Big brain evolution: our mutation rate is slowing (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Sunday, January 27, 2019, 19:32 (22 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: You have not accepted the history of God's actions as not only representing God's actions but his decision to do it that way. Why is it illogical to conclude He decided to use that method as factual history presents?

dhw: And yet again, no, no, no, I have not accepted your interpretation of the factual history or of God’s method. The factual history is confined to the existence of past and present organisms including ourselves as the latest known species.

Your objection is illogical. I start with the premise God runs evolution. To evolve us He used that method so it must be His choice of action. You don't start with my premise so you keep disagreeing.

dhw: All our speculations are unprovable. You cannot explain why he waited 3.5+ billion years to do the only thing he wanted to do. If the reason was limited power, then he is not all powerful. But if he is all powerful, then it makes no sense to say he only wanted one thing, was perfectly capable of doing it, but didn’t do it. The best view is to accept the limitations of the factual history as above, and look for possible explanations that do make sense. I have offered you several theistic explanations, all of which you have agreed are logical (I’ll repeat them if you want me to), but you refuse to consider them.

Once again you have accepted a Biblical version of an all-powerful God. I don't have to explain why He chose evolution. With unlimited power, He always could have made a choice.


DAVID: I am using an Occam approach of a simple explanation based on fact. Evolution happened. God used it. Nothing illogical.

dhw: If God exists, of course he used evolution, and the question is how he used it, and what he used it for. There is nothing simple about an answer which even you find inexplicable.

I have explained it to my satisfaction. God made a choice of methods, as history shows.


DAVID: I have agreed that God watches with interest as He evolves everyone, but with involved interest as a creator, not a spectator.

dhw: If God exists, then of course he is the creator, but what makes you think a creator cannot also be a spectator watching the spectacle he creates?

DAVID: Of course He is a spectator to His creation, but there is no evidence He desired a spectacle for His 'enjoyment', one of your favorite humanizing suppositions about God. I'm simply in interpreting what history shows us.

dhw: Of course there’s no evidence of what he desires (assuming he even exists). Where is your evidence for the illogical hypotheses bolded above? You harp on about purpose, and you agree that he watches the spectacle with interest. Then let’s drop the word “enjoyment”. Now please tell me why you think he finds it interesting.

DAVID: We have free will, which means we humans might do the unexpected, even by Him. I'm in no position to know if God sees the future and can predict our actions. We are in the position to blow ourselves up, and He will have to start again.

dhw: But the spectacle began long, long before we even existed. Are you saying that he didn’t watch what you believe to have been all his special designs with interest? If you think he might be interested in the “unexpected”, wouldn’t it also be interesting for him to give evolution itself a free rein to see what unexpected forms of life might evolve? Why would he specially design 3.5+ billion years' worth of innovations, lifestyles and natural wonders if they were of no interest to him?

Back to your same unanserable questions. I'm sure He watches everything He created, like an artist enjoying his own paintings


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum