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

by David Turell , Friday, March 31, 2023, 16:56 (601 days ago) @ dhw

PART TWO

Cyclones

DAVID: […] An evolutionary process is a screening process which in our case involved a 99.9% loss of forms, but successfully produced us.

dhw: Once more: Why would he invent a system that forces him deliberately to design 99 out of 100 forms that are irrelevant to his purpose, and to design the means of “screening” (killing them off), although he can “design de novo forms as he wishes” and he only wishes to design us and our food? See your definition of a “real” theistic God below.

DAVID: It is your years-ago initial question. I still say God chose it. That is logical from the viewpoint of God the creator.

dhw: How the heck are you able to tell us your God’s viewpoint? Has God really agreed with you that his method of fulfilling his one and only purpose was inefficient, cumbersome and messy?

I follow an expert opinion. Adler used God's evolution of humans to prove God exists.

Supernovas and biodiversity

DAVID: I mean exactly this: my God is fully purposeful and knows what He wishes to create and creates it by evolving it.

dhw: As usual, you come up with a generalization which – if God exists – I don’t suppose anyone would reject, apart from people who don’t believe in evolution. The issue is what he wished to create, and how he used the process of evolution in order to fulfil his purpose. Once more you have dodged the issue of possible purposes other than your own version.

DAVID: Give us your purposes for God. I know about limping experimentation and enjoying aimless free-for-alls.

dhw: Experimentation is not a purpose. In two of my versions I have him experimenting 1) in order to fulfil the purpose you have chosen: to design a being in his own image (mentally, not physically), perhaps to recognize his brilliance, to have a relationship with him etc. But he does not know from the beginning how to create such a being, and so he moves from one successful experiment (some of his creations lived for millions of years) to another; 2) he enjoys creating different forms of physical life, and experiments to see what interesting new ideas he can come up with; humans are the latest of them; 3) the same as 2), except that he finds it more interesting to design a mechanism that will enable life forms to come up with their own ideas. In all three scenarios, he enjoys creating and watches his creations with interest – your very own words, and a perfectly understandable purpose, which also fits in perfectly with your belief that he probably has thought patterns and emotions like ours.

How can you imagine such a totally human God? Amazingly new theology. In evolution I clearly see God's totally purposeful design.

dhw; […] What is nonsense is your insistence that your God subjected himself to an inexplicable obligation to design 99 out of 100 species that had no connection with the purpose you impose on him. Stop dodging.

DAVID: It happened. As creator He must have chosen it. You are looking at the same history I am and cannot distort it into experimentation or-free-for-all for entertainment.

dhw: He must have chosen what? To force himself to design 99 out of 100 species irrelevant to his purpose?

As usual, God chose to evolve us, giving us the history we know.

Common descent

DAVID: A Big Bang, a start of life, an early rocky Earth, all of which then spent eons of time for evolution to reach what He wants. God prefers to evolve His intended creations. You find it illogical, but He didn't. wink No allegory needed.

dhw: You never stop dodging. I believe in evolution, and if God exists I believe he invented the process of evolution. It is not illogical. What IS illogical is your insistence that a) his one and only purpose was us and our food, b) he was perfectly capable of designing us de novo, but c) instead chose to design 99% of irrelevant life forms before even starting to design us in stages along with another lot of irrelevant life forms (e.g. all the dinosaurs except one small group). What I offer you is 3 alternative theories which logically explain the other 99% of non-survivors without making your God out to be a blundering mess-maker.

Evolution is a series of master designs ending with our brain, the most complex item in the universe. Your so=called God must bumble His way along by experimenting. Not a God I recognize.