Balance of nature: human and theological implications (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, January 29, 2025, 11:00 (1 day, 10 hours, 48 min. ago) @ David Turell

Theology

God and evolution

DAVID: Your constant humanizing of God offers no advance in understanding God's nature.

dhw: Nobody knows God’s nature. Why do you think your view of him as messy and inefficient is more of an “advance” than, for instance, the proposal that he wanted an ever-changing free-for-all, or that he enjoyed making new discoveries as he went along? Why do think the above list of possibilities suggested by you is not “humanizing”?

DAVID: Because my God is never human in any way, but may have attributes that seem humanoid.

You believe that your inefficient God may or may not love us, enjoy creating life and be interested in his creations, want a relationship with us, want to be recognized and worshipped, have thought patterns and emotions like ours…but he is never human in any way, and you never contradict yourself although you describe your beliefs as “schizophrenic”.

DAVID: I don't know why He chose to use evolution to produce us.

And you don’t know why, according to you, he chose to specially design and then cull 99 out of 100 species that had no connection with us, but you cannot bear the thought that your theory about his inefficiency might be wrong.

Balance of Nature: human

DAVID: I'm happy with drill baby drill to improve the USA economic position in the world.

dhw: So are you happy that China and India should continue the practices that we know are harmful to the environment, because that will improve their economic position? Please explain why you would like to ask Brazil to follow the example of your reforesting NA loggers.

DAVID: Note, it is ASK Brazil! India and China are already defying the world it increased coal use the dirtiest of all.

So do you approve of their use of coal or do you think they should be encouraged to find alternative, cleaner forms of fuel as quickly as possible?

DAVID: You spew Guardian propaganda unwittily. I specifically suggested you get some knowledge of the nitty gritty instead of your cook book propagandist point of view.

dhw: Please stop pretending that every scientist who identifies the harmful effects of fossil fuels, deforestation, and current modes of transport and agriculture has no knowledge of the nitty gritty. You know as well as I do that throughout the world there are cities, fields, rivers and oceans whose pollution is a constant threat to the health of humans and all other species. You are in favour of drill, baby, drill because it serves the economic interests of your country, and I am all in favour of action being tailored to prevent economic and social catastrophe, but I would suggest that the ultimate approach to reducing the damage in every continent and country should not be determined solely by what is best for the American economy in the here and now. Your NA loggers would agree.

DAVID: All of the world's leading countries are in economic competition with each other which will continue. Don't pretend we all play nice with each other.

The fact that we do not play nice with one another is the whole problem, which the Paris agreement was an attempt to solve. Read my bold above. There has to be a balance. Do you agree or disagree that China and India should reduce their dependence on coal as quickly as possible, or would you tell them “drill, baby, drill”?

DAVID: The so-called peril is in a distant future hundred of years from now.

dhw: Do you deny that current practices are already harming the environment? If you don't deny it [correction to my original entry!], then once more: do you not accept that their continuation can only result in more damage? Do you not think it is better to reduce the damage as quickly as pragmatically possible, rather than as slowly as you like? Forget about prophecies. Nobody can possibly know what will happen a few hundred years from now.

DAVID: Exactly my point: " Nobody can possibly know what will happen a few hundred years from now."

But we do know what is happening now, so please answer my three questions.