Watching asteroids; possible damage (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, March 08, 2017, 11:43 (2613 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

TONY: By barking up the wrong tree, I simply meant that the existence of something dangerous did not imply limitations in power, in and of itself.

It is David’s hypothesis that his God might perhaps be limited in power (e.g. perhaps he had no choice but to use asteroids, and to design every life form, lifestyle and natural wonder in order to keep life going until he was able to produce homo sapiens). I don’t buy either of these particular limitations, but I don’t have a problem with the idea that God may have deliberately sacrificed control (at least temporarily), and may also have learned from his own experiments, as opposed to knowing everything in advance. Danger is a different subject, as below:

TONY: When viewed through the lens of "God created the earth even to be inhabited", then it stands to reason that the overall design would reflect the requirements contained therein. You wouldn't design a car without tires. However, the R fact that cars exist implies the inherent dangers of accidents. He desined a universe, complete with s, planets, gravity, etc complete with the inherent possibility of them dying in their own time, with the accompanying cataclysilmic consequences.

Anyone who believes in God will accept that he designed the universe as it is. The fact that his design incorporates natural disasters and diseases that were in place long before humans came on the scene raises questions about his motivation and attitude towards his creations, and also about his own nature. All of us are familiar with these problems (which basically boil down to the origin of evil) and we have discussed them at length. That’s no reason why we shouldn’t discuss them again if you want to!