Theodicy: solution lies in definition of God (Introduction)

by David Turell @, Monday, October 11, 2021, 16:02 (301 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: The biochemical background of the Cambrian I've discussed: underlying vital biochemical processes were perfected in the simple organisms before the more complex Cambrian was introduced. There are precursors in the sense that the these vital processes were carried forward.

dhw: So he used the knowledge he had gained from his earlier special designs in order to specially design the brand new organisms (no precursors) which eventually he would specially turn into the special precursors of the only organisms he actually wanted to design – us and our food – as well as all the other organisms that had no connection with us and our food. No wonder you can’t understand why your all-powerful, all-knowing God used such a roundabout method to fulfil his one and only purpose. And yet apparently he knew right from the start exactly how to produce whatever he wanted to produce.

How do you know God had to learn? I view each stage as known by god in advance and planned in advance, no learning required.

DAVID: You are not God and cannot enter His mind to analyze His motives.

dhw: Nor are you and nor can you. However, at least you have accepted that all my alternative answers are logical. Only your own theory leaves that question unanswered.

DAVID: Unanswered only in your mind. Your alternative answers fit a highly humanized God who thinks only like a human. That is how I accept them; not a real acceptance, is it?

dhw: By acceptance I do not mean that you have to believe any of them (they are all different anyway). You accept that they are logical. And you have in the past agreed that our logic is like God’s, and we probably have thought patterns similar to his.

Again quoting my guesses about God as fact.

dhw: What instructions do they carefully follow when they fall ill or die?

DAVID: Apoptosis and death is built in.

dhw: But you keep telling us (under “Theodicy”) that the system makes its own uncontrollable mistakes, and your God has tried hard to provide countermeasures, though he doesn’t always succeed.

DAVID: Of course.

dhw: And that means that your all-powerful God is not in full control of the system he designed. So you solve the problem of theodicy by telling us your God didn’t have the power to control the system, despite his all-powerfulness. I solve it by proposing that he didn’t WANT to control it but deliberately gave cells/cell communities the freedom to work out their own modes of survival. Why is your less than all-powerful God with his unwanted errors less "humanized" than my all-powerful God who produces precisely what he wants to produce?

God is not in full control of each of our lives which are built to run on their own. He tried to stop errors by His designed editing systems showing He didn't want a free-for-all.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum