May 12, 2009
-
Eugenics… my reply to the “Professor”
My reply was so long… I thought maybe I should post it at my place
and link to his question today. It is a very fascinating question. He
ask what we thought concerning embryonic research and in particular the
selection of particular embryos over others.Visit his site here…. http://fkiprofessor.xanga.com/
Now this is an interesting topic… Mr Vee and I have discussed this
quite a bit. “Eugenics” seems to be one of those sins that “reoccurs”
in mankind similar to the sin of Babel (self exultation.) We are
thinking that scripture speaks of a tradition where the Lord would
bring the woman to the man for marriage just like He did the first
time with Eve. In other words, the Lord and what He desired was very
much a factor in the selection of a mate. Even culturally the
“Father” was very much involved in the selection of the bride. Gen.
24:4 “but you shall go to my country and to my family, and take a wife
for my son Isaac.”... and… as you recall Samson “asked his Father”
for a particular woman. (Judges 14:3) Then of course we also see many
cases where the “Father” was completely left out of the equation and
they “took wives” from heathen tribes… like Esau. Which brings us to
what Mr. Vee and I are thinking is the first judgment of “Eugenics”….
Gen 6:1-4
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the
earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the
daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for
themselves of all whom they chose. And the LORD said, “My Spirit shall
not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall
be one hundred and twenty years.” There were giants on the earth in
those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the
daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty
men who were of old, men of renown.”These men were choosing wives based on only beauty and genetic makeup
so they could produce huge handsome warriors… (they also may have
been “bred” for bad temperament like pit bulls, who knows.) This is interesting
because I know there are genetic instances of pituitary problems that
will produce “giants.” The disorder is called Acromegaly. The
“polydactyly” (6 fingers and toes) as seen in Goliath may also be a
part of this genetic malfunction that was being promoted by “selective
breeding” or this early “eugenics.” (BTW, I think someone is Noah’s
family would have had to carry that gene for Goliath to come about.)But what is also interesting is that the judgment of God seemed to reflect that type of sin also….
think about it… God shortened mans life. He would no longer be able
to genetically produce many offspring over and over! Bottom line… I think we can
count on God judging Eugenics.Now thinking about the ramifications of Eugenics today….. this is
very interesting! Check out this verse in Matt. 24:37 “But as the days
of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in
the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and
giving in marriage….” I always wondered what was so bad about
“marrying and giving in marriage”… but this might be an explanation
for it. Eugenics will once again rear its ugly head at the time of the end and God’s judgment will be forthcoming!What do you think? Bee
Comments (7)
I think in this particular case the reference to 120 years is the time from the giving of this prophecy until the flood. Not the maximum length of human life. Other than that, I think you hit upon a series of brilliant points.
Thank you for opening up points in this debate which I hadn’t heard before…very nice.
blessings
Jim
@FKIProfessor -
RE 120 yrs… well it could be that this was the amount of time they had left before the rain came down… do you know when Methuselah died? His name meant “when he dies it will come” meaning the flood/judgment. Is there an indication of how long Noah spent building the ark? (I can’t find it.) This might help us determine if that interpretation is correct.
We were thinking it possibly meant men’s lifetimes because they began to dwindle at that point. I know people still lived longer than 120 years after that… but it was never the same as in the beginning… (I think Abraham died at 175 yrs.) I was speculating about the possiblity that God added a DNA mutation into man at that point that caused a shorter life span, essentially “trumping their eugenics”. That would be such a “poetic justice” type of judgment …
but I don’t think I will never find out if that is true or not.
@BeeyondSight - If you check the context I think you’ll find it was 120 years from the prophecy to the flood. Its a peculiar wording, but then we know all about how peculiar wording can send people down wrong rabbit trails. LOL. Methuselah did die the year of the flood according to Mesoratic math.
btw, on an unrelated note, I’ve come to agree with you about the 400 year thing being from the prophecy to the exodus and not actual time in Egypt.
@FKIProfessor -
RE 120 years: Well, I read it over and over and I am still not sure that the context is clear that this is the case… I gotta think about this one a bit. I am going to see what Mr. Vee thinks, he has been soooo busy lately, travel etc… but busy is good in today’s economy!
There’s certainly room to debate either way, but I’m pretty sure the 120 years is time to the flood rather than future typical lifespan.