Theodicy (Introduction)

by David Turell , Tuesday, December 15, 2020, 00:11 (1438 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: My imagination of God is not as humanized as your God.

dhw: So a God who, you are sure, is interested in and likes and is satisfied by his creations is less human than a God who does things for interest and liking and satisfaction, and that is why you oppose the theory. Although of course you have no more idea than the rest of us what God is really like.

You must realize I am discussing God's attitude about Himself and what He accomplishes. He never does it to purposely please Himself or to enjoy self-satisfaction. that i s how you are humanizing.

DAVID: I know the dispute, which will never be resolved. Humans obviously are God's prime purpose as I follow Adler's reasoning.

dhw: As before, “prime purpose” means there are other purposes, but you never tell us what they are. In any case, the dispute does not concern the specialness of humans, but your belief in a method of fulfilling his one and only goal (specially designing millions of life forms and food supplies unconnected with humans) which – you may remember – leaves you with “no idea” when you are asked for an explanation.

Smile all you want, but your question needs no answer: As His prime goal is humans all the other steps leading up to that are necessarily secondary purposeful steps/goals.