Re: [asa] Origins of Life

From: <gmurphy10@neo.rr.com>
Date: Fri Jun 05 2009 - 14:03:43 EDT

I think I answered this in my reply to Cameron but again, I'm just saying that "there's a problem." Further investigation is needed to see who's problem it is. But to to an extreme example, if someone were to claim on the basis of biblical texts that bacteria aren't alive because they don't have "the breath of life in them" then I think most of us would feel inclined to go along with biologists.

Shalom,
George

---- mrb22667@kansas.net wrote:
> Quoting gmurphy10@neo.rr.com:
> >
> > My point wasn't that biologists & scientists who work on chemical evolution
> > get to have the last word on the meaning of "life." But if a definition of
> > life conflicts with biologists' understanding of what's alive & what isn't
> > then there's a problem.
> >
>
> I know this is jumping in to this thread on one isolated comment, but here it
> is: Isn't your latter comment above a contradiction of sorts of the one just
> before it?
>
> I have more sympathy for the first comment above since "life" in scriptures and
> theology has much wider meaning than just biological life (whatever that is
> taken to be.)
>
> --Merv
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jun 5 14:04:12 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jun 05 2009 - 14:04:12 EDT