You are right that chance doesn’t exist except as a statement of the ignorance of an observer (“probability based upon what I do and don’t know”).
But that says nothing about intention one way or another.
Intention is creative and can balance.
What I’m trying to tell you is of course chance doesn’t exist the way you’re defining it. I’d be surprised to find anyone who seriously thought it did. You imagine atheists are your opponents here, but that’s due to a gross misunderstanding of how people think about chance.
I don’t even know what that means.
Chance doesn’t actually exist, read what James says above, I agree with him.
It means that you can only create a Ferrari with intention, and you can only drive it with intention. Without intention neither happens.
I’m not sure what that has to do with a world [any world] where, say, 20,000 children aged 5 years and younger starve to death every 24 hours. That’s either part of the Creator’s plan or it is not.
But, based on the manner in which I construe the global economy, this certainly does not happen by chance. And most of those who own and operate this economy embrace a Creator in turn. They simply rationalize [explain away] the parts that seem sadistic to an atheist like me.
Sounds like someone’s been overdosing on their Hegel. Really, about ten pages per day is all most minds can absorb. I once read about thirty and I had to give up LSD for about six months.
I’m just telling you as a friend.
I believe that this is a world infected with evil , as G K Chesterton said, feel free to spit at it. But hopefully this is just a passing phase , but an important one nonetheless.
Hegel poisoning.
yep-yep.
Don’t read academic style philosophy…seen what it does to people here (basically they turn into drugged up morons…and I speak as someone who has grown copious amounts of weed and occasionally exploits the recreational side effects of prescription drugs) … 
We don’t know each other so friendship doesn’t come into the discussion.
I meant “as if we were friends”, or “in a friendly way”.
If you read Hegel (within the proper limits, of course) I think you’d see what statik and I are talking about.
Look, Chet - can I call you Chet? No one thinks that the Universe was created unless they also think there was a creator. If someone said to you “The world was created by chance”, then they’re just speaking quite sloppily.
You’re taking a rationalist approach without doing the homework. Which is typical of rationalists, even the pros.
I am left to wonder what this particular proof of the existence of God accomplishes, however. Again, I think it’s better to make some stab at justifying the position that the world was created first, and then go on to prove the existence of God.
What should make us believe that the world was created? If you don’t answer that question, why should we care that “chance” couldn’t have?
I went to school with a guy named Chance, by the way.
Hmm, do you have reason to believe he created the universe?
No. he has, in fact, told me that he didn’t. If only I knew a guy named Intention…
That is probably his wife. 
That’s it, but you should also mention the ignorance of the actor.
“To leave it to chance” - to roll the dice - to act without knowing what one is going to have done.
Of course chance doesn’t exist. Probability doesn’t exist either. Not in the way you mean anyway. They’re not “out there” in the universe. They are abstract concepts.
Who said that this world was created by chance ?
Not it isn’t. It’s a non-explanation. It literally explains nothing.
Why do you always make some non-sequitur argument and then link it to the probability of god existing ? It makes no sense. Every single thread you make follows that structure.
Roses are red, violets are blue, therefor god exists.
A car is a machine, reality is beautiful, and so god exists.
I mean, what the fuck ?
So you’re going for the argument from design here, correct ?
At least he’s using a design that can get you laid.