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

by dhw, Thursday, April 01, 2021, 11:56 (252 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: I believe God chose to evolve us. All of my theory follows logically after that decision.

dhw: You believe God chose to evolve – by which you mean design – EVERY species, and you have left out the fact that you believe God’s only purpose in creating life was to “evolve us” (and our food supply), and so it does NOT follow logically that before evolving/designing the only species (plus food supply) that he wanted to design, he designed millions of life forms that had no connection with us. Please stop playing these word games. :-(

dhw: Meanwhile, you still refuse to tell us why a God who wants total control is not “human” whereas a God who wants a free-for-all is “very human”.

DAVID: I've explained before: it depends on one's view of God's personality and his purposes. A free-for-all implies a God who gives up a marked degree of control over His creations.

dhw: I know what a free-for-all implies.

DAVID: But you don't consider it as I do as it relates to a purposeful God.

If your God designed a free-for-all, his purpose was to design a free-for-all. You normally refuse to speculate on his purpose for creating humans and their food supply – his one and only goal – so we needn’t bother to ask why he wanted to create a free-for-all (though I have taken up your certainty that he enjoys creating, and have suggested that enjoyment of creation might therefore be his purpose).

DAVID: Humans as an end goal could easily be lost.

dhw: If humans were indeed his “end goal”, he could always dabble if he wanted to, but this is totally irrelevant to the question of why a totalitarian God is not human, whereas a free-for-all God is “very human”.

DAVID: A free-for-all God lacks purpose and is not the image of God I have. The use of totalitarian is bastardizing this discussion as it is not an applicable term in the context you are using. You do not understand how you humanize God in your imagination of Him.

The lack of purpose argument is a non-starter, as I have shown above. I know you have a different theory. I have no idea what you mean by “bastardizing”, since you insist your God wants to be and is in total control (except when he isn’t, but that’s not his fault) – and I understand perfectly how YOU humanize God (i.e. endow him with thought patterns, emotions and other attributes similar to ours) in a different way from me, as is made abundantly clear from the next exchange:

DAVID: My God, from the point of starting this universe fine-tuned-for-life, knew what the endpoint would be.

dhw: Most human designers start out with a purpose and know what the endpoint will be. So how does this come to mean that God the know-all designer is not “human”, whereas a power that designs a mechanism that will produce an endless and unpredictable variety of life forms, developments, events etc. is “very human”?

DAVID: The word 'unpredictable' makes your God weak. My version of God is as above, a creator who knows exactly where He is headed in creating.

There is nothing weak about a God who deliberately creates something unpredictable. You have missed my point and have totally ignored my now bolded question. Please answer.

DAVID: Note the precisely designed fine-tuning of the universe to allow life to appear on a very special Earth on which it happened. Seems like precise designing to me. Why would stop that precision during evolving life? Your view of God is inconsistent with the history of His works.

If he exists (and for the sake of this discussion, I am assuming that he does), then of course the design is precise! That is not the subject of our discussion, which is your insistence that he had only one goal in mind (humans) and so proceeded to precisely design millions of life forms, 99% of which had nothing to do with humans.

DAVID: Now we know subduction started very early to make this planet just perfect for life. God doesn't always waste time. Sometimes He seems to but that is a humanizing complaint about Him. His timing is obviously what He prefers since He is always in total control. And that easily explains Why God gave us a big brain much earlier than its full use finally happened. Why deny that God knows what He is doing.

You just did. On the same day: “he is always in total control “, and “It is possible God did not recognize exactly how we would learn to use our brain. We are beyond His control so here is your example of free-rein in action!” But even if he was fully in control, that does not explain why he would have given us extra cells which would prove to be redundant!

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum