Theists, how do you explain natural evil and bad design?

[Ali]

3.  I don't know how to argue if those people who get cancer have the perfect genome as designed - do you think that god designed imperfect people?

The better question is, under our premise,: Is today's human an exact example of that perfect being or is today's human a flawed example of what once was perfect?  If so, why or why not?  ...under the premise.

LOL  We're getting more and more out there, because there are so many different theories of what god is and what s/he/it does and doesn't do.  I don't know how to tailor my argument specifically to you because I don't know specifically what you believe, and I can't tailor it specifically to me because I don't believe.

Are you talking about something along the lines of Plato's Theory of Forms (basically god creates the...erg....idea or "form" of a perfect person, and then all real people are imperfect copies?)  (I think that's right.  Without aging myself, Philosophy 101 was a loooooong time ago.)

[Genericguy]

LOL  We're getting more and more out there, because there are so many different theories of what god is and what s/he/it does and doesn't do.  I don't know how to tailor my argument specifically to you because I don't know specifically what you believe, and I can't tailor it specifically to me because I don't believe.

No kidding. I guess either the bible is fiction or just the book of revelation is according to AD. Not really sure though, since he wont tell me. Have fun with this topic, as I can't continue with someone that won't provide specific objections to my side of the argument. "you are completely off and have no understanding" without a retort is a pointless one sided conversation.

[AnimatedDirt]

LOL  We're getting more and more out there, because there are so many different theories of what god is and what s/he/it does and doesn't do.  I don't know how to tailor my argument specifically to you because I don't know specifically what you believe, and I can't tailor it specifically to me because I don't believe.

Are you talking about something along the lines of Plato's Theory of Forms (basically god creates the...erg....idea or "form" of a perfect person, and then all real people are imperfect copies?)  (I think that's right.  Without aging myself, Philosophy 101 was a loooooong time ago.)

I can agree that for you it's getting more and more "out there".  I understand you don't believe, but the whole premise is that which falls under what Christians believe based on that piece of fiction known commonly as the bible.

Now, I'm not trying at all to convince you that it is true...hence the use of 'piece of fiction' to appease your mind.  The reason I am doing so is to find out whether *you know the "truth" therein...meaning according to the piece of fiction.  Some have a good knowledge of the stories of the piece of fiction, yet fail at knowing the interpretation(s) and granted there is more than one, but there is one or two that stand out as 'accepted' by the majority.

How does this relate to our flawed design chat?  Here's why.  The typical Atheist will argue that if God created humans perfect, why do humans get cancer, murder, why is there pain...and ultimately death...because an omnipotent God would know better, being omnipotent.

What the typical Atheist seems to miss is that today's human is NOT what God created.  Pain is not a part of our world "because God works in mysterious ways...".  It is present because of another reason which is not the point of this thread.

So then the design is flawed, but not to the extent that the EYE is flawed in how it works.  At least it's not flawed in that no person is able to design something better and/or different that is functional in a human.  Our eyes get worse.  That's not a function of flawed design, but rather a function of age (as we know aging that culminates in death) which was not part of the original design.

So my belief is, I can't prove, but some scientists or dr's have alluded to that I've come across just on the mole rat issue as of recently, is that we may have the genetics that the mole rat does to repel cancer, but it is not "wired" correctly.

The naked mole rat's kind of cancer prevention may prove relevant to humans because the same genes are involved, says Brown University cancer biologist John Sedivy. The rat's defenses "evolved separately but use the same nuts and bolts," he says. Sedivy writes in an accompanying commentary in PNAS that it may be possible to "tweak the entire network [of tumor-suppressing pathways] to develop new prevention strategies."

Taken from Naked Mole Rat Wins the War on Cancer

[AnimatedDirt]

No kidding. I guess either the bible is fiction or just the book of revelation is according to AD. Not really sure though, since he wont tell me. Have fun with this topic, as I can't continue with someone that won't provide specific objections to my side of the argument. "you are completely off and have no understanding" without a retort is a pointless one sided conversation.

It's "one-sided" because you assume to know the basics, yet don't know the basics.

[Ali]

Can I just say that the use of "piece of fiction" does not "appease" me, I actually find it a little condescending, like you can't even imagine an atheist that would debate without falling back on "namecalling".  If I wanted to get nasty and start using terms like "piece of fiction" and "sky daddy" I would have by now.

What the typical Atheist seems to miss is that today's human is NOT what God created.

This is confusing.  I thought that (most) Christians believe that God creates each person.  "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you" and all that.

[AnimatedDirt]

Can I just say that the use of "piece of fiction" does not "appease" me, I actually find it a little condescending, like you can't even imagine an atheist that would debate without falling back on "namecalling".  If I wanted to get nasty and start using terms like "piece of fiction" and "sky daddy" I would have by now.

If you rather me use 'bible', I can.  It was with another person on this forum that seemed to not be able to deal with me using bible and rather I use 'piece of fiction' which I figured was the preference of most Atheists.  I was not at all trying to be condescending.  My apologies if that's how it was received.

What the typical Atheist seems to miss is that today's human is NOT what God created.

This is confusing.  I thought that (most) Christians believe that God creates each person.  "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you" and all that.

The manner in which we are formed is of God, according to the bible, that he made us and pro-creation is part of His creation.  However, we are no longer direct products of God's creative work, so to speak, but rather are His work plus that which taints his work.  So when a person is born with disease, the disease is not of God's direct working, but that which works against God.

So when an Atheist points and says, "Look what your god has created.  A deformed baby...yay. He is so great and loving and omnipotent..."  It is only evident that this person really has no clue in what they speak if they really have studied the bible.  Otherwise they are just spouting off heresay and ad hominem attacks...which this forum doesn't like.  The typical Atheist will not go and really study the bible to find out even why this may be or the explanation of it.  Like I've mentioned.  It's not unlike someone to go and really study a book of fiction.  Take Star Wars or Lord of the Rings.  Some people get really into it knowing its fiction and have all the knowledge of why this event happened or that event happened...  I gave a website that is an example of this: Thain's Book - Guide to Tolkien's Middle-earth where there is a lot of depth given about this ficticious story so that there might be more understanding to those that seek the understanding.

[Genericguy]

AD... You're wrong, and this is why you are wrong. That's how it works. Not just you are wrong. Providing you can't answer why I am wrong (for the third time) I will assume I am correct. Thanks.

[Ali]

Can I just say that the use of "piece of fiction" does not "appease" me, I actually find it a little condescending, like you can't even imagine an atheist that would debate without falling back on "namecalling".  If I wanted to get nasty and start using terms like "piece of fiction" and "sky daddy" I would have by now.

If you rather me use 'bible', I can.  It was with another person on this forum that seemed to not be able to deal with me using bible and rather I use 'piece of fiction' which I figured was the preference of most Atheists.  I was not at all trying to be condescending.  My apologies if that's how it was received.

I prefer "Bible" and better yet "Christian Bible", as there are many holy books and it helps to know which one you are referencing.

What the typical Atheist seems to miss is that today's human is NOT what God created.

This is confusing.  I thought that (most) Christians believe that God creates each person.  "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you" and all that.

The manner in which we are formed is of God, according to the bible, that he made us and pro-creation is part of His creation.  However, we are no longer direct products of God's creative work, so to speak, but rather are His work plus that which taints his work.  So when a person is born with disease, the disease is not of God's direct working, but that which works against God.

So when an Atheist points and says, "Look what your god has created.  A deformed baby...yay. He is so great and loving and omnipotent..."  It is only evident that this person really has no clue in what they speak if they really have studied the bible.  Otherwise they are just spouting off heresay and ad hominem attacks...which this forum doesn't like.  The typical Atheist will not go and really study the bible to find out even why this may be or the explanation of it.  Like I've mentioned.  It's not unlike someone to go and really study a book of fiction.  Take Star Wars or Lord of the Rings.  Some people get really into it knowing its fiction and have all the knowledge of why this event happened or that event happened...  I gave a website that is an example of this: Thain's Book - Guide to Tolkien's Middle-earth where there is a lot of depth given about this ficticious story so that there might be more understanding to those that seek the understanding.

I think that here again, we fall back on the problem that there ar eso many different interpretations of what/who God is, and what s/he/it does.  I was raised Christian, church every Sunday, baptized at age 10, et cetera, and I have always heard that God personally designs each person.  I'm not saying that you're wrong in your interpretation, it just illustrates how many interpretations there are, and how it is not just the probblem of "Atheists" being unwilling to learn."  

[AnimatedDirt]

AD... You're wrong, and this is why you are wrong. That's how it works. Not just you are wrong. Providing you can't answer why I am wrong (for the third time) I will assume I am correct. Thanks.

Until you can prove to me that your initial post that I questioned is 100% correct, then you're simply saying, "I'm right and you're wrong..."  Good luck with that approach.

[AnimatedDirt]

I prefer "Bible" and better yet "Christian Bible", as there are many holy books and it helps to know which one you are referencing.

If it's easier, unless I say different, when I mention bible, you can assume rightly that I mean the Christian Bible. 

I think that here again, we fall back on the problem that there ar eso many different interpretations of what/who God is, and what s/he/it does.  I was raised Christian, church every Sunday, baptized at age 10, et cetera, and I have always heard that God personally designs each person.  I'm not saying that you're wrong in your interpretation, it just illustrates how many interpretations there are, and how it is not just the probblem of "Atheists" being unwilling to learn."

It would really interest me to find that you were taught that EXACTLY as it sounds (the bold above).  Specifically, that no past pastor of yours would add a caveat to that statement.

If this is true, then God is a liar.  If this is God's design for *you, then why change that design later?  If there is a better design, wouldn't it stand to reason that God would make you perfect if he was in fact creating each person?  The fact is, according to the bible, is that God can work through imperfection.  He made "you"...the "you" that is inside each person...not the physical manifestation seen today.  That will change when the real "you"...the inside "you" and the perfect bodily manifestation of "you" is united, if you will.  It's not that you will look different, but if you had a physical abnormality in this life, the life he offers, you will be whole.  If you had a disease, you will be free of all disease...

[Davin]

So when an Atheist points and says, "Look what your god has created.  A deformed baby...yay. He is so great and loving and omnipotent..."  It is only evident that this person really has no clue in what they speak if they really have studied the bible.  Otherwise they are just spouting off heresay and ad hominem attacks...which this forum doesn't like.  The typical Atheist will not go and really study the bible to find out even why this may be or the explanation of it.  Like I've mentioned.  It's not unlike someone to go and really study a book of fiction.  Take Star Wars or Lord of the Rings.  Some people get really into it knowing its fiction and have all the knowledge of why this event happened or that event happened...  I gave a website that is an example of this: Thain's Book - Guide to Tolkien's Middle-earth where there is a lot of depth given about this ficticious story so that there might be more understanding to those that seek the understanding.

I think that here again, we fall back on the problem that there ar eso many different interpretations of what/who God is, and what s/he/it does.  I was raised Christian, church every Sunday, baptized at age 10, et cetera, and I have always heard that God personally designs each person.  I'm not saying that you're wrong in your interpretation, it just illustrates how many interpretations there are, and how it is not just the probblem of "Atheists" being unwilling to learn."

Don't forget that AD is essentially saying that his version of god did not know what was going to happen to humans after it created them. Also there's the perfection begatting imperfectly problem, if everything about an organism is perfect, from whence cometh imperfection? If Adam and Eve were perfect, then why did they not have perfect children... if they had perfect children, then why didn't those kids have perfect children?

I've heard the incest argument, but then that would mean that god designed imperfection into the species by only creating two people which would necessarily result in inbreading. Which by the design of the god would produce imperfections making humanity imperfect by design.

[AnimatedDirt]

Don't forget that AD is essentially saying that his version of god did not know what was going to happen to humans after it created them.

Really?  You know this to be true how?  Heresay.

Also there's the perfection begatting imperfectly problem, if everything about an organism is perfect, from whence cometh imperfection? If Adam and Eve were perfect, then why did they not have perfect children... if they had perfect children, then why didn't those kids have perfect children?

The answer, according to the bible, is that sin entered...and thus they began to die...literally as we do from the moment of birth we are dying. 

I've heard the incest argument, but then that would mean that god designed imperfection into the species by only creating two people which would necessarily result in inbreading. Which by the design of the god would produce imperfections making humanity imperfect by design.

Where inbreeding problems comes in is when the problems of imperfection comes in...the dying part.  If they were perfect beings, then their offspring was close to perfection, but not as close...and so on.  I'm don't have proof, but I'm sure incest was not the long-term plan.  I dont know what is.  We are not specifically told.

[xSilverPhinx]

I hope you're not suggesting that we make a 'Stevil' a unit of perfection? If so, then is 1 Stevil just as perfect as all 100 Stevils with variations among them?

Well, evil is measured in Asmos. Guys like Hitler are about 500 to 700 µAsmos in terms of evil. A regular garden variety secretary is a few nanoAsmos. YHWH is at whopping 1/2Asmos and The Asmo is... An Asmo. 

Could definitely work. The evil Asmo as a measurement against all of evil can be compared.

You would think that 2 Stevils is twice as good as 1, but that would imply that 1 Stevil is less than perfect.

But that's the thing. 1 Stevil is as good as it gets, you can't improve on that, you can't improve on perfection.

This!

So, assuming people were perfect-er before the Fall of Man...wait...what is perfection anyways? ???

[Davin]

Don't forget that AD is essentially saying that his version of god did not know what was going to happen to humans after it created them.

Really?  You know this to be true how?  Heresay.

It's the consequences of what you're saying: humans werre perfect but aren't any more, so either god designed them to be imperfect, or the god didn't know what the result would be.

Also there's the perfection begatting imperfectly problem, if everything about an organism is perfect, from whence cometh imperfection? If Adam and Eve were perfect, then why did they not have perfect children... if they had perfect children, then why didn't those kids have perfect children?

The answer, according to the bible, is that sin entered...and thus they began to die...literally as we do from the moment of birth we are dying.

Against the plan/design of this god?

I've heard the incest argument, but then that would mean that god designed imperfection into the species by only creating two people which would necessarily result in inbreading. Which by the design of the god would produce imperfections making humanity imperfect by design.

Where inbreeding problems comes in is when the problems of imperfection comes in...the dying part.  If they were perfect beings, then their offspring was close to perfection, but not as close...and so on.  I'm don't have proof, but I'm sure incest was not the long-term plan.  I dont know what is.  We are not specifically told.

Well if the god is all knowing and designed everything, then the current imperfection must be the result.

Also: if you admit that we are not perfect anymore, then how can you even try to say:

The blood vessels in the eye are in front of the optic nerve. That's like designing a camera with all the wiring in front of the lens. Very bad design!

Well, and I think I recall from my anatomy class that the optic nerve is crossed so that when the images come in to the brain, they are upside down, and then our brain has to flip them right side up.  Or something like that.  That's also a silly design.

Yet they work perfectly.

Which is it, are humans imperfect or working perfectly? The law of non-contradiction does not allow both to be true.

[AnimatedDirt]

It's the consequences of what you're saying: humans werre perfect but aren't any more, so either god designed them to be imperfect, or the god didn't know what the result would be.

Consequences as you see them...or as the bible states them to be.  How are we going to approach this...being in the Religion secion of this forum?  Are we going to go on what you perceive as the "truth" of the bible or on what the "truth" is according to the bible?  Let's decide now, that way we can either continue or leave it at the fact that you've drawn your own conclusions on the bible, yet now really knowing what the bible teaches OR at worst, that the Christian has it wrong on what the bible teaches.

Well if the god is all knowing and designed everything, then the current imperfection must be the result.

Is this an opinion based on your knowledge of the bible or based on your own perception of what the bible says of God and his plan/design?  If the former, present the proof that this god designed this all for the purpose of it to become imperfect.

Also: if you admit that we are not perfect anymore, then how can you even try to say:

Does the design on the eye not work?  What are you saying is imperfect about it...and how do you know what the design was for?