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

by David Turell @, Thursday, July 08, 2021, 15:42 (110 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Copied from today miscellany: My image of your God, based on what He does, is that He is very human in thought and planning. The difference is I don't view my God as human or having human desires. Using the human terms we have to use is a truism.

dhw: So when you say your God knows exactly what he wants, plans it in advance, wants and keeps total control, is driven by a single purpose (to create humans and their lunch, perhaps so they will admire his works, or he can have a relationship with them), enjoys creating, watches his creations with interest, always has “good” intentions and therefore must have had good reasons for designing “bad” viruses and bacteria, and you are sure we mimic him, you don’t actually mean that he has any of these human attributes but you are merely using human terms. Whereas if I suggest that he knows what he wants, wants the ever changing bush of life we know from history, enjoys creating, watches his creations with interest, we have no idea whether his intentions are “good”, especially against the background of evil, and I am sure that if he exists we mimic him, this makes him “very human”. And therefore your illogical theory of evolution is correct, whereas my alternative logical theories are not even to be considered.

You neatly left out the main parts of your God's humanized intentions: experimenting, letting organisms do their own designs, enjoying a free-for-all, deciding on making humans somewhere along the way. I've considered your form of God and agreed all your theories about that style God fits your theories about that God's actions. You have never looked at my God, as I looked at yours, with you just full derision and rejection.


DAVID: Nothing is illogical in stating God chose to produce us by evolving us from bacteria by designing each step.

dhw: No. What is illogical is the belief that your all-knowing, all-powerful, all-controlling God’s one and only purpose was to produce us and our lunch, and so he proceeded to “evolve” (= design) millions of life forms, lunches etc. etc. that had no connection with us. THIS is what you yourself find inexplicable. I seem to have said this before.

Yes, same muddle as before. The history of evolution is what God produced on the way to creating us. Your version of my God is that He has no idea of what He is doing.


Privileged planet
DAVID: You object to God as the designer of reality, while recognizing design exists in biology. Enjoy your picket fence.

dhw: In none of these discussions on the possible nature and purpose of a possible God do I object to God as the designer of reality. That is another of your escape routes, as you try to dodge the illogicality of your own theistic theory of evolution.

DAVID: The problem in this discussion is I really don't understand what you claim is illogical in believing God chose to create us by evolving us from bacteria, designing step by step.

dhw:n No. What is illogical is the belief that your all-knowing, all-powerful, all-controlling God’s one and only purpose was to produce us and our lunch, and so he proceeded to “evolve” (= design) millions of life forms, lunches etc. etc. that had no connection with us. THIS is what you yourself find inexplicable. I seem to have said this before.

Yes, same muddle as before. The history of evolution is what God produced on the way to creating us. Your version of my God is that He has no idea of what He is doing. Not inexplicable, just history.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum