Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, June 18, 2020, 11:12 (495 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: My purposeful God uses the process of evolution in each stage from the Big Bang on, enumerated many times previously.

dhw: Yes, he uses evolution. What is not logical is that he uses evolution to produce millions of now extinct life forms etc. although his one and only purpose is to produce H. sapiens! Please stop dodging.

DAVID: It is your dodge, not mine. If He uses evolution, as you agree, then the history of evolution is the evidence you should accept. Yet inexplicably you don't. Weird reasoning.

And the history of evolution shows us 3.X billion years’ worth of extinct non-human life forms etc., which you constantly dodge because you cannot explain why your all-powerful God would have directly designed them although the only thing he wanted to directly design was us.

DAVID: It is easiest to discuss our problems which we know as current events. You are right the history is higgledy-piggledy, but I see purpose in creating the necessary econiches and your god is usually not that purposeful.

dhw: […] What is the point of your constantly saying how purposeful your God is if you can’t tell us what that purpose might be?

DAVID: Another bolded non-sequitur. His ultimate goal and purpose is humans, as always stated.

You cannot tell us the purpose of the 3.X billion years’ worth of extinct non-human life forms, and you refuse to tell us the purpose of your God’s creation of humans. I offer you a clear purpose for both. It is hardly a non sequitur to ask what your purposeful God’s purpose might have been for two of the key factors of life’s history.

DAVID: I didn't say the biological errors were God's mistakes, but implied it is probably impossible for a high speed biochemical system to always be perfect. God cannot achieve that result which requires perfect molecular reactions at all times.

dhw: Since your God is supposed to have created absolutely everything from scratch, how can errors not be his? Once again, why is this fallibility less “humanizing” than experimentation, or having new ideas as he goes along?

DAVID: The errors are due to the high speed molecules making mistakes, not God's mistakes. Please note living biochemistry has many mistake screening backups in place, designed by God who knew mistakes would happen.

The system God invented from scratch makes mistakes. But God himself doesn’t make mistakes. He just knew that the system he had created from scratch would make mistakes. And this is not “humanizing”, whereas a God who experiments or who has new ideas as he goes along is impossible, because God always knows exactly what he’s doing and is always in control.
dhw: Please, either find a logical connection or admit (once more) that there isn't one, and then we can stop going round in circles.
DAVID: My theory of God running evolution is the acceptance of a need for a designer. I've accepted your reasoning by describing it as humanized reasoning imposed on God without evidence. You've constantly agreed God theoretically ran evolution, and the constantly refuse to accept historical evidence from what we know of evolution itself.

What we know includes the 3.X billion years’ worth of non-human life forms etc. which you refuse to include in all your arguments. There is no “evidence” to prove any of the theories, including your own.

DAVID: Humans were the endpoint of that history, weren't they? You keep asking why God didn't bring them in earlier. He didn't. Accept that, because it is true. Purpose can be long term, without immediate satisfaction. Again what you want from God is a humanized expectation.

I do not keep asking why he didn’t bring them in earlier! I keep asking why he directly designed 3.X billion years’ worth of non-human life forms if his only purpose was to directly design H. sapiens, and he could have done so any way he wished! When asking this question, I am not wanting anything from God. I am wanting your explanation for a part of your theory that has no coherence. My alternative, logical explanations cover different interpretations of life’s history coupled with different interpretations of your God’s purpose. Whether these are humanized or not is irrelevant, since nobody can possibly know to what extent your God has thought patterns similar to our own.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum