Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Saturday, June 27, 2020, 10:38 (1608 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: You have completely missed the point, which is that he has created a system over which he does not have complete control. In the past, your God was in complete control of everything. Once you allow for him NOT being in complete control, you open the door to the theory that he did not WANT to be in complete control (a much more respectful interpretation of your God’s nature and power).

DAVID: I'm sorry you refuse to accept the fact that God created life and He knew that life would have problems, so He added as many safeguards as He could, but it is a true fact, from my knowledge of living biochemistry I've known all along. And yet I accept God as I describe him, while you blithely ignore all of His other accomplishments.

For argument’s sake, I am accepting the existence of God, and so I accept that he created life. It is a "true fact" that life has problems. It is pure guesswork on your part that your God was unable to create a system without problems, and that he added safeguards! The theory that he deliberately created a system with problems is a different guess. You also guess that he deliberately designed every single life form and was always in full control of every evolutionary development. I guess that he deliberately designed a mechanism that would enable life forms to do their own designing, and he deliberately did NOT control every evolutionary development (though he may have dabbled when he felt like it). You constantly present your opinions as facts. I don’t know what you are referring to in your last sentence.

DAVID: I know your unhappiness. Why can't God evolve from simple to complex as history indicates?

dhw: Of course life evolved from simple to complex. How does that come to mean that he directly designed every life form, and he did so only because he wanted to create humans? Please stop dodging the issue!

DAVID|: I've not dodged the issue. You refuse to accept what Adler presents as the goal. I don't know why He chose evolution as his method, but it obvious He did. Your objection makes no sense if you accept God is in charge of making the history we know.

I have offered you two explanations of evolution’s history that are based on Adler’s theory. If God exists, then of course I accept that he is responsible for the history we know. But as I wrote yesterday:
dhw: You do not follow history when you claim that 1) God is in control (now contradicted by the points raised at the start of this post), 2) that he directly designed every life form, and 3) that he did so for the sole purpose of directly designing H. sapiens! This is all guesswork, and you can’t find a reason that would enable you to link 3) to 1) and 2).

DAVID: You are dodging facts. God cannot fully control life's high speed reactions perfectly. I've known that all along and should have introduced that concept to you long ago.

Again this is no answer to the above! You have always maintained until now that God is in full control of everything. Your admission that he is not opens the door to a different view of life’s history - you can't just impose your own limits on his lack of control! But please don’t blame yourself. You are beginning to loosen some of the bonds that tie you to your illogical theory of evolution!

DAVID: That disproves nothing else in my view of how God works. Keep seizing on every tidbit you can as you refuse to see God as I do. That is your role as an agnostic and the reason behind this website battle.

I’m not convinced that I see God differently from you. If I believed in him, I would see him as all-powerful and all-purposeful and totally logical in all that he does. What I refuse to see is your combination of 1), 2) and 3) as a believable account of how evolution works.