Return to David's theory of evolution, purpose & theodicy (Evolution)

by David Turell , Tuesday, July 02, 2024, 18:28 (67 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Of course you know Adler through me. Yes, he said God is in no way a human-like person.

dhw: So he’s agnostic (= neutral) about God having human attributes, but he says God has no human attributes! That makes him as self-contradictory as you. Or are you obfuscating with your use of “person”? Above, Adler apparently said “God is not human in any way.” That = he can’t possibly have any human attributes.

Your confusion relates from you not accepting Adlers' use of allegorical for words applied to God. Since God is not human, we do not know how our words apply to Him!

"Allegory" and human attributes

dhw: Correct. There is no moral or hidden meaning in such expressions as God wants us to worship him, God is all-good, God loves us, God enjoys creating etc... We all know exactly what they mean, and the question is simply whether they are true or not.

DAVID: That is not the question!!! It is whether the human terms cam be applied to God in any meaningful way.

dhw: “Worship” only has one meaning, and the question is whether he does or does not want us to love, respect, thank him etc. The word “worship” does not contain any moral or hidden meaning.

Still sticking to a classical use of allegory. Since God is not human, we do not know how our words apply to Him! Yes, He MAY want us to "love, respect, thank him, etc." in a Godly way, and He MAY NOT as Adler points out.

dhw: If we may share human-like attributes, then each attribute will show a way in which we humans and God are alike!

DAVID: We do not know if God 'loves' as we do. We do not know how our words apply to God if they really do!! Contradictions are in your false interpretations of my presentations.

dhw:... “If God understands “love” as meaning to hate and to cause suffering, then that would simply make nonsense of our language. Under “microbes in trees”, you defend his design of bad microbes by calling him “benevolent”. We don’t know if God loves us, and yet you know he’s benevolent, without any “allegorical” nonsense. How do you know he’s benevolent, if he’s certainly not human in any way and we don’t know if he loves us? The question is not what the terms mean to God, but whether they apply to him - as you keep agreeing, and then trying to disagree, with one contradiction after another.

God is an unknown entity as we try to relate to Him. Note the bold just above with which I agree. I can call Him benevolent from my religious feelings, but an analytical philosophic view says I don't know He is benevolent. A bit schizophrenic on my part, as I believe at two levels. Religiously and analytically.