A possible God's possible purpose and nature (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by David Turell @, Monday, June 21, 2021, 18:41 (34 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Same illogical point. My view is still simple. God, as Creator, evolved humans from bacteria, and I simply accept the entire history of evolution. I've never understood your objections. They always sound as if 'God did it wrong'.

dhw: Your view is not simple, and you impose an illogical theory on the history of evolution. According to you, your God also “evolved” [= directly designed] millions of life forms, their lunches, lifestyles, strategies and natural wonders from bacteria, and 99% of them had no connection with humans and their lunch, although his one and only purpose was to evolve (= design) us and our lunch. It’s not “God did it wrong” – it’s “you must have interpreted it wrong”. Especially since you insist that your God acts logically!

The history of evolution is what God created. I start with that point. We were created from original Archaea. You've agreed God could choose to do it that way. Since we are here it is obvious we were a goal. Supporting that idea is Adler's point of how unusual we are. Nothing illogical if one accepts God is the Creator. We evolved, so God must have evolved us for us to be here. 99% had to disappear replaced by more complex forms as evolution proceeded from simple to very complex. I find, as always, your totally illogical complaint seems to be something you threw against the wall to see if it would stick. Life must have a supply of energy to survive. All eras of evolution had their own bushes of energy supply. What is your alternative for God? Direct creation of humans? Please tell us your alternative to produce humans from bacteria.

dhw: In all my theistic theories, my God has purpose. In one of them (experimenting), he isn’t sure how to get what he wants (a being like himself). What is wrong with that? Yes, you are sure of your belief in the illogical theory bolded above. And yes, I’m still searching. How does that come to mean that your illogical belief is the only possible solution to the mysteries I wish I could solve?

Please answer my question above


DAVID: […]. I don't have 'escape routes', but a very different view of God than you do. Mine is well-defined and yours whatever you decide He should be. Example: Above your God has to create to interest Himself so His self-satisfaction becomes a necessary event. A totally different view of a possibly existing God than mine. My God creates with pure purpose.

dhw: What on earth is “pure purpose”? You have allowed him only one purpose, as bolded above. What’s “pure” about that? You even say that perhaps he created us so that we could study and admire his works, and you are certain that he enjoys creating and is interested in his creations. But although in the past you have agreed that he probably/possibly has thought patterns and emotions similar to ours, you cannot bear the thought that perhaps our human search for what you call “self-satisfaction” might mirror his. I recall on another occasion your suggesting that he might have created us in order to have a relationship with us. What possible relationship could there be if we have no thought patterns and emotions in common?

I am sure we mimic Him in many ways as your statement shows, but just how much is unknown. As for 'pure purpose' my definition is simple. God knows what He wants and must produce and does it. Again I cannot know His reasons for His choice of production goal/goals or the choice of method. You conjure up a battery of guesses about Him which creates an amorphous humanized version of Him, never my image. All we can do is imagine Him, based on His works..


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum