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

by dhw, Friday, February 19, 2021, 11:00 (334 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: Then, for the thousandth time, please explain why a God whose one and only purpose was to design humans and their food supply, designed millions of life forms and their food supplies, 99% of which had no connection with humans. I quote (amongst other quotes): “extinct life has no role in current time”.

DAVID: The bolded quote is obvious. There is no contemporaneous time connection, as you try to distort a misinterpretation of it.

dhw: Yes, it is obvious, so please tell us what role extinct life (let’s say, the brontosaurus), which you claim was "part of the goal of evolving humans", plays in our human present.

DAVID: Evolving humans went through necessary complexifying stages that included the Bronto.

Bearing in mind your insistence that your God directly designed every life form, do you truly believe that your God could not have designed H. sapiens if he had not designed the brontosaurus plus the other millions of extinct life forms, 99% of which you have agreed had no connection with humans?

dhw: You have agreed that he possibly (and earlier probably) has thought patterns and emotions similar to ours.[…]

DAVID: […] He is above finding a creation for self-interest. You do not understand how you humanize Him.

dhw: I understand perfectly well that a Creator who creates something that will interest him would have a human pattern of thought similar to ours (though it might be more accurate to say that we have a pattern similar to his). And you agree that it is possible. By what authority do you claim that although he is interested in his creations, he did not create them in order to create something that would interest him?

DAVID: We create movies, plays, novels, TV sitcoms, etc. All for human entertainment. You claim God needs entertainment. He is above that aa a person like no other person. (Adler) Your 'God' will never resemble my view of God.

How many more times must I tell you that “entertainment” is your choice of derogatory terminology? I have stuck rigidly to your agreement that he is INTERESTED in us, and so I ask why you think a creator who you are sure is interested in his creations should not have created them because he wanted to create something that would interest him.

Magnetic field reversal

DAVID: The magnetic field protects us from most harmful rays. It is a must have. Why it flips and that lasts 1,000 years is not explained. And so it is another issue for theodicy discussion wondering if God has a reason for this phenomenon that might be required.

Yes, one could well include mass extinctions as part of the theodicy problem, along with diseases resulting from errors in the system, bad bacteria and bad viruses. They all fit in perfectly with the theory that if God exists, he set up a complete system whereby changes in the environment would bring about changes in life forms and behaviours, as organisms individually and autonomously responded or failed to respond to the new requirements.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum