David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Wednesday, March 25, 2020, 11:42 (1702 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You don't seem to read what I answer to you. The first bold shows how you distinctly worry about a delay, when God knows what He wants to do in my theory. That is direct implication God should not be impatient as you view it in my theory.

dhw: God knows what he wants to do in all the theories I have offered you! And you agree that they are all logical and fit in with the history of life.

DAVID: I've agreed they are logical if considering a humanized God. Don't misuse my comment as you debate.

I suppose I had better repeat that you believe God probably has thought patterns similar to our own. So my alternatives are still logical in the light of that belief.

dhw: I do not worry about a delay – I worry about a theory which insists that there was a delay and which cannot supply a single logical reason for it.

DAVID: The delay is obvious in the historical record. It exists! Your comment doesn't fit reality.

It is only a delay if the action takes place later than it should have done! If designing H.sapiens was NOT your God’s sole purpose or he thought of humans late on, there was no delay. If your God was experimenting to get what he wanted, there was a delay with a logical explanation. All three theories logically fit reality. If your God was all-powerful, had only one aim but did not fulfil it until he had produced millions of other things, there was a delay for which you admit there is no logical explanation. Your theory is not made any more convincing by your insistence that we must accept it and not question its logic. The rest of your post reiterates this blinkered approach, your objections to humanization despite your acknowledgement of your God’s probable human thought patterns, and your clinging to the coat tails of Adler, the logic of whose basic tenets I keep accepting though you keep pretending I don’t.