Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Wednesday, June 10, 2020, 17:53 (1408 days ago) @ dhw
edited by David Turell, Wednesday, June 10, 2020, 18:01

DAVID: Once again you are assuming God did not choose to evolve humans from bacteria as history tells us and you agree He could have done. Your twisted view of my reasoning solves nothing.

dhw: You keep deliberately dodging the issue of why an all-powerful God whose sole purpose was to evolve humans from bacteria would choose to directly design millions of life forms and econiches that had nothing whatsoever to do with humans. […]

I dodge nothing. You first agree that God could have chosen to evolve humans, and then you express surprise that so many forms over so many stages took place first! We are discussing my theory according to the heading. And again you denigrate the econiche importance for food supply for seven + billion humans now living on Earth. According to you God couldn't have planned ahead to answer the problems, but I forget, your version of some sort of a god bumbles along enjoying spectacles, not sure of himself, experimenting, and you object to my calling your version humanized. How you try to pick apart my version of how God ran evolution for His purposes make absolutely no sense to me if we first agree to discuss my theory as to how God ran evolution. It is simple to just accept the historical record. All of my explanations then logically fit.

DAVID: Still comes back to the interpretation of why humans are here, based on our very different attributes, which you always try to diminish by telling us how bright every other organism happens to be, which is supposed to diminish our difference.

dhw: Shifting the subject again!This has nothing whatsoever to do with the absurd argument that your God designed all those extinct econiches in order to feed humans who did not even exist.

It is interesting that your view of God is that He cannot reason what the future would bring once human were dominant and their population grew in enormous numbers.

dhw: I would suggest that a theory which posits God as being interested in all the products of his invention is actually more likely than a theory which posits that he deliberately designed all of these products although the only thing he really wanted to design was humans.

DAVID: You misread. I still object to spectacles, etc., […] Of course God was/is interested in all of life's vast bush that He created on his way to humans. He deliberately and purposely designed all of it.

dhw: You object to his being interested in the spectacle of life’s vast bush, but of course he was/is interested in all of life’s vast bush. Curiouser and curiouser.

DAVID: Curious only if you refuse to recognize God's purposeful activity to reach humans as a final step in evolution. God is always interested in his activity.

dhw: As before, I have offered you two explanations of the pre-human bush which allow for your God’s “final step” AND explain the vast bush that preceded it AND offer a purpose for ALL the life forms, including humans. Why would he bother to create any organism, if he wasn’t interested in its activities? And humans, with their special gifts would be especially interesting. You agree but you object.

I've discussed your humanizing explanations above. But you are correct about God's interests. I certainly assume God is interested in all his evolutionary creations as they formed econiches, as He worked His evolutionary way to create humans.