Why did God create mosquitoes?

[FarWanderer]

Mosquitoes suck, yet God created them. They don't appear to serve much ecological function, so why?

There seems to be two theistic strategies to explaining mosquitoes. One is that they are somehow our fault. The fall led to the existence of these menaces. However, if that is the case, I have to wonder what mosquitoes were originally? I mean, what did they evolve into bloodsuckers?

The other strategy is to say they don't really suck, but just seem to suck. The mosquito is an integral part of God's great plan for ultimate super-duper happy awesomeness. We just don't understand how they fit into God's super-cool plan, and so only out of ignorance do we complain about those little bloodsuckers. But I have to wonder, why should we be thinking God's plan is really all that cool? Especially when we actually haven't got the slightest clue what it is, and God's other plans, like that flood that didn't solve anything, have not been very awesome.

So, to repeat the main question: Why did God create mosquitoes?

[Zzyzx]

.

We live in a time when everything must be verified scientifically. Since many why questions, especially regarding origins, can not be verified and we do not like rules, especially when they interfere with our fun, we can throw this guidance out of hand.

Okay, forget "scientifically" verified for a moment. HOW can bible / religion claims be verified by ANY means?

Is "take my word for it" sufficient? His word? Their word (the many who believe)? This book (that cannot be shown to be truthful or accurate)?

If that is the standard of verification, a Realtor in Florida has land for sale. He and his associates say it is high and dry, a great buy. Is there any reason to verify what they say?

How is the Realtor's word any more or less reliable than that of a preacher, a "prophet" or bible writer?

Thousands of proposed gods can be "verified" if one sets the standards low enough.

That is why I am not going to take someone's word that the existence of mosquitoes proves that there is no deity.

Will you take someone's word that dead bodies come back to life after days in the grave, that water magically turns into wine, that virgins give birth, that snakes and donkeys converse with humans, that the Earth was flooded to the tops of mountains? Do you have anything OTHER than someone's word (oral or written) that such things occurred -- or that Jesus is divine, or that a god created the universe?

I do not ask anyone to take my word for anything, but rather that they evaluate what I say and check it against reality.

Notice that you did not address the question "Okay, forget "scientifically" verified for a moment. HOW can bible / religion claims be verified by ANY means?"

I have no problem with scientific study and verification in that regard.

Excellent. Much of what I do in these threads is to ask for verification of claims and stories made by Theists. The response is typically a reference back to the same book that makes the claim.

However, if scientific humanists say that there can be no deity, because they do not like how the world currently works, I have a problem with that.

I would have a problem with that also – if that was all there is to the situation.

All I have claimed on this thread is, if a deity is not possible, then "Why did God create mosquitoes?" has no meaning. However, if it is possible that there can be a deity, there are possible answers to that question.

I, for one, acknowledge that any of the thousands of proposed gods are POSSIBLE.

I am sorry to say that you claim that "there is no objection from me (and others)" is clearly false.

The statement is NOT false unless one translates "and others" to mean "and everyone."

[bluethread]

.

That is why I am not going to take someone's word that the existence of mosquitoes proves that there is no deity.

Will you take someone's word that dead bodies come back to life after days in the grave, that water magically turns into wine, that virgins give birth, that snakes and donkeys converse with humans, that the Earth was flooded to the tops of mountains? Do you have anything OTHER than someone's word (oral or written) that such things occurred -- or that Jesus is divine, or that a god created the universe?

I do not ask anyone to take my word for anything, but rather that they evaluate what I say and check it against reality.

Notice that you did not address the question "Okay, forget "scientifically" verified for a moment. HOW can bible / religion claims be verified by ANY means?"

I take people's word about a lot of things that I have not verified. I take people's word that men traveled into space and landed on the moon in a vehicle with walls no thicker than tin foil. I also take people's word that the human heart has a rudimentary brain that can work independently of the one in my cranium. These things have supposedly been verified scientifically by others, but I am going on hearsay. I also accept many historical accounts, even though all we have are written records. These things can not be verified scientifically. Since such things can not be verified scientifically, I agreed with Ooberman that we would set them aside for this discussion. Regarding the possibility of those events happening, as I noted above, there are many things that were not thought possible, that have been shown to be not only possible but have been replicated. Therefore, I am willing to give measured credence to things that are hard to believe to the extent that they actually effect my day to day life.

I have no problem with scientific study and verification in that regard.

Excellent. Much of what I do in these threads is to ask for verification of claims and stories made by Theists. The response is typically a reference back to the same book that makes the claim.

That is the nature of the historical argument, it gets more and more difficult the further back one goes. Thus, the difficulty with making claims about origins of any kind.

All I have claimed on this thread is, if a deity is not possible, then "Why did God create mosquitoes?" has no meaning. However, if it is possible that there can be a deity, there are possible answers to that question.

I, for one, acknowledge that any of the thousands of proposed gods are POSSIBLE.

I am sorry to say that you claim that "there is no objection from me (and others)" is clearly false.

The statement is NOT false unless one translates "and others" to mean "and everyone."

If you were using the term others to say that yours is not a singular view, fine. I was just pointing to the context of the post that you initially commented on. That post was in response to Ooberman's insistence that the existence on mosquitoes begs an ontological dilemma regarding the existence of a deity, because such a deity can not be amenable of suffering and death. Such is not the case. If a deity does exist, it is amenable of suffering and death, and has designed the creation to accommodate it. Discussion regarding whether that is how it has always been or not, is beyond scientific examination and therefore, it appears, not acceptable to Ooberman.

[Zzyzx]

.

Notice that you did not address the question "Okay, forget "scientifically" verified for a moment. HOW can bible / religion claims be verified by ANY means?"

I take people's word about a lot of things that I have not verified. I take people's word that men traveled into space and landed on the moon in a vehicle with walls no thicker than tin foil.

Did you take someone's word OR did you accept a convergence of evidence of all kinds from all over the world – by disconnected sources?

If a few people from NASA made the claim with NO supporting evidence would you take their word?

Notice that the question remains unanswered "Okay, forget "scientifically" verified for a moment. HOW can bible / religion claims be verified by ANY means?"

I also take people's word that the human heart has a rudimentary brain that can work independently of the one in my cranium. These things have supposedly been verified scientifically by others, but I am going on hearsay.

Regarding issues such as that I tend to reserve judgment (not make a decision) until additional, more conclusive, more independent evidence is presented.

However, that does not answer the question, does it?

I also accept many historical accounts, even though all we have are written records.

It makes little difference in one's life if they accept or reject most historical accounts. Whether we know that Caesar did this or that makes absolutely no difference in how we live today.

However, many people allow their lives to be influenced by unverifiable accounts attributed to unidentified bible writers thousands of years ago telling of incredible events.

These things can not be verified scientifically. Since such things can not be verified scientifically, I agreed with Ooberman that we would set them aside for this discussion.

I would go further to suggest we acknowledge what we cannot verify and not claim it is true or not true.

Regarding the possibility of those events happening, as I noted above, there are many things that were not thought possible, that have been shown to be not only possible but have been replicated.

Many things that were not possible just a few decades ago are commonplace now. Many things that were not possible are still not possible. So what?

If some day mankind learns to return long-dead bodies to life, will the "resurrected" be divine?

Therefore, I am willing to give measured credence to things that are hard to believe to the extent that they actually effect my day to day life.

Could you provide a couple or few examples of such things that affect your day-to-day life but you accept even though hard to believe, so I can understand what you mean?

I have no problem with scientific study and verification in that regard.

Excellent. Much of what I do in these threads is to ask for verification of claims and stories made by Theists. The response is typically a reference back to the same book that makes the claim.

That is the nature of the historical argument, it gets more and more difficult the further back one goes. Thus, the difficulty with making claims about origins of any kind.

Exactly. Events and conversations from two thousand years ago are VERY difficult to verify.

That being true, HOW can anyone claim to know that bible stories are true or that events and conversations were recorded truthfully and accurately?

I am sorry to say that you claim that "there is no objection from me (and others)" is clearly false.

The statement is NOT false unless one translates "and others" to mean "and everyone."

If you were using the term others to say that yours is not a singular view, fine.

Thank you. That was my intent. It was a misunderstanding due to terminology.

[Skybringr]

Why did God create mosquitoes?

One could say that mosquitoes gives us a sharper conscience to insulate ourselves from the wilderness.

[bluethread]

.

Notice that you did not address the question "Okay, forget "scientifically" verified for a moment. HOW can bible / religion claims be verified by ANY means?"

I take people's word about a lot of things that I have not verified. I take people's word that men traveled into space and landed on the moon in a vehicle with walls no thicker than tin foil.

Did you take someone's word OR did you accept a convergence of evidence of all kinds from all over the world – by disconnected sources?

If a few people from NASA made the claim with NO supporting evidence would you take their word?

Notice that the question remains unanswered "Okay, forget "scientifically" verified for a moment. HOW can bible / religion claims be verified by ANY means?"

I have been processing information from various divergent sources all my life. The problem is that most of it is second hand at best. I have seen things at the Smithsonian Air and Space museum, but as to whether the landing on the moon ever took place, I believe it did, but I would not bet my life on it. Regarding the Scriptures and the practices related to them, from my prospective, the events appear to line up historically and the laws appear reasonable.

I also take people's word that the human heart has a rudimentary brain that can work independently of the one in my cranium. These things have supposedly been verified scientifically by others, but I am going on hearsay.

Regarding issues such as that I tend to reserve judgment (not make a decision) until additional, more conclusive, more independent evidence is presented.

However, that does not answer the question, does it?

It supports the assertion that we all live our lives based on many unverified presumptions. That is not limited to the theist.

I also accept many historical accounts, even though all we have are written records.

It makes little difference in one's life if they accept or reject most historical accounts. Whether we know that Caesar did this or that makes absolutely no difference in how we live today.

However, many people allow their lives to be influenced by unverifiable accounts attributed to unidentified bible writers thousands of years ago telling of incredible events.

Yes, Socrates also has a lot of influence on people lives, even though some think that he is a fictitious invention of Plato.

These things can not be verified scientifically. Since such things can not be verified scientifically, I agreed with Ooberman that we would set them aside for this discussion.

I would go further to suggest we acknowledge what we cannot verify and not claim it is true or not true.

Have I claimed something is absolutely true or not true in this discussion?

Regarding the possibility of those events happening, as I noted above, there are many things that were not thought possible, that have been shown to be not only possible but have been replicated.

Many things that were not possible just a few decades ago are commonplace now. Many things that were not possible are still not possible. So what?

If some day mankind learns to return long-dead bodies to life, will the "resurrected" be divine?

That is the fallacy of prospective. If I do not know something, it can not be recognized as existing. However, if I do know something, it is only natural. One's understanding of something does not establish it's cause or nature. It only verifies one's prospective.

Therefore, I am willing to give measured credence to things that are hard to believe to the extent that they actually effect my day to day life.

Could you provide a couple or few examples of such things that affect your day-to-day life but you accept even though hard to believe, so I can understand what you mean?

Adonai set the seventh day apart as a memorial, therefore, I do no ordinary work on Shabbat.

That is the nature of the historical argument, it gets more and more difficult the further back one goes. Thus, the difficulty with making claims about origins of any kind.

Exactly. Events and conversations from two thousand years ago are VERY difficult to verify.

That being true, HOW can anyone claim to know that bible stories are true or that events and conversations were recorded truthfully and accurately?

That is the fallacy of novelty. As I said before, the events generally appear to fit the historical record. The fact that certain particular events can not be established beyond a shadow of a doubt, does not make the lessons of the past of no value.

Regarding why Adonai created mosquitos, that is a philosophical question(why) regarding the passed(did) based on a presumption(god create) , therefore my responses were based on those parameters. The limitations on those parameters are really another question.