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

by dhw, Tuesday, November 26, 2024, 09:02 (20 hours, 49 minutes ago) @ David Turell

God’s possible reasons for creating life and us

DAVID: God does not come with labels. We each apply our own. I dismiss yours.

Nobody knows that God exists, let alone what he thinks and feels. Therefore we can only offer theories and test them for feasibility. You have dismissed mine on the grounds that (a) you’ve never read about such a God, although you have (see deism and process theology); (b) my theories are not mainstream – but neither are yours; (c) my theories “humanize” God, although they are all linked to your own humanizations of him, you agree that he probably/possibly has thought patterns and emotions like ours, and all your "humanizations" and mine are possible.

DAVID: God can show human attributes while being entirely unhuman. Your thinking is too rigid.

It is therefore nonsense to “dismiss” your own “humanizing” theories and mine just because they involve your God having human attributes, since we agree that he can have human-like thought patterns and feelings although he is not a human being.

Theodicy

DAVID: You tailor your God to fit your disposition for process and reduce Him to not omniscient. Fine for you, but not for me.

dhw: I offer different alternative theories, not beliefs, and they are “tailored” to fit the facts we know, not to fit any personal wishes. Whereas you admit that your own starting point is what you wish. Maybe God is not all-good, not omniscient, not all-powerful. You make him an inefficient designer who does not have the power to create an Eden (a world without evil), and who tries (often in vain) to provide cures for some of his evils but lacks the knowledge to do so. Neither omnipotent nor omniscient. All fine for you?

DAVID: Overdrawn negatives for my God who created a universe, invented life and evolved us. No small achievements if not perfect.

dhw: The problem of theodicy has nothing whatsoever to do with your God’s achievements (if he exists), but is concerned solely with the question of how or why an all-good God has created evil. One of your answers is to ignore the problem, and another is to ignore my answers when you object to my alternative theories (as above). But your last comment suggests that you yourself are beginning to have reservations about your preconceptions. Your God is “not perfect”. Please tell us more.

DAVID: Obviously, evil persons and bad bugs are side effects of God's good works.

“Obviously” if he is omniscient and omnipotent, he would have known he was creating evil and would have prevented it if he had wanted to. (See above for bolded limitations you impose on him.) We know from your theory of evolution that you think he is inefficient, so when you say “if not perfect”, does this mean evil is also the result of his inefficiency?