Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Thursday, July 23, 2020, 18:22 (368 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: […] I find it absurd to argue that your all-powerful God could not correct some errors, but gave us the intelligence to do what he couldn’t do.

DAVID: The errors you want God to correct are all unexpected accidents of molecular activity which God could never control unless He somehow created a fail-safe system. That it isn't fail-safe proves it is impossible to create.

dhw: If they were unexpected, it means your once all-powerful and all-knowing God didn’t realize he was creating a defective system until…oops…he’d been and gone and done it! That it isn’t fail-safe therefore proves that your God was unable to do what he wanted to do, although amazingly H. sapiens is smarter than your God, because H. sapiens can actually correct some of the mistakes God couldn’t correct. And I’m accused of downgrading your God by “humanizing” him!

What you don't seem to realize is that billions of correct reactions are all going on at the same time in the biochemistry. As in the other thread, the backup mechanisms which do correct most of the mistakes, indicate God anticipated the problem. He invented life. We can't but we have the brain to help out as far as we can.


DAVID: No dodge. Your confusion. God has the right to evolve us and feed all organisms along the way.

dhw: Your God has the right to do whatever he wants to do. How does that explain the theory that he only wanted to “evolve” (= directly design) us, but spent 3.X billion years “evolving” (= specially designing) anything but us? Stop dodging.

You are the consummate dodger. The bolds above show it. God has the expressed right to evolve us over time. We are the endpoint of his works with our huge brain and consciousness. It is obvious and you refuse to back down from an untenable position.

DAVID: It is not an issue of understanding God's logic. We obviously cannot know His reasoning behind his choices of purpose or method of achieving them.

dhw: No, we cannot “know” any of this, including whether God actually exists. But how can you say he definitely uses logic as we do if you can’t explain what you insist are his choice of purpose and method?

I can only see his methods from history and reality. I can only guess at his reasons. Your 'reasons' always humanize His purposes.

DAVID: And it ends with the usual distortion of my view of God's thoughts.

dhw: Not a distortion but a direct quote, and a perfectly reasonable theory. When pressed for a possible explanation of your God’s purpose for creating H. sapiens, you even acknowledge that your God might want a relationship with us, might want us to admire his works, and might enjoy his own works as a painter enjoys his paintings.

DAVID: Exactly my thoughts as pure guesswork, when responding to your request to come up with possible reasons. Guesswork is not substantive thought, and I've stated those guesses were at the level of humanizing.

dhw: Why are my guesses less “substantive” than your guess, which defies all human logic? There is nothing wrong with “humanizing”, as you quite rightly pointed out in the statement which I keep quoting and which you keep trying to forget.

Of course He may have human purposes. Your guesses are all humanizing and mine try to picture Him as full of direct purpose, without any self interest. Different approaches.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum