Post reply

Reply to the message by David Turell

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> > DAVID: [i]Exactly!!! Only God knows why He did it His way. You must think of it as follows: the historical evidence of how evolution happened from Archaea to us is a God created history. Remember, Adler uses this as proof of God. Think about it, Adler did this without your reservations!! If alive, he would consider your irrationality as screwy as I do.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: As usual, you dodge the whole issue by hiding behind Adler’s “proof” of God’s existence. And I am not challenging the theory that we evolved from bacteria! I am challenging your illogical theory that your God’s only purpose was us and our food, and therefore he designed countless life forms and foods that had no connection with us.
> 
> The obviuws connnection is the process of evoution, which God chose to use. He didn't tell any of us why. Remember, I view God in charge of all creation, including from bacteria to us. What you miss about Adler is that he made the same assumptions about evolution and God's role as I do!!
> > 
> > DAVID: [i](2) is really a variation of (1). You want me to give you God's reasoning for his choices. I obviously can't, but that doesn't make my thought process about God illogical. Does God have the right to make His own choices of methodology? Your answer will tell the point.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: The answer is yes, and he has the right to choose his goal, and your personal theory about his goal and his methodology is so illogical that apparently “[b]it makes sense only to God[/b]”, which means it doesn’t make sense to you. Please stop pretending that your theory about God’s goal and method of achieving that goal is an objective fact.
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]It is so simple!!! The bold is obvious. I accept God's choices of how to accomplish His desires for creation. That makes perfect sense to me!!![/i]
> > 
> > dhw: You accept your own theory that his sole “desire” was to design us and our food and therefore he designed all the species and foods that had no connection with us; and you accept your own theory that he was perfectly capable of designing species with no precursors and yet decided to design in stages the only species he wanted to create (plus its food). And it makes perfect sense to you that only your God can make sense of your illogical theories.
> 
> If you could only come to the realization my explantions make perfect sense to many folks who believe as in ID.
> >  
> > dhw: [i]I trust that logical alternatives to your illogical theories will never again be dismissed on the grounds that they entail thought patterns and emotions similar to our own, since you regard such patterns as being 50% possible.[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]All we can do is guess.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: [i]Or at least keep an open mind, as opposed to pretending that 50/50 yes or no = 100% no.[/i]  ;-)  
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]Some of us have the mental power to make choices based on evidence. [/i]:-P   
> > 
> > dhw: Some of you have the power to put on mental blinkers that will shut out the 50% of evidence against your rigid beliefs. :-D
> 
> There is no evidence that is absolute proof, but I'll take adler's proof beyond a reasonable doubt.