]

... a mutagen would be an epigenetic factor.

 

Maybe, but I think a mutation itself would be genetic.

[Ouroboros]

Genetic mutations cannot be purely epigenetic.

Right. The mutations are not epigenetic at all. Mutations are genetic. But epigenetic factors can be the reason to mutations (like mutagens). But there are spontaneous mutations as well. Those are not epigenetic, but purely genetic.

[Ouroboros]

... a mutagen would be an epigenetic factor.

 

Maybe, but I think a mutation itself would be genetic.

The mutation is genetic, yes.

 

But a mutagen is an external factor that causes a mutation. That's the definition of mutagen. There's no gene code for a mutagen. A mutagen could be a virus, but it also can be radiation or chemicals. Many cancers are caused by mutagens for instance. And cancer is a result of mutation in the genetic code (usually the mtDNA in these cases, IIRC).

 

---

 

I haven't studied enough to say that I know all these things for 100% sure, but I'm confident that I'm not too far off.

 

Only because of this discussion, I bought a book specially about epigenetics just to read up more about it... IT'S YOUR FAULT!!!

[MagickMonkey]

... a mutagen would be an epigenetic factor.

 

Maybe, but I think a mutation itself would be genetic.

The mutation is genetic, yes.

 

But a mutagen is an external factor that causes a mutation. That's the definition of mutagen. There's no gene code for a mutagen. A mutagen could be a virus, but it also can be radiation or chemicals. Many cancers are caused by mutagens for instance. And cancer is a result of mutation in the genetic code (usually the mtDNA in these cases, IIRC).

 

---

 

I haven't studied enough to say that I know all these things for 100% sure, but I'm confident that I'm not too far off.

 

Only because of this discussion, I bought a book specially about epigenetics just to read up more about it... IT'S YOUR FAULT!!!

 

Viruses have a gene code, and (I think) can cause gene insertions directly into our genetic code. BTW, my brother seems to think Valtrex could possibly be mutagenic.

[Ouroboros]

Viruses have a gene code, and (I think) can cause gene insertions directly into our genetic code.

That's exactly right.

 

It seems like the virus also have a way of matching up with a specific position on the DNA as well, so it inserts itself where it will have the replicating effect. They use this for guided splicing in gene modifications.

 

BTW, my brother seems to think Valtrex could possibly be mutagenic.

Yeah, who knows.

 

Overall, it's extremely complex. Still, after 80-90 years (or whatever it is) of genetic research, there are still many questions that are not answered. I'm talking a class where we studied some of these things, and I had some questions to the teacher how certain things worked, and he apologized that unfortunately there are things we still don't know.

 

Epigenetics is still very controversial because it goes against the traditional "gene only" view of evolution. But I think it makes perfect sense. If you know just a little about how the cell works, you soon will realize that it's not only the DNA that is in control. Many parts work together, and a large part of the cell is not DNA.

[oddbird1963]

 

Maybe you read it differently Mike. I am open for different interpretations as I have never had a strong feeling about this particular verse.

 

 

Exd 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation].

 

This seems to be talking explicitly about the nature of sin though, so unless sin has a genetic quality it is probably not easily correlated with the study of epigenetic systems. Now, one thing that I can think of (which is somewhat related to the topic) that might be considered a "generational curse" would be any variety of heritable diseases such as Sickle-Cell anemia. The traits of sickle-cell anemia, low O2 carrying capacity in erythrocytes, is actually beneficial in regions where malaria parasites are endemic. However, this tends to decrease the fitness of any population with this trait outside of such an environment. Would it be considered a "curse" in a conventional Christian sense? Probably doubtful, unless you're an athlete with sickle-cell who is struggling to compete with the everyone else who may not have that trait.

 

In biology there is no right or wrong, only the pursuit of survival. Ergo it is probably not accurate to map anthropomorphic human cultural ideas to physical or biological systems where there is no analogue.

 

Fetal alcohol syndrome?

 

 

Nowhere in the context of god visiting the sin of the fathers upon three generations is the concept of "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome" dealt with or any particular kind of birth defect, body mass percentage and what not. The kinds of visitations upon sin that are threatened and performed in the old testament are plagues, crop failures, invasions, grass fires,unhealthy children or no. (See Deuteronomy 7:12-17as an example).

 

Healthy births are mentioned, but it is an incredible stretch to link sick children, still births and infant mortality to epigentics in 1200 B.C.E. There were so many factors not related to unhealthy , morally objectionable behavior linked to birth problems, death and disease that it is absurd to say "this epigentic phenomenon is what god had in mind when he inspired the bible writers to talk about punishing three or four generations."

 

Like many other concepts, the idea of something taking three generations to "reset" in a context having to do with epigenetics is being inappropriately applied to a random set of phrases that appears in the old testament.

 

The topic of epigenetics is fascinating. It is intriguing to read about what has been discovered about genetics and heredity. But the only thing the old testament has in common with that field of study is the coincidental occurrence of the number three and the word generation.

[Guest end3]

 

Maybe you read it differently Mike. I am open for different interpretations as I have never had a strong feeling about this particular verse.

 

 

Exd 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation].

 

This seems to be talking explicitly about the nature of sin though, so unless sin has a genetic quality it is probably not easily correlated with the study of epigenetic systems. Now, one thing that I can think of (which is somewhat related to the topic) that might be considered a "generational curse" would be any variety of heritable diseases such as Sickle-Cell anemia. The traits of sickle-cell anemia, low O2 carrying capacity in erythrocytes, is actually beneficial in regions where malaria parasites are endemic. However, this tends to decrease the fitness of any population with this trait outside of such an environment. Would it be considered a "curse" in a conventional Christian sense? Probably doubtful, unless you're an athlete with sickle-cell who is struggling to compete with the everyone else who may not have that trait.

 

In biology there is no right or wrong, only the pursuit of survival. Ergo it is probably not accurate to map anthropomorphic human cultural ideas to physical or biological systems where there is no analogue.

 

Fetal alcohol syndrome?

 

 

Nowhere in the context of god visiting the sin of the fathers upon three generations is the concept of "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome" dealt with or any particular kind of birth defect, body mass percentage and what not. The kinds of visitations upon sin that are threatened and performed in the old testament are plagues, crop failures, invasions, grass fires,unhealthy children or no. (See Deuteronomy 7:12-17as an example).

 

Healthy births are mentioned, but it is an incredible stretch to link sick children, still births and infant mortality to epigentics in 1200 B.C.E. There were so many factors not related to unhealthy , morally objectionable behavior linked to birth problems, death and disease that it is absurd to say "this epigentic phenomenon is what god had in mind when he inspired the bible writers to talk about punishing three or four generations."

 

Like many other concepts, the idea of something taking three generations to "reset" in a context having to do with epigenetics is being inappropriately applied to a random set of phrases that appears in the old testament.

 

The topic of epigenetics is fascinating. It is intriguing to read about what has been discovered about genetics and heredity. But the only thing the old testament has in common with that field of study is the coincidental occurrence of the number three and the word generation.

 

Lev 10:9 Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: [it shall be] a statute for ever throughout your generations:

 

I think unless the bible comes out and mentions methylation specifically OB, you probably are not going to see the connection.

[MagickMonkey]

Maybe you read it differently Mike. I am open for different interpretations as I have never had a strong feeling about this particular verse.

 

 

Exd 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation].

 

This seems to be talking explicitly about the nature of sin though, so unless sin has a genetic quality it is probably not easily correlated with the study of epigenetic systems. Now, one thing that I can think of (which is somewhat related to the topic) that might be considered a "generational curse" would be any variety of heritable diseases such as Sickle-Cell anemia. The traits of sickle-cell anemia, low O2 carrying capacity in erythrocytes, is actually beneficial in regions where malaria parasites are endemic. However, this tends to decrease the fitness of any population with this trait outside of such an environment. Would it be considered a "curse" in a conventional Christian sense? Probably doubtful, unless you're an athlete with sickle-cell who is struggling to compete with the everyone else who may not have that trait.

 

In biology there is no right or wrong, only the pursuit of survival. Ergo it is probably not accurate to map anthropomorphic human cultural ideas to physical or biological systems where there is no analogue.

 

Fetal alcohol syndrome?

 

 

Nowhere in the context of god visiting the sin of the fathers upon three generations is the concept of "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome" dealt with or any particular kind of birth defect, body mass percentage and what not. The kinds of visitations upon sin that are threatened and performed in the old testament are plagues, crop failures, invasions, grass fires,unhealthy children or no. (See Deuteronomy 7:12-17as an example).

 

Healthy births are mentioned, but it is an incredible stretch to link sick children, still births and infant mortality to epigentics in 1200 B.C.E. There were so many factors not related to unhealthy , morally objectionable behavior linked to birth problems, death and disease that it is absurd to say "this epigentic phenomenon is what god had in mind when he inspired the bible writers to talk about punishing three or four generations."

 

Like many other concepts, the idea of something taking three generations to "reset" in a context having to do with epigenetics is being inappropriately applied to a random set of phrases that appears in the old testament.

 

The topic of epigenetics is fascinating. It is intriguing to read about what has been discovered about genetics and heredity. But the only thing the old testament has in common with that field of study is the coincidental occurrence of the number three and the word generation.

 

Lev 10:9 Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: [it shall be] a statute for ever throughout your generations:

 

I think unless the bible comes out and mentions methylation specifically OB, you probably are not going to see the connection.

 

This verse is not a general prohibition of drinking alcohol. Notice the conditional phrase "when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation". Basically, don't be drunk when you go to the tabernacle. This verse says nothing about inheriting the consequences of drinking.

[Guest end3]

This verse is not a general prohibition of drinking alcohol. Notice the conditional phrase "when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation". Basically, don't be drunk when you go to the tabernacle. This verse says nothing about inheriting the consequences of drinking.

 

I don't see it that way at all MM. Aaron was a priest in the tabernacle.....that being a relationship with God to serve the people. Being drunk was against God's commandments, a.k.a. sin, within that relationship and is directly analogous to modern day Christians being a kingdom of priests in a relationship with God as servants. Being drunk is consistantly and still a sin.

[MagickMonkey]

This verse is not a general prohibition of drinking alcohol. Notice the conditional phrase "when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation". Basically, don't be drunk when you go to the tabernacle. This verse says nothing about inheriting the consequences of drinking.

 

I don't see it that way at all MM. Aaron was a priest in the tabernacle.....that being a relationship with God to serve the people. Being drunk was against God's commandments, a.k.a. sin, within that relationship and is directly analogous to modern day Christians being a kingdom of priests in a relationship with God as servants. Being drunk is consistantly and still a sin.

 

To me, it seems pretty clear that this verse is not a general prohibition against getting drunk. Maybe the priests would be in the tabernacle enough that drinking was a bad idea. But even if this verse can be construed to be a prohibition of getting drunk for the priests, it is still not a general prohibition for all. I can't recall any verses in the OT that generally getting drunk, though I don't claim to know there are none. I know there's one good example of how getting drunk is a bad idea - when Lot gets drunk and bangs his daughters. Of course, I don't need the OT's examples. I've made plenty of my own examples of why getting drunk is a bad idea.

 

Your interpretation seems to be like me telling my kids "I don't want you or your brothers drinking coolaid in the living room" and them thinking coolaid is prohibited all together.

 

EDITED to reflect the fact that end was talking about getting drunk and not simply drinking.

[oddbird1963]

 

 

Lev 10:9 Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: [it shall be] a statute for ever throughout your generations:

 

I think unless the bible comes out and mentions methylation specifically OB, you probably are not going to see the connection.

 

 

I see the connection you are trying to make. I just think it is inappropriate and arbitrary. And where exactly do you see birth defects being discussed as a consequence of priestly clans entering the tabernacle drunk? You just found a verse that randomly mentions alcohol and the word generations. How does that validate the connection you are trying to make?

[Guest end3]

 

 

Lev 10:9 Do not drink wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation, lest ye die: [it shall be] a statute for ever throughout your generations:

 

I think unless the bible comes out and mentions methylation specifically OB, you probably are not going to see the connection.

 

 

I see the connection you are trying to make. I just think it is inappropriate and arbitrary. And where exactly do you see birth defects being discussed as a consequence of priestly clans entering the tabernacle drunk? You just found a verse that randomly mentions alcohol and the word generations. How does that validate the connection you are trying to make?

 

I don't know how else to describe it OB....the priests of then and the Christians today would occupy the same role within God's economy. It was not appropriate for them to sin, and specifically during that relationship. I expect that although it does not say your children will have a flattened nose bridge and lowered rounded ears, that the verse visited the children would be sufficient to make the jump of assmuption. For you, it may not be.

[oddbird1963]

I don't know how else to describe it OB....the priests of then and the Christians today would occupy the same role within God's economy. It was not appropriate for them to sin, and specifically during that relationship. I expect that although it does not say your children will have a flattened nose bridge and lowered rounded ears, that the verse visited the children would be sufficient to make the jump of assmuption. For you, it may not be.

 

 

Lev. 10:8-11

 

8 Then the LORD said to Aaron, 9 “You and your sons are not to drink wine or other fermented drink whenever you go into the tent of meeting, or you will die. This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, 10 so that you can distinguish between the holy and the common, between the unclean and the clean, 11 and so you can teach the Israelites all the decrees the LORD has given them through Moses.”

 

This passage from which you quote basically tells the priests, upon pain of death, not to drink alcohol so their judgment wouldn't be clouded as they engage in their priestly duties. The rule was to last for all generations. The passage makes no threats of visiting the sins of the fathers upon three generations. How do you connect this verse to epigenetics or even to the verses that speak of the sins of the fathers? It still seems that the accidental occurrences of the words "fermented drink" and "generations" is the only reason you are using this verse.

 

And the phenomenon of 1) fathers sinning and 2) subsequent generations suffering through fetal alcohol syndrome or other very bad things through epigenetic changes remains baseless and unnecessary in this concept. You say you see sufficient warrant to assume this is what the passage is talking about. Where? The words, when put together and read in the context of the chapter in which it appears in no way lends itself to that interpretation.

 

What is the difference between a shaman throwing chicken bones onto the floor and reading them to make determinations about the world and what you are doing in your own whim-driven style of interpretation?

 

It is very tempting to want to be able to divine principles of how a god supposedly works in the real world and even meld science and religion together to make one's belief seem relevant. But if you are going to presume to use a sacred text to make such determinations about how "God's economy" works, there has to be some coherent, consistent and systematic approach to interpreting those texts. And I don't see the texts yielding the interpretation you are advocating at all.