The motorcycle gangs are groupings of people with a common purpose and social anthropology seeking for an identity. Initially their membership was from lovers and funs of choppers and motor cycling who enjoyed traveling in wads and tourists who enjoyed adventure on two wheels.
There are thousands of motorcycle gangs in the United States but only four are recognized as outlawed which include the pagans, hells angels, the outlaws and the Bandidos (Custom Choppers Guide, Para 1-3).
The motorcycle gangs
The outlaw motorcycle clubs have lived since the genesis of motorcycles. Immediately the production of the cycle started the clubs started emerging though the out laws have emerged much later. The clubs brought together the lovers of motor riding and other events including music. The first motor cycle club to emanate was the McCook outlaws in the mid 1930s. The group was formed with the purpose of touring and racing for long distances with alcohol consumption as secondary theme though important (Wheeler, Para 1-3).
With the end of the Second World War, the young soldiers on return home were in search for adventure. The active war men were seeking for their other survivors for companionship and motorcycle riding was entwined in these relationships. The clubs were acceptable then to an extent they got support from the American Motorcycle Association (AMA) especially after the war. In the late 1940s an allegation was made that the disorder that had occurred in California was caused by the motorists. This statement which was suspected to have been released by the AMA made some of the clubs detach themselves from association and later they turned out to be the outlaws.
Outlaw motorcycle clubs aggressed all over the United States which included the Bandidos and hells angels among others. With the beginning of the Vietnam War, clubs membership rapidly increased as the veterans who were given freedom found console and comfort in the clubs upon acceptance. This is where the culture of drugs originated in the history of the gangs; it was an introduction of the veterans from Vietnam, who had been introduced to illegal drugs in Asia in their sovereignty as soldiers. This led to the clubs receiving corrupted labels and in conflict with the law enforcers (Wheeler, Para 4-6).
Cultures have taken a view of featuring the motorcycle gangs as vigilantes, individualistic and rebels on a silver plate or screen. The bikers are known to be corruptive of their neighborhood and intimidating, though they seem less vital to their aims. The members of the outlaws insist that illegal activities should not be labeled on every one, for only a small fraction of the group deal with illegal drugs and violence. The outlawed clubs have had an impact on the history in the 21st century despite their negative perception; this sub-culture has greatly influenced the American culture (Custom Choppers Guide, Para 4-6).
How the society viewed the gangs then
The motorcycle clubs were initially viewed as groups to help people develop and enjoy the talents within themselves. They were known as racing teams which were accepted even by the governments to points of being supported for example by the AMA. They were set of people with common personalities and drives seeking for identity.
Other groups were formed in search of brotherhood like the warlocks motorcycle gang and to be able to offer security to each other. This was the good spirit of being a brothers keeper. The families whose members made up this gang that started in Philadelphia had no problem with their sons being members of the group. This in itself made the society have a positive attitude to the groups. The society and the members of the gang proclaimed that before its formation there was lot of violence which had reduced with their existence hence an advantage (Dulaney, Para 11-16).
These groups lived in the confines of what they would do and achieve together. For example the Hells Angels claimed to be patriots who abided with the law. Their name is just a brand of honor of what they were capable of accomplishing. Comprising of ex-members of the United States 11th airborne Army who were trained as paratroopers, they believed they would rain death in the camps of their enemies (Manning, Para 5-8).
Contrary to the initial purpose, a segment of the gang has involved itself in illegal activities which have made the whole group be stereotyped over the time, which they claim it has been so due to wrong media sensation. Hollywood also took advantage and reflected the negative view in their movies of the violent perception hence a sub-culture developed surrounding the group.
The good notion people had for motor cyclers were also seriously affected by the tattoo labels they used on their bodies and clothing especially the leather jackets. Initially, the tattoo was brands used by criminals; also identified with people whose culture was totally unfit to the human race. They are a true identity that signifies who the wearer really is. They at a point used a skull tattoo which changed the good the society had for them. The society therefore branded them as outcast of which they were proud of (Best Tattoo Gallery, Para 4-7).
How the society views the gangs today
The world has changed in all aspects may it be economical, physical, cultural and even morally. With the rapidly growing technology and hard economic times things have changed seriously to points and standards far of the times these clubs began.
Today the word gang despite where it is being used has been interpreted as a group of individuals who transact with drugs or personal security providers, extortion and other crimes that take over the territory of the cities. The term gang can represent a group of people with a positive motive and concern.
In addition, following the many media exposures of activities whether true or not involving the gangs, the perspective the society had has really been distorted and corrupted. The inhuman actions that are revealed in the movies which may also be a creativity result using technology has made the society term these groups like outcasts. The fearfulness of their outward look is one in question and open to all manner of conclusion that an individual or group would want to make especially if there is some other evidence to support the same.
The many media report all over the world, concerning the social evils the members of these groups are engaging in are enough evidence for the society to conclude that these people are drug traffickers, extortionist, and rapists among others. For example in western Sydney, the government after taking precautions against the gangs it only seemed to them a short-term distraction and they confidently hit back for what the government had done.
An ACC investigating groups have established that the motorcycle gangs are involved in money laundering, trafficking of firearms, and tax frauds among drug production with the help of some criminal networks. This have presented big threat to the nations like Australia due to the geographical wide spread and the size of these gangs in this nations (Pratt, Para 6).
Bloody clashes between the warring gangs are a concern. This has consequently raised public anxiety concerning the gangs. Most governments are now looking forward into making laws to govern and limit the power of these groups. They are on the business of separating them and making it hard for a member of the gang to associate with another (China Daily, PP11).
Conclusion
It is not all motor cycle gangs that engage in illegal activities though over the time they have gained a bad reputation especially in the last half a century. The motorcycle gangs started in good faith, most of them with no intention to rebel. Over the years due to factors that may range from economical hardships to journeys to fame and popularity among pursuit for security they have ended up in many illegal activities that were never in their mind.
Some of these groups still show their humanity like the booze fighters who support children with mental retardation by organizing fund-raisings together with the mental health retardation society. Example of this is the Tarrant County Toy Run in Texas for debilitate disease impacted children.
This statement does not rule out the fact that there are those whose initial purpose and primarily goal was rebellion. Not forgetting mass-manship having contributed a great deal. Out of either the creation of man through technology or the reality happenings the gangs have gone beyond what was thought to be their purposes. Hence, different nations and statesmen should enforce laws or come up with some that will guard its citizens from the social evils being carried out by these gangs.
Works cited
Best Tattoo Gallery. The Rising of the Biker Gang Tattoos , BestTattooGallery.com. 2009. Web.
China, Daily. Australia moves quickly to pass anti-biker gang bill , China Daily 2009. Web.
Laser is a name that is derived from Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. Laser machines usually give out light in that is in form of electromagnetic radiation via a process called optical amplification that uses simulated emitted photons.
The emitted lasers contain an elevated level of spatial and temporal coherence that are very hard to get when using majority of the present forms of technology. Laser beams can be directed towards very minute objects, because of their ability to gain high irradiance powers. A laser is made up of a gain medium, which is put inside a high reflective optical cavity and a source of energy for the gain medium that must have the ability to amplify light by stimulated emission.
The gain medium takes up pumped energy that is used to increase the quantum energy of electrons. An increase in the amount of particles in a specific excited state will lead to population inversion; hence, light amplification, when such numbers are above the quantity of particles in lower energy states.
This is caused by the large amount of stimulated emission that will pass through an object as compared to the amount of energy that is absorbed. The amplification of light will result in the development of an optical amplifier, which may develop into a laser, in case it is put in a resonant optical cavity. Lasers normally function in two primary modes namely uninterrupted or pulsed mode.
These two modes depend on the method in which power required to energize the formed lasers is supplied. In most scenarios, lasers are called continuous waves when they show signs of maintaining power stability over long durations of time and the high power frequency has minimal effects on the intended application (Slusher, 1999, pp. 71-79).
Uses of Lasers
One primary use of lasers is in optical research and education laboratories. For example, since the invention of the Helium-Neon gas laser, there has been numerous discoveries on the use of discharges to amplify light consistently. This type of laser has the ability of operating under different wavelengths; hence, the vast number of educational researches that are associated with it. Secondly, lasers find wide application in industries more so for cutting and welding.
As a result of the ability of Carbon dioxide lasers to give out high quantities of energy at a go, this energy can be used to cut heavy metals faster, as compared to most traditional methods. Moreover, some manufacturing and processing plants use laser interferometers to ascertain distances and displacements, more in areas of heavy machinery. Additionally, lasers play a central role when it comes to classifying varying species of chemicals and ascertaining the development most chemical processes.
This is possible because lasers have the power to energize molecules to a fluorescing point. Lasers also find wide application in grocery shops, more so supermarkets in barcode scanners to identify goods. This has greatly enhanced operations in supermarkets, because they help to provide all the details of goods by just passing the bar code reader across the bar codes that are normally embedded on goods.
In medicine, lasers are very useful in surgery. Primary applications of lasers in this field include the use of lasers as hot scalpels for cutting tissues, in LASIK eye surgery, in the treatment of glaucoma and macular degeneration, and during the removal of birthmarks and tattoos. Lasers can also be applied in some medical procedures such treating of kidney stones and during the process of angioplasty.
On the other hand, Lasers are also important in most military operations. High-power lasers are normally used as defense tools when it comes to attacking enemies in most deadly missions that require the use of range finders and detonation of bombs and missiles in definite areas. In addition, there is a wide use of lasers in military communications systems, to give clear communications, more so when in enemy zones (Hecht, Ewing, & Hitz, 2001, pp. 3-9).
Holograms
Holograms are three-dimensional images that are primarily obtained using photographic projection. They are different from three-dimensional graphics in that, unlike in three dimensional reality where illusion of depth is used and the image is normally projected in a two-dimensional surface, all products of holograms are in three-dimension; hence, they do not need any specific viewing apparatus. There are two classes of holograms namely reflection and transmission holograms.
The former case uses laser or white light reflecting services to develop a three dimensional object, where as in the latter case three-dimension images are usually made using monochromatic light. A holographic device is primarily made up of lasers, beam splitters, mirrors, lenses, and holographic films. Lasers are the primary elements of any hologram, because they are used to produce real images in addition to determining the color of the image.
The function of the beam splitter is to divide the beam of light that has been projected to its surface using mirrors and prisms where as mirrors are used to direct light in order to ensure that it hits the required targets. On the other hand, lenses are used to develop holographic images, whereas the holographic film primarily helps to capture the holographic images (Winslow, 2007, 6-16).
How to make holograms
Holograms are made by dividing laser light into two different beams, whereby one of the beams is focused on an object and the other beam is focused straight to the film. At point of union of these two beams on a film, an interference will that is in form of microscopic bright and dark lines will result; hence, leading to formation of a hologram.
If one is viewing a hologram using the instant hologram film, it is not compulsory to develop it, but all that is required is to put the hologram in its original location, after which it should be lighted with a single beam that should be produced directly from a laser.
Once the resulting holographic interference has diffracted, the laser light that goes through the holographic interference will result in a three-dimensional representation of the real item. Through holography, presently, individuals are able to record fields of light that can be reconstructed in the absence of primary fields of light.
This technological innovation almost works using the same analogy used in recording of sounds, because sound can also be encoded in method that will facilitate future retrieval of such sounds when needed. Any form of holographic recording is usually in form of a random intensity structure and not in a regular format.
This is normally the case primarily because, there are numerous interferences that can cause multiple reflections in the glass plate where the photographic emulsion is fixed. Illumination of the resulting hologram by the main beam will result in formation of a light field that has shares the same properties with the light field that was formed by the real object, because of the diffracting effects of the hologram.
Therefore, although the main object is removed, the formed field will enable individuals looking into the hologram to observe an image that is similar to the original object. These like images are called virtual images, because they are identical recoded representations of the original objects. Although some people have successfully duplicated some holograms, this process is complex and very difficult, because to duplicate a hologram, one has to find an identical laser that made the hologram for visualization purposes.
Getting a laser with waves that are in phase, peak-to-peak, and trough-to-trough is very hard, because coherence in this properties is the only element that will enable an individual to duplicate laser. This is the case due to the fact that, these properties are the primary determinant of the ability of a laser light to interfere with itself in order to give out the desired interference patterns (Feller, kasper, & Emil, 2001, pp. 4-37 and Jeong, Aumiller, Iwasaki, & Blythe, 2009, p.1).
Generally, the formation of a hologram primarily depends on two primary processes namely interference and diffraction. The former case results due to superimposing of wavefronts, where as the latter results due to encountering of an opaque object by a wave.
Applications of Holograms
Holograms are used in numerous commercial applications that include in compact disks that use them to process light, in spinning scanners that are widely used in stores, in high resolution spectrometers, in medical laboratories (when conducting non-destructive testing of samples), and in military aircrafts to manufacture head up displays.
In addition, they can be used in phase conjugation studies, to prevent the use of counterfeit cards, in the manufacture of Femto-second lasers, to produce bar codes that are used to identify goods in stores using holographic scanners, and in creating holographic gratings that use high resolution spectrometers.
On the other hand, holograms are likely to revolutionize the world of computers, because of the new invention of producing hard drives called Holostore that uses holographic memory systems for keeping large amounts of information (Jeong, 2010, pp. 392-407)..
For a long time, eugenics has been one of the most contradictory social issues. From the rational point of view, selection applied to a man is quite a positive phenomenon, as it aims to eliminate degeneration in the human gene pool. However, since the time of its formation as a concept and later as a science, eugenics had fallen into the wrong hands.
Definition of eugenics
Widely popular in the first decades of the XX century, eugenics later became associated with Nazi Germany, so that its reputation suffered considerably. However, the modern development of genetics and reproductive technologies makes it a substantial reconsideration of eugenics, its ethical and moral status in human life. Eugenics in general is defined as a science that deals with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed (Singleton, 2014, p. 122). There exist two interpretations of eugenics. Negative eugenics claims that people with some hereditary disorders and deviations should be prohibited to reproduce for keeping the gene pool healthier. Positive eugenics assumes that healthy, intellectually genetically flawless human specimen should bring more and more descendants (Singleton, 2014).
The emergence of eugenic science
Deriving from ancient Greece, Sparta, and Rome, eugenics as a practical tool to improve the quality of the species was first described by the British psychologist Francis Galton. Supporting Darwins theory of natural selection, Galton formulated the principles of improvement of agricultural plants and cattle, as well as of human heredity, and in 1883 introduced the term eugenics . Gradually eugenic theories had spread in the academic circles of various countries, with the United States being the most fruitful one. Such interest was boosted by the massive immigration waves to the US. American scientific eugenics movement officially started in 1898 when Charles Davenport from Harvard presented his single gene theory of human traits. In 1910, Davenport together with the American Breeders Association established the Eugenics Record Office, the leading research institution of heredity deficiencies (Singleton, 2014).
The problem of sterilization
The main scientific achievements of that period led to the establishment of sterilization laws in a range of the states and widespread use of euthanasia in American mental clinics. Harry Laughlin, the creator of the Model Eugenical Sterilization Law, provided an economic justification for sterilization in comparison with regular medical treatment. In 1927, the notorious Buck v. Bell case in Virginia made it for the sterilization of imbecile, mentally ill and raff people to become an accepted rule. From the beginning of the XX century till the mid-70s more than 30 states adopted sterilization laws, with more than sixty thousand patients forcibly sterilized. The state sterilization practices had gone too far, and after the revelation of unreasonable and inhumane treatment of physically healthy small children in the 1974 Relf v. Weinberger case, the draconian regulations subsequently were loosened (Singleton, 2014).
Eugenics in the modern world
Nowadays the problems of eugenics, especially the fight against hereditary diseases, are solved within the framework of human genetics. Such tools as pre-implantation genetic screening, somatic and germline modification can help avoid unhealthy descendants from parents suffering genetic diseases. From one point of view, this may seem like an invasion of some divine plan, but from the other such genetic changes avoid human suffering in the future (Singleton, 2014). Eugenic principles today can be useful to provide recommendations in cases of the desired and unwanted pregnancy.
Conclusion
Overall, eugenics itself is not a harm to society. The only harm comes from the perverted interpretation of the people. It is not a secret that man has transformed the process of natural selection by the development of medicine and technologies. The diseases, which once were obstacles for the transfer of defective genetic material to the next generations, can now be cured. Thus, if a man has invaded natural selection, he now has to deal with the quality of the genetic pool. The other point is that such improvement must be done based on the principles of equality, humane and impartiality.
References
Singleton, M. (2014). The science of eugenics: Americas moral detour. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 19(4), 122-125.
View through the lens of history focuses on examining an object in connection to its past, events, people, and other significant factors that led to its presence in a given setting. It entails the investigation of historical participants as well as the human input that produced historical occurrences (Strada, 2021). The lens of social sciences emphasizes society as a whole as well as its constituents as unique human beings (Strada, 2021). It deals with societys operation, social interaction, conformity, customs, and culture.
In both social sciences and history lenses, the human factor predominates, that is, a person acts as the main source of both injustice and justice. In terms of justice, the social sciences and history are comparable in that they both place emphasis on individuals in society, their behaviors, relationships, beliefs, and biases, both in the present and in the past. To learn more about social linkages, they both research human interactions and how they shape the modern understanding of justice.
The social sciences lens is connected with learning more about social interactions, group dynamics, and how society affects peoples lives. Justice is viewed as having healthy interpersonal interactions and a supportive social setting. History focuses on the examination of key historical occurrences using primary sources, such as the examination of artifacts. Justice is regarded when artifacts are evaluated with the least amount of prejudice feasible.
From the point of view of the research process, the correct approach is to use both lenses for a deeper understanding of such a complex concept as justice. A versatile approach allows you to look more broadly and complement each other. The lens of the social sciences has the advantage of focusing on interactions and provides an opportunity to look at the human element of justice and understand patterns. It may be somewhat subjective, but in the study of complex concepts, it is an important component. At the same time, the lens of history gives a more objective view and allows you to study justice by analyzing it more deeply, taking into account artifacts and already-known outcomes.
Reference
Strada, J. M. (2021). Through the global lens: An introduction to social sciences. Routledge.
In the Old Testament, the God revelation is discharged as a constant search for communication to humans. Hence, the discovery of God is perceived through many Gods creatures in nature. The idea of revelation is also an attempt to reveal the mighty acts as a divine blessing for many people. This can be noticed in the following abstract of Psalm 104:24:
How many are your works, O Lord!
In wisdom you made them all;
the earth is full of your creatures.
Like the Old Testament, the main role of the New Testament lies in the manifesting of Gods love for people and reason as the measure of faith. However, in the New Testament, the centre of revelation is Jesus Christ embodying the material and spiritual embodiment of God (Heywood 131).
The appearance of Christianity was predetermined by numerous changes in social, cultural, and religious life. The main historical event that triggered the rise of the religion was the cleavage of the Roman Empire. It also originated from Jewish communities so that the early Christianity is marked by the appearance of Jesus movement in the village of Nazareth. The cultural conditions of Jesus movement were brightly demonstrated in the gospels by Mathew and Luke. Finally, the rise of the religious also manifested the birth of foreign culture and religion (Irvin 22).
The above-mentioned gospels narrate about the moral teachings and miracles of God. All the four gospels of Mathew, Luke, Mark, and John perpetuated the deeds of God in the sacred book. In particular, the miracle stories of walking on the water and feeding four thousand people are brightly described in Mark and Matthews gospels:
He told the crowd to sit down on the ground. When he had taken the seven loaves and given thanks, he broke them and gave them to disciples to set before the people, and they did so. They had a few small fish as well; he gave thanks for them& (Mark 8:1 10 NIV).
Immediately Jesus made the disciples get into the boat and go on ahead of him to the other side, while he dismissed the crowd (Matthew 14:23-33 NIV).
The gospels also narrate the life and sayings of Jesus of Nazareth. The first three gospel by Mark, Luke, and Matthew are accounted similarly whereas the fourth gospel narrated by John is a religious and theoretical work that differs considerably from the others. Apart from this, the gospels recollect the heeling of the blind and the lame in the churches by Jesus: And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple; and he healed them (Matthew 21:14KJV); Jesus choosing twelve Apostles: And to have power to heal sickness, and to cast out devils (Mark 3:15 KJV); sending the twelve on Mission: Then he called twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over the devils, and to cure diseases (Luke 9:1-2,6 KJV;); people healing by the sea of Galilee: For he had healed many; insomuch that they pressed upon him for to touch him, as many as had plagues (Mark 3:10-12 KJV).
The appearance of Eastern Christianity should be regarded as a historical religion, as the historical scriptures of the Old Testaments prove it as well as the events of life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth described in the New Testament. In other words, there observe a veritable connection of these two written evidences where one is based on another.
Works Cited
Heywood, David. Divine revelation and human learning: a Christian theory of knowledge. US: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2004.
Irvin, Dale T., and Suquist, Scott. History of the World Christian Movement: Volume 1: Earliest Christianity to 1453. US: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2001.
Deuteronomistic History or D-History is an umbrella term covering the Old Testament books from Joshua to Kings. Among other things, they allow tracing the history of the ancient Israelite monarchy. The monarchic rule is central to D-History since its establishment under Saul in 1 Samuel until the destruction of both Israel and Judah. Across this plot, the office of monarchy illustrates the peril of putting political ambitions before faith: Israelites desire to be more like other nations politically eventually leads them to idolatry in religion.
Outline of D-History
D-history begins with the tribes of Israel marching into Canaan and conquering it with divine assistance. Having divided this land between the tribes, the Israelites settle on but quickly begin to forsake their covenant with God, who, in return, delivers them into the hands of their enemies. Each time, a God-chosen champion arises to defeat the foreign conquerors, such as Gideon (Judges 6:11 8:32) or Samson (Judges 13:24 16:30), but the cycle repeats. Dissatisfied with the collective theocracy represented by the Judges, Israelites tell Samuel they want a king such as all the other nations have (1 Samuel 8:5). Although God is not initially pleased with the idea, He goes with it and makes Saul the first king of Israel. Sauls preoccupation with political success over piety eventually makes him unworthy, and the mantle of leadership passes to virtuous David. However, the decline begins under Davids son Solomon, who eventually starts honoring foreign deities (1 Kings 11:4-6). The once united kingdom splits into Israel and Judah, with both giving into idolatry and eventually destroyed by the Assyrians and Babylonians (2 Kings 17:7-23, 25:1-21).
Divine Purpose of Monarchy: Maintaining Gods Order
While the monarchy is not Gods first choice for the Israelite government, it does not mean it has no divine purpose behind it. D-History hints at this purpose in a refrain reoccurring in Judges when describing troubled times: In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as they saw fit (Judges 17:6, 21:25). This refrain paints a picture of religious and social anarchy in the late pre-monarchic period. A monarch can fix it by always having the copy of Gods law on him to read it all the days of his life and follow Gods word (Deut. 17:19). Thus, in the absence of a king, people do whatever they want rather than follow Gods word, but a king can serve as a conduit of Gods will, which is the monarchys intended purpose.
Human Interpretation of Monarchy: Pursuing Political Success
However, the Israelites perception of monarchy and its purpose is vastly different from the divine vision. When the people ask Samuel for a king, they do it not to follow Gods will better but to be more like other nations (1 Samuel 8:5). Apparently, Israelites want their country to be a respected and feared member of the regional community more than they want to be pious. Even though God goes along with the people in their desire for the kingship, the fickleness of His human instruments soon shows. Saul defeats the Amalekites but retains the precious spoils of victory instead of destroying them as per Gods word, thus putting the political interest to accumulate more wealth before Gods will (1 Samuel 15:7). By putting political considerations before faith, Saul demonstrates both disrespect and short-sightedness. His disobedience offends God, and, in his concentration on military might and treasures, he forgets that it is Gods will that decides the outcome of any political effort.
While David offers an example of virtuous kingship, his descendants fail to live up to the ideal. After the glorious period of his initial reign, Solomon, influenced by his wives, turns to worship foreign gods (1 Kings 11:4-6). From a secular political perspective, Solomon might have thought that honoring local deities could strengthen Israel internally. Yet, just like Saul before him, political considerations make him blind to the divine truth. It is no wonder that the D-History, while lauding the first period of Solomons reign, launches an uncompromised excoriation of Solomon after his turn to idolatry. Things only worsen from there: the once united country splits into Israel and Judah, and kings begin constructing and worshipping idols (1 Kings 12:28). Scholars may disagree whether D-History criticizes bad kings individually or the office of monarchy in general. Regardless, the outcome of the Israelite monarchy is the same: the desolation and conquest of those who have forgotten their covenant with God.
Conclusion
If one focuses on the theme of monarchy, D-History is obviously the history of failure but it is the reasons behind this failure that matter most. When God grants the Israelites plea for a king, he does it so that the king might serve as a conduit of His will and replace the social and religious anarchy with divine order. However, Israelites themselves consistently demonstrate that they want monarchy for political rather than religious reasons. The desire to emulate other nations politically reaches its logical conclusion in emulating their religious practices and, along with Gods favor, Israelites immediately lose the political power they have striven for.
Bibliography
Fretheim, Terence E. Divine Foreknowledge, Divine Constancy, and the Rejection of Sauls Kingship. The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 47 (1985): 595-602
Knoppers, Gary N. Two Nations Under God: The Deuteronomistic History of Solomon and the Dual Monarchies, vol. 2: The Reign of Jeroboam, the Fall of Israel, and the Reign of Josiah. Leiden: Brill, 2018.
Mayes, Andrew D. H. Deuteronomistic Royal Ideology in Judges 17-21. Biblical Interpretation 9, no. 3 (2001): 241-258.
Miller, Geoffrey P. Politics and Kingship in the Historical Books, With Attention to the Role of Political Theory in Interpretation. In The Oxford Handbook of the Historical Books of the Hebrew Bible, edited by Brad E. Kelle and Brent A. Strawn, 187-200. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2020), 197.
Conscientious objection to participating in war and violence has a long history, and tracing it from a Christian perspective is important for a considerable number of reasons. First of all, the New Testament emphasizes a strong pacifist message, as in Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God (Matthew 5:9) and many other cases. Secondly, the histories of pacifism and Christianity are closely interwoven because there is no record of non-vocational conscientious objection to participation in war before the Christian era.1 Other religions, such as Hinduism, had bans on violence, but only vocational and conditional the Brahmins could not participate in war but were free to support it. Finally, the history of Christian pacifism is closely linked to major theological problems, such as balancing ones allegiance to God and to earthly authorities or shifting from Judaic henotheism to Christianitys universal message. Despite numerous arguments raised against it, Christian pacifism persisted throughout time and remains even more important today than it was in many previous ages.
War and the Old Testament
There is no denying that the Old Testament contains a great number of wars, both victorious and unfortunate for the Israelites, and that Gods chosen people are no less militant than their many neighbors. The God of the Old Testament is also militant in the sense that He recognizes the reality of war and does not shy away from guiding His chosen people through fighting when He deems necessary. There are instances when God is directly referred to through His martial qualities, as in The Lord is a warrior; the Lord is His name (Exodus 15:3). God also does not shy away from commanding the utter destruction of certain polities up to slaughtering all of the captured cattle. For example, God not only commands Saul to attack the Amalekites but also orders to totally destroy all that belongs to them (1 Samuel 15:3). The God of the Old Testament is not above ordering His chosen people to wage war or doing so with considerable prejudice. With this in mind, there are ground to interpret this representation of the Lord as militant.
Such a depiction is not something unexpected or strange because, at this point in Biblical history, the Lord is still, first and foremost, the God of Israel. While being the creator of the entire universe and all that is in it, His first concern is His chosen people. Considering how much effort it took to teach Israelites the ways of God and how often they strayed from the path, this decision to initially reserve oneself to a single ethnic group was extremely wise. With this taken into account, it is perfectly understandable that the God of the Old Testament is a henotheistic god, and, thus, His care for just one nation is to be expected. 2 With God caring, first and foremost, about one ethnic group, there is nothing unnatural in Him supporting this group when it is at war with its enemies. God of the Old Testament is the God of Israelites and, as such, instructs and empowers them to wage war, meaning that, sometimes, He deems it necessary.
Still, while it would be very easy to interpret the Lord as portrayed in the Old Testament as a militant henotheist deity who has no reservation about violence and war, this is not the case. On numerous occasions, the Bible mentions the Lords insistence on fighting Israelites wars for them. One of the more notable examples comes in the description of Jehosphaphats wars with Ammon and Moab, when the Lord says: The battle is not yours, but Gods (2 Chronicles 20:15). He then clarifies: You will not have to fight this battle. Take up your positions; stand firm and see the deliverance the Lord will give you (2 Chronicles 20:17). Even though God recognizes that sometimes it is necessary to wage war, He goes out of His way to ensure that the Israelites participate in it as little as possible. To put it simply, the Lord fights Israels wars so that the Israelites themselves would not have to.
As one can see, the Old Testament hardly sends a coherent pacifist message. Israelites often wage wars, and God openly sanctions some of these conflicts. At the same time, God does the fighting for His chosen people in their stead, meaning that, all things being equal, He prefers that they do not participate in violence. In other words, while the God of the Old Testament does not view war and violence as absolute evil, he still prefers His chosen people not to be more violent than it is necessary.
War and the New Testament
The emergence of Christianity made considerable additions to the preceding Judaic tradition. It introduced the worldview heavily centered on loving ones neighbor, which reaches its logical conclusion in loving and forgiving ones enemy. It also shifted from the henotheist stance of the Old Testament to the universal message embracing all nations of Earth. All these changes left a decisive impact on the simultaneously emerging tradition of Christian pacifism.
When it comes to discussing the New Testaments approach to war and violence, the first and foremost consideration that comes to mind is the centrality of love to Jesuss message. The passages about love and non-violence are among the most famous and oft-quoted parts of the New Testament and the Scripture as a whole. By building on the older principle of loving ones neighbors, Jesus teaches to love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you (Matthew 5:44). Similarly, the New Testament builds on the Old Testaments tradition of God fighting wars so that the people would not have to deliver a stricter and clearer pacifist message. The Bible says: Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for Gods wrath, for it is written: It is mine to avenge; I will repay (Romans 12:19). Based on the previous Judaic tradition and the unconditional command to love one another, the New Testament develops a more stringent approach to war and violence. The centrality of the neighborly love to Jesuss message leaves much less room for the justification of war than the sometimes militant verses of the Old Testament.
Another important change that comes with the emergence of Christianity and the New Testament is the shift from ethnic-based henotheism of the preceding Judaic tradition to the universal message embracing all nations. It was a particularly important transition in terms of the approach to war and violence since wars, as a rule, are waged by and between nations. Admittedly, Jesuss original intent was to deliver His teachings to Israelites first, as evidenced by I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew 15:24). However, he soon commands his apostles to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). This task signifies the end of henotheist partiality, as Jesus openly proclaims Himself as a God whose control is widened to include all nations. 3 It has necessary implications for the religious attitude toward war: while a deity partial to one nation can naturally support it in wartime, a universal God can rarely, if ever, afford such bias. Thus, the universality of Christianity also made pacifism a logical necessity for believers.
Apart from the overall message of love and the inclusive nature of Christianity as a whole, the stout resolution to avoid violence manifests time and again in Christs specific actions in the New Testament. Nowhere is it more evident than in Jesuss decision to come peacefully to those who have come to arrest him. In a now-proverbial statement, Christ commands Peter to put his weapon back to sheath, as those who draw the sword will die by the sword (Matthew 26:52). He then inquires: Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? (Matthew 26:53). Being one of the triune persons of God, Jesus can easily outmatch any violence that His human persecutors can throw at him, but He makes a deliberate choice not to. When confronted with the perspective of suffering and execution, His choice is not violence but death and resurrection. This example demonstrates with sufficient clarity and on Jesuss own example that, as far as the New Testament is concerned, violence is never a good first option.
At the same time, the teachings of the New Testament also contain some provisions that, albeit indirectly, can be used as a justification of war or, at the very least, military service. When the Pharisees try to trick Jesus in the discussion of Roman taxes, he famously answers: So give back to Caesar what is Caesars, and to God what is Gods (Matthew 22:21). While He makes this statement in the context of taxation specifically, it is possible to interpret it in a broader sense as applying to different obligations that Christians have toward their earthly governments. The core of Jesuss argument is clear: Christians have earthly and heavenly citizenship alike, and both place responsibilities on them.4 Whether these responsibilities extend to compulsory military service, if such is enacted by the state, is a complex question that will be discussed in more detail later.
To summarize, the New Testament delivers a coherent and insistent pacifist message, especially when compared to the Old Testament. The overall emphasis on love requires Christians to forgive their enemies, and the universal appeal of Christianity makes partiality to a certain nation or nations in war a logical impossibility. Moreover, Jesus offers an example of a stout pacifist who, while able to easily outmatch His enemies in violence, foregoes this option in favor of death and resurrection. At the same time, the concept of Christians dual citizenship allows for different interpretations when it comes to military service, providing biblical grounds for the critique of Christian pacifism in the patristic period.
Patristic Period and Beyond
Just as the emergence of Christianity, with its global and universal appeal, necessitated a transition in the approach to war, the adoption of the new faith as a state religion brought changes as well. As far as the evidence suggests, early followers of Christ were universally pacifists, and the first Christians who are known to have been soldiers are not found until 177 C.E. .5 Yet after Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire and then its multiple successor states, the issue of balancing earthly and heavenly citizenship became much more acute. The practical necessity of the armed forces required religious arguments in favor of military service, and scholars generally agree that the ascension of Constantine ends the pacifist period in Christianitys history.6 Since the adoption of Christianity as a state religion roughly coincided with the patristic period, most arguments against Christian pacifism first emerged at this time. One may say that, by outlining the basic tenets of the Just War theory, the patristic period defined the argument about war and violence in Christianity for centuries to come.
One of the central arguments of the Just War theory that early Christian theologians used to criticize pacifism was the afore-mentioned concept of dual citizenship. With the New Testament explicitly mentioning that believers have responsibilities before God and earthly government alike, it was only a matter of time until the opponents of pacifism would extend it to military service. St Augustine was among the first to argue for the conditional acceptability of war for pious Christians as long as it is carried in obedience to God or some lawful authority. 7 St. Thomas Aquinas developed this point by insisting that earthly authorities had to to watch over the commonweal of the city, kingdom or province subject to them, with the force of arms, if necessary.8 By associating military service with the communitys well-being, just as taxation exists to protect civil order, this argument derived the necessity of the military from the principle of giving to Caesar what is Caesars. Thus, the dual citizenship argument was among the first objections toward Christian pacifism raised by the proponents of the Just War theory during the patristic period.
Yet this argument alone was hardly sustainable grounds to justify military service for Christians because its conditional acceptance of a given war still hinged on the premise of God supporting it. The Bible clarifies that warfare depends on the will of the Lord rather than purely earthly factors, such as legitimacy. There is no arguing that Egyptians perceived the Pharaohs rule as legitimate, since six hundred of the best chariots, along with all the other chariots of Egypt, with officers over all of them followed him without question (Exodus 14:7). If a conscientious objector in the Egyptian army was to voice his concerns, he would be punished as a rebel against the legitimate government. Still, it did not prevent this mighty army from suffering a catastrophic defeat at the hands of the Lord. Similarly, Saul, while technically remaining legitimate in the peoples eyes, was already deprived of divine support after his transgressions (1 Samuel 15:23). Thus, Christian pacifists could rebuke the dual citizenship argument by noting that legitimate governments, including those that genuinely think they obey God, do not necessarily follow Gods intent, making fighting for them a sin.
Apart from this counterargument, some Christian pacifists denied the necessity of balancing ones responsibility before God and earthly authorities altogether. A suitable example of this tradition would be Anabaptists, famous for their practice of re-baptizing people as an act of resistance to the Constantinian alliance between Church and State. 9 By doing so, this branch of Christian pacifism seeks to place political authority directly into the hands of the community of believers rather than the state as Caesars tax collector. While, historically, this approach did not become the most popular, it was one way of circumventing the dual citizenship argument against pacifism.
Another argument raised against Christian pacifism in the patristic period stressed that war was justifiable when it represented a lesser evil among the possible options. Once again, St. Augustine can take much of the credit for developing this line of argument. In his Reply to Faustus the Manichaean, he points out that the true evils of war are love of violence, revengeful cruelty, fierce and implacable enmity, and the like.10 Hence, punishing these evils with an armed force, if necessary is right for a Christian, and those refusing to do so out of strict pacifist conviction are wrong.
The simplest and, arguably, most effective response to this line of argument from Christian pacifists is the verses advising not to take judgment in ones own hands. It is hard to argue that there is much evil in this world, including the specific evils of war mentioned by Augustine. Yet the Scripture also says: Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for Gods wrath, for it is written: It is mine to avenge; I will repay, says the Lord (Romans 12:19). Based on this, Christian pacifism could confront the war as a lesser evil argument as an attempt to take over Gods vengeance.
Yet another approach developed in the patristic period to challenge the validity of Christian pacifism is the reflection on to which degree the Kingdom of God is currently present. There is no denying that the perfect world with people willingly organized according to Gods will would be peaceful. However, the Just War theory often rests on the premise that, since the kingdom is not yet fully present, Christian behavior cannot be expected to conform fully to it. 11 To put it simply, the imperfection of the world as it currently is provides for some allowances in following Christianitys central message of peace, which could include military service and even participation in wars.
Once again, the development of this argument prompted a corresponding reaction on Christian pacifists part, and the opponents of violence offered a counterargument to this perspective. The necessity to follow the principles of the virtuous life in its totality is proclaimed directly in the Bible. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says: Anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:19). Moreover, the earthly life of Jesus Himself serves as an example and practical confirmation that His teachings cannot remain an impossible abstract ideal. 12 Following the New Testament closely leaves no room for allowances, allowing Christian pacifism to use it as a counterargument against the Just War theory.
Finally, one more albeit indirect argument against pacifism brought up in the patristic period was that Jesus did not deny military service per se. A case in point is Christs encounter with a Roman centurion when Jesus commends the centurions faith and heals his servant (Matthew 8:5-13). The proponents of the Just War theory stressed that, through the entirety of this scene, Jesus does not actually condemn the centurion for being a soldier. 13 In this context, one may interpret the scene as allowing at least military service, if not necessarily direct participation in battle.
Christian pacifism crafted a response to this argument as well, noting that, at a later point in the New Testament, Jesus provides perfectly clear instructions on the matter. When arrested, Jesus stops Peters attempt to use his sword (Matthew 26:53). Following Tertullians interpretation of this scene, Christian pacifist tradition insists that, by disarming Peter, Christ unbelted every soldier. 14 In this interpretation, Christ not only makes a definite stand on the military service but also outright cancels the practice of divine sanction for war often present in the Old Testament.
The patristic period largely framed the debate between Christian pacifism and the Just War theory for the centuries to come, with both sides crafting their arguments and counterarguments. With Christianity becoming a state religion in more states, the practical necessity of military service made Just War theory more prevalent and pacifism an exception rather than a rule. It took major changes in the nature of war for Christian pacifism to reemerge with renewed strength.
Pacifism in the Age of Total War
By the early 20th century, most Christian denominations have accepted one or another version of the Just War theory to combine the earthly obligation of military service and heavenly citizenship without theological conflict. However, the nature of war itself changed significantly by that time. Instead of relatively small professional armies, great powers now had massive conscript forces and engaged each other in total wars, using increasingly destructive weapons and mobilizing entire populations. These total wars highlighted the shortcomings of the Just War theory, giving new credibility to Christian pacifism.
One major reason for the re-emergence of Christian pacifism in the age of total war is the rise of new, indiscriminate weapons. The atomic bomb is the most obvious example, but mass bombing with conventional munitions can be just as costly in innocent lives. Simply put, modern warfare depends on weapons that either kill or threaten to kill innocent persons. 15 One of the more notable Christian pacifists of the late 20th century, Stanley Hauerwas, notes that, even on the Just War grounds, the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were clearly murder. 16 Unless the Just War theory accepts collateral damage as permissible, such wars are undoubtedly evil from a Christian perspective.
Apart from that, the total wars of the 20th century demonstrated the henotheist perils of the Just War tenets. None of the Christian countries involved in both World Wars denied their allegiance to Christ on the contrary, they all presented their struggle as righteous. Marion Benedict offers many examples of how easily Christian nations at war slip into this stage of& henotheism. 17 When the entire society has to be morally mobilized for war, it is all too easy for the warring parties to shift back to the nation-exclusive approach of the Old Testament. This approach throws Christian teachings millennia back and, as such, cannot be supported in good faith.
Perhaps the most famous critique of Christian pacifism during this period belongs to Reinhold Niebuhr, but it does not offer that much new theological insight. Relying largely on Augustines language of the lesser evil, Niebuhr emphasizes the responsibility to others in a social order, namely, the responsibility to protect the innocent.18 Hauerwas is right to note that this argument is less than suited to modern warfare. With irregular warfare and the bombing of civilian populations becoming a rule of thumb, a just warrior cannot speak of protecting the innocent at the same time when he or she kills them.19 Niebuhr also speaks of Jesuss ethics of love as normative but not immediately applicable, which is also merely a reusing the Kingdom of God argument going all the way back to the patristic period.20 Hence, while the conflict between Christian pacifism and the Just War theories continues well into the 21st century with no signs of abating, new arguments for the Just War are hard to come by. Considering the increasingly inhumane nature of warfare, it opens new possibilities for Christian pacifism in the foreseeable future.
Conclusion
As one can see, Christian pacifism went through many changes from a dominant approach to a statistically small exception but still remains a well-grounded theological position. Although the Old Testament contains justification and even glorification of war, God still fights so that His chosen people would not have to, signaling that violence is better avoided when possible. The New Testament delivers a clear and powerful message of love and peace, ensuring the strict pacifism of the early Christians. After Christianity became a state religion, the political necessity of military service led to the rise of the Just War theory, which soon came to dominate most denominations. Reduced to an exception, Christian pacifism reemerged with new strength in the 20th and 21st century after total wars and indiscriminate weapons made the position of the Just War less tenable theologically.
References
Augustine, St. Reply to Faustus the Manichaean. Documenta Catholica Omnia. n.d. Web.
Benedict, Marion J. The God of the Old Testament in Relation to War. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2010.
Cahill, Lisa S. Love Your Enemies: Discipleship, Pacifism, and Just War Theory. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994.
Cartwright, Michael G. Conflicting Interpretations of Christian Pacifism. In Christian Political Ethics, edited by John A. Coleman, 261-277. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2008.
Charles, J. Daryl. Between Pacifism and Jihad: Just War and Christian Tradition. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005.
Childress, G. F. Reinhold Niebuhrs Critique of Pacifism. The Review of Politics 36, no. 4 (1974): 467-491.
Dombrowski, Daniel A. Christian Pacifism. In The Routledge Handbook of Pacifism and Non-Violence, edited by Andrew Fiatla, 43-53. New York, NY: Routledge, 2018.
Gill, Robert. A Textbook of Christian Ethics. London: T&T Clark, 2006
Ramsey, Paul. War and the Christian Conscience: How Shall Modern War Be Conducted Justly? Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1961
Ott, Daniel J. Toward a Realistic, Public, Christian Pacifism. American Journal of Theology & Philosophy 33, no. 3 (2012): 245-257.
Thomas Aquinas, St. Whether It Is Always Sinful to Wage War? The Latin Library. n.d.
Footnotes
Daniel A. Dombrowski, Christian Pacifism, in The Routledge Handbook of Pacifism and Non-Violence, edited by Andrew Fiatla (New York, NY: Routledge, 2018), 43.
Marion J. Benedict, The God of the Old Testament in Relation to War, (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2010), 4.
Benedict, God of the Old Testament, 4.
J. Daryl Charles, Between Pacifism and Jihad: Just War and Christian Tradition (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 16.
Dombrowski, Christian Pacifism, 44.
Lisa S. Cahill, Love Your Enemies: Discipleship, Pacifism, and Just War Theory (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 40; Robert. A Gill, Textbook of Christian Ethics (London: T&T Clark, 2006), 194.
St. Augustine, Reply to Faustus the Manichaean, Documenta Catholica Omnia. n.d. Web.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Whether It Is Always Sinful to Wage War? The Latin Library. n.d.
Michael G. Cartwright, Conflicting Interpretations of Christian Pacifism, in Christian Political Ethics, edited by John A. Coleman (Princeton: Princeton UP, 2008), 273.
Augustine, To Faustus, 414.
Cahill, Love Your Enemies, 5.
Cahill, Love Your Enemies, 5.
Gill, Christian Ethics, 196.
Paul Ramsey, War and the Christian Conscience: How Shall Modern War be Conducted Justly? (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1961), xv.
Dombrowski, Christian Pacifism, 47.
Hauerwas, Stanley, 2001: A Pacifist Response, Duke University. Web.
Benedict, God of the Old Testament, 5.
Childress, G. F. Reinhold Niebuhrs Critique of Pacifism. The Review of Politics 36, no. 4 (1974): 478.
Hauerwas, September 11.
Daniel J. Ott, Toward a Realistic, Public, Christian Pacifism, American Journal of Theology & Philosophy 33, no. 3 (2012): 246.
Through natural Selection, organisms with more advantageous qualities tend to live and reproduce at a higher rate than those with less domineering traits. This is the main way evolution happens, and it is what led to the incredibly diverse array of species we see today. Natural Selection, which may be seen in a wide variety of creatures, including humans, is driven by variation within a population and competition for resources (Santos-Lopez et al.1). The examples presented in this essay will focus on hominins and their evolution through natural Selection.
Examples of Biological Natural Selection
Every organism must develop a trait that enables them to outlast a specific period. Survival of the fittest is a common phrase used to describe natural Selection, which favors organisms with traits that are better adapted to their environment (Wells et al.1). Natural Selection is the cumulative result of evolutionary processes such as mutation and genetic drift over many generations. Natural Selection can be seen in the development of human lactose tolerance.
Adaptation can also be internal to help sustain specific specie in an environment. For instance, the capacity to absorb the milk sugar lactose without feeling gastrointestinal irritation is known as lactose tolerance (Wells et al. 2). For thousands of years, this quality gradually spread throughout the human population, reaching a level of prevalence in contemporary European, North American, and African societies (Wells et al. 2). It is thought that the domestication of dairy animals, which made milk a vital and conveniently accessible sustenance source, led to the genesis of the tolerant trait. The reason is that individuals who possessed the feature were superior to those who did not, and made became a lasting characteristic of the population.
The evolution of hominins ability to walk upright on two legs is another significant example of Natural Selection in action. Contemporary humans are distinguished by their ability to walk upright on two legs, a trait known as bipedalism (Young et al. 2). It is believed that environmental factors were the driving force behind its emergence in our hominid ancestors. The capacity of hominins to walk upright made it possible for them to investigate their surroundings and discover new food sources efficiently (Young et al. 2). Those individuals who could walk upright had a much-increased likelihood of surviving long enough to produce children and pass on their genes. The evolution of modern humans was made possible by the gradual adoption of bipedalism by an increasing number of hominins over time.
Another manifestation of natural Selection is the development of antibiotic resistance in microorganisms. Antibiotic resistance develops when bacteria undergo adaptive evolution to become resistant to the therapeutic actions of antibiotics (Santos-Lopez et al.1). Antibiotics kill off normal bacteria, leaving only antibiotic-resistant strains to thrive and spread (Santos-Lopez et al.1). The resistant germs eventually dominated the population as a whole enabling them to dominate that specific environment.
Relationship between Biological Survival in Humans and Natural Selection
Biological survival in humans exists due to the adamant need to avoid extinction. One strategy of human natural Selection is human lactose tolerance. The global population gained this characteristic to survive the famine since milk provided a source of nutrition (Young et al. 1). This factor indicates that the quest for survival pushed the humans to gain lactase persistence to ensure that they benefited from its contents and maintained their dominance as species.
Another biological evolution of humans is the ability to walk upright. Bipedalism is a natural selection that increases their existence, enhancing social status. The movement of the arms enables humans to survive, considering that the flexibility helps them make tools and stretch to reach out to distant objects such as fruits and other vegetation, enhancing survival (Santos-Lopez et al.1). This ability to use hands also improved communication, bringing a better survival mechanism considering that humans could share when damage arose, which enhanced their chances to live.
This survival mechanism in bacteria is due to the fact that antibiotic-resistant bacteria have evolved to be more successful in the presence of drugs intended to eliminate them. Adaptive evolution is contributed by mutation and Selection, which helps the bacteria to produce enzymes that denature the effects of the antibiotic (Wells et al. 2). This action demonstrates natural Selection, whereby the bacteria change or adapt to an unnatural environment to survive (Wells et al.1). The survival of bacteria in the presence of antibiotics indicates that the need for survival makes the organism adapt to its environment by developing resistance to destruction.
Conclusion
Natural selection is the process through which organisms traits and behaviors become more or less common in a species as time passes based on their fitness for survival and reproduction. This process is the primary mechanism of evolutionary change and is responsible for adapting species to changing environments. Human tolerance to lactose, bipedalism, and bacterial resistance to antibiotics are examples of the various natural selection strategies that have ensured different species maintain their balance in the ecosystem. The connection between natural Selection and biological factors is that an increase in one result in change or mutation in the affected specie to ensure that survival is maintained.
The Bible, as a historical source, is of great value since it contains the centuries-old experience of people and can reveal a lot. It has long been proven that those parts of it, where it speaks of Egypt and Babylon, were written by people who are well informed about the life of these monarchies. Discoveries are more convincing that these people were real representatives of the culture that dominated their time; this information is constantly being confirmed and clarified. The text of the Bible, consisting of several books, was compiled at different times; the oldest parts of the Bible were written no later than the XII-XI centuries BC. Many letters and documents in the Aramaic language found in these places during excavations are indisputable evidence of the closest Jewish-Egyptian relations at that time. Egyptian religious thinking reveals many contact points; an overlap between biblical and Egyptian literary and religious images is evident. What is more, the Egyptians unique culture, practices, and beliefs can be noted due to sacred primary sources.
Cultural Features
The events of the Old Testament are associated with several localities, namely the regions of the ancient Middle East. Historians note that the Nile is the dominant geographical feature of Egypt played an essential role in the history of Egypt and was reflected in the cultural worldview of the Egyptians. The fertile black soil of the valley was the source of life and vitality, while the lifeless sands of the desert reminded the ancient Egyptians of their mortality. The Egyptians treasured the great muddy river; the soil rich in black soil was called the black land, and such a picture of the world was reflected in the unique cultural fund of the people. (Arnold & Beyer, 2015) The culture of Egypt cannot be considered in isolation from religion since syncretism was the spiritual foundation of the people. Religion has been an integral factor in the development of Egyptian culture throughout its entire existence (Aling, 2020). They believed in the magical power of art and its mystical purpose. Therefore, they created a rational system of artistic expression, conveying the sacred meaning of the ritual of human burial.
The uniqueness of culture was determined by the early emergence of class relations and the state and the relatively isolated geographical position of the Nile Valley. All this made it difficult for the ancient Egyptians to contact and, consequently, borrow the cultural achievements of other peoples. The decisive role of the Nile in the economy and the geographic features of the valley determined the specifics of the Egyptian worldview and religious cult, the entire system of spiritual values. Only by common labor, organized by the intense power of the Pharaoh, the Egyptians could create conditions for a normal life. Therefore, fear of the formidable forces of nature embodied in fierce deities, of the all-crushing power of the Pharaoh, their absolute greatness, and power permeated the entire worldview of the Egyptian in antiquity.
Practices of the Egyptians Found in Bible
The Bible also reflects the Egyptian views on the afterlife, in particular, the concept of psychostasy. Bible books repeatedly mention weighing as a method (Israel-Pelletier, 2018). The sculpture served as part of a funeral ritual; it was a backup copy of the body. If the mummy for some reason is destroyed, then the soul could have a spare home a statue made of limestone or alabaster. As part of the ritual, sculptures were made subject to specific rules, so a canon appeared a set of aesthetic principles when depicting certain images and subjects.
It should be noted that the Jews who lived in Egypt did not disdain the funeral rites of the Egyptians, as directly stated in the Bible. The account of Josephs history in Genesis ends with a description of his death: And Joseph died one hundred and ten years. And they embalmed him and put him in an ark in Egypt. (Collins KJV Bibles, 2008) Thus, one of the faces of the biblical story, Joseph, was buried in Egypt and according to Egyptian custom.
Beliefs and special rituals
The Egyptians believed that almighty gods govern natural processes and human life. The gods were recognized as the creators of cities, laws, crafts, and art; however, the Egyptians revered some gods more than others. To preserve the proper course of things in the universe, a small army of priests in numerous temples in Egypt offered daily prayers to the gods. In each temple, there was a unique statue of a deity, with which the ritual of opening the mouth was performed to obtain the spiritual essence of the deity. (Aling, 2020, p 27) These statues received daily offerings of food, drink, and gifts. The priests also sang hymns and even washed and clothed their gods. During the ritual, oils and incense were used, as well as eye paint.
Conclusion
The Bible and the primary sources based on it make it possible not only to immerse oneself in religion but also reveal valuable historical information about the people involved in its creation. The development of ancient Egyptian culture and its high level was determined by the features of the socio-economic system of the Ancient Egypt. The economic development of the Nile Valley, the creation of rationally organized agriculture, and the general rise of the entire economy created the material basis for cultural creativity. It can be concluded about the uniqueness of the Egyptian people, with their cultural characteristics, views, and ways of development.
References
Aling, C. F. (2020). Egypt and bible history: From earliest times to 1000 BC. Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Arnold, B. T., & Beyer, B. E. (2015). Encountering the Old Testament: A Christian survey [eBook edition]. Baker Publishing Group.
Collins KJV Bibles, C. K. (2008). Holy Bible: King James Version (KJV) [eBook edition]. HarperCollins Publishers Limited.
Israel-Pelletier, A. (2018). On the Mediterranean and the Nile: The Jews of Egypt. Indiana University Press.
One of the worst infectious disease outbreaks in history is the plague. It belongs to the group of particularly dangerous quarantine infections. The three most common forms of plague are bubonic, septic and pulmonary. The causative microorganism is a gram-negative polymorphic stationary bacterium Yersinia pestis of the Enterobacteriaceae family of the genus Yersinia (Alfani, 2020). It is highly resistant in the external environment and survives in various substrates from 30 days to 6-7 months (Alfani, 2020). In a modern laboratory today, this organization would be identified by microscopic examination. The smears taken from the contents of the bubo are fixed by immersion completely in the Inpiforov liquid for 20 minutes (Alfani, 2020). The type of specimen to be studied may also include separable ulcers or punctate from the carbuncle in the cutaneous form of plague and material from the pharynx taken with a swab, and sputum in the pulmonary form of plague.
Sectional material (pieces of cadaver organs, blood), live rodents, their corpses and fleas can be used as a specimen. The exact test that would be used for preliminary identification is smear staining with Lefflers methylene blue, as this method better detects bipolarity (Alfani, 2020). The exact test that would be used for final identification is a bacteriological study during which crops of the test material are produced on agar by the addition of growth stimulants such as blood or sodium sulfite. In cases of suspicion of the presence of a bacteriophage, the crops would be treated with an anti-phage serum. The appropriate treatments that are available today include co-trimoxazole in the cutaneous form and chloramphenicol with streptomycin intravenously; additionally, tetracycline antibiotics are used.
Reference
Alfani, G. (2020). Pandemics and asymmetric shocks: Evidence from the history of plague in europe and the mediterranean. Journal for the History of Environment and Society, 5(1), 197209.