|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2514 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Biblical Tall Tales | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Nuggin Member (Idle past 2514 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
Is acromegaly hereditary?
Goliath's two brothers were also giants. One of them was polydactic as well.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1365 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
both the septuagint and the dead sea scrolls say "4 cubits and a span" instead of the masoretic's "6 cubits and a span."
i think we're looking at a different kind of change here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Iblis Member (Idle past 3917 days) Posts: 663 Joined: |
NCBI/eutils102 - WWW Error 404 Diagnostic
Koch and Tiwisina (1959) reviewed 8 examples of affected persons in 2 successive generations, including 4 instances of father and 1 or more sons affected. Some reported instances of familial acromegaly may in fact be pachydermoperiostosis (167100), acromegaloid-cutis verticis gyrata-leukoma syndrome (102100), or cerebral gigantism (117550). Furthermore, familial acromegaly can be a partial expression of the multiple endocrine adenomatosis syndrome, specifically multiple endocrine neoplasia type I (MEN1; 131100). Pituitary growth hormone-secreting tumors occur also as part of McCune-Albright syndrome (174800) due to mutations in the GNAS1 gene. Levin et al. (1974) reported the cases of 2 brothers with acromegaly confirmed by elevated GH levels. Both had acanthosis nigricans and pituitary tumors. Pestell et al. (1989) described a family in which 5 members over 3 generations had isolated functional pituitary adenomas. In 4 cases this was associated with acromegaly, and in the fifth galactorrhea from prolactin excess was the presenting feature. The tumors were histologically of either atypical mixed cell or undifferentiated cell type. No parent-child transmission was observed. The 5 individuals were related as uncle and nephew or uncle and niece or as second cousins. There were no consanguineous marriages in the family. Autosomal dominant inheritance with reduced penetrance was proposed. Pestell et al. (1989) considered the disorder in this family to be distinct from MEN1. Jones et al. (1984), Abbassioun et al. (1986), and McCarthy et al. (1990) also reported cases of familial acromegaly. 30 MEDLINE Neighbors Nothing about polydactyls though, isn't that supposed to signify a vestigial twin? This message has been edited by Iblis, 01-04-2006 01:20 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Iblis Member (Idle past 3917 days) Posts: 663 Joined: |
a different kind of change I think you're right! (and I really admire your jedp response on a different thread.) I think Origen couldn't believe 9 foot 6 himself and as usual searched for a "wild text" that would suit his ideas. The scroll from Qumran is a sample of that text, but doesn't match the "LXX" (Origen's 5th Column) in many other ways. But I could be wrong? Doesn't matter a lot really.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1365 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
i'm sorry, i'm not following this thread too closely. what source are you looking at? i'm reasonably certain the lxx says "four cubits and a span." i see some stuff about some changes/omission to the story. is that what you mean?
(and I really admire your jedp response on a different thread.) thanks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Iblis Member (Idle past 3917 days) Posts: 663 Joined: |
You've got it right, the LXX favors 4 cubits, one of the dead sea scrolls favors 4 cubits, the other texts say 6.
I believe that the disagreement can better be explained by the fact that the "LXX" by the 4th century consisted specifically of those readings that disagreed with the targums Onkelos (Aquila) and Jonathan (Theodotian) and the further Judaizers like Symmachus. I also suspect that the anecdotes relating to Goliath and the Gath family indicate acromegaly or a related pituitary disease that could produce heights greater than 7 feet and various other afflictions; and that the cubit like its descendant the yard has increased by about 20% due to the increase in the average length of the arms used to set the standard. But if you want you can have your 4 cubits, let's make them babylonian 20 inch cubits though
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1365 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
You've got it right, the LXX favors 4 cubits, one of the dead sea scrolls favors 4 cubits, the other texts say 6. oh ok, i see. i'm not sure i follow the rest about disagreements with the targums.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Discreet Label Member (Idle past 5085 days) Posts: 272 Joined: |
I think someone attempted to point out that the original preserved meaning is entirely different then what is currently present. Something to note about translating between languages is that the translation has an entirely different cultural meaning to another group. (someone brought up the idea of giant among men earlier in the thread)
Well another example would be some Americans tendency for food analogies. I.e. Now we are cooking with grease. in spanish. Ahora estamos cocinando con la grasa. I mean it just means we are cooking with grease. The difference is that the spanish culture doesn't have the similiar euphemisms as american culture so where the american context indicates hey this job is going fast, or the idea is great... In spain its just oh..we are cooking with grease. So i feel that arguing for the preservation of meaning of the bible is not necessairly possible with a literal translation of the bible. Someone floating around this forum inidcated an excellent translation of the bible, not necessairly word for word, but one that placed comprable cultural euphemisms. (i think the version was the recent Jewish society am not sure it was discussed in some prior threads on this forum)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1365 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
So i feel that arguing for the preservation of meaning of the bible is not necessairly possible with a literal translation of the bible. well, yes and no. the difference here is that a somewhat literal translation of the bible has been part of our cultural reading list for about 400 years. and so some hebrew euphemisms, translated literally, have worked their way into our language: seed (children/sperm), fat of the land, hardening one's heart, stiff-necked, scapegoat, to gird one's loins, skin of my teeth, double-edged sword, set teeth on edge, etc. there's a ton of other english idioms that derive from stories in the bible, too. adam's apple, fly in the ointment, reaping whirlwinds, feet of clay, writing on the wall. the problem is that there's a bunch of ones that don't quite work in english: stones (testicles), feet (penis), covering one's feet (urination or oral sex depending who's doing it and to whom), uncovering one's feet (getting naked), son of man (mortal) there's a bunch of questionable ones, and ones that are really only used in religious circles, too: lift up one's head, fruit of ____, milk and honey, slept (died), one's cup, numbered days, evil eyes, etc. it's really kind of subjective how literal a translation can or needs to be. and it changes from time to time what works in english and what doesn't.
Someone floating around this forum inidcated an excellent translation of the bible, not necessairly word for word, but one that placed comprable cultural euphemisms. (i think the version was the recent Jewish society am not sure it was discussed in some prior threads on this forum) it might have been me. i find the newer jps version to be quite easily understandable in modern english, and retains the idea of the text quite well. This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 01-04-2006 05:02 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DorfMan Member (Idle past 6102 days) Posts: 282 From: New York Joined: |
quote: You don't need me to be, you have your own ideas and mine won't matter a farthing.I avoid the horror I call quibbling. From observation I note that it is often misstated as debate. Nor am I interested in making converts or indulging in the possibility of obtaining agreement. It is for that reason my posts are always short, and my preference is an occasional comment. Lurking becomes the DorfMan.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 633 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
I have a horror of vague references to things being called a discussion, much less a debate. I don't think unsupported claims, or vague references show what you are actually trying to say and support.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
chuckiliwakels Inactive Member |
This does raise an all important question of how accurate everything in the bible is. It is difficult to tell, just because everything was passed through the word of mouth, and of course people may exaggerate and make stories out to be better than they actually are. Did Moses part the red sea? Did Jesus perform miracles? Did Jesus walk on water? There are so many different examples of larger than life stories, but who really knows if they are accurate or not?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminJar Inactive Member |
Welcom to EvC. We hope to learn much from you during your stay.
At the bottom of this message you'll find links to several threads that may make your stay here more enjoyable. To comment on moderation procedures or respond to admin messages:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ReverendDG Member (Idle past 4132 days) Posts: 1119 From: Topeka,kansas Joined: |
You don't need me to be, you have your own ideas and mine won't matter a farthing.
yes because somehow anything people want to debate you on is quibbling, why come to a debate site like this if all you want to do is state things without question? if you would like to do that get a blog then you can say what you want, I mean we could perchance agree with you on somethingI avoid the horror I call quibbling. From observation I note that it is often misstated as debate. Nor am I interested in making converts or indulging in the possibility of obtaining agreement. It is for that reason my posts are always short, and my preference is an occasional comment. Lurking becomes the DorfMan. This message has been edited by ReverendDG, 01-17-2006 04:38 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPD Inactive Administrator |
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024