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

by dhw, Wednesday, February 24, 2021, 12:09 (78 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: With my theist hat on, I look at what he has created, and I assume as you do that he had a purpose. But I have no idea why, ... you regard the desire to create something interesting as beyond the “degree of humanizing” that is acceptable to you. I also wait to hear what purpose for life including humans you would regard as being within the degree of humanization acceptable to you.

DAVID: God does not create out of any self-interest or to create interesting things or events.

You are simply restating your fixed beliefs. Why don’t you explain why it is not possible for a God - who you are sure is interested in his creations - to have created them because he wanted to create something he would find interesting. And why is “humanized” interest acceptable to you but “humanized” desire for something interesting is not?

DAVID: From Swinburne:
3:16: What’s the role of analogical language in theism?
RS: Humans cannot fully understand the nature of God, and so they have to use words whose normal meaning they understand, but which are not fully satisfactory for describing that nature. So there is a sense in which God is a “person”, that he has beliefs, thoughts and other conscious events; but also a sense in which God is not a person, in that his identity is constituted by his properties – such as omnipotence and perfect goodness, whereas the identity of all other persons is independent of the degree of their power and the morality of their actions.

Apparently my identity, then, is independent of what I can and can’t do, and of whether I am a good person or a bad person. Tell that to the judge. Why are you quoting such stuff? (See also under “Miscellany”.) And in any case, how does it come to mean that your God can’t want to create something he can watch with interest? That’s not “bad” is it?

DAVID: My point is God has very little human in his personality.

How do you know which thought patterns and emotions we share with him and he shares with us? And why is “interest” OK for a creator but wanting to creating something interesting is not OK for a creator?

DAVID: He seems to me full of purposeful activity to create what He desires to create with no other motive than the creations themselves.

dhw: This is a sensational new development in your thinking. Until now you have been adamant that every creation was “part of the goal of evolving humans”, which makes no sense since 99% of extinct life forms (plus food supplies) had no connection with humans. Now apparently he simply desires to create whatever he creates, with no other motive.

DAVID: You keep straining for a change in my thinking. I always view that His final step was humans.

dhw: Nobody is going to deny that so far humans are the last species to have emerged. But what about all the other species unconnected with humans? Please explain what you meant by him having “no other motive than the creations themselves”.

DAVID: Simply, He is a purposeful creator. using evolution from bacteria. We know He has created a being that recognizes Him, that has a very fruitful, very expanded lifestyle. That is obviously what He wanted to do. Does that give Him self-gratification? He has no need.

You are regurgitating your mantras and ignoring my question. Yes, if he exists, he is a purposeful creator, yes ALL multicellular organisms including humans evolved from bacteria, yes humans recognize him. Now please tell us what you meant by “he has no other motive than the creations themselves”?

dhw: History tells us that there were millions of life forms, now extinct, that had no connection with humans. You have no idea why your God would have designed them if his only purpose was to design humans. They did not provide a food supply for humans, but now you tell us that he had no other motive than the creations themselves. And it makes perfect sense - if we accept your belief that he is/was interested in them - that he might have designed them because he wanted to design something that would interest him, even if that makes him “quite human”. Better than trying to explain why he designed them even though they had no connection with what he wanted to design!

DAVID: Evolution connects all forms through the passage of time. God evolved humans from bacteria. Done.

God, if he exists, evolved ALL life forms from bacteria through the passage of time, not just humans, and I eagerly await your explanation of his desire to create them all (not just humans) for no other motive than the creations themselves, bearing in mind that you are sure he is interested in his creations and that previously you have claimed that they were all "part of the goal of evolving [= directly designing] humans" Please don't dodge.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum