Re: tsunami impact on animals

Jack,
 
Once again, I see no reason that leads me to believe that "good" =
"perfect". As far as my standards, I'm simply looking at the
definitions of those two words and seeing that they are not the same.
By insisting that Genesis says "and God saw all that he created, and it
was perfect", I think you're reading something into the text that isn't
there.
 
I find the idea that animals don't suffer to be utterly impossible to
accept. I don't think I'll ever understand how an animal could have its
flesh torn from it's body while it's still alive and we refuse to call
that suffering. I'm really curious as to your definition of the word
suffering.
 
Best,
Charles

>>> "jack syme" <drsyme@cablespeed.com> 1/11/2005 6:04:34 AM >>>

I guess there are those on the list who want to see the creation,
created by an omipotent being who declared it "good" as being somewhat
less than perfect. I guess their standards are higher than God's. ;)
 
And I happen to agree with your 'fine tuning' argument, that Creation
is perfect, it seems like it could be no other way. And that includes
earthquakes, volcanoes, diseases,etc. But of course some of that is
just speculation.
 
However, even if all of these things are part of a perfect creation,
there still is a problem of human suffering that ocurrs as a result of
these morally neutral acts of nature, and why would an omnipotent,
omniscient God, who is Good (in the moral sense) allow it to ocurr.
 
There are some assumptions in my comments that others may not accept
and might be worth discussing somewhat. I am assuming that death from
natural causes, including predation, of sub-human creation is not evil.
I am also assuming that animals cannot suffer, because I would consider
suffering, even of animals evil. Clearly, there was death to sub-human
creation before the fall of man. Of course this is speculation, but if
man had not fallen, wouldnt it have been such that these natural events
would have ocurred without causing death or suffering to man? If we
still had a relationship with God, would we be better stewards of the
Earth, and refrain from building our cities on coastlines, and would be
aware of such destructive things before they happened?
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Perrett
To: 'Charles Carrigan'
Cc: ASA Discussions (E-mail)
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 5:26 AM
Subject: RE: tsunami impact on animals

Charles,
It depends on what one considers perfect. I see it as perfect as it
is. Do you believe that the world would be what it is if the force of
gravity were different? If even one of the natural laws were different,
then so would the entire universe. We're not talking a perfect circle
or square, like dark ages. We're talking about each an every chaotic
element working in "perfect" harmony with each other to create a set of
conditions "perfect" for our survival.
 
Don P
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Carrigan [mailto:CCarriga@olivet.edu]
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 10:36
To: donperrett@genesisproclaimed.org
Subject: RE: tsunami impact on animals

Don,
 
What reason is there to believe that the creation was created perfect,
and beyond that it still is?
 
Regards,
Charles
 
<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><<><
Charles W. Carrigan
Olivet Nazarene University
Dept. of Geology
One University Ave.
Bourbonnais, IL 60914
PH: (815) 939-5346
FX: (815) 939-5071
 
 
 
>>> "Don Perrett" <donperrett@genesisproclaimed.org> 1/8/2005 10:49:50
PM >>>
If one believes that the universe was created perfect, and that it
still is (regardless of man's fall), then one must also submit that all
natural acts regardless of the level of destruction and death are good
from God's perspective.
 
Don P
Received on Tue Jan 11 09:21:28 2005