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

by dhw, Saturday, July 08, 2023, 11:35 (502 days ago) @ David Turell

Theodicy

dhw: I have asked you what you think was his purpose in creating a world with challenges, and you merely repeat that his purpose was to create a world with challenges! Why do you think he wanted to create a world with challenges?

DAVID: We have the brain He gave us to handle challenges, so He challenged our brain.
What possible purpose could he have had in creating murderous bacteria, viruses and human beings, knowing the pain and suffering they would cause, in order “to challenge our brain”? Is it perhaps a game for him to watch?

dhw: The proportion of evil to good is irrelevant, and so is our responsibility.

DAVID: Proportionality depends on perspective. God allowed evil but we have the capacity to reduce its size.

If we are asking how and why an all-good, all-powerful God created evil, the proportion of good to evil is irrelevant. According to you, your God did not “allow” evil: he deliberately created the murderous bacteria, viruses and humans knowing in advance the suffering they would cause. The question is why, and now that you have dropped your first approach (evil doesn’t matter), your second is that he wants to challenge us. Why? Is it a game?

DAVID: A creating God without anticipation is creating a world blindly. Not much of a creator.

dhw: You are certain that your God is interested in his creations. A creating God who WANTS to create a world which will interest him through its unpredictability is not creating it blindly. With your latest theory, do you think your all-knowing God watches us and knows precisely how we are all going to respond to the challenge? […]

DAVID: Yes, He follows us. Your blind God drifts along, entertained by the chaos He is partially creating.

dhw: “Follows”? Do you mean he watches us with interest? But in your theory he knows precisely how we are going to act, so why bother to “follow” us?

DAVID: Free will means humans producing unexpected results.

So if that is what he wanted from us, why do you refuse to even contemplate the possibility that he might have created the process of evolution as a free-for-all because he wanted unexpected results?

dhw: But there are two separate questions here: why did your all-good God create evil (or why did he create a world of “challenges” in which good battles with evil), and why doesn’t he intervene now that he sees the chaos he has created? You have dodged the first question, and I have offered a list of possible responses to the second.

DAVID: Chaos again is your over interpretation of the amount of evil.

It is you who introduced the word “chaos” (now bolded above), but I have no objection to it. Perhaps you don’t watch the news bulletins concerning epidemics, pandemics, wars and civil wars, natural disasters, homeless refugees etc. that are bringing suffering to millions of people. Meanwhile, how about answering the two questions above?

David's theory of evolution

DAVID: Since God chose to develop humans in a stepwise fashion through evolution, the 99.9% culled out are absolutely necessary.

dhw: In your nonsensical theory, the problem is not the culling but the deliberate creation of 99 unnecessary organisms which have to be culled!

DAVID: Nonsensical only in your Godless view. God chose to create us by evolving us. Your rudderless version did the same thing.

dhw: Hardly “godless”, since we are discussing your God’s motives and methods, not his existence. You keep repeating the mantra that focuses solely on us, and leaving out the nonsensical part of your theory, which is that in order to create us plus food, he deliberately designed 99 out of 100 species that had no connection with us plus food. My alternatives are not “rudderless” – they simply offer different methods and/or purposes from those you impose on him, though their combination makes no sense to you.

DAVID: Yes, your so-called God makes no sense to me. His lack of foresight allows Him to permit evil! What a twisted view of God.

This time you dodge your nonsensical theory of evolution (the 99% of irrelevant designs) and go back to theodicy. I’m surprised that you now have a fixed belief in an all-powerful, all-good God who deliberately creates (not “allows”) evil, with all the suffering that it involves, in order to “challenge” us – though you haven’t come up with a single reason why he would want to do that. But you think a God who experiments is “twisted”.