Let's study ID (Introduction)

by David Turell , Saturday, September 04, 2021, 18:20 (957 days ago) @ dhw

Transferred from “Theodicy”, as the argument culminates in the same question.

dhw: […] your theory leads to a question of logic which you cannot answer. That is why you fall back on the “humanization” argument, which becomes irrelevant in the light of all the quotes.

DAVID: [...] I have NEVER seen anything illogical except as how you seem to invent it. What I can't answer is Why God chose evolution of humans from bacteria, but I counter that with the clear evidence He prefers to evolve His creations.

We both accept that if God exists, he chose to evolve (by which you mean design) ALL life forms from bacteria. I’m delighted to hear that you have a logical answer to my question, so I will ask it once more and wait for your answer:if your God’s one and only purpose was to evolve [design] humans and their food, why did he evolve [=design] countless forms of life and food which had no connection with humans?

Logically because He chose to do so by designing an evolutionary process starting from bacteria. Your bold again implies why didn't He go straightaway to making humans. The sticking point is your discomfort with the concept of our exceptionality, the core of Adler's argument, and is part basis of my logical reasoning.

DAVID: Each population with each proper food supply at each stage finally leads to our stage.

dhw: You are forgetting that we both believe ALL life forms descended from bacteria, and the vast majority of extinct life forms and food supplies had no connection with humans. And so each “population” did NOT lead to humans and our food supply. Hence the bolded question. Please answer.

Each step in the process God chose to make humans. One step does lead to every next step.

DAVID: […] in my view God ran evolution by design, creating a pattern we interpret as common descent.

dhw: If God exists, then of course he designed the mechanisms for evolution. That does not mean he directly designed every life form plus food supply.

DAVID: We differ on how design appears. I prefer direct hands-on while you propose God offering second-hand instructions making cells appear intelligent.

dhw: One of my alternative theistic proposals is that your God created cellular intelligence to do its own first-hand designing. This would explain all the life forms that had no connection with humans – and that is the problem you continue to dodge if you insist that all life forms were “part of the goal to evolve [=design] humans”.

That is your proposal, that I have countered by explaining secondhand design is cumbersome, inefficient, and as I result, I think you are wrong about how God decided to create things..

DAVID: It is my firm belief. That He prefers to create by evolving each stage is obvious. His only direct creations are the BB and starting life. The bold is a statement about evolution that denies my theology. […]

dhw: I am not denying evolution!!! I am asking one simple question [ bolded above] […], concerning your interpretation of why and how your God “ran evolution”, and all you do is dodge that question.

I've dodged nothing. You don't like my reasoning. God obviously prefers to evolve all His creations, a comment of mine you've never denied.

DAVID: Because He used the process of evolution by design of stages, creating the illusion of a natural common descent. Fits history.

dhw: We agree that he used evolution, which takes place by stages. I don’t know why you call common descent an “illusion”, and “because he used evolution” does not explain why he used it to create life forms and foods that had no connection with his one and only purpose of producing humans and their food!

Ask Him. I don't know why He chose the methods He used.