Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Tuesday, December 19, 2023, 17:00 (130 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Our only difference is I recognize God's purpose to produce us by His choice method of evolution, and you offer God's who don't make choices or seem to not have any goals.

dhw: According to you, his one and only goal was to produce us plus our food, and his choice of method to produce us was to produce and then cull 99.9 out of 100 species that had no connection with us. This you describe as messy, cumbersome and inefficient. In all my theistic alternatives, God has a very specific goal (not necessarily the same as yours) and chooses a logical method to achieve his goal.

There is only one method which culls 99.9%. All you present is alternative motives for the same events. Those motives all humanize a picture of God.

DAVID: A God who could create a universe and then start life, is not then going to use the inefficient form of creating by experimentation, a method that must look for answers. (dhw’s bold)

dhw: So instead you have him deliberately designing 99.9 mistakes and then culling them – a method you call messy, cumbersome and INEFFICIENT. And of course you ignore the other alternatives.

With only one method historically available, your God culls 99.9% also.

dhw: You even believe we and our foods are descended from Cambrian species that had no precursors, thus hammering home your belief that he wasted his time designing all the life forms that preceded the Cambrian.

DAVID: Easily explained: pre-Cambrian forms developed the necessary biochemistry for Cambrian forms.

dhw: Biochemistry is common to all life forms. Evolution is the history of life forms, and if your all-powerful God only wanted us plus food right from the start and knew how to design us, why did he have to design all the pre-Cambrian forms that had no connection with us plus food? Might it be that he had to experiment first in order to “develop the necessary biochemistry”?

Only your humanized form of God needs to experiment. My God makes a pre-planned designed evolution.

DAVID: God designed the huge bush of life for our use.

dhw: And 99.9% of history’s huge bush is extinct and was NOT designed for our use. Hence the question why he bothered to design it if he only wanted to design OUR bush.

DAVID: Foolish response. The 0.1% that survived is the issue. Everything on Earth is for our use.

dhw: So why did he design the 99.9% that did not lead to the 0.1% which evolved into our present bush?

Because He prefers to evolve His creations.

DAVID: […] stop complaining about a necessary 99.9% loss from the process. It is simply a complaint God used the wrong method.

dhw: Stop dodging. I complain that you are imposing a purpose and method on your God that make him look like a bumbling idiot (though you confine yourself to terms like messy, cumbersome and inefficient.)

DAVID: Stop attacking my God. I like Him just as He is. What you view is a myopic contortion of my theology.

dhw: You know perfectly well that I’m not attacking your God but I’m attacking your illogical theories of evolution, for which you admit you can find no possible reason. There is no “myopic contortion” unless you now wish to deny that you believe your God’s only purpose was to design us and our food, and therefore he designed and culled 99.9 out of 100 species that had no connection with his purpose. Are you now withdrawing this “myopic contortion” of history? (I wish you would. )

I can't let you make a mockery of God. with your weird humanizing attempts.