Return to David's theory of evolution, theodicy & Goff (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, October 05, 2024, 20:48 (12 days ago) @ dhw

Contradictions

DAVID: Karen Anderson's book describes an OT God as angry, the NT God as loving, and the Koran God as creating 'works' in describing how human thought about God developed. That sounds like a selfless God to me in the Koran.

dhw: It would seem that Karen Anderson is aware that nobody knows the truth, so why are you quoting her? Does she mention the fact that all three books present a God who demands to be worshipped, and that is why we build synagogues, churches and mosques, and why rabbis and priests and imams and what we call “worshippers” worship God, and a God who demands to be worshipped can hardly be called selfless?

Anderson , of whom you know nothing about, is a retired nun. Her book is history of how humans have matured in defining God. No mention of God's demands. I see a selfless God in her book.

99.9% v 0.1%

DAVID:[…] The extinct died leaving new living forms! We are debating the semantics of then or now. Yes, we are among the survivors who came from extinct ancestors. You accept evolution as a continuum. Then you create breaks in it. The old brings the now!! That is my position in using Raup's statistics.

You called my description of how evolution works “perfect”, and then disagreed with it! Once more: The extinct died, leaving 0.1% of survivors. Those survivors produced the new living forms of the next stage. The next extinction destroyed 99.9% of the then existing forms, and the 0.1% of survivors went on to create the next stage of new living forms. Raup’s statistics are based on plural extinctions, and the continuity is provided by the survivors of each stage. Example: 99.43% of dinosaurs left no descendants, but 0.57% survived and went on to produce thousands of species of birds. It is only the surviving 0.1% of the old that produce the new. I quote:

dhw: Do you believe that we and our food are directly descended from 99.9% of all the creatures that ever lived?
DAVID: No. From 0.1% surviving.

dhw: Why were you insane when you agreed?

The insanity is tossing out the 99.9%, from whom the 0.1% descended. We are among the 0.1%.

The free-for-all theory

dhw: So it makes sense that an omnipotent, omniscient God is inefficient, unable to correct the mistakes in his design, relies on humans for help, and designs bugs that are cleverer than him. But yes indeed, the comings and goings of evolution, the so-called mistakes, and the victory of “bad” bugs over “good” bugs all make sense if your God deliberately gave all forms of life the autonomous means of designing their own methods of survival. That means a free-for-all.

DAVID: Yes, the dog-eat-dog interpretation implies a living free-for-all. There are no mistakes in God's design. You still don't understand: God made the only working system of life that can work. Please finally respond to that concept you've ignored.

dhw: You have told us repeatedly that there had to be mistakes in the design, which your God even tried to correct. I do not ignore your theory that your first-cause God was forced to design a system with mistakes. I simply regard it as incompatible with the theory that he is omnipotent, and so I propose instead that (if he exists) he created the system he wished to create. You agree that life’s history is “a living free-for-all”, in which case what you call “mistakes” are simply the result of organisms designing their own means of survival.

The bold is totally incorrect. I said God had to handle mistakes in evolutionary events, NOT in the biochemical system of life!!! God chose a living system that could work comparable with His omnipotence. THE ONLY SYSTEM. No other can be created!!! Of course He wished it!