Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
110 online now:
dwise1 (1 member, 109 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,057 Year: 6,169/6,534 Month: 362/650 Week: 132/278 Day: 30/24 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Biblical Eugenics - being wrong about how to colorize your goats
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 185 (706679)
09-16-2013 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Alias
09-16-2013 10:04 AM


Reading comprehension.
I'll take your first point that since I don't believe Jesus walked on water so why should you believe your version of gen 30-31.

FYI: my version of 30 is different than fundies point of view that's something i'm proud of but that does not quantify to trash talking the story since I'm standing up for what the story

Being different from fundies is nothing really noteworthy. Fundies often read the Bible correctly, even when they take the meaning in literal was that were never intended. But having done so, fundies often end up straining at gnats.

In my opinion, and this is strictly my opinion, you seem willing to distort the story of Jacob beyond what the text actually says because you don't find any value in the story actually told in the text. I don't see that as standing up for the story. Your intentions are good, but the Bible does not need the kind of help you are offering.

As I see it, the story, true or false, is about the relationship and dispute between Laban and Jacob, and might well be similar to any dispute you might have with your brother man. In that respect the story is universal. In resolving the dispute, Jacob consults God, and Laban apparently does not.

As far as the meat of the story is concerned, it matters very little whether you can actually affect sheep biology using rods. So for me, the genetics part of the story is interesting, but of little importance. But for you and the fundamentalists apparently the issue of where striped sheep come from is essential. Well at least the fundies version of the tale is coherent. You have yet to tell me where the Laban's colored sheep mentioned in verse 40 could have come from.

The Grasshopper and the Ant episode never happened. Ants cannot talk. But to try to find some way to read the story so that the insects are not actually talking is ro miss the entire point.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 10:04 AM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 1:14 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 66 of 185 (706680)
09-16-2013 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Alias
09-16-2013 12:15 PM


Re: a test for honesty.
If we read it as Jacob removing them in 35, 30:40 is much more clear as is the whole passage due to their agreement in 32-34 and in CH 29 where it reads laban wanted to pay Jacob something (vs cheating him).

Verse 40 unequivocably refers to Laban's colored cattle. How does Laban manage to still have any colored cattle?


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 12:15 PM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 12:41 PM NoNukes has not replied
 Message 68 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 12:47 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 185 (706686)
09-16-2013 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Alias
09-16-2013 1:14 PM


Re: Reading comprehension.
Laban's colored sheep in 40 came from the flock Jacob removed in 35 as per the agreemeant in 32.

According to your interpretation, those sheep were removed by Jacob according to the agreement in verse 32. If so, then those sheep were not Laban's but were instead Jacob's. But that contradicts both explicit language in verse 40 and your own statement that the sheep in question where Jacob's by agreement.

So why does the Bible call them Laban's? My answer is because your assumption is wrong. Laban removed the sheep and put them in his son's care. If you can resolve the issue without trashing the text in verse 40, I'd like to hear how you do it. But so far you have not done that.

But I am interpreting it to support biblical thought that a con by god's servant didn't happen

Thanks for acknowledging that point. Your reading is a motivated one. It seems that your primary reason for resolving what you consider ambigous is to reach your desired result. But you don't limit your self to chosing meanings for arguably ambigous passages. You continue by rewriting the explicit ones.

It is not necessary to do this to save the story.

Consider the following interpretation. The original agreement can be interpreted to mean that there was an ongoing promise that Jacob would receive the spotted cattle born to Laban's herd. Jacob expected that the spotting would serve as a brand that would avoid any misunderstanding. He also expected that there would be a certain percentage of marked cattle born.

The Laban removes the mottled cattle from the herd. Even if he later returns these cattle to Jacob, his expectation is that the pure white cattle will not produce any more speckled cattle. In short, Jacob will earn no wages for any of his future work with Laban.

Jacob took steps to prevent such an outcome. I have no problem with that. Jar says that such an actions were not justified, but I disagree. Laban's expectations were frustrated, but he intended to cheat Jacob.

it portrays the morality of god hence why god is helping it's faithful servant.

Is Jacob's faithfulness limited to this one incident? Nope. So there is no reason to justify God's rewarding of Jacob. But the rewards you suggest (helping the sheep to mate/making them stronger) simply aren't anywhere in the text.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 1:14 PM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 3:06 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 185 (706687)
09-16-2013 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Alias
09-16-2013 12:47 PM


Re: a test for honesty.
Maybe this will clear it up.

You aren't clearing anything up. Your making up a new position.

The agreement in 32 between laban and Jacob was for Jacob to breed colored/spotted, etc flock using Laban's flock as wages from laban. That way there is no gift from laban as per 31. Then it took place.

Except that Jacob only had access to the flock of non-spotted cattle after the events of verse 36. There is no way to interpret that verse to say anything different.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 12:47 PM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 4:03 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 185 (706695)
09-16-2013 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Alias
09-16-2013 4:03 PM


Re: a test for honesty.
Actually I have cleared it up, vs 40 contradicts the con cheat interpretation. How could Jacob have access to laban's colored flock to con laban in v 40, to seperate them from laban's colored flock, if laban removed his colored flock in v 35 and cheated Jacob from removing them?

Verse 40 requires that the speckled cattle belong to Laban. You cannot seem to address this. Secondly, Jacob does not need access to Laban's sheep merely to have his own sheep face in their direction. So no problem is presented here.

Both verse 36 and verse 40 contain items that you simply cannot address without giving up your interpretation. Verse 36 explicitly says that Jacob is tending the rest of the sheep, which means sheep without any coloring. You have no way around that.

You also cannot have Jacob take the colored sheep in verse 35 and then still have them belong to Laban in verse 40.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 4:03 PM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 4:37 PM NoNukes has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 96 of 185 (706728)
09-16-2013 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Alias
09-16-2013 7:07 PM


Right. Either way you get weak colored that were not used to mate present. It does not jive if laban took the colored in 35.

The point to the story was that Jacob did not make very many weak colored cattle. Any weak colored sheep that got made would still belong to Jacob.

The story works out perfectly well if Jacob is able to get white cattle of his own choosing to produce dark cattle. And verse 41 says that Jacob can do exactly that.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 7:07 PM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Alias, posted 09-17-2013 6:48 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 97 of 185 (706729)
09-16-2013 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by marc9000
09-16-2013 7:21 PM


I'd be interested in hearing your take on the story. I don't recall ever attending a church service in which the pastor used this story as his text.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by marc9000, posted 09-16-2013 7:21 PM marc9000 has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 185 (706741)
09-17-2013 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by Alias
09-16-2013 11:45 PM


What is more probable is that this is how they thought genetics worked

I agree. But that opens up more possibilities than you have listed. Yes, this could be just a story. Or perhaps God actually intervened for Jacob when he used the rods and that detail did not get recorded. In either event, no rules of genetics need be broken.

There are actually quite a few stories in the Bible where God required the favored to perform actions and to use props despite the fact that God could have just used magic directly. Other examples would include the Elisha with the widow and the jars of oil in 2 Kings 4 and the fish with the coin in its mouth in Matthew 17:27.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Alias, posted 09-16-2013 11:45 PM Alias has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 112 of 185 (706797)
09-17-2013 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by jar
09-17-2013 4:00 PM


Re: contradiction
It is important to remember in all the fireside Jacob tales that conning, cheating and getting even shows up. There are examples among the wives, between Laban and Jacob, between Jacob and his father and brothers, even between Jacob and God.

Exactly. There is simply no point in trying to force an interpretation on this story were Jacob does not try to out wit Laban unless your plan is to rewrite the Bible ala Conservapedia. If Alias weren't hidebound on his silly task of proving Jacob to be a human angel...

If God had not promised differently to Abraham, He would surely have kicked Jacob straight to the curb somewhere short of Genesis 35.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by jar, posted 09-17-2013 4:00 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Alias, posted 09-17-2013 9:48 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 185 (706798)
09-17-2013 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Alias
09-17-2013 6:48 PM


Reading primer
The story reads in 41 that jacob put the branches in front of the strong animals so they would mate in front of the branches. Whenever the animals were weak he did not place them in front of the branches they just went to laban as per 42. Strong to Jacob weak to laban. Says nothing of what you posted.

That's exactly what we've been telling you since you joined this thread. And it is entirely consistent with what I said in message 96. Jacob did not put the rods in front of weak, non-colored parents because he did not want to get stuck with the resulting weak colored offspring. By withholding the rods he allowed Laban to get the offspring of weak parents which presumably would also be weak and non-colored.

At this point you are arguing for the mere sake of arguing. You said that you did not want to discuss this anymore, so I was not planning to respond to your summary. Then you post more nonsense.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Alias, posted 09-17-2013 6:48 PM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Alias, posted 09-17-2013 9:53 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 185 (706846)
09-18-2013 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Alias
09-18-2013 10:38 AM


Re: contradiction
just creates grammatical issue because 35 and 36 use he vs names which makes sense due to translating from ancient to new languages

I acknowledge that there is an ambiguity about who does what in verse 35. I think the ambiguity is resolvable, but there is no need to address that issue here.

There is no such ambiguity in verse 36. If you think there is a translation error, you need to dig that out instead of just assuming there is one. But there is no facial ambiguity.

quote:
36 And he set three days' journey betwixt himself and Jacob: and Jacob fed the rest of Laban's flocks

There is simply no way that Jacob set three day's journey to separate himself from Jacob. You cannot replace the "he" and "himself" and get any kind of sensible thought. The text clearly refers to Laban moving. Further, it is clear, regardless of who took the sheep in verse 35, that those sheep are not included in "the rest of Laban's flocks".

Another thing, your interpretation creates a bigger issue for literalists than mine.

That claim is laughable and false. By your own admission, your interpretation requires you to denounce the entire Laban/Jacob story as false, uninspired, and not proper scripture. Fundamentalists on the other hand just chalk up the birthing of spotted cattle from non-spotted parent cattle to God's intervention. As is evidenced from the commentary I cited, fundies don't have much of a problem with Jacob's breeding experiment.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Alias, posted 09-18-2013 10:38 AM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Alias, posted 09-18-2013 7:01 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 130 of 185 (706904)
09-19-2013 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by Alias
09-18-2013 7:01 PM


Re: contradiction
Ref post 121-124 and follow those. CS has presented a better interpretation of the contradiction I kept mentioning, and we are elaborating on that now.

Let's assume that those posts resolve the issue. Given that they were made after your post which drew my response, and even after my response, they don't rebut my comments about your position prior to your being persuaded by Catholic Scientist.

Further, one of your reasons for disagreeing with the mainstream interpretation is wanting to establish that Jacob was not a con artist. I think your efforts would be better addressed at explaining Jacob's tricking his brother out of his birthright or at Jacob's whining like a puppy when he faces his brother after leaving Laban. Esau appears to be 10 times the man Jacob was.

It appears to me that your sole issue is to rebut the idea that the Bible says that striped rods cause plain cattle to produce colored cattle. You seem to think that CS nitpicking (in my opinion) over the possibility that not all of the colored animals were removed fixes thing.

Well actually that nitpicking is unhelpful. The reason is that even if some colored sheep did not get removed, we know that colored goats are not sired or born by sheep of any color. Yet all goats with any white on them had been removed from Laban's herd. So you still need an explanation of where speckled goats came from. If the answer is facing colored sheep, that answer is just as silly as proximity to striped rods.

Frankly, I think the best assumption to attack is the assumption that white animals cannot have speckled offspring. If coloring were recessive, you could expect a fraction of the births to white sheep to be colored. Of course I don't actually know who goat/sheep genetics works...

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Alias, posted 09-18-2013 7:01 PM Alias has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 131 of 185 (706905)
09-19-2013 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 129 by Alias
09-18-2013 11:15 PM


Re: The contradiction
CS, please don't talk to me like I'm an idiot. I have a bachelor's degree in applied science. I have also studied the bible since I was about 10 which is roughly 22 years.

So what should we think when you say things that are proven clearly wrong based on 10 seconds of reading the Bible. Things like 'Laban had no sons' or when you admit to confusion about the branches being white.

Generally speaking though, citing your BS degree in a discussion about the meaning of about 10 verses in the Bible isn't a winning argument. And I've noticed that you aren't above ridiculing your opponent. When you are wrong, just take your lumps.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Alias, posted 09-18-2013 11:15 PM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Alias, posted 09-19-2013 1:14 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 133 of 185 (706913)
09-19-2013 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Alias
09-19-2013 1:14 PM


but it does read that jacob used them so they would MATE in front of them.

It actually says that he put the rods in front of mating cattle so they would mate in front of rods. If it did not say that, then this argument would be over. You read the purpose into statements that are best interpreted differently.

quote:
41 And it came to pass, whensoever the stronger cattle did conceive, that Jacob laid the rods before the eyes of the cattle in the gutters, that they might conceive among the rods

The passage said that when the stronger cattle did concerive that Jacob laid the rods before the cattle. The result was that the cattle conceived among the rods.

The passage does not say that the impetus to conceive came from the rods as you claim it does.

I'll admit that verse 42 does not close off your interpretation, because it does not talk about the weak cattle conceiving. But you should not need to be told that cattle were making babies or that other animals need no help to make babies. But perhaps solid colored animals do need some help making streaked babies.

I've only ridiculed when the other started ridiculing FIRST.

I think the record will show that you ridiculed me before I changed my tone with you.

As for not responding to my message 130, I cannot blame you for that. Because it blows you up pretty well.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Alias, posted 09-19-2013 1:14 PM Alias has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by Alias, posted 09-19-2013 1:50 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 137 of 185 (706924)
09-19-2013 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by Alias
09-19-2013 1:50 PM


NoNukes writes:

I don't care what you said in post 17.

You started it just like paul and CS.

If you think my statement comments ridicule, then you are extremely weak (and that is ridicule). Perhaps you should have taken my comment to about the weak and ineffective nature of the content in your posts in which you simply state that arguments are moot, go back and read post 17 which does not even address the arguments and contains bad info to boot.

Now were talking translation issues which I've mentioned. It uses the word heat in the NIV instead of conceive from the KJV.

That's a much better argument than the one you used before in which you simply badly paraphrased the KJV version. Let's not pretend that it is the same argument you used before.

Your current argument still begs the question of why you think the strong animals in heat needed help mating, and how the production of colored goats from white goats actually happened. And why would verses 41 and 42 result in Laban getting weak cattle.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Alias, posted 09-19-2013 1:50 PM Alias has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022