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

by David Turell , Saturday, June 04, 2022, 15:52 (901 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: Please stop flogging the dead horse. You have agreed that there is a 50/50 chance (originally you actually said “probably”, which is more than 50/50) that your God has patterns of thought and emotions similar to ours. But in any case, attacking my alternatives does not alter the fact that even you cannot find a logical explanation for your theories concerning purpose and methodology.

The original 50/50 refers to "one or the other, nothing else probable". I don't know if God's thoughts and emotions are similar to ours, but I think it probable. The other 50/50 is from Adler who presents that as whether God really cares about us.

dhw: You accept your own theory that his sole “desire” was to design us and our food and therefore he designed all the species and foods that had no connection with us; and you accept your own theory that he was perfectly capable of designing species with no precursors and yet decided to design in stages the only species he wanted to create (plus its food). And it makes perfect sense to you that only your God can make sense of your illogical theories.

DAVID: If you could only come to the realization my explantions make perfect sense to many folks who believe as in ID.

dhw: ID makes perfect sense, but you keep admitting that even you can't explain your combination of evolutionary theories. Only God can!

Of course what God does is inscrutable. We all theorize.

DAVID: It is easy to simply accept God's choices of methodology.

dhw: Your theories are not GOD’s choice of purpose or methodology, but YOUR interpretation – and I have offered alternative interpretations. Please stop pretending that your interpretation is an objective truth.

Nothign about God is an objective truth.

DAVID: There is no evidence that is absolute proof, but I'll take Adler's proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

dhw: Adler’s “proof” concerned the existence of God, not the possibility that God had thought patterns and emotions similar to ours. Please stop dodging and please stop trying to hide behind Adler.

DAVID: I'm not hiding behind Adler. I follow his insructions as to "How to think about God". Did you have any instructors to guide your thinking?

dhw: Once more, you totally ignore the fact that you have dodged the issue we were discussing, which was God’s thought patterns etc. and not the existence of God. I’ll take the bait, though. If you’re following Adler’s instructions, then you’re making out that all your illogical ideas are actually his. As for “instructions” on how to think about God, I cannot imagine anything more presumptuous than a human being pretending he knows the “right” way. The history of religions past and present should be enough to tell you how absurd and also how damaging such pretences can be. You have agreed that all my alternatives fit logically into the history of life.

The bold exists only from my previous comment about your God theories that they are logical only by assuming a very humanized form of God. A comment you constantly distort to make it seem I support your views.

dhw: Your combined theories don't, and only God can explain them. Or maybe one or more of your theories could be wrong.

Only God can fully explain what He has done in creation of our reality. You know that.