Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Friday, July 31, 2020, 18:40 (86 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: The usual total distortion of my theory.

dhw: Of course it’s preposterous to argue that God's one and only purpose was to specially design H. sapiens and so he specially designed anything but H. sapiens before eventually specially designing H. sapiens.

What is preposterous is that you keep forgetting we were evolved from bacteria, which history tells us was God's choice of creation, as the argument is from the position God is in charge of creating reality


DAVID: All of the past organisms are linked to the eventual humans though the process of evolution. Bacteria are our ancestors, or have you forgotten?

dhw: Please explain why humans could not have evolved from bacteria without your God directly designing all the thousands of extinct life forms, econiches, natural wonders etc. which preceded his direct design of hominins and homos. And please don’t forget that for you evolution does mean direct design and not random proliferation.

My point is that they couldn't have in the time we know evolution took place, based on chance mutations. Proven mathematically by ID material you do not know about, but I carefully follow. God is the active agent, which is mathematically required. ID shows the math but then doesn't mention God as part of their approach


DAVID: As for His choice of method, it makes lots of sense, as it leads to a giant bush of food supply. Life always needs daily energy intake, a concept you love to downplay.

dhw: I do not downplay the obvious fact that life needs food! I simply ask why your God would have directly designed millions of extinct life forms and their food supplies if the only life forms he wanted to design were H. sapiens and his food supply.

Your usual retort, with n o basis in reason.

dhw: I’ll skip the rest of the post until the final exchange:

dhw: Please explain how all the millions of now extinct non-human life forms and their now extinct food supplies, plus all their strategies, lifestyles, natural wonders etc. – all apparently directly designed by your God - are to be regarded as “developing stages” before your God could directly design H. sapiens.

DAVID: You are back to immediate creation by God. Why? Developing stages equals evolution, which is the true history of reality. The reality God chose to create.

dhw: The true history of reality (for those of us who believe in evolution) is that ALL life forms passed through developing stages, and if God exists, then the reality he chose to create was the vast bush of life, 99% of which has disappeared. You insist that ALL of the bush was directly created, and the only concession you make to evolution is common descent, which means that existing organisms were either preprogrammed to change into new species, pursue their lifestyles or perform their wonders, or he stepped in to give them lessons or to dabble with their anatomy.

Splitting your entry: God's designing work has all the appearance of common descent, and therefore is common descent. If God is accepted as in charge, as I do, it all fits history.

dhw: So if his one and only purpose was to directly design each stage from bacteria to H. sapiens, why would he preprogramme or dabble all the life forms etc. that did NOT constitute “stages of development” towards humans?

You are so confused about evolution. All stages gradually became more complex until we arrived. The massive bush not directed at human development supplied the food for all including now the huge human population, which god obviously expected to appear. Why dop you constantly force me to repeat obvious points of theory?

dhw: It is the combination of your beliefs that lead to their illogicality, but you persist in focusing on just one at a time in order to dodge the truth of the matter, which is that you have no idea why your God would combine your idea of his purpose with your idea of his method.

The bold is your usual mantra. God has the right to choose His preferred method. I don't try to guess His reasonings. Again forced to repeat one of my constantly restated positions. I drive most of this discussion by presenting new studies, and all you do is complain about my theories based on those studies, while presenting your humanized God.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum