David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Friday, April 10, 2020, 22:27 (201 days ago) @ dhw

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.

dhw: 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.

But I have said why, and you continue to ignore it or talk around it. The current size of the human population requires the size of the bush for food supply, as God obviously anticipated from the beginning of life.

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”

I'd like not to be constantly ignored. Read the oft repeated reason above please. Can you refute it? I think n ot, because you refuse to recognize it.

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.

dhw: 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.

Still all your manufactured problem. Why wasn't God humanly impatient as you obviously think Her should be?

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.

dhw: 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.

Again repeating a distorted version of my thoughts about God's thinking. All I have agreed to is that God thinks logically as we do, nothing more. "Emotions and attributes similar" is a possibility, but not any proof of how God thinks as He decides on purposeful activity.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum