David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Friday, April 10, 2020, 13:15 (1686 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Why do you deny that evolution from bacteria to bush is a step by step process that creates and then moves on from one level to the next.

I don’t deny it! That is the actual history which makes nonsense of your personal theory that your all-powerful God had only one purpose (humans) which he could achieve in any way he wanted, but spent 3.X billion years directly designing billions of non-human life forms etc. at lots of different levels before directly designing the only species he wanted to design (though he even did that bit by bit)! Please stop ignoring the subject of the discussion.

DAVID: It is still your created problem. I see no issue. The mass of humanity today requires a huge bush for food. God foresaw this need. And in your humanizing approach you still don't understand a patient God.

But the mass of humanity does not require the 3.X thousand million years’ worth of directly designed bush that preceded it! In your blinkered approach, “you still don’t understand” that a God who can do anything he wants when he wants to do it must have wanted the WHOLE bush, not just the bush related to humans. (Or maybe he was experimenting.) That is why you quite rightly informed us in the past that you had no idea why he chose such a method to achieve his only goal. You had no idea, because you knew it didn’t make sense.

dhw: What you are really saying is that God knew he had to do what David Turell thinks he had to do!

DAVID: Now I'm not allowed to interpret God , with my logical reasons for God's giant bush.

You have no logical reason for the 3.X billion years’ of giant bush that preceded the giant bush that humans require. All you can say is that it happened, and so your God must have wanted to specially design humans by first specially designing the giant bush that had nothing to do with humans, but we shouldn’t ask why.

DAVID: ...accept the history as fact and interpret whatever one can from it, if one can. We cannot know God's underlying reasons for His obvious purpose, creating humans. It is always guess work, entertaining discussion , but nothing ever solid.

dhw: We are not discussing the reasons for his creating humans, whether they were his purpose or not! We are discussing his possible reasons for spending 3.X billion years directly creating anything but humans and their necessary food supply. Since you cannot find any, the “obvious” inference is that either H. sapiens was NOT his one and only purpose (though he might well have had the idea late on, as evolution progressed) or he needed to keep experimenting in order to hit on the right formula for creating a being with thought patterns, emotions and attributes similar to his own.

DAVID: Open your static mind. I had to lecture you about the formation of econiches and their importance, and I remember your first offhand comments that, of course, everyone ate.

Not offhand. I had to lecture you on the obvious fact that ALL life forms need econiches (i.e. a food supply) in order to survive, and this has nothing whatsoever to do with your theory that humans were your God’s only purpose but for some unknown reason...here we go again!... he directly designed billions of years’ worth of non-human bush and econiches before directly designing the only ones he wanted to design.

DAVID: Now I think you recognize the importance, but from your view you still want to deny God's planning. Still anything but God. We will not convince each other across the divide.

Your usual escape route from your illogical theory by claiming that I am trying to avoid your God’s planning. I have offered you several logical THEISTIC theories to explain how the actual history can be made to fit in with your God’s nature and/or purposes. You can hardly dismiss those as “anything but God”, and so then you escape to your complaint that your God mustn’t be “humanized”, although by your own admission he could very well think like us and probably has thought patterns and emotions and attributes similar to ours.