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

by David Turell @, Wednesday, February 03, 2021, 17:22 (94 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: […] in your own words: “The current bush of food is NOW for humans NOW.There were smaller bushes in the PAST for PAST forms

DAVID: Your usual twisted quote out of context.

dhw: It is not a twisted quote, and there is no other possible context, and it is as obvious a truth as you can get. The current bush of food is not the bush of food for organisms that existed and disappeared millions of years ago!

Of course the quote is true, as you try to diced up and slice up the continuity of evolution.
Humans are fully part of that continuity from bacteria.

Protein folding creates life

DAVID: I never asked you to forget, but reasonably study the problem instead of sniping at God's efforts.

I am reasonably studying the problems which you raised of why your God was incapable of finding cures for the diseases which his system had created (to which you can now add the harmful retrogenes from another thread), and why he directly designed bad bacteria and viruses, and your response is that it wasn’t his fault that he couldn’t cure the diseases, and one day someone will tell us why the bad bacteria and viruses are in fact good. I am not sniping. On the contrary, I have offered an explanation which removes all the responsibility implied and then abandoned by your approach. And your only objection is that it gives your God a feature in common with humans, even though you agree that your God probably has thought patterns and emotions similar to ours.

Again a misquote. God uses logic as we do. We can know no more about his thoughts.

DAVID: Of course He would be interested in the results of His creations, but they were not primarily created just to be interesting, a very humanizing interpretation.

dhw: Then please tell us at long last what you think was his primary goal in creating life, including humans.

DAVID: I know His goal was the eventual production of humans. We all can guess at why. I don't believe He's directly told us.

dhw: He has not directly told us anything (assuming he exists), so how do you “know” we were his goal right from the start, and how do you know he directly designed every life form, and why, if his goal was us, did he directly design all the dead species and food supplies that had no connection with us?

My faith based on overwhelming evidence, and as always, He chose to evolve us, as history shows.

DAVID: I have no idea why He chose evolution to produce us. It is not important to me, as it seems to you. You don't accept we were a goal.

dhw: “A” goal again! What were the other goals? If your only problem is to explain why he didn’t directly create humans instead of evolving them, you must have a good explanation for his direct design of millions of life forms that had no connection with humans, but all you’ve come up with is that these extinct life forms, which had no connection with humans and died out millions of years before humans arrived on the scene, were part of our food supply. You yourself have recognized that this is nonsense – see the two quotes above. You have a fixed belief, you can’t find a logical explanation to justify it, but nothing will shake you out of it. That was the conclusion reached weeks ago, and we agreed to leave it at that. So please leave it at that.

My position is entirely logical. The current massive human population needs food which teh massive bush supplies. You illogical view of evolution splits it into segments, whereas, it is entirely connected.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum