Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Wednesday, July 08, 2020, 18:26 (38 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Total distortion. God cannot control each protein molecule's actions.

dhw: Why is creating what he wants a distortion? Why do you assume that an all-powerful God’s powers are limited and he was forced to create something he didn’t want to create and tried – sometimes in vain – to rectify?

Forced! Crazy comment. God creates exactly what He wishes. What is distorted is your constant claim that God could have made the living biology system with perfect function. Impossible.


dhw: […] when I propose that he actually created the system he WANTED to create – because he did not want to create billions and billions of perfect life forms that would go on multiplying and diversifying but would never die – I am accused of “humanizing” him and making him act without a purpose.

DAVID: Your one lucid moment about recognizing death is builtin, which is not my issue about humanizing: you have Him experimenting and enjoying spectacles.

dhw: Experimenting would remove the discrepancy in your theory between God having only one purpose (us) but spending 3.X billion years directly designing anything but us. Your all-purposeful God must have had a reason for creating the great bush of life, including us, and it is perfectly possible that, as you put it yourself, he enjoys his work much as a painter enjoys his paintings. Of course we can only speculate, but as you so rightly assume, he probably has thought patterns similar to ours.

Same mistaken approach. But you always forget that the huge bush gives us the food energy we need for a huge, and growing, human population.


dhw: How can a “logical method of thought” be the same as ours if we can’t understand the logic?

DAVID: Adler uses our difference to prove God exists, and discusses our purposeful creation by evolution to cement His points.

dhw: But you have told us explicitly that he does not cover the above discrepancy. Please stop dodging the issue and trying to hide behind Adler, whose logic I do not dispute.

Thanks for accepting Adler. Your comment about understanding God's logic is impossible to achieve. Whatever logic God used to decided upon His method of evolving us, I am sure it was logical, but He doesn't tell us His logic behind His reasons. How can we understand it?


DAVID: We go 'round and 'round. Adler makes my theory logical. Our logic is similar to God's, the only thought pattern which is definitely similar. That is my only agreement with you. Logic is logic and it has rules.

dhw: We go round and round because you keep dodging the issue. The basic rule of logic as I understand it is that the premises of an argument should combine to form a pattern that makes sense to those engaged in the discussion. Here are all your premises. (Forget Adler – it’s your theory we are discussing.) Humans are unique and are so complex that they prove the existence of God. God’s one and only purpose was to create sapiens. God is all-powerful. God spent 3.X billion years directly designing every non-human life form, econiche etc. before directly designing our ancestors before directly designing us. Each premise is reasonable in itself. But put them together, and the following question arises: if your all-powerful God had only one purpose (us), why did he spend 3.X billion years NOT designing us but designing millions of now extinct, non-human life forms, econiches etc.? Your answer: no idea.

False conclusion. You've totally ignored my two reasons: God runs evolution and chose to evolve humans over time. The huge bush of life provides food for a burgeoning population of humans. My 'no idea' is not as you always imply. I have 'no idea' why He made the choices He made. I can't know!!! History can only tell us what He did, not why. My interpretation is not your interpretation, which basically is, why wasn't God impatient? Patently humanizing.

dhw: Goodbye to logic. “Our logic is similar to God’s” = God has no idea either. If God exists, I reckon he would know what he wants and would do it. Hence all the logical alternatives I offer.

Your approach to God is denial, not logic. Your 'human logical thoughts' about God are all humanizing. God knows exactly what He is doing. Your bold is totally without logical thought. Read my comment above carefully. My 'no idea' is not your 'no idea'.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum