Paul wrote: " The difference between scientific literature and scripture is
that the former is subject to constant revision as new discoveries are made,
while the latter is held sacrosanct in every word. This leads to problems
for the clergy as situations arise (cloning; abortion; stem-cell research)
for which scripture has no clear answer. Each body of clergy decides for
itself what stance it will adopt on behalf of its adherents, and seeks some
interpretation of scripture that supports this. There is no vote, and no
peer review of whatever edict is then put forth, and no appeal. Meanwhile,
scripture - the Bible, Koran, Torah, Bharagavad Gita or whatever - remains
inviolate, not shortened or lengthened by a word."

Paul, I can't speak for Islam and Christianity but this is not the case for
Judaism or Buddhism.  Both have a long tradition of formal debate,
commentary, clarification, additions and congresses on their religious
texts.  Even in Christianity the example that comes to mind is varying Bible
translations, updated versions being released all of the time.  So although
certain sects may not budge from their "version" (I hate to say it but many
scientists have their "camp" like this as well), I don't believe even the
Bible would be considered inviolate.

Kristine Zickuhr
Registrar
Wisconsin Veterans Museum

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).