Origin of God? (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by dhw, Sunday, April 24, 2016, 12:58 (3134 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: Evil is not the problem. I wrote that I could “find credible reasons why he would create the great mixture of “good” and “bad””, and you are simply offering those credible reasons. We are discussing the nature of your God as revealed in his works. Evil is only a problem for those who insist that God is all nice and good, and not nasty and bad. His works reveal a mixture, so why would anyone assume that they do not reflect his nature? -DAVID: If by nature you are discussing God's innermost thoughts, I have said all along we cannot know them. If we stick to possible purposes, I think it is to create humans. We are not a rational result of the dangerous inorganic universe that appeared. Whether god is good or bad we really don't know. When you have suggested that God might be bored as a reason for His creations, I've always responded that you are placing human conditions on him. We do not why He did what He did. Basically I think our analysis has to come back to recognizing His acts are purposeful, but his underlying motives are hidden. We can be thankful we are here, nothing more. This is the maturity of thought Armstrong and I follow.-This discussion for some reason branched off from “origin” and should have remained under “concepts”. You referred to Karen Armstrong, who “follows the mature development of human concepts re God as the religious books appeared.” You explained that we can only say what God might be like ”from what we see He has created” (Koran), and the NT concept of “love and honouring others” was more mature than the OT's God who “takes sides in wars…threatens Abraham” etc. Not innermost thoughts, not purpose, not underlying motives, but simply what he is like (his nature). If you are now telling us that neither you nor Karen Armstrong can tell what he is like by seeing what he has created, and we should ignore the development of human concepts re God as the religious books appeared, and that “we can be thankful we are here, nothing more”, that's fine with me, though I can't help wondering what the rest of your Armstrong posts have been about.