Watching asteroids: a close one is coming (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, April 18, 2017, 09:20 (2778 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: As I look at reality I see purpose, and certainly that is a human attribute, but beyond that point I find no evidence of anything else. God's love is a religious proposition as an example.
dhw: But the only purpose you see is the production of humans, and then you refuse to ask why he would want to produce humans, which I would have expected to be a pretty important question!
DAVID: I don't know why and neither do you. I presume to share in His consciousness and relate to Him through it. I've said this before.

And I've said this before: we don’t even know if God exists, how life originated, the true nature of the universe etc., but we discuss them endlessly. The only unknown factor you are not prepared to discuss is your God’s purpose for producing humans, even though you insist that the whole of “creation” is related to that one purpose. You don’t and can’t “know” that either, so why do you bother to discuss it? Fortunately, however, there are now signs that you are coming down off your theistic fence!

dhw: If it is reasonable to assume he is pleased with his creations, then why is it unreasonable to suggest that he created them in order to derive pleasure from them – and what is the difference between deriving pleasure and enjoying?
DAVID: Tony has covered this. I'm sure He has been pleased with his creations, but not with the bad results of granting free will.

You have not answered my question. If you are sure he has been pleased with his creations, why do you refuse to consider the possibility that he created them in the hope that they would please him, i.e. give him pleasure, i.e. enable him to enjoy them? (But see “Purpose and design”.)