Re: Paradoxes

On 16/01/2025 11:54 pm, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 19:46:59 +1100
MarkE <me22over7@gmail.com> wrote:
 

On 16/01/2025 6:46 pm, Martin Harran wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:42:09 +1100, MarkE <me22over7@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
[...]
>

>
Sure, be careful to avoid a god-of-the-gaps.
Sure, knowledge of God lies outside the province of science.
Sure, do not rest religious belief on the science of the day.
>
But, I suspect the thinking you espouse is the product of an a priori
commitment to metaphysical naturalism. Which itself is a position of
faith, for example:
>
"The cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be." (Carl Sagan)

>
>
I've already asked you this several times but you've always ignored
it; is there any chance of you addressing it this time?
>
How do you squareyour claim of an a priori faith-like commitment to
metaphysical naturalism with the many, many theistic evolutionists
like myself who are totally convinced of  their religious beliefs but
have no problem accepting the role of natural processes in both OOL
and Evolution?
>
As pointed out by Eugenie Scott, Director of the US National Center
for Science Education, "In one form or another, Theistic Evolutionism
is the view of creation taught at the majority of mainline Protestant
seminaries, and it is the official position of the Catholic church"
>

>
I assume you meant to say "metaphysical supernaturalism"?
>
Personally, I haven't ruled out Theistic Evolutionism. A have trusted
and respected friends who are orthodox Christians and hold to various
forms theistic evolution.
>
However, to me, the scientific evidence does not support a
noninterventionist interpretation.
>

 The trouble is that any postulated interventions are quite bizarre; a
well-organised god would be much better advised to skip messy evolution
and create mankind more quickly and with fewer flaws. Or maybe just sit
back after setting up some firmament, and let nature do the rest.
Either way this god is unlikely to have a cosmic hotline for any
individuals woes.

We naturally to seek to answer why and how questions about God's actions. Moreover, the Bible attributes order and reason to God.
On the other hand, if we imagine that human reasoning, experience and expectation can be used to assess what God would/should or would/should not do (be "much better advised" to do), then we comically/tragically overestimate our position and perspective.
What are your dog's thoughts and "better advice" regarding your habit of leaving in the morning and returning at night? How much more so for us and God:
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
     neither are your ways my ways,”
declares the Lord.
“As the heavens are higher than the earth,
     so are my ways higher than your ways
     and my thoughts than your thoughts."
(Isaiah 55:8-9)