Posted: Nov 07, 2019 4:01 pm
by AlanF
I'm writing a long essay debunking 60 years worth of anti-evolution rhetoric from the Jehovah's Witnesses and related Fundamentalist religions. At one point I invoke a narrow part of theodicy, as follows:

*======*======*======*======*======*======*
A Fatal Flaw In the Argument That the Loving Christian God Is the Creator of Everything

The argument that “design requires a Supreme Designer” and that that Designer is the Christian/Hebrew God has a major flaw: according to the New Testament passage at 1 John 4:8, 16 “God is love”. As the Creator and Parent of all living things, and as one so lovingly cognizant of every creature that, according to Matthew 10:29:

Two sparrows sell for a coin of small value, do they not? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground without your Father’s knowledge.


The history of the last 550 million years of life, with the constant conflict between predators and prey and all the pain and suffering that history entails, proves unarguably that any postulated Creator is far from loving. A loving Creator, by definition, could not create a world in which the daily lot of so many life forms is to suffer a nature “red in tooth and claw”. Thus, either the God of the Bible is not loving, or he does not exist.

An alternative is that there are one or more other sorts of Creators, but it is obvious that none of these are the Bible’s God, and that they are not loving. There might be any number of these sorts of ‘creators’ or ‘gods’, such as a Deistic god who created the universe and then went off to tend to other business, or some entity altogether different. Some Christians assign the word “God” to these; creation by them can be called forms of theistic evolution.
*======*======*======*======*======*======*

I'm not getting into the details of arguments about theodicy, because my intended audience is unsophisticated and would understand very little. My narrow and simple point also avoids some of the rationalizations that Christian apologists usually invoke in trying to defend their beliefs.

I'd like to get comments from people on my argument. Are there flaws that Christian defenders can exploit? Etc.

Thanks,
Alan