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

by David Turell @, Friday, October 09, 2020, 14:43 (12 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: We see evolution. That is fact. My proposal is simply that God is the creator of evolution. You find all sorts of reasons why you do not like that conclusion, based on your humanized version of a possible God. We will never solve this difference.

dhw: As an agnostic, I have always acknowledged the possibility that there is a God who is creator of evolution, and ALL my alternative explanations of evolution have allowed for that. You know very well that my objection to your explanation is not to God being the creator, but to your insistence that he directly designed every extinct life form, econiche, natural wonder etc., and that all of them were part of his goal of evolving [= directly designing] humans because all the extinct forms provided food for one another, although the vast bush of extinct life “plays no role in current time.” My objection to this sequence of non sequiturs has nothing to do with my so-called “humanized” alternatives. Attacking these provides no defence of your own theory.

You total objection is to my assertion God designs all of evolution stage by stage.


Your post continues with further attempts to divert attention away from the list of non sequiturs, but I’m reluctant to ignore some of the distortions involved.

DAVID: I cannot know God's logic, nor can you. Again you want direct creation of humans, but that is not what we factually know. You are arguing with my view that God created history. He made human a final wanted goal.

dhw: I do not “want” direct creation of humans. It is you who insist that your God directly created EVERY life form, and that is why it makes no sense to say he directly created ALL of them if he only wanted to directly create ONE (plus food supply). I do not argue with the possibility that God created history. We are arguing about your interpretation of HOW he created history. I don’t even have a problem with the logic behind the individual premise that humans were “a final wanted goal”. You know perfectly well that it is the COMBINATION of your premises that doesn’t make sense.

Again an insistence God cannot be a direct designer of everything.


DAVID: You agree God can do whatever He wants in creation and then deny the logic of the facts of evolution. All the steps to create humans have to happen first!!! We know we evolved from apes. I believe God did it. I see nothing to debate in my proposal.

dhw: It is you who deny the logic of the facts of evolution. Yes, we know we evolved from apes. But the facts of evolution are that EVERY life form evolved from earlier life forms. And so once more: It is NOT a “fact of evolution” that your God directly designed EVERY life form, or that EVERY life form was “part of the goal of evolving [= directly designing] humans”. You are quite right that “we cannot know God’s logic”, but my attack on your own illogicality has nothing to do with my “invention of God’s personality” and is not a denial of the facts of evolution. The fact (we must be careful here, though – Tony would not agree) that we evolved from apes does not mean that your God directly designed every life form in history, or that every life form in history was designed to enable us to evolve from apes, or that your God designed every stage from bacteria to apes and from apes to sapiens although his only goal was to design H. sapiens plus food supply.

The bold is a clear demonstration that you are completely opposed to my belief that God is the designer. I have come to believe in God. You simply don't accept God as designer. That is our prime difference. But design stops you from becoming an atheist. It is your struggle, not mine. We go round and round and will continue to do so. We are oceans apart.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum