David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Wednesday, November 20, 2019, 11:25 (24 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Once again you refuse to accept the premise God chose to evolve human over the time it took. You refuse to accept that human reasoning about God. I never consider questioning His choices of action. You do that and it makes the issue your sole problem.

dhw: If God exists, I accept the premise that he chose the method of evolution to produce every species that ever existed, including humans. According to you, he specially designed every one of them. What I refuse to accept is the premise that he did so because although H. sapiens was his one and only purpose, he decided not to fulfil his purpose for a period of 3.X billion years, and therefore had to design all the other species to cover the time which, for no reason you can think of, he had decided to take before turning his attention to humans. And what you never consider questioning is not your God’s “choices of action” but your interpretation of his choices, and you refuse to acknowledge that since your theory is not illogical “if we do not apply human reasoning to the facts of history”, that means your theory IS illogical if we apply human reasoning to the facts of history.

DAVID: The bolded above is an illogical twist of my conclusion of not trying to judge God's thinking and actions that history presents. I simply accept what God does.

There is no “judgement” – only your insistence on your belief that you know God’s thinking (“All I wanner do is design H. Sapiens”) and his actions (“I’m gonna wait 3.X billion years before I start doin’ it, and so I’m gonna design a few billion non-human life forms, econiches, lifestyles an’ natural wonders just to cover the time till I do the only thing I wanner do.”) I will once again provide your exact words if you want me to. The bolded statement above means precisely what it says: this theory is not illogical so long as you do not apply human reason.

DAVID: And what is wrong with God having humans as an eventual goal of His creation by evolution?

Nothing is wrong with it. It is the combination of this one belief with the rest of your beliefs that creates the illogicality you have recognized in the bolded statement.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum