David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by David Turell , Sunday, November 17, 2019, 19:36 (1831 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: As always, you select sections of your belief which in themselves are not illogical, and you leave out the other sections. Yes, it is logical to regard humans as exceptional and to argue that such complexity may be used as evidence for a designer. Since humans are the last species so far, it is not illogical to argue that we might have been the designer’s goal. But what, by your own admission, is not logical is the argument that humans were your God’s one and only goal he is always in total charge, but for reasons you cannot fathom he decided not to fulfil his one and only goal for 3.X billion years and therefore “had to” specially design billions of other life forms, lifestyles, strategies etc. to cover the time he had decided to take[/b]. This is the combination of beliefs which, in your words, is not illogical "if we do not apply human reasoning to the facts of history.” Why do you refuse to explain what other meaning your words could possibly have? I suggest once more that you should agree with yourself, so that we can move on.

DAVID: Why I never answer is that the distortions are quite obvious to anyone who would review our discussion. Taken out of context and twisted by inference. The red is Adler's concept theology which I accept fully. Read the book and then complain.

dhw: You are using the same device again. I keep pointing out that your individual beliefs are logical, and it is the COMBINATION of beliefs that doesn’t make sense. I do not dismiss the “goal theory” on its own, and have proposed hypotheses to fit that goal to the historical fact of the higgledy-piggledy bush (experimentation; or possibly a late arrival on his list of purposes).

The combination makes sense to me, but not you, for a reason I do not understand. Can you explain why is is clearly illogical, instead of simply declaring it so?

DAVID: The blue covers the point that in my view God chose to use evolution to reach humans with consciousness, the only animals that have it to our degree. Of course I could 'fathom' God's possible reasoning and have done that at your insistence, but I prefer to simply accept his reasoning as to what history tells us. Of course evolution through the bush of life takes time, and of course God would know that in advance, so as you try to imply that He simply filled time, He did not wile away time to help the time pass. He had work to do such as setting up food supply in econiches of the bush of life to cover the time that was necessary to finally reach humans.

dhw: If God exists, then of course he chose to use evolution, but if his one and only purpose was to produce humans, and if as you claim he is always in total charge, you have a problem of logic: why spend 3.X billion years specially designing the higgledy-piggledy non-human bush? Here is your answer: “He knew those designs were required interim goals to establish the necessary food supply to cover the time he knew he had decided to take." Why did he DECIDE to take all that time? Your answer:"I have no idea why God chose to evolve humans over time.”

It is simple and logical. He chose to evolve humans over the time it took. Accept His choice and there is no logic problem.

DAVID: Start with my premise that God wanted humans to appear and it all makes perfect sense. I'm sorry you cannot see that. But of course, you are insisting we are not His goal…

dhw: I am not. I offer various alternatives to fit various goals to the history. When I pointed out that your explanation did not fit the history and was therefore illogical, you replied that it was not illogical “if we not apply human reasoning to the facts of history”. Once more, please explain your comment if you truly believe that the combination of your individual beliefs “makes perfect sense”.

As above, and please remember I do not questions God's choices of action. then of course God took his time as history of evolution shows.