Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Saturday, August 01, 2020, 15:35 (84 days ago) @ dhw

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.

DAVID: 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.

dhw: You have yet again avoided the question. We are not talking about the time or about ID! We are talking about all the extinct non-human life forms your God directly designed – the great bush of life, 99% of which has disappeared – although the only life forms he wanted to design were H. sapiens and his food supply. Please stop dodging.

I don't dodge. I find your complaint about 99% gone as simply not recognizing history as God produced it. It implies I should favor Genesis and six days of creation. I don't. And I won't stop quoting ID which influences my basic thoughts about the necessity for God as the active agent, and makes Darwin theory superfluous. Mutation rates as studied actually show that the time evolution actually took, 3.8 by, is not nearly time enough for natural accidental mutations to produce us. I don't dodge. I follow reasoning you do not accept.


dhw: Because you continually gloss over the illogicality of your theory. If his only purpose was H. sapiens plus food supply, why did he directly design all the non-human stages of complexity and their food supplies? Why not a direct line from bacteria through to humans instead of the vast bush?

Yes, the bush supplies the food for all. It also represents the many stages of evolution from simple to complex. Please describe your concept of 'direct line'.


DAVID: God has the right to choose His preferred method. I don't try to guess His reasonings.

dhw: But this is all YOUR reasoning: you say he had only one purpose, and in order to achieve that one purpose, he deliberately devoted his attention to designing life forms that had nothing to do with his purpose. This is not logical. I offer you alternative, theistic explanations of life’s history which you agree are logical but which you dismiss as “humanizing” while agreeing that your God probably has human attributes. Again illogical.

Not logical to you. Perfectly logical to believers.


DAVID: 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.

dhw: And it is your presentation of these studies that keeps the website going, for which I am profoundly grateful. But you cannot expect me to swallow illogical arguments out of gratitude to you!:-(

It is your series of illogical thoughts that lead you to complain about my well thought out theories. ;-)


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum