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

by David Turell @, Monday, January 03, 2022, 21:10 (219 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Your concepts of God and mine are colored by childhood instruction. My words you quoted still apply. But my point as I just noted in PART ONE is we start with the same all-powerful God concept, but diverge from my very purposeful God who knows the exact direction in which He is headed, and compared to yours who gives up control, changes His mind, experiments, and obviously had no endpoint in mind when He started to create.

dhw: A not very neat way of changing the subject from your irrelevant objection that my proposals would not be recognized by “religious circles”. In PART ONE, you refuse to tell us what direction your very purposeful God is headed in, whereas I offer you three distinct alternatives, each one of which has a very precise purpose and – unlike your truncated version of a purpose (to produce humans, but you won’t tell us why) – each one covers all life forms and natural wonders, including those that had no connection with humans. Giving up control serves the purpose of providing a far more interesting spectacle for him to watch (you agree that he watches with interest). Changing his mind could apply equally to your version of him “dabbling”, especially in view of the fact that the majority of his actions according to you had no connection with the direction he wished to head in (humans and their food). Experimentation can be targeted or could be a purpose in itself (to learn something new), and interest and enjoyment would be greatly enhanced by having no endpoint in mind. Please tell us what endpoint you think your God had in mind when he designed H. sapiens.

The humans are the endpoint. Again you want His reasons which I cannot know. I can make the same guesses again so you can distort them again. His reasons are your problem. You don't like the fact that I simply accept them as I accept the historical endpoints as His obvious purposes. Adler and I accept that any relationship with God is a 50/50 probability and that He loves us is 50/50. So we can each psychoanalyze Him till the cows come home. I have my approach, and you yours, with wildly different results. So we can never agree on What God is like. Yours wants entertainment like a five-year-old to pass time or a free-for-all type of evolution with an unknown mysterious outcome like a murder mystery on TV. Human desires!!!


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum