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

by David Turell , Tuesday, October 31, 2023, 18:40 (387 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Nonsense! Evolution means a 99.9% loss, as shown by Raup. God's success: humans and food supply are here.

dhw: The only evolution of life that we know entailed a 99.9% loss. How on earth does that come to mean that your all-powerful God, “who directly creates what he wishes directly” and whose only wish was to design us plus food, therefore had to design and cull 99.9 out of 100 species that had no connection with us and our food?

Not "had to design and cull"!! God is not forced to do anything. God chose His method.

DAVID: God's own analysis! Revealed by Raup.

dhw: Does Raup also tell us when and where God revealed to him that his only purpose was us and therefore he had to design and cull 99.9 out of 100 species that had nothing to do with us?

DAVID: More nonsense. Raup did not discuss purposes. Raup studied history, not God.

dhw: Then what is this nonsense about your theory being God’s own analysis revealed by Raup? The 99.9% loss is history, the rest is your wacky interpretation of history. It’s lucky for you that Raup, sadly, is no longer with us. Otherwise, he could have sued you for dragging him into your nonsensical version of your God’s purpose and method.

Raup's analysis of God's evolution revealed 99.9% were ancestors of the 0.1% alive today. What is your problem?

DAVID: God's choice of evolving us makes perfect sense. He chose direct design where He wished as shown in the Cambrian.

dhw: So he wished to design and then cull 99.9 unnecessary species, although he could have directly created us if he had wished to. You do not know why, but it makes perfect sense, although you can’t make sense of it.

It makes perfect sense for the rational. God chose this method. I assume your version of God can't make choices.

Theodicy

DAVID: What GOOD God produced secondarily produced evil. God allowed evil to appear because there was no other alternative. Proportionality is a way to accept it.

dhw: Your all-powerful, all-knowing God was powerless to prevent evil, and yet he “directly creates what he wishes to create”, and in one of your theories he even invents evil as a challenge to humans. As first cause, he created everything out of himself, so how could he “allow evil to appear” if he was nothing but good? We don’t need proportionality to “accept” evil. Every war, murder and rape confirms that evil exists, and theodicy asks us to explain it, not accept it.

DAVID: All of the theodicy essays I've read use the same approach, the good far outweighs the evil that appears secondarily.

dhw: Your reading list does not answer any of the points that I have made. I suggest you start thinking for yourself, accept that evil exists in no matter what proportion, that theodicy attempts to reconcile evil with the theory that your God is all good, and try to find an answer to the bold above.

I thought for myself before reading the essays on theodicy which all agree with me. The good outweighs the evil, all of which appear secondarily to God's good works: free will for us, and good bacteria and viruses necessary for the ecosystems of life.