Re: Irreducible complexity and the flagellum

From: Jan de Koning (jan@dekoning.ca)
Date: Fri Nov 08 2002 - 21:18:42 EST

  • Next message: allenroy: "Re: Genesis in cuneiform on tablets"

    At 06:53 AM 08/11/2002 +0100, Peter Ruest wrote:

    And I do not repeat most of the writing:

    >This implies that, from what is presently known about it, the type III
    >system does not disprove irreducible complexity of the flagellum system.
    >Of course, this, in itself, does not prove it, either.
    >
    >Peter
    >--

    Nor does it prove anything. Also, faith is not based on proof. If it
    were, we would not have any Christianity.

    What I miss in all these discussions is a real evaluation of the basic
    systems of faith, philosophies, in the times of the bible, and in our own
    time. These philosophies influenced the way the OT was written, since God
    would not have anyone write in a way people could not understand. Also,
    translators have certain views inherited which influence the way they
    translate. I mentioned before the words translated by "soul", "spirit",
    "heart". In other places these words are translated by "living being",
    "wind", "blood" etc.

    As long as we do not take these philosophies into account all our
    discussions will lead nowhere. I tried in the past to get a discussion
    going on this, since I believe not taking these philosophies into account
    will lead to endless and fruitless debate.

    I hope that when I come back in about three weeks, these backgrounds will
    be discussed.

    Jan de Koning



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 12 2002 - 10:57:41 EST