I asked you for the word born in the verses. Where is born?
I used your failed argument about them being created to show how easily it is to refute it. I said that they were created with a belly button. So just because you couldn't think of any counter arguments, you've decided to throw in a strawman. Where did ever say that Adam and Eve were born?
I couldn't make it; I said that He doesn't want to. It's useless. A belly button would require born. For Adam, it's useless. He can tend not to choose like how He chooses to ignore certain people's prayer because they are assssholes.
So since he wanted Adam and Eve to have a bellybutton so they can pass it down to their offsprings, he created them with a bellybutton. It's useless for Adam to have nipples since there's no need for him to breastfeed their babies, that part falls solely on Eve. So why was Adam created with such useless things? And he can choose too, just like how he choose to answer prayers from assssholes.
Do you have a belly button? If you do, then you are born, not made. Period! Every babies have a belly button. The percentage is high.
Correct, babies that are born have a bellybutton because they are the offsprings of parents who have one. Cain and Abel had one because they're the offsprings of parents who were created with one. So show us babies that are made that doesn't have a bellybutton.
So you believe that God created humans to have a belly button? For what use? I already told you why.Because as a artist like me who draws, there is no need. I draw things that are required, not wants and just to waste time. Do you buy things that doesn't benefit you? I don't.
No, you draw things that you want to draw. I buy things that things that benefit me. That is why I buy a lot of food and drinks whenever I go grocery shopping. I don't just buy the food and drinks that are needed in order to satisfy my hunger at that very moment. Those extra food benefit me later on.
Where's the bible verse that said he had it? We both don't have the empirical evidence for this, but to rely on philosophy. Again, as an artist or a painter, why buy things that doesn't benefit your art? For example, you bought dumbbells rather than paint. Why? What's the use for that for your drawing?
See, you want your strawman argument to benefit you, but it doesn't. Only evidence that are needed can and will benefit you. If you decide to do an oil paint of a scenery, you buy oil paint. You cannot just put acrylic paint on your palette and have it miraculously be oil paint whenever you want to.
And that's also why I presented my version of your argument back at you to show how irrational it is. And without that, you have nothing except for your baseless assertions.
As empirically, we both don't have. As for logically, my chances are more since as an artist or painter, I don't buy shiet that are useless for my drawing.
Nope. You used assertions as your reasoning and simply just continuously repeating the same things over, while ignoring the objections that are presented. You make claims based on your ignorance of evolution, and by this, I'm referring to even just the most basic form of it. With no evidence to support your claims, they're nothing but bald assertions. And imagining philosophers that agree with you, is not evidence. I, on the other hand, used empirical evidence to support and explained my arguments. I addressed your points by showing why your arguments are illogical and explained those fallacies that you've made.
Probably your worst argument is your ridiculous take on the the probability you've came up with. News flash, one cannot come up with the probability if there is nothing to compare it with. I have humans to compare along with the reality in nature.
Before you can even start to claim that a useless thing is impossible, you first must demonstrate why that particular thing is useless.
I asked you for the word born in the verses. Where is born?
I used your failed argument about them being created to show how easily it is to refute it. I said that they were created with a belly button. So just because you couldn't think of any counter arguments, you've decided to throw in a strawman. Where did ever say that Adam and Eve were born?
I couldn't make it; I said that He doesn't want to. It's useless. A belly button would require born. For Adam, it's useless. He can tend not to choose like how He chooses to ignore certain people's prayer because they are assssholes.
So since he wanted Adam and Eve to have a bellybutton so they can pass it down to their offsprings, he created them with a bellybutton. It's useless for Adam to have nipples since there's no need for him to breastfeed their babies, that part falls solely on Eve. So why was Adam created with such useless things? And he can choose too, just like how he choose to answer prayers from assssholes.
Do you have a belly button? If you do, then you are born, not made. Period! Every babies have a belly button. The percentage is high.
Correct, babies that are born have a bellybutton because they are the offsprings of parents who have one. Cain and Abel had one because they're the offsprings of parents who were created with one. So show us babies that are made that doesn't have a bellybutton.
So you believe that God created humans to have a belly button? For what use? I already told you why.Because as a artist like me who draws, there is no need. I draw things that are required, not wants and just to waste time. Do you buy things that doesn't benefit you? I don't.
No, you draw things that you want to draw. I buy things that things that benefit me. That is why I buy a lot of food and drinks whenever I go grocery shopping. I don't just buy the food and drinks that are needed in order to satisfy my hunger at that very moment. Those extra food benefit me later on.
Where's the bible verse that said he had it? We both don't have the empirical evidence for this, but to rely on philosophy. Again, as an artist or a painter, why buy things that doesn't benefit your art? For example, you bought dumbbells rather than paint. Why? What's the use for that for your drawing?
See, you want your strawman argument to benefit you, but it doesn't. Only evidence that are needed can and will benefit you. If you decide to do an oil paint of a scenery, you buy oil paint. You cannot just put acrylic paint on your palette and have it miraculously be oil paint whenever you want to.
As empirically, we both don't have. As for logically, my chances are more since as an artist or painter, I don't buy shiet that are useless for my drawing.
Nope. You used assertions as your reasoning and simply just continuously repeating the same things over, while ignoring the objections that are presented. You make claims based on your ignorance of evolution, and by this, I'm referring to even just the most basic form of it. With no evidence to support your claims, they're nothing but bald assertions. And imagining philosophers that agree with you, is not evidence. I, on the other hand, used empirical evidence to support and explained my arguments. I addressed your points by showing why your arguments are illogical and explained those fallacies that you've made.
Probably your worst argument is your ridiculous take on the the probability you've came up with. News flash, one cannot come up with the probability if there is nothing to compare it with. I have humans to compare along with the reality in nature.
Before you can even start arguing that a useless thing is impossible, you must show why that particular thing is, in fact, useless. If you can do that, you can then argue as to why it is impossible for a useless thing to not exist. If you cannot demonstrate this, your argument falls to being nothing but your own opinion.