David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Friday, April 17, 2020, 11:00 (1679 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: We go round and round with no agreement, as our visions of God are so different. I start on solid ground: God is in charge of creation. Therefore history tells us what He did. You question why did it happen that way when He could have done it differently. You are questioning my God and wonder why He was so patient. It is a problem you create because you have a humanized view of God.

History tells us that there has been a huge bush of life forms, 99% of which have gone extinct, and humans came comparatively late on the scene. It does not tell us that your all-powerful God’s sole purpose was to specially design H. sapiens plus food supply, that he specifically designed every twig of the bush, and that his sole purpose for creating 3.X billion years’ worth of extinct non-human life forms was so that they should eat one another until he specially designed H. sapiens plus food supply. That is what I question. I do not question your God but your interpretation of your God’s motives and methods, which are illogical. The criticism of your illogicality has nothing whatsoever to do with the alternatives I offer, all of which you agree are logical.

DAVID: They are all logical if God thinks like a human, but my God doesn't.

So your personal image of God is that he possibly/probably has thought patterns, emotions and attributes similar to ours, but he doesn’t, and therefore your own theory, the logic of which escapes you because he doesn't think like a human although he possibly/probably does, must be right. I hope you can unravel yourself in time for supper.

dhw: It was you who said he had a lot more interest than that of a spectator. I asked what that interest might be, and you have no idea, so what was the point of your statement?

DAVID: God created all of reality, and may still be evolving the universe for all we know.

Good to hear that humans may not be the endpoint after all. Now please answer the question.

DAVID: I'm sure God is watching, at His own level of personal thought. ("Cellular controls of protein paths", 6th March @ 16.56)

dhw: Yep, you’re sure your hidden God is watching, but you ridicule the idea that he created life so that he could watch it.

DAVID: Your usual human approach. Clear thought: God watches what He created, but since He is the creator it is not a spectator but as an interested inventor. Spectators watch interesting spectacles, as you have stated God does. How human God is in your description, as usual.

“Clear”? I haven’t stated anything – I offer you different alternatives – but do you really think an inventor would not want to watch how his invention worked? Your own image was the painter enjoying his paintings. Mine would be a playwright watching the actors perform the play. You are sure your God is watching. Good. And he created what he is watching. Good (no matter how he created it). What else do you think he’s doing other than watching the spectacle he created?

DAVID: you poison your own thinking by viewing God from the wrong viewpoint to start with. […]

dhw: If God exists, only he knows the right viewpoint.

DAVID: A real true statement about God […]

dhw: If only God knows the right viewpoint, what grounds do you have for telling me that mine is wrong and poisonous (bolded above)?

DAVID: Because your god is primarily human in purpose. Try treating God as entirely non-human in His purposeful creative thoughts. You keep looking for His secondary ego satisfactions. Did it ever occur to you He doesn't need them?

Why “entirely non human”? Your agreement that he possibly/probably has thought patterns, emotions etc, similar to ours makes perfect sense, especially in the light of your anthropocentric view of his purpose. Why – and even how – would he create a being with all our thought patterns etc. if they had nothing in common with his own? With your recent conversion to Creationism, maybe you should consider the possibility that your God made man in his own image?