David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Wednesday, November 13, 2019, 19:58 (28 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: So why did you say it was not illogical “if we do not apply human reasoning to the actual history”?

DAVID: I have applied my own reasoning while not questioning God's, as you constantly attempt to do, with no way to know if your objections to God's methods are true.

I do not question God’s reasoning because even if he exists, none of us can possibly know it. I question YOUR reasoning and your interpretation of his methods, and it is you who admit that your theory is not illogical so long as we do not apply human reasoning to the actual history.

DAVID: I logically see the necessity for design, but it is you who cannot find a designer.

As you know perfectly well, I accept the logic of design and a designer, but…as follows:
dhw: I constantly dispute your version of what he did and why he did it – a theory which leads to such confusion that you can only admit it is not illogical provided you do not apply human reasoning to the actual history.

DAVID: Nothing illogical if you accept history as what He did. The 'why' is what we debate.

dhw: If your God exists, what he did (the history) was produce the higgledy-piggledy bush. What is illogical is your version of “how” (designing billions of non-human innovations, lifestyles, natural wonders etc.), combined with your version of “why” (in order to cover the time which, despite being in total charge, he had inexplicably – you have “no idea” why – decided to take before beginning to design the only thing he wanted to design, H. sapiens). You are absolutely right to say that such a theory defies human logic.

It is you who say my thoughts are illogical and defy human logic. I simply accept what God did and you find that illogical. It is your problem. Not mine. I quit.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum