Return to David's theory of evolution and theodicy (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Saturday, June 10, 2023, 16:33 (322 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Once again God did not produce evil. He produced bacteria which do more good than evil and viruses, both of whom do no evil unless ending up in the wrong places. Giving free wiil to humans allowed them to be evil.


dhw: You seem to have forgotten that your God is all-knowing, which means he knew that some bacteria, some viruses and some human beings would do evil. The problem of theodicy is why your “perfect” and all-powerful God would knowingly create a system which produced evil and the suffering it causes. The problem is not solved by putting on a pair of blinkers that allow you only to look at the good things he created.

There is irrefutable evidence God knew of the problems His creations might cause. Living biochemistry is filled with editing safeguard mechanisms to correct errors. Since living reactions move at such high speeds, everything is correct 99.9999+% of the time.


DAVID: But those good works are 99% of God's story.

dhw: I have no idea where you get your statistics from, but even if they were correct, a perfect God is not 99% good. It’s no defence to say that Dr X saved the lives of 99 patients but murdered the 100th.

Same illogical point. God does not murder, but His creations can cause death.


dhw: My interpretation of the history is success through alternative systems: 2 x targeted experimentation, and 1 targeted free-for-all, all of which successfully provide him with the enjoyment of creation and an ever changing variety of interesting organisms and events to watch. I have no objections at all, though, to your proposal that he specially created humans (as in my first theory) because he wanted them to recognize him and his work.

DAVID: You are blind to the fact that your God is just like you. I'm sure we reflect God as you note.

dhw: If you are sure we reflect God, why are you sure that although he enjoys creating, is interested in his creations, and might want recognition for himself and his works, he cannot possibly have created life so that he would be able to enjoy creating things which he would be interested in and which might appreciate him and his works?

DAVID: God may have those thoughts as secondary to His purpose in producing humans.

dhw: And so far, his purpose in producing humans is to have them recognize him and his works – which is a nice humanizing addition to the list of purposes I have proposed in order to explain the 99 out of 100 designs which had nothing to do with humans. Your agreement that he may have these thoughts finally invalidates your objection to my alternatives on the grounds that they “humanize” your God. Thank you. :-)

My agreement is a 'may have' which means a possibility of God's personality characteristics. Your God enters into an experimental form of evolution with no goals in sight. So lets go back. Why did He produce a universe, invent life? What was His reasons to get things started? It is ludicrous to think He was just playing with possibilities to occupy His eternal time.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum