Back to theodicy and David's theories PART TWO (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by David Turell @, Monday, February 01, 2021, 18:48 (352 days ago) @ dhw


DAVID: It is our study of the history of evolution that leads thoughtful folks to recognize how unexplained we are, and therefore unexpected.

dhw: Unexplained yes. You have not told us who didn’t expect us, and you have not told us why whoever it was expected trilobites, dinosaurs and duckbilled platypuses. Yes, we are uniquely gifted. No, we are not the only unexplained creatures on Earth.

Let's stick with unexplained, as the primary argument.


DAVID: You again diminish God's purpose and powers.

dhw: Then once more: please tell us his purpose in creating the brontosaurus etc. And how does it diminish his powers if he created the mechanism that has led to the whole of life as we know it, and the whole of life as we know it is what he wanted to create?

Ad nauseum evolution goes through complexifing stages to reach the most complex, us.

DAVID: He created a universe that permitted our appearance based on quantum mechanics we still don't understand. Note that point. His creativeness remains beyond our understanding, no matter how hard we try. He must have very complex mental ability well beyond what He granted us. But I still wish to try and understand as I think you do.

dhw: If your God exists, then I agree with all of this. But how does it come to mean that your illogical theory of what he did and why he did it must be right, and any other explanation – even if it is perfectly logical – must be wrong?

We all know what God created. You and I have very different versions of the fellow God must be as we describe a possible personality, and so God's motives for you and I are totally different .

dhw: And finally, there is nothing second-hand, weak or confused about a God who knows what he wants, designs it, and gets it.

DAVID: Finally we agree on something, although I'm sure our interpretations of that statement really differ.

dhw: They certainly do. According to you, your God designed all sorts of nasty things, but he didn’t want to...

DAVID: Don't misinterpret me. Everything here is part of his desired creations.

dhw: You had him trying but failing to provide cures for diabetes, Alzheimer’s etc. And you have no idea why he created bad bacteria, but you still insist that he wanted them. This apparently makes him stronger and more clear-headed than a God who deliberately designed a mechanism that would enable all life forms to design their own means of survival.

Again, your God is nothing like the God I think about. Interesting since we both look at the same 'works'. Each of us is biased in totally different directions.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum