Unanswered questions (General)

by David Turell @, Monday, July 01, 2019, 18:44 (1733 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: I am allowed a fixed interpretation. You are the one with an imagination about what/who God might be.

dhw: Your fixed interpretation is your imagination of your God’s purpose (humans) and of his illogical method (you have “no idea why”) of achieving that purpose (special design of millions of non-humans), and of his nature (always knows what he wants, always knows how to get it, has total control), but sacrifices control of humans (see free will below).

The only thing free will affords is freedom of action, and note that animals wander around doing what they want also. God controls speciation in my view, and can still do that if He wishes. Your free will objection is comparing apples and eggs.


DAVID: The record does not indicate He had limits based on the history of the universe, the Earth and of life itself.

dhw: Once more, the record (= history of life) does not show that God exists, and if he does, it does not show that he has limits or total control, or that he specifically designed every single life form etc., or that he did so for the sole purpose of specially designing H. sapiens. Hence my different hypotheses to explain the record (= history of life), all of which you agree are logical, unlike your fixed belief which even you cannot explain.

My fixed belief is that the universe and the origin of life are God's creations. That He chose to evolve them indicates He did use direct creation to make humans. I explain my belief from my readings and in my books. Your explanations are logical if God is humanized.


DAVID: Creating humans by evolution required He design everything to satisfy the requirements of evolving the form.

dhw: So he had to design the whale’s flipper and the salmon’s migratory reproduction system and the weaverbird’s nest to satisfy his own requirements for specially designing the form of H. sapiens. And you consider this to be logical.

If God managed all of evolution, as I believe, of course it is logical. He created every state in evolution


DAVID: Your God is a large part human as you add all these human attributes to Him.

dhw: Neither you nor anybody can say that he has no human attributes. Frankly, if he doesn’t, he might just as well not be there as far as we humans are concerned, so I can’t help wondering why he would have wanted to create us in the first place. But how an always-in-control, all-planning being can create human attributes (e.g. love) without having the slightest experience of them is way beyond my comprehension.

Your mamby-pamby God cannot imagine or think of anything. And I agree, we have no idea if God has any human attributes


DAVID: I agree with our free will we are unpredictable. The right to dabble means He keeps total control of evolution, but not of His desired creatures He created, humans. Your argument makes no sense. Other than in Bible stories, there is no evidence God has ever tried to control us.

dhw: My argument is that if he was prepared to give us free will, i.e. NOT to control us (= he WANTED unpredictability), he may also have been prepared to give evolution free rein, i.e. NOT to control it (= he WANTED unpredictability). I only mention free will in that context. (But always with the option of dabbling in both contexts.)

Very contorted free-will argument as usual. He purposely gave us a giant brain , which makes us very special and with free will. It was obviously a result He desired. Our actions are unpredictable but He has full control over our possible further speciation, if He desires it. We can be free in actions and thoughts, impulsive or not. In a way so are other animals as they attack and eat each other.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum