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

by David Turell , Thursday, October 05, 2023, 18:29 (413 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Adler and I believe God's primary purpose was to create humans by evolving them.

dhw: You have specified that the creation of humans plus food was your God’s one and only purpose. If “primary”, what were his other purposes?

Everything else is secondary and directed to preparing for humans.

DAVID: Method and purpose are now covered, not dodged.

dhw: The method you have specified up to now is that your God specially designed 99 out of 100 species that had no connection with his one and only purpose, which was to design us and our food, and you have no idea why he would use what you call such a messy, cumbersome and inefficient system.

God had His own reasons. Unfortunately for you I am not His psychoanalyst.

DAVID: The […] bold is your strawman invention of a twisted interpretation of God's form of evolution, which is the only form we have.

dhw: It is YOUR twisted interpretation of your God’s form of evolution, not mine! Please tell us which part of it you now wish to reject.

Your idiotic exclusion of 99% of evolution as unnecessary.

Theodicy

dhw: Your “byproduct” theory is irrelevant. Do you believe that your evil-hating God is all-powerful and all-good, and would only create what he wants to create? If he’s all-powerful, why do you think he is incapable of designing a system which does not produce something he hates? If he only creates what he wants to create, why do you think he wanted to create a system which he knew would produce evil?

DAVID: Incapable? God created what He could create from available substrates. And byproduct results are relevant.

dhw: If he is the first, all-powerful cause of everything, it’s not a question of “available substrates” but of what substrates he wanted to create! If he was capable of designing the “substrates” necessary for a Garden of Eden, why did he choose not to do so? If he is all-knowing, he knew that his system would produce evil, whether you call it a byproduct or not. Now please answer the bolded questions above.

God produced what He thought was best to produce. Eden was a simple place compared to this reality. Why do you endorse a biblical place in this discussion of this reality and God's role in it? Must I repeat the evils are byproducts of His good works.

dhw: I have several dictionaries of religion, philosophy, modern thought etc., all of which agree with my definition of theodicy. The problem “has been on the philosophical agenda for at least 2000 years.” (Fontana Dic. of Modern Thought) The Wikipedia article gives a history of this endless and extremely varied discussion. Like all my reference books, it never even mentions “proportionality” as a factor – the reason being painfully obvious: you can’t solve a problem by pretending that the problem doesn’t exist.

DAVID: We must read different authors. Mine all use proportionality to mitigate the problem.

DAVID: Adler tells pagans how to believe. He is a world-renowned philosopher of religion.

dhw: Lots and lots of religious people, including the writers whose works appear in the Bible and all the “authorities” who preside over all the different religions in the world, tell other people how and what to believe. And strange to relate, there are even world-renowned philosophers who tell people not to believe in a God.

DAVID: Agreed.

dhw: So please stop hiding behind Adler as if his opinions are gospel!

DAVID: As a pagan directly addressed by Adler in his book, 'How to Think About God', His instructions represent a theological philosopher's distillation of thoughts by many theists. Certainly, an acceptable teacher for me. Equal to 'The Theology of God's Attributes 101' in college.

dhw: Your worship of Adler does not answer any of my questions relating to your illogical theories of evolution and your contradictory views of his nature, as exemplified by your attempts to dodge the problem of theodicy.

I have not dodged theodicy. I am the one who first raised the issue, please remember.