Back to David's theory of evolution: God's error corrections (Evolution)

by dhw, Wednesday, August 05, 2020, 14:25 (1569 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: […] during evolution, when errors occurred by the molecules, He stepped in and made corrections.

dhw: According to you, God is not doing anything in the present. So what period in time are you referring to when you say he couldn’t stop the molecular errors, was correcting as much as he could, high speed reactions can have errors God can’t control, and he can’t stop molecular errors in a system he created?

DAVID: You are correct. I view evolution is over and God is not active biologically: As I've stated several times, during evolution God corrected every mistake He wished to correct. Now we handle the job, as best we can. God has always known the molecules can make mistakes. You are having trouble sorting out the issue. Protein molecules must conform their shapes to provide functions. They are under strict instructions, but can make mistakes. End of story. Since this has all been surprising news to you, but not me, I've not explained it as well as I should have.

There is nothing at all surprising in the news that the cellular/molecular system that keeps us alive is riddled with potential and actual mistakes. Anyone who has ever been ill will know that things can go wrong. But you have explicitly told us that during evolution God could not stop or control the errors, and yet he could correct the errors if he wished. THAT is what surprises me. I do not understand how your God could correct errors which he could not stop or control.

dhw: And are you telling us that during pre-sapiens evolution, all animals – other than those that were eaten – died of old age?

DAVID: It is obvious death is builtin, first to make room for those arriving, but from many other causes, disease, accident, predators, mutational mistakes, etc.

That is not quite what you told us. You reminded us on 26 July that “progressive aging to cause death is purposely built in”. So your God deliberately designed all the “errors” that afflict old organisms. If he deliberately designed these, but corrected the other errors, all pre-human animals – apart from those killed by accident or predators – must have died of old age. How could they die from disease or mutational mistakes if he corrected or “destroyed” or “removed” all the bad mistakes (as bolded below)?

dhw: We are talking about evolution, and you can’t see the contradiction: God “fully recognized his inability to control the molecules”, but he “corrected everything”! How do you correct what you can’t control? […]

DAVID: Covered above. Shows your continual confusion. As God ran evolution He engineered DNA, and allowed some beneficial mutations and destroyed others.

It’s not covered at all. He engineered DNA, couldn’t control or stop the errors, and yet could stop the nasty ones by destroying them! If he destroyed them, how do you know they even existed? And if it comes to that, why call the beneficial mutations errors and mistakes? And “allowing” beneficial mutations that caused speciation leads to the inevitable conclusion that he did not design them – hence your next problem.

DAVID: At all times the molecules are free to make rare mistakes in the high speed biochemical reactions of living functions.

dhw: Yes, at all times, throughout the history of speciation. And whether your God can or can’t control them, one of those “mistakes” may have “arranged for our human evolution”, and you have delivered a powerful blow to your theory that your God directly designed every species.

DAVID: The only blow is only your continual confusion. If God allowed a DNA mistake because it fit his plans, He is still in full control. And remember all bad mistakes by DNA were removed as I view God's role. [See above, re the bold.]

Once more, how can he be in full control when you tell us that he couldn’t stop the molecular errors, was correcting as much as he could, high speed reactions can have errors God can’t control, and he can’t stop molecular errors ? I wish you would reconsider your error-strewn theory of errors..