David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Thursday, November 28, 2019, 18:47 (13 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Human thoughts attempting to reason about God's thoughts remain reasonable guesses. No proof of anything.

None of the theories, theistic or atheistic, provide proof of anything. Thank you for again acknowledging the reasonableness of the above theories, in stark contrast to your own, which according to you is not illogical only “if one does not apply human reasoning to the actual history.” I understand why you persistently ignore your own judgement, but I’m afraid it won’t go away.

DAVID: Each of us reach our own conclusions, which for some become faith. For me God runs things, and chose to evolve us. Why go further?

dhw: What a good question. If he exists, he also chose to evolve every other organism that ever lived, so why on earth did you bother to go so far as to claim that humans were his one and only purpose, that he is in total charge, that he specially designed every other non-human species (as opposed to designing a mechanism enabling them to evolve themselves), and that he did so only because he had decided for some inexplicable reason to delay fulfilling his one and only purpose and therefore had to design the rest to “cover the time”? All of these are “further” to the claim that God “runs things, and chose to evolve us.”

The answer is simple. I have totally accepted Adler's argument that we were specially designed as God's purpose. I also agree with the IDer's that God runs evolution and designs everything. Thus my theory fits my decisions. I understand that the 'delay' issue between us is your humanizing of God. God is allowed to delay as long as He wants. He is in charge.


DAVID: I've fully covered my reasoning and it is reasonable as it uses actual history.

dhw: According to you, the above theory is only reasonable if it is NOT applied to the actual history.

Of course it is related exactly to the historical record. Where and how did you conjure up that comment, or is it your usual twisting of the meaning of words in the discussion?


DAVID: I've bolded my complaint about your issue of why wait. What is your point. I see no answer.

dhw: My point is that you reject all the reasonable alternatives to your own theory, although you acknowledge that the latter is unreasonable by human standards.

It is unreasonable to you as you constantly humanize God with your human thinking. That is what I avoid. I take God at His works. You cannot think like God does when He thinks about His purposes.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum