Return to David's theory of evolution PART TWO (Evolution)

by dhw, Wednesday, December 15, 2021, 17:26 (36 days ago) @ David Turell

PART TWO
dhw: […] who are all the other scientists who see evolution as you do, with every life form and natural wonder specially designed as “part of the goal of evolving [designing] humans” and their food, including all those that had no connection with humans and their food?

DAVID: All of ID feels God designed evolution and humans through 3.8 billion years of evolution, after He designed life itself.

Yes I know. How many of them believe thathe individually designed every life form, econiche, lifestyle, natural wonder etc., including all those that had no connection with humans, as “part of the goal of evolving [designing] humans and their food”?

DAVID: You avoid reading ID as well as Adler, while defending your position. How well-rounded is your background of research studying thoughts of all great minds? I even follow Larry Moran!!

Yes, yes, you have read lots of books that I haven’t read. Now please save me years and years of research and let me into the great secret: name, say, three scientists who believe that your God individually designed every life form etc. as bolded above.

dhw: It is you who claim that your theory is pure logic – even though you can’t understand it yourself! As before, why do think a laissez-faire God or an experimental scientist God is more “severely humanized” than a control freak who keeps digressing from his one and only purpose, and who is forced by circumstances beyond his control to create a system containing errors which he tries but often fails to correct?

DAVID: Calling a purposeful God a 'control-freak' is a purposeful distortion, something you do all the time. It is shown in your final 'forced by circumstances' comment. The fact is God created life with the only system that works, warts and all, and edited for warts because He knew exactly what He was doing.

Suddenly your theory has become a fact. I used “control freak” as a counter to your dismissal of an experimenting God as weak, purposeless, bumbling etc. And since your God is supposed to have created everything from the beginning, and is supposed to be all-powerful and all-knowing, I find it somewhat belittling to claim that he could only find one way of creating life, knew there would be errors, and tried but frequently failed to correct them, leaving it to us humans to find a solution. I suggest that instead, the system devised by your all-powerful God – if he exists – was precisely the one he wanted, in which all life forms were given the freedom to find their own ways of survival. Hence the “good” and the “bad” which create the problem of theodicy for theologians. Why are you so opposed to the idea that your all-powerful God might have WANTED the existing system with its so-called “errors” instead of “having to” (you have used those words before) design it that way?

DAVID: Creating the underlying basic living process came first, then the design of new forms, some as in the Cambrian completely new. Other partial new design as adaptations of old ones. All God's choice at the time.

dhw: Alternatively, he created the mechanism whereby these forms were able to design themselves.

DAVID: Back we go to a weak, humanized God who hands off a major part of His job.

How do you know what his “job” was? It’s you who insist that his job was to design humans plus food! And why is it “weak” to create autonomous life? And why is your all-powerful though not all-powerful (see above re errors) puppet master or control freak less human than my laissez-faire creator?

DAVID: Why should He be at all like any human you know?

dhw: […] I find it totally logical that if God exists as first cause, whatever he creates will reflect some aspect of himself, since it never existed until he thought of it. Do you really think your God has no idea what it means to love, hate, enjoy, be bored, be sad, be happy? Are we that much more advanced than he is? If he exists.

DAVID: Same problem: God is so advanced you completely misunderstand the concept of God. He knows all we know and so much more. It doesn't take 'enlightenment' to know we mimic Him slightly. Your imagined humanized God I see as Him mimicking us!

I am not disputing the fact that if a being can create universes and life itself, he must know much more than we know! Thank you for yet again agreeing that we “mimic” him. I have no idea what “slightly” means in this context, since you have avoided answering my question directly. You can only mimic something that already exists, and so it is totally absurd to imagine that God mimicked us when he created us!


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum