The Watchmaker: my fav argument

[possibletarian]

When you quote the bible all you are doing is echoing others made up excuses. If you have evidence that the earth ever existed  in any other way than we see it through its history could you show it ?

Biblical literacy is required to make a coherent objections. Otherwise, it's like making some contrarian claim about Harry Potter but refusing to hear quotations from the books.

If you already knew the Earth was created good and subsequently fell according to the story (and perhaps I've misunderstood you). Why did you imply that God created an earth that "seems not ideal?"

You're the one who believes a god created an ideal earth, and then sin and the fall made things fall apart. I'm entertaining the idea for the sake of the argument. Do you, or do you not have evidence that the earth was anything other than history or geological records show ?

Sure quote the bible all you want, but like Harry Potter it does not match up with the world we know, In other words what evidence do you have that the bible narrative of a perfect creation that fell is in any way true ?  

And so far I've never come across anyone who believes in Harry Potter, have you ?

[Angrboda]

When you quote the bible all you are doing is echoing others made up excuses. If you have evidence that the earth ever existed  in any other way than we see it through its history could you show it ?

Biblical literacy is required to make a coherent objections. Otherwise, it's like making some contrarian claim about Harry Potter but refusing to hear quotations from the books.

If you already knew the Earth was created good and subsequently fell according to the story (and perhaps I've misunderstood you). Why did you imply that God created an earth that "seems not ideal?"

Which other god was it that intervened and made the world a fallen one?

---

Prospero: Look at this! It's perfect! It must have been designed!

Gildenstern: What about this odd bit over here?

Prospero: In a fallen world, that's to be expected!

Gildenster: So heads you win, tails I lose, I guess.

[John 6IX Breezy]

And so far I've never come across anyone who believes in Harry Potter, have you ?

Right; we can treat the Bible as complete fiction. And yet the claim that Earth is imperfect, or even destructive, is an observation compatible with its narrative. These are not arguments against design; and Christianity in particular accounts for them.

[possibletarian]

And so far I've never come across anyone who believes in Harry Potter, have you ?

Right; we can treat the Bible as complete fiction. And yet the claim that Earth is imperfect, or even destructive, is an observation compatible with its narrative. These are not arguments against design; and Christianity in particular accounts for them.

Its narrative is that it was once perfect, and that the fall made it less than perfect, I ask for the third time can you point to any evidence that it was once perfect ?

I could write a book claiming that monkeys from outer space made it less than perfect and use the same excuses as you are, Fitting a narrative is irrelevant, what matters is when trying to discern the truth how can we show any particular narrative to be true. Does the geological record show an always less than perfect world throughout history, or not ?

In other words how do we tell the difference between made up narratives, and ones that are actually true if we just keep quoting the narrative as true, without showing it to be so ?

If you can't show evidence that a particular narrative is true, simply say so.

---

Biblical literacy is required to make a coherent objections. Otherwise, it's like making some contrarian claim about Harry Potter but refusing to hear quotations from the books.

If you already knew the Earth was created good and subsequently fell according to the story (and perhaps I've misunderstood you). Why did you imply that God created an earth that "seems not ideal?"

Which other god was it that intervened and made the world a fallen one?

---

Prospero:  Look at this!  It's perfect!  It must have been designed!

Gildenstern:  What about this odd bit over here?

Prospero:  In a fallen world, that's to be expected!

Gildenster:  So heads you win, tails I lose, I guess.

Space monkeys.. of course !

[John 6IX Breezy]

Prospero: Look at this! It's perfect! It must have been designed!

Gildenstern: What about this odd bit over here?

To better adapt this dialogue to our thread lol:

Theist: This complexity appears designed

Atheist: No because it's not perfect

Theist: No one said it was?

Atheist: Well, I'm going to pretend you did. So you lose.

[possibletarian]

Prospero:  Look at this!  It's perfect!  It must have been designed!

Gildenstern:  What about this odd bit over here?

To better adapt this dialogue to our thread lol:

Theist: This complexity appears designed

Atheist: No because it's not perfect

Theist: No one said it was?

Atheist: Well, I'm going to pretend you did. So you lose.

More often people say that complexity is not a sign of design, I've only heard the 'perfect' retort when people claim perfection in design, or design for a purpose by a perfect designer .

[John 6IX Breezy]

Genesis uses the words "good" and "very good." Perfect is not part of the description and I have not used it either. (If I have I'll gladly retract my position.)

[possibletarian]

Genesis uses the words "good" and "very good." Perfect is not part of the description and I have not used it either. (If I have I'll gladly retract my position.)

But one must assume that for creation to have 'fallen' it must have once been in a noticeably better state ? And that pre-fall at the very least the earth designed specifically for humans was an ideal place to live. If not what would 'good' and 'very good' even mean ?

[arewethereyet]

Using the Bible to prove the Bible. Try again.

[John 6IX Breezy]

But one must assume that for creation to have 'fallen' it must have once been in a noticeably better state ? And that pre-fall at the very least the earth designed specifically for humans was an ideal place to live. If not what would 'good' and 'very good' even mean ?

I agree, that should be the case. But I disagree that an absence of evidence constitutes a falsification. It's like asking if there's evidence in a butterfly that it was once a caterpillar (perhaps there is). But if a change has occurred, by definition, the previous state has been altered, minimized, or eliminated.

The point here: Christianity accounts for imperfection.