Return to David's theory of evolution PARTS 1 & 2 (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, February 05, 2022, 16:07 (1020 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: Yes, I am human. I thought you were too. But no, apparently you know the true theistic view of the real God. But unfortunately, he has never explained to you why he designed countless life forms that had no connection with humans plus food, although all he wanted to do was design humans plus food.

DAVID: You have expressed your exact problem. We have to accept what God did and try to understand it from a developmental view of His creation which God does not explain.

dhw: Assuming God exists, the only thing we agree he did is invent life. We do not “have to” accept your theory that his one and only goal was to design humans plus food, that he designed every life form, or that every life form he designed was part of his one and only goal even though most of them had no connection with his one and only goal. If you propose a theory, it is for you to explain it, and you can’t, because you have no idea why your God would choose such a method to achieve such a goal. The obvious implication is not that God works in mysterious ways, but that your theory is wrong.

I follow simple logic. God created evolution and history tells us how He did it, not the why of His choice of method. Total logic to me. It is ridiculous to claim my theism is wrong just because I don't question God's choice of method.

DAVID: I've given you my explanation which you refuse to accept, since God did it in a round-about way over lots of time, in comparison to an efficient human approach who would have gotten it done straight away. Thus your humanized God appears to solve your problem.

dhw: It’s not MY problem. It’s yours if you think your God is less “efficient” than us humans!

Not me! It is your human complaint about His time-taking method.

Hummingbird torpor and sea spiders

dhw: Why would God specially design an energy-saving mechanism just for hummingbirds when all
he apparently ever wanted to do was design humans and their food? Would we really not be here, or would we starve, if it weren’t for the hummingbird’s torpor?

DAVID: Each organism fits an ecosystem providing food for all.

dhw: Yes indeed. But each ecosystem provides only for the organisms that are part of it. I do not believe, and nor do you, that every organism and every ecosystem that ever existed was “part of the goal of evolving [= designing] humans” and their ecosystems.

DAVID: Yes, no other way to explain God's actions. I accept them, not complain about His methods.

dhw: What do you “accept”? You are proposing a theory about your God’s actions, and it doesn’t make sense. And I am complaining about your theory, not about your God’s actions!

My theory is not a theory in this fact: I fully accept the history of evolution as God's doings with us as the current endpoint. Adler does exactly the same to make his argument, which is the significance of the "Difference of Man and the Difference it Makes".