Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Monday, June 08, 2020, 18:26 (111 days ago) @ dhw

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.

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

The two are already conflated in my belief that God runs evolution, and I see Him as viewing humans as His desired endpoint, but He fully had to desire to produce all that came beforehand as the necessary food supply. All carefully planned.


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?!

dhw: 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.

Again you have forgotten or ignore the obvious. Of course God knew the population we would achieve and the vast bush of life provides the food energy we need to survive.


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 exp lanations 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.

dhw: 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.

You misread. I still object to spectacles, etc., as I responded to your last sentence now bolded. Of course God was/is interested in all of life's vast bush that He created on his way to humans. He deliberately and purposely designed all of it.


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.

dhw: 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?

Covered endlessly in econiches discussion re' food supply for billions of eventual humans covering the Earth, as now. Don't you notice it is such a problem there are huge industries in agriculture and animal husbandry to unnaturally develop enough food supply? Your bolded phrase shows what you choose not to recognize.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum