Well, the point of this thread [mine] is to somehow reconcile a God said by many to be loving just and merciful with “the question of theodicy”: “the vindication of divine goodness and providence in view of the existence of evil”
Pain and suffering that is clearly derived from human interaction and then the terrible afflictions inflicted on humankind as a result of so-called “acts of God”.
This is just a question of creation vs evolution.
There has been much said on both sides of this debate.
The fine tuned qualities of the universe.
The irreducibly complex qualities of some living things.The answer revolves around deduction.
We can’t ask God if there is a god,
and we can’t ask reality if it is alive.
But deduction shows clues about how much of this whole thing is like this or like that.
What clues do you deduce about God or the universe that might explain the existence of viruses like HIV or Covid? Or bacterium that brought about such things as the bubonic plague.
What if i asked you to prove there is no creator?
Then, from my frame of mind, we are back to suggesting it is far more incumbent upon those to demonstrate something that they claim does exist than for those to prove that it does not. Besides, the assumption here is that God and the Universe do exist and, as a result of it, staggering amounts of human pain and suffering accumulate day after day after day.
Why, given the assumption that, in turn, God and the Universe reflect “divine goodness and providence”?
Demanding proof is for lazy half-philosophers.
You gotta get it yourself.
Though not for, say, committed scientists.
And have you got some proof yourself? So far, what is it?