Return to David's theory of evolution PART 1 (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, May 26, 2022, 10:53 (910 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: The results are available for all of us to see, and if God exists, they are based on his decisions, which as you say are unknown to you. His decisions will be based on his purpose, which is also unknown to you. Of course he could create gaps if he wanted to. But none of this alters the fact that your interpretation of his purpose (only to design us and our food) does NOT explain why – according to you – he deliberately designed countless life forms and foods that did NOT lead to his one and only purpose, or why he created us in stages although – according to you – he was perfectly capable of designing species with no precursors. Far from explaining the history from a design standpoint, your theory leaves you with no alternative to confessing that you cannot explain it and it makes sense only to God.

DAVID: Once again you denigrate the vital need for food energy to support life over 3.8 by of evolution. That is what all the branches that do not lead to human provide. We are worrried now about ecosystem damage that might reduce food supply.

Once again: all forms of life require food. That does not mean that all the branches and foods that did not lead to humans and our food were specially designed as “an absolute requirement” in preparation for humans and our food! And the fact that our current ecosystems are in danger is totally irrelevant to the question of why your God specially designed countless extinct life forms and ecosystems that did not lead to us and our ecosystems if his one and only aim was to design us and our ecosystems!

DAVID: Your mindset is relevant and rigid. You see the design that keeps you agnostic. The next logical step for a logical human mind is to recognize the design complexity must be created by a designing mind. Where or how that mind came from is irrelevant. All of the new information that exists in living matter has to come from somewhere. See today's entry.

dhw: I keep acknowledging the logic behind the design theory. But the same logic tells me that if our human minds require a source, then a mind infinitely more powerful than ours must also have a source. You acknowledge that belief in some sort of supernatural, eternal, sourceless, all-powerful form of consciousness requires faith, as does belief in the powers of chance to create life and consciousness. Both beliefs defy logic. You know all this, as we have gone over it again and again, and you have only switched the discussion in this direction as a means of dodging the issues raised by all the contradictions bolded above, that lead to theories which you can’t explain and which “make sense only to God”. Please stick to the subject.

DAVID: The subject is proof of a designer. The whole debate at its base is does God exist? And, yes, if God exists, He is sourceless. You don't like my interpretations of what i think are His actions and possible motives. but I like them, as they make perfect sense to me.

Look at the heading. The subject is “David’s theory of evolution”, and our discussion presupposes the existence of God and concerns the many contradictions in your theistic theory, as well as providing various theistic alternatives to it. See Part Two for your idea of “sense”.