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

by David Turell , Wednesday, June 23, 2021, 18:37 (1247 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: He did not wish to limit Himself to one line. That is your weird view. The other branches are lunch.

dhw: How can all the other branches have been lunch for humans if humans were not there?

Pre-humans had pre-lunches in each stage. How silly can hour objections become? All cover in past discussions.

DAVID: What is your alternative for God? Direct creation of humans? Please tell us your alternative to produce humans from bacteria.

dhw: Of course if he is all-powerful, as you and your fellow Creationists believe, he must have been capable of designing us and our lunch directly – as in the Bible. That is your alternative, and it’s why Darwin’s theory caused such a kerfuffle. And it’s still a problem for you, because you can’t explain why he would have chosen such an indirect method (evolution), let alone the rest of your bolded theory. If God exists, he wanted evolution – that is agreed. What is not agreed, and is illogical, is bbthat he only wanted humans plus lunch and therefore created all the forms etc. that had nothing to do with humans.bb The alternatives, apart from direct creation, lie not in his wish for evolution but in the different explanations of his purpose and method. And you don’t need me to repeat my list again, do you?

DAVID: You go back to your illogical view of God that He has tunnel vision and can only see a goal of humans.

dhw: I’m delighted that you recognize such a theory as tunnel vision, but this is an extraordinary case of mistaken identity. That is YOUR view!

No, not my view, but my view of yours. God's goal of finally reaching humans by evolution from bacteria does not close His eyes to the need for all of the branches producing needed food energy along the way.

dhw: you have no idea why he chose to “evolve” humans (= design them in itsy-bitsy stages) instead of creating them directly,

It is you who seems to want direct creation. I don't attempt to know why God evolved us. I simply accept the history God created.

dhw: but also you have no idea why he chose to evolve (itsy-bitsy design) every item on our menu, plus all the items that are not on our menu.

Food supply, an obvious need, blind to you.

DAVID: God does not produce errors. The living system He created has the ability to make errors, and He knew it and designed editing systems that work amazingly well. Viruses may help in evolutionary design and most bacteria are our helpers. All you can see is the dark side. You should be thankful you are here. Deyanu.

dhw: So your all-powerful, always-in-control God invented a system which contained errors that he could not control, designed editing systems which sometimes work but sometimes don’t, and your explanation for the "dark side" (= the problem of theodicy) is that we should be thankful for the bright side.

We should be thankful. Aren't you for being here?