Re: tsunami impact on animals

First of all, pain and suffering are not the same thing.
 There is no question that animals experince pain in the
most fundamental definition of the term at the least, i.e.
avoiding certain stimuli.

Suffering I think, requires self awareness. I guess it
depends to what extent one thinks that animals are self
aware. I am thinking it is along the lines of having a
soul, which would make it unique to humans.

However, assuming that there were many humans around
before Adam. And assuming that evil was brought into the
world through sin, the fall. I am having trouble seeing
the consistency in these other humans, not having the
capcity to suffer, before Adam. So, perhaps even
suffering in itself is morally neutral, as
counterintuitive as that idea seems to be.

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 08:20:36 -0600
  "Charles Carrigan" <CCarriga@olivet.edu> wrote:
>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 09:33:46 2005