Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Monday, June 08, 2020, 10:58 (505 days ago) @ David Turell

Edited to avoid some of the repetition.

DAVID: God controls creation and history tells us He chose to evolve humans. I don't know how you can logically question that conclusion.

dhw: If God exists, history tells us that he chose evolution as the method of producing every single organism that ever lived. It does not tell us that he directly designed every single one, or that the only organism he wanted evolution to produce was H. sapiens.

DAVID: Your response lists my true beliefs.

Yes, they are beliefs and they are not history, though you constantly try to conflate the two.

DAVID: Remember history tells us life's evolution goes from fairly simple to very complex. Humans are the end point as very complex.

dhw: […] There is no straight line from simple bacteria to very complex humans! And you have no idea why the line wiggled all over the place if your God was always in total control.

DAVID: Since God in this discussion is in control, why can't He chose to wiggle all over the place?!

Of course he can. And that is why I suggest that he wanted evolution to wiggle all over the place. But wiggling all over the place is not consistent with having a single purpose (H. sapiens) in mind, plus the ability to fulfil that purpose any way he wished, plus the claim that he was always in control! Repeat: it suggests that he WANTED the vast variety of life forms, lifestyles, econiches, natural wonders etc. And that is not consistent with the theory that all he wanted was humans.

DAVID: What's wrong with recognizing Humans were His ultimate purpose and He used evolution of life to get there?

dhw: You are claiming that he specially designed 3.X billion years’ worth of non-human life forms in order to get to humans! I have offered you two theistic explanations of the non-human bush that do allow for the special purpose, but you keep ignoring them or trotting out your silly “humanization” objection.

DAVID: Don't object to your humanized explanations. They all list a human interest such as spectacle.

Thank you for no longer objecting. I would suggest that a theory which posits God as being interested in all the products of his invention is actually more likely than a theory which posits that he deliberately designed all of these products although the only thing he really wanted to design was humans.

DAVID: He obviously had to design all prior stages until He got to humans. My usage of words is not strange. God is the necessary designer of the evolutionary process

dhw: Yes, if he exists he designed the evolutionary process. But “evolution” does not mean the direct design of every product of the evolutionary process, and it does not mean that every organism that preceded humans constituted a necessary prior stage on the way from bacteria to humans.

DAVID: How do you know what God thought as He evolved bacteria and everything else to get to us? My presumption is the history of evolution tells us what God did as designer of each step. Your approach in the bold is to accept that God only designed process that took care of itself.

It was you who specified that he designed the evolutionary process, and that allows for the theory that it “took care of itself”. You presume that he designed not only each step from bacteria to us, but also each life form, lifestyle, strategy, natural wonder etc. that had nothing whatsoever to do with us. All of these constitute part of the “history of evolution”. Back we go to the question at the heart of this whole discussion: What do you “presume” was his purpose in directly designing all of them?

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum