Originally posted by e4chris
its a bit of a jump - yes the syphalis theory is, but its been around for a long time.

Do you have any references we can look at?

Originally posted by Rank outsider
[quote]14 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “These are the regulations for any diseased person at the time of their ceremonial cleansing, when they are brought to the priest: 3 The priest is to go outside the camp and examine them.

If they have been healed of their defiling skin disease,[a] 4 the priest shall order that two live clean birds and some cedar nk it with sin, not the actual belief that leprosy is a sign of sin) given what the Bible says.

Scanned through...no, nothing radical and on the surface I wouldn't argue with any scripture quoted, but not sure if your in any way supporting the premise made by e4chris in OP that syphilis is mistaken for leprosy in the Bible, or that morality stems from that syphilis.

Originally posted by divegeester
Do you have any references we can look at?

well it somehow evolved over x million years . maybe the devil put it there in 1500 and it never existed before? Syphalis and sin do go together, even to the extent that the only ones to survive it were those who had to eat mouldy bread! the rich took arsenic for it. I'm not sure at all if the bible links them but later christians did over and over.

Originally posted by e4chris
well it somehow evolved over x million years . maybe the devil put it there in 1500 and it never existed before? Syphalis and sin do go together, even to the extent that the only ones to survive it were those who had to eat mouldy bread! the rich took arsenic for it. I'm not sure at all if the bible links them but later christians did over and over.

So you don't have any references?

Originally posted by divegeester
So you don't have any references?

I'll just open up the library in my back pocket ... are you saying it does not exist or what? I don't know then it dates back too ... i could give you a paragraph on how arsenic did not work for it i know about that. Re the bible i started this thread hoping for a few references which RO provided.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Most studies point to a New World origin for syphilis. The disease leaves definite traces in the skeleton, and to my knowledge there is not a great deal of evidence supporting it's presence in 'biblical' populations. Here's a nice paper:

http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/10/1454.full.pdf

Thanks, so maybe it was not around then, - but here you have a roman case
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11957923
and i read that Herod Agrippa - king Herod might of died from it??

Originally posted by divegeester
Scanned through...no, nothing radical and on the surface I wouldn't argue with any scripture quoted, but not sure if your in any way supporting the premise made by e4chris in OP that syphilis is mistaken for leprosy in the Bible, or that morality stems from that syphilis.

I think, if you look back at your and my posts, you will see I never addressed the point about leoprosy being syphilis. I simply asked if you were asking about it. I have no comment on this. I commented on the link between leprosy and sin.

I think my previous post does make the point about the link the Bible draws between leprosy and sin. Many interpreters of the Bible see this issue in the same way. If you have an alternative explanation for the need for guilt offerings, sin offerings, atonement, refusal to let someone disfigured from leprosy approaching the altar, its use as a punishment by God and the shunning and stigmatisation of individuals in a way that it is not medically necessary or beneficial, then I am willing to listen. It seems pretty conclusive to me.

I don't know what you mean by 'morality stems from the syphilis'. Who is suggesting this? I am suggesting that leprosy was perceived as a sign of sin, or as a punishment for sin, not that morality comes from leprosy.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
I don't know what you mean by 'morality stems from the syphilis'. Who is suggesting this?

e4chris is suggesting this in the OP, although he doesn't have any scriptural references to support the premise so I'm classifying it as more of his random conjecture.

Originally posted by e4chris
I'll just open up the library in my back pocket ... are you saying it does not exist or what? I don't know then it dates back too ... i could give you a paragraph on how arsenic did not work for it i know about that. Re the bible i started this thread hoping for a few references which RO provided.

Well you opened this thread with the proposition that syphilis determined Christian/Biblical morality. All I've been doing is trying to find some common point of reference so we can consider this premise.

The reason we are not connecting over this is that you appear to me to be looking for a form of Christianity that fits your lifestyle and your mindset, where as I look for scriptural reference and guidance then expand upon that.

Originally posted by divegeester
Well you opened this thread with the proposition that syphilis determined Christian/Biblical morality. All I've been doing is trying to find some common point of reference so we can consider this premise.

The reason we are not connecting over this is that you appear to me to be looking for a form of Christianity that fits your lifestyle and your mindset, where as I look for scriptural reference and guidance then expand upon that.

This is not about fitting the bible round liberal ideas -
but syphalis was the scourge of the immoral - esp those who went with prostitutes, then took arsenic and mercury to try and hold it back.
I don't think the strict (and yes to my mind possibly to strict) laws of the old testament come from any sin - illness idea. I've said before i think the jews were conservative because they had to flee from nasty polytheistic cultures - egypt - and after that they rightly wanted boring / paid a lot off attention to sin. thats just my theory.

The idea its in the bible in conjecture yes, i've put down what little i know and if you can put down something to counter that all well and good . it seems historically it was not common then but - see the bbc link you do still have a few cases.

Originally posted by e4chris
but i tell you syphalis was the scourge of the immoral.

Scourge of the the sexually immoral, (to use your terminology) yes I would agree with you, to some extent.

There are some connection/references in the Bible to disease and sexual immorality but there is no written connection between STDs and leprosy.

There is a connection between disease generally and sin, in fact this connection goes right back to Adam and Eve of course and ultimately the connection is between sin and death. Disease in all it's forms, physical, mental, spiritual all stem from one point Biblically speaking.

Originally posted by e4chris
Thanks, so maybe it was not around then, - but here you have a roman case
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11957923
and i read that Herod Agrippa - king Herod might of died from it??

I recall back in the 1990s there was another suggested case of congenital syphilis in the Old World from a fourth-century context in France. Later expert analysis concluded that the evidence was inconclusive, and was considered more likely to have been consequent to a disorder called 'lithopedion' than from treponemal disease.

It is admittedly difficult to distinguish between the two conditions on an infant skeleton, but the complete absence of evidence from adult skeletons and the extreme rarity in juveniles in the Old World prior to Columbus does rather strongly support a New World origin.

Originally posted by divegeester
e4chris is suggesting this in the OP, although he doesn't have any scriptural references to support the premise so I'm classifying it as more of his random conjecture.

Sorry, I think I took e4chris at face value when he said:

I suppose a better question is does the bible associate Leprosy (which was probably syphalis) with bad morals? Leprosy is in the bible a lot.

I was answering the questions as rephrased, which is that the Bible does indeed associate leprosy with bad morals.