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

by David Turell , Friday, November 29, 2024, 22:44 (4 days ago) @ dhw

Theodicy

DAVID: No. Evil is a side effect of God's good works. We have free will but it allows evil people.

dhw: Did your God not know that his good works would also produce evil? And that our free will would also produce evil? If he did not know, he is not omniscient. If he knew, and in some cases tried but failed to provide remedies (as you suggest) he is not omnipotent, but clearly as inefficient as the God who according to you made such a mess of evolution.

God knew because He provided editing systems. God did not make a mess of evolution. We arrived as He wised. As usual you have distorted the exact history of our discussions to satisfy your skewed views of God.

Immunity system complexity: Battling pseudomonas

DAVID: We are so unusual we must be purposely deigned by God, Adler's proof of God. It is a powerful argument you ignore.

dhw: All of life is so unusual that it provides a powerful argument for God’s existence. These posts are a discussion of your God’s possible purposes, methods and nature and not about his existence. Stop dodging.

DAVID: No dodge. We were God's purpose! I simply inverted Adler.

And taken from “theoretical origin of life”:
dhw: You’d rather ridicule him than admit that your theory might be wrong.

DAVID: No. I follow Adler's argument that we are a most unusual result of natural evolution, which means we were purposely designed by God. The debate is simply why God chose to evolve us instead of direct creation.

dhw: Adler’s proof of God’s existence is totally irrelevant. You are defending your own theory that humans were your God’s one and only purpose. The debate is simply why, according to you, your God messily and inefficiently chose to design and then cull 99 species irrelevant to the purpose you impose on him.

You keep uselessly repeating your mantra. Nothing was unnecessarily culled during evolution.

DAVID: A free-for-all, by definition has no direction or purpose. […]

dhw: An atheist, of course, would argue that life has no purpose anyway, apart from whatever purposes we make for ourselves. However, a possible direction and purpose of a God-made evolutionary free-for-all would be to provide him with the enjoyment (purpose) of an ever-changing, unpredictable history, for good or bad. If he gave humans free will (a different kind of free-for-all), his purpose could have been for us to recognize and worship him (puppet-string worship would be meaningless.). Both possibilities allow for a free-for-all with very clear purposes. You have agreed that such “humanizations” are possible and do not mean that your God is a two-legged mammal.

DAVID: As usual you scurry back to a humanized God who must have enjoyment and a purposeless free-for-all.

duw: No “must”, and possible purposes made crystal clear above. These are alternative theories. I quote from yesterday’s post:
dhw: 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.

DAVID: Let's leave it at that.

dhw: Thank you. I shall earmark your agreement for future reference.

dhw: As usual, you agree, and the next day you scurry back to your silly “humanization” objection.

If you stop humanizing I will stop.

dhw: 3) Does it not completely shatter your theory that your omnipotent, omniscient God dabbles or has provided “full instructions to handle all issues”? Quite clearly he has failed miserably, according to your theory, and we humans are left to try and relieve the suffering your God has inflicted on us. However, if you embrace the theory that he gave cells the autonomous mechanism to work out their own solutions (i.e. intelligence), we have a full explanation of the medical successes and failures, and also of the process of extinction, adaptation and innovation. […]

DAVID: […] It all can be explained by DNA instructions.

dhw: But many of your God’s “instructions” have failed, leaving us humans to clear up the mess. Is this further evidence of what you call your God’s inefficiency?

DAVID: No. The presence of bacteria is a required part of life that God designed. That God created life is amazing within itself. Failures are a tiny portion compared to the overall successes.

dhw: The problem is not the good bacteria but the bad. Yes, life is amazing, but that does not solve the problem of theodicy. The evils of disease, natural disasters, and especially human folly are the focus of theodicy, and if you think they are “tiny” and not worth bothering about, I suggest you take your head out of the sand and look at the world around you.

It's out and sees a pleasant world, compared with your doom and gloom approach.