Evolution and humans: all over Africa (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Sunday, October 08, 2017, 14:43 (45 days ago) @ dhw


dhw: Your interpretations of your God’s evolutionary intentions do not make sense to me, and since you cannot answer my questions, they clearly don’t make sense to you either, but you don’t worry about it. That’s one way of avoiding the issue, but fine, I don’t worry about it either.

DAVID: I gave you an answer you will not accept: balance of nature, until the human brain exists. Your mind is as closed as you infer below mine is.

dhw: This is the answer I find illogical and hence unacceptable: that your all-powerful God sets out to produce the human brain, but on the way has to design eight stages of whale, the weaverbird’s nest, the toxin-eating snake, the monarch’s reproductive cycle etc. in order to “balance nature” so that life will go on until he can do what he really wants to do. You can’t make sense of it either (it is one of several questions you can’t answer), but you refuse to consider any other explanation.

Our difference here is I find my explanations entirely logical. I look at history: God chose to evolve the universe, the Earth, and humans. Balance of nature allows for the time involved. Whales contribute to the ocean's balance of nature. That has been shown. Some of the unanswerable points have no answers I can logically arrive it. Can't answer doesn't mean I've failed. If I find your suppositions as illogical in view of my acceptance of God, so be it.


dhw: I just keep looking for more logical explanations of evolution than yours, while always allowing for a designer. “No matter how you squirm”, you have acknowledged that my theistic hypothesis (your God designing a process in which organisms can do their own designing, though he can dabble if he wants to) fits the facts as we know them, and so “I don’t understand your reluctance” to accept the possibility that it might be closer to the truth than your own.

DAVID: Theories that fit facts are not proof. I have identified what I view as powerful factors that point to God's purpose that include more than just studying evolution. I'll stick to my conclusions as I fit it into my overall views. I've crossed over to faith in my beliefs.

dhw: None of the hypotheses are proven, though I would suggest that if they fit the facts, they have a better chance of being true than theories that don't fit the facts! I can understand and accept your faith in the God hypothesis, for which you provide logical reasons, but that is a separate issue from your faith in your illogical explanation of the great higgledy-piggledy bush of evolution. And so whenever you claim that new discoveries or natural wonders support this particular aspect of your faith, we go down the same path: I ask how they fit the facts and you don’t know. Design: yes; anthropocentrism, no (although the option of a dabble remains open).

Unfortunately we are discussing evolution in a vacuum. My faith in God is based on much more than that one aspect of God's work. Those considerations are the content of both of my books which you have read. No need to represent all of them here. I find my view of evolution as logical. You just can't accept the bush is God's choice.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum