Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Wednesday, August 26, 2020, 07:42 (35 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: If he exists, and since we both believe that evolution happened, of course he chose to evolve his creations! But that does not mean that his sole purpose was to produce H. sapiens and food supply, that he directly designed every species, econiche, lifestyle, strategy and natural wonder, or that every species etc. was directly designed as “part of the goal of evolving humans”. You have admitted that you have “no idea” why he would have chosen such a method to achieve such a goal, so perhaps we can end this repetitive discussion if you simply say this is your belief and you couldn’t care less about logic.

DAVID: Your prime objection is the interpretation of God's purpose. I'm with Adler in that humans were God's prime purpose. If you wish to challenge Adler's powerful book, critique it for me.

dhw: My prime objection is to the illogical combination of your beliefs as bolded above. If humans were your God’s ONLY purpose, I have proposed experimentation as an explanation of the 3.X billion years’ worth of non-human, directly created and now extinct life forms, econiches etc. If humans were A PRIME purpose, I have proposed that the idea came to him later on in life’s history, and not at the beginning. This too would explain the 3.X billion years’ worth…If an ever changing variety of life forms, lifestyles, strategies, wonders etc, was his purpose, that would also explain the ever changing variety of life forms, lifestyles, wonders etc. – and humans unquestionably provide the widest possible variety of lifestyles, strategies, wonders etc., so they would fit in perfectly with his desire for endless variety.

DAVID: Your constant attempt to present a God who finds His way along during the process is purely a humanized God. The reason we will never agree is my vision of God has a different personality than the God you envision. Humans WERE God's purpose and He evolved us, a method He chose for His own reasons. You find my belief illogical. So be it. I don't accept yours. (dhw’s bold)

Once again, you cannot find a reason why your God should have combined the different parts of your theory (bearing in mind that by “evolved” you mean specially designed,), and so you dodge its illogicality. “Finding his way” is only one of three theories I have offered above, all of which you have agreed provide a logical explanation of life’s history. I don’t expect you to accept any of these three – I only offer them to show you that there are logical alternatives to your own illogical theory.

DAVID: I can make 'possible' human considerations by God, but not consider Him in any way fully human as you have Him. You have Him stumbling on the idea of creating humans!

dhw: Do you really think I’m stupid enough to regard as “fully human” an infinite, immaterial, almighty and eternal mind that has no source, and can create a universe and life? A God who experiments, gets new ideas, enjoys creating things is no more human than a kindly God who doesn’t want us to suffer, or who makes mistakes and tries hard to correct them. If you can give him human attributes, then so can I – and mine at least have the merit of logically explaining the great bush of pre-human life, which you try so hard to brush aside.

DAVID: I never brush the huge bush aside. I've explained it is obviously required, both as as side effect of evolution branching in many directions and also for food supply for all.

Of course evolution branched in many directions to produce the huge bush. That is what makes nonsense of the claim that your God specially designed every twig as “part of the goal of evolving humans”! Specially designing food supply for all the millions of non-human organisms also makes no sense if he only wanted to design humans and their food supply – “a method He chose for his own reasons” which you cannot fathom.


DAVID (under “Independent and dependent life”): Parasites and viruses are not independent life, but some macrophages among the bacteriophages blur the lines:

dhw: I can’t help wondering why your God would have designed them as “part of the goal of evolving humans”.

DAVID: All part of necessary econiches.

dhw: Necessary for what? Do you think your God would have been incapable of directly designing H. sapiens plus food supply if he hadn’t designed these particular parasites and viruses?

DAVID: Read today's entry about fighting bacteria and phages. Our gut biome has to kept under control and beneficial. Every part of the giant bush of life can be shown to have a purpose, from a purposeful God, whom you do not understand the way I do.

Of course bacteria are necessary – for ALL life forms. And of course every part of the giant bush of life can be shown to have a purpose, but that does not mean that the purpose was to evolve humans! You keep coming up with general truths and glossing over the fact that it is the COMBINATION of your beliefs bolded above that leaves you with “no idea” why your God chose to “evolve” (= specially design) H. sapiens by first “evolving (= specially designing) all the other branches of the giant bush.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum