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

by dhw, Monday, August 10, 2020, 08:45 (434 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: You have told us that during life at the present time, he does nothing at all. All your previous, bolded remarks above therefore apply to what he could and could not do during evolution. Once again: How can a God who could not control or stop the errors have been in total control?

DAVID: Use your imagination. I have God is charge of coding the advances in evolution. He creates the DNA code. We know that DNA can make replication copy errors. Therefore God is watching for those errors. If it is a bad mutation, as most are , He deletes it. If it happens to be beneficial for the advancing evolutionary code He wants, He keeps it. How is that not total control of the final DNA output? As you type a story you may make mistakes and correct them. The final output is obviously fully your work under your total control.

1) The errors in the system are/were not confined to those which did or didn't advance evolution! According to the above scenario, the “final DNA output” should have been perfect, since he deleted the bad mutations. But even during pre-sapiens evolution, according to you “He was correcting as much as he could”, and surprise, surprise, the DNA system is STILL making mistakes, some of which are the SAME as in pre-sapiens times (e.g. cancer). And you are the one “willing to show that God is not all-powerful and all-knowing and He can’t stop molecular errors in a system he created.” Yet again: If he can’t stop them, and if he can’t correct all of them (he only corrected “as much as he could”) how can he be in total control? Your analogy clearly indicates your confusion: my mistakes as an author are my fault, but according to you, “if He couldn’t stop the molecular faults, then they are not his fault.” In both cases, if the “final output” is still full of errors – whose fault is it?

dhw: This part of our disagreement concerns your insistence that a God who could not control the errors in the system he created was in total control of the errors in the system he created.

DAVID: Explained above. I have explained my view of God's role during evolution, correcting DNA errors. The time today is a different situation totally. That is my point, and you continuously try to conflate the two different time periods and confuse your thinking.

The “different situation totally” is that the system continues to be full of errors, but your God apparently is no longer trying to correct or control them,though he did leave backups, some of which work and some of which don’t. If his only concern then was evolution, why did he leave backups for the non-evolutionary blunders (though he himself couldn't correct them)? In fact, you say he has left it to us to try and correct the errors he could not stop or control. How does this support your argument that he was in total control and corrected the bad mutations?

2) You have totally ignored the astonishing reversal of your own theory of evolution, which is/was that your God directly designed every species. You now have every species being the result of random mutations which your God “allows” to survive – which is exactly the same process as Darwin’s natural selection.

dhw: The mutations include those that lead to speciation, and indeed according to you: “a mutational error favoured by natural selection or by God may have arranged for our human evolution.” And why do you continually try to gloss over the blatant contradictions I have just pointed out? Please reconsider this theory.

DAVID: If you will carefully read my theory about God's control over evolutionary DNA coding, you will see He is in full control over the final output. And remember God knows molecules will make mistakes, the reason for the careful backup editing systems in place. I have used the facts we know. I thank you for trying to find errors in my logic. There is none and no reason to reconsider.

The “final output” is still riddled with errors! Here are the two basic sets of contradictions:

1) He directly designed all species (old theory), but he selected the beneficial random mutations that led to speciation (new theory). Which is it?
2) You have also told us he is all-powerful and you have told he is not all-powerful; he is in total control but he is not in total control.

There is clearly something wrong somewhere. Please don’t just repeat your new theory, because then I shall have to repeat the different contradictory quotes. I just wish you would reconsider it, since it can only lead to more and more contradictions like your author analogy.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum