| (Copyright 10-22-2024) by Craig M. White (Australia) |
|---|
| Christians have heard of or read the Scriptures dealing with curses upon third and fourth generations: “…Visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.” (Ex. 34:7. Also Num. 4:18; Deut. 5:9.) Like many other Scriptures, these may be multi-layered containing both overt and hidden meanings. Duality is imbedded within the Word of God, and it behoves us to take notice of the Scriptures and not constrain ourselves to a limited interpretation. The basic thesis of this article is that it appears that we can pass on our character, attitude and health, let alone physical attributes, to one’s offspring via one’s behaviours and eating habits ––there appears to be a generational impact resulting from our experiences, actions and thoughts. Revelations From Science Rahel Wells attempts to understand this from a theological, rather than genetic, perspective: “One of the more challenging aspects of the covenant curses [of Deuteronomy 28] is that some curses seem to put the consequences on the children when it was their parents’ fault for sinning. For instance, the wounds that God causes carry on to their offspring in Deut. 28:59. However, this might also be an example of epigenetics, or that the children partake in the sins of their parents, not so much that God is punishing the innocent children for sins they did not commit (cf. Exod 34:7; Joshua 7). God makes clear in many other places in Scripture that he does not blame the children for the sins of their parents and vice versa (cf. Ezekiel 18; 33).” (“Christ in the Covenant Curses? Deuteronomy 28 and the Gospel,” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, Vol. 32, Nos. 1-2, 2021, p. 43 [emphasis mine].) Many would have already been aware that this is likely, and importantly a modern study has confirmed what Christians have long suspected: “Eat poorly, and your body will remember — and possibly pass the consequences onto your kids. In the past several years, mounting evidence has shown that sperm can take note of a father’s lifestyle decisions, and transfer this baggage to offspring. Today, in two complementary studies, scientists tell us how.” (Katherine Wu, “Dad’s Pass on More than Genetics in their Sperm,” SmithsonianMag.com, 26 July 2018). You can read the rest of the article online, along with many others representing comparative arguments. But what is being demonstrated is that the Scripture is true and accurate, thousands of years before its time. The Scriptures appear to be gelling with the laws of behavioural genetics that researchers have discovered. According to these researchers, the laws of behavioural genetics are as follows: Human conduct is inherited. The genetic effect outweighs the influence of growing up in the same family. The impacts of genes on families do not explain a large amount of the diversity in complex human behavioral traits. There are numerous genetic variants linked to a typical human behavioral attribute, but these variants only make up a very small portion of the total behavioral diversity. All phenotypic interactions (i.e., observable traits) are mediated or confused by genetics to some extent. Referring to point 1, it is now proven that identical twins grown up apart will be comparable in every conceivable way. In general, genetic similarity predicts behavioural and other phenotypic similarities across all human relationships, regardless of environmental circumstances. That is, identical twins are more similar than fraternal twins or complete siblings, who are more similar than half-siblings, who are more similar than first cousins, and so on indefinitely. The question is, after creation, were human behaviours that imprinted on future generations part of the way human conduct was generated and continued? Is this how national traits were developed? “The phenomenon has long been known in psychology: traumatic experiences can induce behavioural disorders that are passed down from one generation to the next. It is only recently that scientists have begun to understand the physiological processes underlying hereditary trauma. ‘There are diseases such as bipolar disorder, that run in families but can’t be traced back to a particular gene,’ explains Isabelle Mansuy, professor at ETH Zurich and the University of Zurich… “Mansuy and her team have succeeded in identifying a key component of these processes: short RNA molecules…” (“Hereditary trauma: Inheritance of traumas and how they may be mediated,” ScienceDaily.com, 13 April 2014” [emphasis mine].) Take for example a study undertaken at the University of Cambridge which revealed that a father’s life experiences, including food consumption, drugs, exposure to toxic products, and stress, can significantly impact the development and health of his children and grandchildren. (McGill University, “Environmental memories transmitted from a father to his grandchildren,” Science Daily, 8 Oct. 2015). “This has turned the traditional belief that life is about nature versus nurture on its head. What this really means is that nature (our genes) is intimately intertwined with nurture (our environment), and these epigenetic changes have deep roots in the choices of our grandparents, and in those of their grandparents. The emergence of epigenetics has provided us with two gifts. One is a forewarning that the way we live today does have significant consequences for our children, our grandchildren, and beyond. And the second gift is one of empowerment. Regardless of what took place two generations before us, we still have tremendous power to modify our own gene expression with every thought, every mouthful, and every physical movement we choose to engage in. Our genes are waiting for direction from us. My advice? Go for the apple.” (Pamela Peeke, “You Are What Your Grandparent’s Ate,” Maria’s Farm Country Kitchen, 14 Nov 2013 [emphasis mine].) Readers may be interested in the following article which highlights the importance of epigenetics to them, “Epigenetics—Inheriting More Than Genes,” www.AnswersInGenesis.org, 24 Jan. 2021, by Georgia Purdom: “Epigenetic markers, how your parents’ diet may affect you, and the problem it poses for evolutionists… “The food you eat, and other aspects of your environment can change these tagalongs. Then they can be passed down to your children and even your grandchildren, affecting the genes that are turned on.” Can Memories Be Passed Down The Generations? Consider this: if one’s physical appearance (especially face), mental attributes, talents, propensity to particular diseases and sicknesses can be carried down the generations, then why not memories? After all, our genes “remember” the aforementioned. In a remarkable article, “Scientists have found that memories might be passed down through generations in our DNA,” 30 May 2014, we find that Emory University School of Medicine has discovered that certain information can be inherited through chemical changes in DNA. The study found that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic experiences, such as fear of the smell of cherry blossoms, to subsequent generations. This suggests that experiences are transferred from the brain into the genome, allowing them to be passed on to later generations. The researchers now aim to further understand how information is stored on DNA and whether similar effects can be seen in human genes. However, more careful mechanistic study of animal models is needed before applying these findings to humans. For many years, some churches believed –– like so many in society used to –– that you could sort of “imprint” character (to some degree) on future generations by one’s behaviour. There was a lot of research on this over the decades which was later “pooh-poohed” by the liberal-left academic Del Ratzsch in The Battle of Beginnings, as well as the establishment and their media allies. But “Science is a complicated, historically shifting play among nature, theories and a host of often-unstated nonempirical principles that shape our thinking, evaluating, theorizing and even perceiving. Since the parts are so interwoven, changes in one part frequently have consequences for the content and contours of other parts. Parts do change over time –– theories are replaced, shaping principles alter, and so forth. And sometimes entire systems involving all three components are overturned and replaced by others” (p. 128). How much more so with inherited traits? As the Apostle Paul was inspired to write: “For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate… “For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.” (Rom. 7:15,18) But to be clear: one’s inherited attributes do not overwhelm one and this can never be used as an excuse for any negativities or criminal activities. It is not some sort of invisible force that overwhelms one or possesses one, but it does seem to tug or pull at one in a certain direction. A sort of propensity to this or that behaviour. Yet one can still make decisions that can change the propensity. In other words, though these pull and tug at us, in the end we have far more capacity at making decisions and choosing what to do –– we have free moral agency and must take personal responsibility for our own actions. Animals have less capacity to do so –– much less. See Scriptures that support this position such as Deut. 16:15-20; Eccl. 8:11; Phil. 2:12; II Pet. 1:10; James 1:13-14. Perhaps the mental imprint of the founders of the nations listed in Genesis 10 was so powerful as to affect the behaviours of their descendants for centuries. In other words, unresisted propensity may exert a powerful influence. Hence national characteristics originate this way, at least in part? For example, some admixture may dilute or change the propensity in some way, but this will take an enormous amount of research and vast resources to prove or disprove. In a header to their article on epigenetics, Vision magazine contained this statement: “Science is revealing how our environment and behavior from conception to old age affect not only us but also future generations. The Ripple Effect.” According to the article’s author, Dan Cloer, understanding epigenetic systems reveals that humans are preprogrammed at birth for certain behaviors, which can be changed and reprogrammed in the future. This can lead to harmful relationships and suggests a form of inheritance outside our DNA code. This revelation is unexpected, but it could be beneficial for our well-being. (“The Ripple Effect,” Vision, Fall 2012, online.) Another article of note is “Can trauma be passed on through our DNA?” by Jonathan Davis, 3 March 2016. The article discusses that understanding how to heal from trauma before passing it on to the next generation is crucial. So, thanks to the emerging discipline of epigenetics, researchers are uncovering that trauma can be inherited by future generations through mechanisms beyond just learned actions. Previously it was stated that these influences do not, of course, possess you or force you to do anything. They simply influence you or provide an “urging” of sorts to operate in a certain way. You are not helpless to change, and I might add, not all these influences are bad. Some are good or a mixture of good/positive and bad/negative. It is almost as if these inbuilt influences “drag” you in a certain direction because inside your mind are forces or energies that pertain to certain behaviours or characteristics that you are born with. See Rom. 7:15-23. These come from your parents and even distant forefathers. In this regard one article worth a read is “Culture etched on our DNA more than previously known, research suggests,” CBS News, 11 Jan. 2017 by Shanika Gunaratna. The study suggests that factors like common ancestry, culture, and environment contribute to the genomes of individuals within the same ethnic groups. For the first time, researchers have quantified the non-genetic aspects of race and identity for those from the same ethnic background. The researchers examined DNA methylation –– markers that can be inherited or altered by life experiences and influence gene expression –– in 573 Mexican and Puerto Rican children. They found 916 methylation differences associated with Mexican or Puerto Rican ethnicity. Interestingly, only three-quarters of these differences could be explained by genetic ancestry. This led the researchers to theorize that a significant portion, around one quarter, of these DNA fingerprints likely reflect the biological signatures of environmental, social, and cultural differences between the ethnic groups. Factors like diet, neighborhood conditions, and smoking habits tend to vary across racial and ethnic groups. These subtle cultural and environmental differences can be manifested in DNA methylation patterns! The study’s lead researcher, Dr. Esteban Burchard, emphasized that this furthers our understanding of the complex relationship between race, ethnicity, and biology. It suggests that the common framework of viewing race/ethnicity as social constructs versus genetic ancestry as a biological construct is overly simplistic. Going forward, the researchers plan to explore whether these findings apply to other populations beyond the Mexican and Puerto Rican groups studied. Understanding the interplay of genetic, environmental, and social factors in shaping racial and ethnic identities is crucial for healthcare professionals in diagnosing and treating health issues. “The research suggests that abandoning considerations of race and ethnicity in medicine — as some academics, who view race and ethnicity as social constructs, suggest — would be a grave mistake, and that these lenses carry valuable insights for more precise and culturally specific medicine. “The future of medicine, Dr. Burchard argued, carefully considers genetic ancestry, race, ethnicity and culture all at the same time. He published research back in 2011 showing how far the medical research establishment is from factoring in the nuances of race and ethnicity. That 2011 research showed that 94 percent of study participants in modern genetic studies are white, Dr. Buchard said. “‘We study whites a lot, and then we try to generalize that to Sri Lankans, blacks, Asians, and other racial groups. That’s not just socially unjust, it’s bad science and bad medicine’ Dr. Burchard said.” [emphasis mine]. Lessons for us today The great lesson to take away from the above is simple: control your thinking, reactions to traumatic events, and eating habits for the sake of future generations. Because you can pass on attributes –– both positive and negative. You can either be a blessing or a curse to those that come after you –– your very descendants. ——————————————————————————————————— See Craig M. White’s other articles at: White, Craig M. – Church of God, Bismarck (church-of-god-bismarck.org) Reprinted with permission from: Friends of the Sabbath Australia http://www.friendsofsabbath.org/ Originally published by 21stcenturywatch.com ——————————————————————————————————— |
Views: 1
Sign up to Receive [The "New" Church of God Messenger] weekly newsletter: