David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Thursday, October 24, 2019, 18:48 (1855 days ago) @ dhw

Again I am telescoping threads to avoid some of the repetition.

DAVID: Humans are God's final goal. He evolved organisms to get there as history tells us.

dhw: Humans may be the last product of evolution (itself a guess), but that does not mean every preceding life form, lifestyle and natural wonder was specially designed to cover the time your God decided to take before pursuing his one and only goal, and it does not alter the fact that you can only accept your own theory by NOT applying human reason to the history.

You always fail to understand that I simply look at history to see what God did.

dhw: Yes, A bush of life in the form of an econiche is essential for humans, just as it is/was for all species that ever lived. That does not mean that THE bush of life throughout life’s history was necessary for humans! You have ignored your own explanation! Once more: all of these non-human organisms and econiches were “interim goals to establish the necessary food supply to cover the time he knew he had decided to take” – i.e. before he started to design the only thing he actually wanted to design, namely us. And you “have no idea why God chose to evolve humans over time”.

DAVID: Stop the illogical repetitions. They make no sense to me. Of course in using evolution to create, He created interim animals and eco-niches over the time involved. Of course the bush of life was necessary for the creation of humans which were His goal, since they are God's endpoint. I don't ever intend to explain His reasoning, and it is obvious you can't as you constantly humanize Him, and attempt to distort the history of His works, which tell us exactly what He decided to do and how to do it.

dhw: What illogical repetitions? I have repeated YOUR interpretation of his reasoning, but you yourself find it so unreasonable that you tell us that it is only logical “if one does not apply human reasoning to the actual history”! I do not distort the history, and indeed you have always acknowledged that my various alternatives fit in with it (“Of course I can agree with you that your suggestions are logical at a human level”), but you try to dismiss them as “humanizing”, even though you admit that your God “very well could think like us”. I understand your frustration, but I do not understand your attempts to distance yourself from your own acknowledgement of the problems associated with your theory.

DAVID: You constantly refuse to follow logical reasoning. If God is in charge, history shows us what He did, not why. Guessing why is pure guessing. What does your guessing prove. Nothing!

dhw; But it is you who guess that the reason why your God (whose very existence is a guess) created life was to produce H. sapiens, and every other life form, lifestyle and natural wonder up until 3.X billion years ago was an “interim goal” to cover the time he had decided to take before embarking on fulfilling his one and only purpose. All theories concerning the existence of God, the origin of life, the origin of consciousness etc. are guesses which prove nothing.

Not a guess. Design requires a designer.

dhw: I have always balanced my acceptance of your logical design argument with the argument that we do not solve one mystery by creating another. I find your eternal, sourceless, immaterial conscious mind just as difficult to believe in as the ability of chance to assemble the first living cells.

DAVID: You have a right to this position, and the right to guess, but guessing in worthless, whether you accept God or not.

dhw: And yet you have written two brilliant books to support one of your guesses (that God exists), and you continue to delve into all the mysteries, as you provide us with a constant stream of articles detailing the latest attempts to solve them. I remain extremely grateful for these, and do not regard them as worthless, even though they are guesses. And I do not think it is worthless to apply human logic in assessing the possible validity of people’s guesses. That is the nature of all our discussions. If guessing and discussing the guesses is worthless, we may as well close down this website!

I don't think we should stop. I constantly can show overwhelming evidence of design which you recognize and keeps you in confusion By the way Amazon just sold a copy of my first book.