Return to David's theory of evolution PART 2 (Evolution)

by David Turell , Thursday, May 26, 2022, 16:03 (707 days ago) @ dhw
edited by David Turell, Thursday, May 26, 2022, 16:20

Source of information

dhw: The whole article supports the argument that life is too complex to have arisen by chance. If you like to say that life requires too much “information” to have arisen by chance, I really couldn’t care less. Yet again: I accept the logic of this argument, so please stop dodging behind it whenever I challenge your illogical theory of evolution.

DAVID: My theory of evolution fits exactly how a designer would have done it, as based on the actual history. I have explained an answer to each of your objections, but they don't satisfy your constant doubt.

dhw: Your various theories of evolution have led you to make the following statements:
“What I cannot explain is why God chose evolution over direct creation. Why can’t you accept that explanation?”

dhw: I’m sorry, but I do not regard your inability to explain your theory as an explanation.

I chose to accept what God did as His intent. There is no way I can know his underlying reasoning. I can't explain it for you is a reasonable retort.

dhw: On the question of why he designed countless life forms and foods that had no connection with humans and our food: “God makes sense only to himself.”

See the other thread for the logical answer. Food supply is required NOW for 7.8 billion folks with many malnourished. The bush could work better but must work. And God making sense to Himself is a truism, and contains an answer that tells you God must know what He is doing. It worked and we are here discussing Him. I cannot unfold His thinking to unfold all your doubts.

dhw: No, I am not satisfied with the explanation that your theory only makes sense to God, or with your telling me elsewhere that if I want answers to my questions concerning the illogicality of your theory, I should go and ask God.

You are so unaware of how to think about God as I do, in the form of a sourceless designer, we don't discuss Him clearly to each other. One must start with the assumption, the history we see reveals His planned results. I then look for logical reasons for the giant bush, etc. My analysis may not reflect the designer's reasons. but they are the best guesses I have. You simply object to the known record He created. I find your objections totally illogical.

You have objected to the roundabout way humans arrived since we started these discussions. You don't like the 'God's choice' answer, but it is one sensible point. It is a roundabout way but the way that happened. You simply object to God's choice of method, so you know better than God how to do it. I don't.

Second article:

DAVID: Only a rigid blind faith in chance could believe in the current results of evolution as coming from chance.

dhw: Agreed. And we don’t need masses of jargon to make that point. Nor should we ignore the fact that a rigid blind faith is also required for belief in the existence of an unknown, hidden, all-powerful, sourceless mind, capable of creating a universe and all the intricacies of living cells, and which has simply been there for ever and ever.

Again avoiding the point, complex biochemical life must have a designer mind creating its not blind faith, but logical reasoning to jump the chasm, that I finally took.