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

by dhw, Tuesday, August 22, 2023, 11:02 (457 days ago) @ David Turell

Evolution

dhw: Please stop dodging! for approximately the 150th time, the question is not why (if he exists) he chose to evolve us, but why, if his one and only purpose was to evolve (in your language = design) us and our ecosystems to supply our food, did he choose to evolve (= design) 99 out of 100 life forms and ecosystems that had no connection with us and our food?***
The ramifications of this theory reach right into the heart of nearly all our disagreements on the purpose and nature of your God. You acknowledge its illogicality (you can’t find a single reason to justify it), but you cling to it, refuse to consider any alternative, and continue to dodge it.
[...]
The gap is my point by point list of answers to your previous post, drawing attention to the manner in which you try to dodge the question *** above. Your whole approach is epitomized by the following exchange:

DAVID: Only 0.01% of the past is the current present. Agreed.

dhw: Then stop pretending that the whole of evolution is a continuum "totally connected" to your God's one and only purpose, and answer question *** above.

DAVID: Impossible as the series of responses above completely negate your premise. The 0.01% result of evolution existing are the present endpoint of the continuum of evolution, humans plus food.

By substituting “present endpoint” for “one and only purpose”, you dodge your own basic premise, which is that your God’s one and only purpose in creating life was to design us and our food. Yes, we are the current endpoint, in the sense that we are the last species so far in the process of evolution, but that does not mean that in order to fulfil his one and only purpose, your God deliberately designed 99 out of 100 species that had no connection with his one and only purpose. Your basic premise makes no sense even to you, which is why you continue to dodge it. And only the 1% (or 0.01%) constitutes a “continuum” of evolution! 1% does not constitute a “total connection”!

Theodicy

dhw: You are no more qualified to describe a “true” God than I am......

DAVID: The obvious comparison: my God knew in advance exactly what He was getting, and your God found us a surprise!!!

dhw: Yes, your all-knowing, all-powerful, always-in-control God knew he was specially designing 99% of irrelevant species which luck would have to “cull”, and your all-knowing and all-good God knew he was specially designing evil bugs and humans, but that was what he wanted.

DAVID: God never designed evil humans or bugs. All explained previously as secondary events.

According to you, he designed free-willed bugs and humans, and he knew in advance all the evils they would produce. Your God only does what he wants to do. Therefore, it is only logical to assume that he wanted the evil he knew his creations would produce. You add insult to injury when you dismiss these consequences as “secondary” and urge us to focus only on the good. Theodicy asks how an all-good God can produce evil. You do not solve the problem by pretending that evil is only “secondary”.