David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Monday, November 18, 2019, 08:22 (305 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: 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).

DAVID: 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?

I have done so many times. If, as you claim, your God is in total charge, and if he has only one purpose (H. sapiens), it is illogical that he should decide NOT to fulfil his sole purpose, and instead design billions of non-human life forms, lifestyles, natural wonders etc. in order to “cover the time” (your expression) until he begins to fulfil his sole purpose. You recognized the illogicality when you wrote that this was not illogical “if we do not apply human reasoning to the facts of history.”

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

In your theory he chose to specially design every single species, lifestyle etc. “over the time it took”. But if his one and only purpose was to design H. sapiens, it is not logical that he should spend 3.X billion years deliberately not designing H. sapiens (according to you that was his “choice”) – hence your agreement that we mustn’t apply human reasoning to the facts of history.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum