Lapidem
Member
I meant to get back to this early and must have missed you conceding this point multiple times. Let's flush this out.
Walking in the woods and happening on a book (only) suggests a writer? How do you connect the book to the writer and why is this connection merely a suggestion?
Let me suggest that a book is objective evidence of a writer, a mind who communicates in symbolic language (the letters symbolizing meaning). The symbols are not randomly arranged but there is an order to it: the letters make up words; the words make up sentences - which express a complete thought; and the sentences make up paragraphs; the book itself is arranged in order of chapters.
Reinforcing this conclusion is the objective evidence of the book - The structure, manufactured materials, paper binding and cover. Even if no words were on the pages, the existence of the structure of the book implies the existence of a book maker. The non-random order of the pages, binding and cover materials is not a result of natural phenomena.
The significance of the non-random order of the symbols is objective evidence of a sentient, sovereign intelligence. The organized use of the symbols is not a result of natural phenomena. The only possible explanation for the existence of a book in the woods is that a writer exists!
If there is doubt, if there is any epistemological uncertainty about the relationship between the existence of a book to the existence of an intelligent mind who produced this book, speak now or forever hold your peace. The relationship between book and writer is not merely a suggestion but one proves the existence of the other in no uncertain terms. Isn't that accurate Mr. Atheist?
All of this tirade is meaningless. There's no issue with a book having an author. Where you run into childish fantasy is when you claim the author is God which is un-evidenced.