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

by dhw, Wednesday, October 07, 2020, 11:00 (18 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: You are “allowed” to believe whatever you want to believe! But the point of this forum is to discuss possible explanations of all the things we don’t understand. If God exists, and if we believe evolution happened, it is logical to assume that evolution is what he wanted to happen. The belief that he directly created millions of non-human life forms and natural wonders, and that he did so as “part of the goal of evolving humans” is not God’s choice – it is your subjective interpretation of his choice. You admit that you have no idea why he would have chosen to “evolve” (in your theory = directly design,) us in this way, so maybe your subjective interpretation is wrong.

DAVID: The issue is whether God exists OR not. I am convinced He exists, and my view of His actions is a logical view. It is when you tell me my view is illogical that my hackles rise.

The last thing I want to do is raise your hackles, but the issue when we are discussing evolution is NOT whether God exists or not. I am an agnostic, and because we are trying to understand how evolution works (Chapter 2 in the history of life), I am discussing the subject – as indeed did Darwin – without casting doubt on God’s existence. I have absolutely no dispute with the logic of your argument for his existence, so do please lower your hackles.

DAVID: And we get back to discussing your view of God, from outside belief, which has to skew your thinking as your grudgingly try Him on for size. You do not think about Him as I do, give Him a similar personality.

The moment you start trying to find God’s purpose, it is inevitable that you end up giving him personal attributes, but NOBODY knows his purpose or his attributes, so we study his works in order to extrapolate possibilities. There is nothing illogical in the belief that the supremacy of the human mind could indicate that we are the endpoint, and were God’s purpose, or one of his purposes. There is nothing illogical in the belief that God is all-powerful. There is nothing illogical in the belief that God directly designed every life form, econiche, natural wonder etc, in the history of life. But what IS illogical is the claim that an all-powerful God whose one and only purpose was to design H. sapiens, and who “could have created humans directly” but didn’t, must have designed the rest as “part of the goal of evolving [=directly designing] humans”, and supplying food for humans, although humans didn’t appear until 3.X billion years after 99% of his designs had disappeared. Once more: it is the COMBINATION of your premises that makes your theory illogical.

DAVID: They are all part of God's pattern of evolution over 3.8 billion years. Ecosystems all have their own needs and structures. And God is always capable of designing big and little.

dhw: I agree. Nothing whatsoever to do with all of them being “part of the goal of evolving humans”.

DAVID: I disagree here.

And yet you have no idea why your all-powerful God chose to evolve [= directly design] humans, his one and only goal, by first evolving [= directly designing] the vast bush of extinct life “which plays no role in current time.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum