PubMed · 9894957
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
G Gillespie. 1999. Gutenberg recycled.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-199901000-00003
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Medicine is as old as the human species, and medical literature is among the earliest writing. Current research is of great help in identifying new interventions, but a great deal of the art of medicine is showcased in ancient works. The 20th century saw a plethora of books, articles, and monographs on the subjects of grief, death and dying, and suffering, but none of these has provided greater insight than the biblical book of Job. Excerpts from Job illustrate both the nature of grief and appropriate intervention when it is confronted.
The theological doctrine of biblical inerrancy is the intellectual basis for modern creation science. Yet Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield of Princeton Theological Seminary, the theologian who more than any other defined modern biblical inerrancy, was throughout his life open to the possibility of evolution and at some points an advocate of the theory. Throughout a long career Warfield published a number of major papers on these subjects, including studies of Darwin's religious life, on the theological importance of the age of humanity (none) and the unity of the human species (much), and on Calvin's understanding of creation as proto-evolutionary. He also was an engaged reviewer of many of his era's important books by scientists, theologians, and historians who wrote on scientific research in relation to traditional Christianity. Exploration of Warfield's writing on science generally and evolution in particular retrieves for historical consideration an important defender of mediating positions in the supposed war between science and religion.
The authors address the problem of why the cleft lip anomalad is not mentioned even once in the Talmud, which contains detailed reports of numerous other forms of pathology and congenital anomalies. It also attempts to define the Sandal deformity, one of the most common congenital anomalies mentioned in the Talmud. It is assumed that cleft lip, the most common major facial defect, existed at the time of the Talmud. It is proposed that the Sandal deformity was actually made up of a number of entities grouped together because of a theorized common etiology, and that the cleft lip entity is included in the Sandal anomalad. This deformity, in its various forms, included, besides cleft lip, aborted tissue and products of gestation. They are all related to the common etiology of a twin gestation during which one fetus presses against the other causing the deformity. The Sandal was noted to look like the Sandal fish or sole, for which it is named. When photos of the Sandal fish and the cleft lip deformity are compared, a similarity is seen. In addition, this deformity apparently was thought to be fatal, and none of these babies survived. It is theorized that cleft lip babies were allowed to die because they were considered nonviable in the eyes of Jewish law. Supporting evidence for the ideas presented by the authors is derived from the talmudic texts and commentaries. If the Sandal does indeed include the cleft lip entity, the citation in the Mishnah (70-200 AD) makes it the earliest historical reference to the cleft lip deformity.