Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, August 18, 2020, 10:54 (349 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: As a believer in God it all fits together for me.

dhw: Your belief in God does not provide any explanation for your illogical belief in a theory that has him all-knowing and all-powerful, directly designing every life form and food supply in the history of life although his only goal was to provide one life form plus its food supply. ... I keep asking you – and now I’m begging you - to reconsider your theories, because they are becoming more and more confused.

DAVID: You are still confused about my views on errors. See the other error thread for another attempt to clear your thinking about the errors without your biases getting in the way.

See the other thread for your confused views.

DAVID: The bold is your fixated version of my God who can only see His goal and nothing else. My God knows He wants to evolve humans from the bacteria with which He stated life and fully understands what is involved in creating the huge bush of life. Don't beg me. You are confused about my God.

I have no doubt that if God exists, he fully understands what is involved in creating the huge bush of life. I doubt very much that he would understand why you think he has to create the huge bush of life (past and present) if his one and only goal is to create a single life form with its own big bush of food supply. Why do you keep complaining about my bold? Please tell me in what way it misrepresents your own fixation.

dhw: And to complicate matters still further, your idea (prior to your new “error theory") of “developing” or “evolving” all these life forms has always been that your God designed them directly! The biblical version in fact makes far better sense if you think his only purpose was to create sapiens and his food supply, but you believe in evolution.
As for “my” God, in all my alternative theories he knows what he wants and performs all his wonders in direct fulfilment of his own wishes – in striking contrast to your God, who knows what he wants and either directly designs what he doesn’t want, or faffs around relying on chance to help him because he has little or no control over the system he invented.

DAVID: I've answered your issues here and elsewhere. No chance involved. It is your weird interpretations that lead to a comparison with the story of Genesis in the Bible.

No chance involved? Your error theory is all about random mutations which your God cannot control but can only allow, and these can change the course of evolution – even in relation to humans. And I’d better repeat your enthusiastic endorsement of chance: “What is wrong with a random chance mutation, if it fits God’s plan to pass through??? Chance can play a role!!!” On Saturday chance can play a role, but on Monday no chance is involved.

I did not compare your theory with Genesis. I was trying to point out that Genesis had a more cohesive version of your theory: your God fulfilled his one and only goal by directly designing H. sapiens and his food supply. But because you believe in evolution, you have him directly designing anything but H. sapiens and his food supply until he has designed millions of other life forms and food supplies. And you don’t know why he would have chosen such a roundabout method.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum