Let me explain this to you in simple terms so that you can finally understand what I am saying. I will do this in several ways so that you are able to follow the argument in a simple fashion.
I think you keep trying to hide behind a smokescreen in accusing me in not understanding you. I understand you fine...like a children's book. I just disagree with you and I don't think at the end of the day you are saying anything other than Christianity is horrible. (going back to your original post) but you can't substantiate why.
First, let’s use the choice approach.
God is perfect.
God makes perfect choices – he cannot choose imperfectly.
God had a choice between this world with tsunamis/cancer/malaria and this world without tsunamis.
God chose this world with tsunamis/cancer/malaria etc.
Tsunamis etc are a necessary part of God’s perfect choice.
Agreed. The problem is that is not what you originally wrote. You said "Tsunamis etc are a necessary part of God’s perfect world." Biblically, there is a huge difference between "choice" and "world". That is what you are missing.
Ok, that was simple. Every Christian I have met agrees with this. You seem not to grasp it. Let’s try the question approach. I will answer the questions as to how I think you would answer, since it is how all other Christians answer, including Craig and Fernandes.
I do not think any of these people you have met would agree with you that "God's perfect choice" is equivalent to "God's perfect world". If this was God's end goal, why would he allow it to be destroy and tells us that it will be replaced with perfection? I mean think about it a moment.
Why are there tsunamis/cancer/malaria in the world?
“It’s all part of God’s plan” “We don’t know the mind of God” “It must serve a greater good”
These answers are stock omniscience escape clause answers and can be summed up as “It’s all part of God’s plan (for a greater good)”.
In all his ramblings, Johnny P has not shown why this answer is wrong. Only that he doesn't like it. And why should anyone care about what he doesn't like?
Is God perfect?
Can God plan imperfectly?
So tsunamis/cancer/malaria etc are part of God’s perfect plan?
Both of these approaches are what I was putting forward. If God is perfect, then these things, since he chose a world with them rather than one without them are part of his perfect plan. This world is his plan, ergo part of this perfect world.
Your main tactic, other than to misunderstand and misrepresent the argument for 8 pages of drivel, was to equivocate on the word ‘world’. For example, you tried to claim it was perfect at creation, but made imperfect by humans. However, you failed to follow your logic through.
"Drivel" is a description that people like Johnny P use for things they can either show is meaningless or that they don't understand. Given that he has failed to show his epistemology for "world",. "good", or "evil", I'm forced to conclude that he doesn't understand the Christian Worldview. Check it. The Bible never claims that this world is perfect, only that it was perfect before human depravity. This is why your argument that there is a problem with the Christian worldview is flawed. The Bible never pretends that such things as natural disasters, human evil, or diseases are not part of God's plan nor not under His control. In fact the only reason we ain't more evil is that God is restraining it.
God chose humans knowing their Fall, rather than choosing for them not to exist, so EVEN THEY must be necessary part of the perfect plan (and all their evil).
But not a perfect world. That plan will result in the perfect world. Re-read Roman 8. Johnny, it might be over your head. If you need help holler.
When philosophers talk about actual and possible worlds, they do so without temporality.
The Bible doesn't. And where is your reference proving that "When philosophers talk about actual and possible worlds, they do so without temporality. "? I wanna see it.
And here is your equivocation. You kept implying and demanding some kind of temporal quality to WHEN the world is perfect. This is silly, because first of all you claim it was perfect at creation and then imperfect after. Yet humans are a perfect choice of God. What is the point of everything after? Why bother? Why ruin perfection with imperfection? A perfect God wouldn’t choose to ruin a perfect creation without a perfect outcome to mitigate it.
Again here is your fail. If God had not allowed the fall, you would not have been born. Y'know the you that exists now. Think about. Would you have been born and ended up exactly where you are and who you are had key events that you had nothing to do with had not occurred. I am a product of a people who were oppressed, enslaved, raped, and who-knows-what. What that evil? You bet. Would I have been born or my parents had it not happened? Nope. Did God have a good reason for allowing it. God tells us He does. I believe Him. I don't believe you.
Secondly, you seem to demand a temporal quality to the world I claim as being perfect. But this equivocation is silly. When I first posted the piece, did I mean a perfect world only at 12.15 on 10/01/2011? How about the next day or the day before? When I talk of perfect worlds, is it only relevant at the exact time I say it? Or now? How about now? This is silly.
Dude, we live and exist inside of time. The world is changing all the time in time. At one time there was one continental land mass and now there are several. And yes when you talk of a perfect world "when" is important and what you mean by "perfect" is of much importance. That is if you are going to be rigorous.
Perfect worlds are judged by the outcome, or the entire process. Either way, the process is integral in reaching the outcome, obviously.
So are you, Johnny, going on record to say that this world in it's present state is worthy to be called complete? That there is nothing coming after this moment that would have an affect of how you judge the quality of the world? If you'd answer "Yes",. that's not just silly that's dumb.
So when philosophers talk about this world being perfect, we don’t mean at 2 o’clock on Tuesday, nor do we mean at the beginning, as you assume
Not me. The Bible says the creation was perfect. And when Jesus come back for His people, it will be perfect again.
Perhaps we mean as an ensemble. When I mean this world in an atemporal sense, I am talking about the world as an ensemble from start to finish.
Then your argument is truly flawed. I'm talking about the world in the very since. At it's conclusion we can call it perfect. Since the fall, until the end, we cannot. God's choices and plan however are perfect.
But, in the sense of judging the world, we mean by outcome. When I talk of a perfect car, I don’t mean during its manufacturing process, but the end result. From a Christian’s point of view, we could still be in the manufacturing process of this world. Which is why I kept mentioning OUTCOME.
As an Atheist, you don't know what the OUTCOME is. You have nothing meaningful you can say about the outcome. Today and all the evils you are whining about are not the final outcome.
These tsunamis and natural evils are ingredients are necessary ingredients for this perfect world (which may yet come to pass) otherwise they are neutral ingredients which serve no purpose and are random.
I don't disagree in that this perfect world we long for is still coming. It's not here.
To arrive at the perfect world, you need the perfect parameters, which is why I called the parameters and outcome effectively synonymous for the purposes of this argument.
Nope. The ingredients are not perfect. That is what makes God so awesome. He can make awesome out of crap. That is why there is hope for us.
God has chose both, and God chooses perfectly. Thus both the parameters and out outcome of this world are perfect choices.
Perfect choices does not equal perfect world.
However, you failed to see how the argument worked, and spent more time demanding my qualifications. More fool you. Well done. You showed yourself to be a consummate philosopher. Sorry, plonker.
Just in case you didn’t realise in my original post that I am talking about the outcome by way of everything throughout history: “This includes every piece of suffering and death experienced by every animal and plant in the history of the world.” I did not say “This is a perfect world NOW based on everything that happens JUST NOW IN THIS INSTANCE!” This is a perfect world based on the choice of this world over any other. How do you compare one world to another? Certainly not by picking arbitrary individual instants of time out, out of their context, and comparing them!!!!
I'm not either. I'm saying God is going to take everything and we will look back on all of it and realize how perfect God is and his choices and plans are. We are going to be praising him forever because of it. Sorry, I mean us not we (ie not you).
There really is, on a good and proper reading of the original text, no need to have drivelled on and on.
You mean that you the Christian Worldview is not wrong. And that God is right? And you have no basis for being an atheist based on this argument? We agree.
What had happen' was.....: Epic Fail: Tisk Tisk, Johnny P