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

by David Turell @, Thursday, April 21, 2022, 15:50 (729 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Wrong! Only two 'possibles' for creation: direct or stepwise. Only the latter exists. Explain what? My theory exists beyond this level of discussion.

dhw: You claim that during the Cambrian, species appeared that had no precursors, and the gaps meant that they could only have been designed directly by your God. So according to you, he speciates directly if he wants to. Yes indeed, your theory...makes no sense even to you, but still you defend it.

Strange, how do you know my theory 'makes no sense to me'? A strange desperate debating point don't you think? Why would anyone defend a senseless theory?


DAVID:Obvious point: What applies in old times of evolution applies in new times! Stop chopping up evolution into unrelated segments. The past leads to the present.

dhw: That is the exact opposite of your bolded remarks, and you know it. The bush of life contained countless branches that have gone extinct and have no role in current time.

I have agreed to your point over and over. Stop denying it. Old is old, new is new.


dhw: We both follow the history, since we agree that there have been countless extinct life forms which did not lead to humans or our food, and humans evolved in stages. The “barrage of illogical complaints” is met by your agreement that you cannot find any logic that will explain your theory as bolded above, which can only mean that you find it illogical, and “God makes sense only to himself”.

I do not find me illogical. I accept God's history of evolution as His choice of method.


DAVID: At least with no knowledge of theological thinking, I looked into other human thought about God, their advice about how to view Him. I found it helpful. You find yourself above that and have launched into the area of thought totally independently. Fine. But that explains why you do not understand how I view your God as humanized. ;-)

dhw: I was raised as a Jew, studied both parts of the Bible at school, and made a point of studying other religions as my original faith began to crumble. I am not totally ignorant of other people’s views of God, but am always put off when anybody pretends that he knows what God thinks and feels. Your antipathy towards any suggestion of God sharing thought patterns, emotions and logic with his creations (although you think he probably does) seems to me one of the weakest of all your arguments, particularly since you yourself continuously endow him with human characteristics. You try to wriggle out of that by saying they’re only guesses. Every pronouncement made by us humans about your God is a guess.

I also was raised Jewish. Drifted into a very soft agnosticism in medical school, but years later began to study evolution from a current science standpoint in various books and articles. So much of Darwin theory made no sense, I returned to accepting a designer is responsible. I know I make comparisons between Him and us at a humanizing level, but I know there is a vast difference in mental power and personal wishes.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum