Evolution took a long time (Introduction)

by dhw, Sunday, February 05, 2017, 11:10 (2627 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: I have not “pushed” you into these beliefs, and you have every right to believe what you wish to believe. However, I think I also have the right to challenge certain assumptions, especially if they do not seem to me to have any justification.
DAVID: But it is you who does not accept God, although you offer the possibility that He might exist. But doubting Him you want to delve deep into his personality and desires, when we have no idea what his personality is like.

You yourself have devoted a lifetime to delving into all the questions we discuss. You have even written two brilliant books about them. Why? Both of us are driven by a desire to make sense of the world we have been lucky enough to experience. We don’t and can’t know if God exists, or what he is like if he does exist, but we examine the world in order to find clues. That is why you tell us we are his “purpose”, we matter to him, he wants a relationship with us (you ask why else would he have given us our consciousness), he is a God of tough love who wants us to solve the problems he has set us. But you resent it if I offer you a different view – only then do you bridle at the attempt to delve.

dhw: You assume that the being who you believe created good and evil, love and hate, and all the other facets of our existence has no experience of them within himself. Why should you assume that these are human inventions and that the inventor of humans, who according to you has total control over what comes into existence, is not himself inherent in all facets of that existence?
DAVID: I don't believe God has any smidgen of evil in Himself....

And there you have the nub of the matter. You have a fixed concept of your God, and the reason why you regard it as pointless to delve into his nature is not that we cannot know it, but that you already have your beliefs and resent any reasoning that throws them into question.

DAVID:...Evil is the result of what He has created: the physical forces of Earth, the evil in freedom-of-choice imperfect humans. That He allowed these results means He does not care if they happen. He has given us the power to try and solve those problems, and we are doing just that.

Once again, you present your own interpretation of your God’s intentions and attitude, but you tell me not to delve.

dhw: If there really is one supreme being who created the universe and life, then of course he is not human. But that does not mean he has nothing in common with humans.
DAVID: What we have in common I believe is consciousness, nothing more. I believe consciousness could not develop from natural causes by itself, but from a pre-existing consciousness.

That is a good argument for the existence of God. But consciousness needs to be conscious of something. Hence my next question:
dhw: What authority do you have to reject the possibility that there is something human about him?
DAVID: I don't reject it, but since we have no way of knowing, any guesses are wisps of nothing. Humans are here. That is a fact. That is solid. that leads me to say God wanted to produce humans. Anything beyond that is 'angels on the head of a pin'.

And the duckbilled platypus is also here, which leads me to say that if God exists, he wanted to produce the duckbilled platypus. So what? You do insist on putting ‘angels on the head of a pin’. Read your own statements above about God’s nature and purpose and attitude. You just don’t want me to offer alternatives.

dhw: It is just as presumptuous to proclaim that he has no traits in common with humans as it is to proclaim that he does have such traits. We can only look at our world and try to extrapolate explanations from what we see. If God exists, why – in our speculations – should we NOT view the creation as a reflection of its creator?
DAVID: I've given you my reflections as far as they can go with any degree of logic. You are the unbeliever who wants to uncover his thought processes. I accept Him without digging into that side of the considerations. I really don't understand why you bother. Are you seeking ways to approach a belief in him?

Yes, you have expressed your own beliefs, including your insistence that God has no traits in common with humans. And I have asked you how you and Adler can possibly make such a presumption. Your answer is to tell me not to delve. As regards why I do delve, see my first response above.