Evolution took a long time (Introduction)

by David Turell , Tuesday, February 07, 2017, 01:16 (2847 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Your view constantly attempts to humanize Him. That is my objection to your delving. I simply state He wanted humans simply because humans are here, and based on how all primates have survived without our big brains, there is no reason for us to appear, unless evolution was driven to do it. After that I guess at His thinking without much faith in knowing if any of my guesses are correct.

dhw: The problem, then, lies in the way you express yourself. You declare your beliefs, vigorously defend them, and vigorously attack alternatives.... Here are some quotes from your very recent posts:

“If we have consciousness we can communicate with Him. I can ask you why did He give us consciousness if not to communicate?”

Communication is a reasonable conclusion, but following Adler, His responsivness to prayer is 50/50.

dhw: “I believe in a tough-love God who expects us to solve problems.”

Based on our consciousness, it is the only possible view I could think of.

dhw: “I view God as a serious operative who never looks for entertainment as a purpose.”

I have no way of knowing if He likes to be entertained. It's your idea.

dhw: “Both Adler and I do not accept anything human about God.”

Yes

dhw: “God is NOT human in thought.”

He does not have a human personality (Adler). Thought is not like ours.

dhw: (Contrast this with your latest claim: “I have not stated that God has no traits in common with humans. He may very well.”

But I have no way of knowing what might be similar. Possible similarities, yes.

dhw: “I don’t believe God has any smidgen of evil in Himself…That he allowed these results means He does not care if they happen. He has given us the power to try and solve these problems…”

This is my view of the tough love approach. Loving us, caring is the religious thought. We have no proof this is the case.

This is why I view (as Karen Armstrong does) that studying God is through His works. Nothing else can be used to know Him!

dhw: You have thought deeply about all these matters and you have reached conclusions. You believe in tough love (a clear humanization of God) and yet you reject boredom because that is humanizing God. If you don’t have much faith in your beliefs, then why not adopt a more conciliatory attitude towards alternatives?

Please note, there are almost no 'beliefs' in my concepts of God as a personlity. They are what I think might be possible attributes of God. What is firm and rigid is God created the universe, conducted evolution and wanted humans. He gave us our form of consciousness.I don't worry about whether He loves us or not, but I'm sure He is very interested in us. Tough love is my guess about disease and living in a dangerous universe. Your humanizing Him goes down a bumpy road with no way to prove anything.

dhw: It is the vehemence and authoritarian tone of your arguments that create misunderstandings (if that is what they are). We can rejig this whole discussion around your latest post, as follows:

All we know is that humans are here. All theories concerning the reason are guesses. One guess is that there is a God who especially wanted to create beings with enhanced consciousness, perhaps because he wanted to communicate with them, or perhaps because he wanted to add a new dimension to the show he was watching. You favour the former. Perhaps humans matter to God, or perhaps they don’t. You favour the former. Perhaps humans created evil, or perhaps human nature reflects the nature of their creator. You favour the former.

Humans can create evil, but not disease or asteroids that can destroy the Earth. It is a challenge to us to solve those threats. Human nature is human nature. We do not know God's. We only know His creations which represent Him. My vehemence and authoritarian tone comes from my personal firm conclusions. I hope you understand. I've been at this science/God study since my mid-50's and gradually reached this very firm point of view.

dhw:Just try the gentle agnostic approach, and see how much simpler it is.

Gently floating around.