David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Saturday, December 14, 2019, 11:34 (292 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: Why would God preprogramme or dabble umpteen whale changes if his one and only purpose was to design H. sapiens? Why should the whale not have been a purpose in itself? Why should humans not have come as a late idea in his purposeful thinking? Or why shouldn’t the whole of life’s higgledy-piggledy bush have been one vast experiment – with the purpose of seeing what will happen if…? Please stop your “humanizing” objection, since you have agreed that your God “very well could think like us”.

DAVID: All of the bush of life are intermediate goals creating the necessary econiches.

Necessary for what? You have left out your theory that your God inexplicably decided not to pursue his one and only goal, and therefore had to create all these econiches in order to cover the time he had decided to take.

DAVID: Evolution sows many steps from simple to complex. Of course God builds each stage on the last until He reaches the final complexity in humans with consciousness.

Please explain how every single extinct, non-human life form and econiche and natural wonder in the history of life provided a “stage” on the way from bacteria to H. sapiens.

DAVID: God uses logic as we do, but his thoughts about his purposes are guesses by all of us. Your guesses are human so you make Him human. I don 't try that.

You do not understand his logic, you have guessed at his purpose, and your guess does not fit in with the “actual history”, which is why you agree that you must abandon human reason in order to believe it.

DAVID: God thinks logically as we do. You will never accept that God had the right to choose to evolve humans from bacteria over time, although you admit a God in change can do what He wants. Talk about inexplicable logic!

dhw: Of course he has the right to choose whatever he wants. That does not mean you have the right to limit his choice to evolving humans when history shows that evolution resulted in vast numbers of non-human life forms long before humans came on the scene! If he thinks logically as we do, then maybe one of the above alternatives is correct.

DAVID: Just your human guesses.

Your guesses are no less human than mine, unless you believe you have divine knowledge.

dhw: I know you think your God is busy dabbling whatever he hasn’t preprogrammed 3.8 billion years ago. You “fail to see” that this creates a logical non sequitur if you also insist that he is always in charge and only had one goal. Once again: I propose – theistic version of the cellular intelligence theory - that if your God exists, he allowed organisms (cell communities) to produce their own variations (you sort of agree) and innovations (you disagree). Unlike your theory, this one does not require us to refrain from applying “human reasoning to the actual history”. Perhaps you now wish you hadn’t said so, but it was an important acknowledgement and confirmation of your confession that you “had no idea” why your God would have chosen the evolutionary method you impose on him.

DAVID: Your usual discussion. My version. God chose to run the entire process of evolution for which we have a full history. Our interpretations about God differ. I see one set of purposes for God, and you find others. I don't try to get behind the reasoning God uses for his purposes. I just look at the results. Your human reasoning about God's purposes makes Him humanized. No logical non sequitur exists for either of us. Our approaches are diametrically opposed.

Your usual discussion which entails your usual evasion. The results/history have been the vast variety of life forms extant and extinct, which logically suggests that your God wanted the vast variety of life forms extant and extinct. It does not suggest that he chose to preprogramme or dabble the entire process, or that he only wanted one particular life form. And so you have yet again dodged your own statement, in which you explicitly acknowledge the logical non sequitur (we cannot “apply human reasoning to the actual history”), as quoted at the end of my comment.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum