Killer Jellyfish Means No God

Atheists and other anti-creationists try to put biblical creationists on the defensive, a tactic that works on those that re under-informed. As we have seen, they use "bad design, therefore evolution" arguments (dysteleology). Another trick is to try to make the Creator seem immoral. Either God is bad, or he does not exist.

It is interesting that they often pretend their arguments are scientific. That'll be the day! Those alleged arguments are feckless theological opinions. In addition, they are examples of bad logic. Consider the challenge that a loving God made a killer jellyfish.

Atheists and other anti-creationists try to put creationists on the defensive by saying a loving God would not create something like the box jellyfish.
Box jellyfish, Wikimedia Commons / Guido Gautsch (CC BY-SA 2.0)

As stated before, when attempting to refute someone's argument, it is intellectually honest to see if the argument is consistent from the other person's framework. Atheists tend to take fragments of creationist views and filter them through materialistic glasses, which means they presuppose that the creationist is wrong at the outset.

They also ignore problems with their own evolutionary beliefs.

A loving God could not make something that kills in such a manner. This ignores the perspective of creationists. It also ignores important scientific facts. To simplify: Many of us believe that certain mechanisms were frontloaded in organisms at creation, and then switched on genetically after the Fall of Man. Meanwhile, evolutionists cannot answer the origin of jellyfish, the complexity of their eyes, why they had stinging cells so long ago, and more.

When Christians point to the complexity of living things as evidence for a Designer (i.e. God), scoffers love to object that many of these same ‘design features’ are used to hunt and capture prey, or alternatively, to incapacitate predators. Of the box jellyfish, for example, ‘that most venomous marine creature’, one anti-creationist (and non-scientist) asks that if God is good, and ‘if he is the originator of all species, governed by the law of Love’, why should he make them with ‘such gratuitous and ingenious cruelty’? And, ‘Who would want to be killed by a jellyfish, even a box jellyfish?’ He concludes, ‘Better no god than this one.’

The rest of the article is at "Skeptics challenge: a ‘God of love’ created a killer jellyfish?"