Back to theodicy and David's theories (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by David Turell @, Thursday, May 06, 2021, 19:41 (84 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Same old, same old. I am referring to time segments which I know includes huge new branching's.

dhw: Same old, same old. You accused me of segmenting evolution, but evolution, like time, is a continuum. And since you know that it branched off in all directions, why do you persist in telling us that every branch “was part of the goal of evolving [= specially designing] humans", when 99% of the branches had no connection with humans?

99% had to die away, but at last we can discuss evolution as a continuum with constant branching, providing a giant food supply for the now huge human population. God plans well for the present and the future.

dhw: Humans do not need the huge branching bushes of food that PRECEDED their existence!

Of course not. The huge bush is for now. Earlier bushed were much smaller.

DAVID: Earlier humans, and before humans, eating animals needed an adequate bush of some necessary size for that period.

dhw: Yes, and 99% of them had no connection with humans, so why do you persist in telling us that the huge bushes of the past were all “part of the goal of evolving [= specially designing] humans?” Please stop this silly dodging game so that we can put an end to the repetition.

God chose to evolve us. Over time all had to eat so all that happened was part of God's chosen process to evolve us.

DAVID: I've agreed your very humanized God fits your theories logically. We can leave it at that. The initial premise each of us has about God differs and we will always differ.

dhw: Another dodge and distortion which I cannot accept. In my alternative theories, my “humanized” God always fits in logically with the history of life. In your own theory, bolded above, your “humanized” God does not fit in logically with the history of life, but that is what you believe and so we can leave it at that.

DAVID: The bold is your confused and seemingly forced misinterpretation. It is logical my God knew humans would become a huge population and needed a huge current bush for food. Yours should also.

dhw: It is not logical that your God created millions of past food bushes that had no connection with humans if his only purpose was to provide a food bush for humans.

I thought we agreed above evolution is a continuum. God was purposeful all through the process of designed evolution.

DAVID: Evolution is God's continuum from God's designed start of life with Archaea to finally introduce sapiens. With your skewed theistic hat you never see the sort of God I do. That difference will continue the discussion. The 99% gone are necessarily gone. But you must admit they played a necessary design role.

dhw: Evolution in your theory is not ONE continuum from Archeae to humans, but thousands of branches, only ONE of which is a continuum from Archaea to humans. I do not admit that the 99% of life forms which had no connection with humans were necessary for your God to design humans!!! You have admitted that you have no idea why he chose to design humans by first designing millions of life forms and food bushes that had no connection with humans, so why are you continuing this discussion?

Only because you accuse me of illogical thought about God's conduct of evolution. It is quite logical to me even if you stay confused in understanding how I view God's work. Your view of God has no relatio nship to my view.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum