Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Tuesday, September 20, 2022, 16:40 (793 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: Allegorical: “A representation of an abstract or a spiritual meaning through concrete or material forms; figurative treatment of one subject under the guise of another.”
“A symbolic narrative”.

“Full control” is not a concrete or material form or a figurative treatment or a symbol.. Control means making something happen the way you want it to happen.

You miss the point. God's view of control may not be ours.

DAVID: So you have no authority but yourself? Adler is an authority to teach "how to think about God", his book!

dhw: I have no authority. Nor do you, Adler, Dawkins or Dennett. If God exists, the only “authority” on how to think about him is God himself.

Exactly!!! We can only be figurative. Please stick to that proper reasoning.

ecosystem importance: microplastic danger

DAVID: If they existed, they were created by God purposefully.

dhw: Maybe, but if he purposefully created life forms and bushes that had no connection with H. sapiens plus bushes, then his one and only purpose cannot have been to create H. sapiens plus bushes. You agree. Your theory “makes sense only to God”, i.e. not to you. Stop dodging!

Maybe!! God, as creator, had a purpose for everything He made appear!!

DAVID: […] my reasonable response is He chose to evolve us in stages. And I gave you evidence of His preferences: He evolved the universe from the BB. the Earth for life from its beginning and evolved life. Stop ignoring the evidence!! I do know!!!

dhw: Yes, the universe and we evolved in stages! That is not the issue, which is your combination of theories: IF your God’s one and only purpose was to produce H. sapiens, and IF your God could design species without predecessors (Cambrian), WHY do you think he designed us in itsy-bitsy stages? Maybe one of your IFs is wrong!

DAVID: Why can't you accept the logical answer: God chose to evolve us for His own reasons.

dhw: And you cannot think of any reasons!!! So I offer you logical alternatives, but you reject them all because they do not fit in with your preconceived ideas about your God! […]

You can't know God's reasoning any more than I can. WE can only analyze what HE produced.

DAVID: You want God to desire free-for-alls, to experiment, to change His mind and shift course. That is all your human thinking about God. I don't accept that humanized version of God.

dhw: You accept a “humanized” version of God who acts in a manner which makes no sense to you, and you reject my logical alternatives because they involve thought patterns and emotions which in some cases (not all) are different from those you believe in.

God makes perfect sense to me. As for your God, His humanized attributes are foreign to my thinking about God.