Christianity's Biggest Problem Yet?

[POI]

Below is a 20 minute video. For the ones who opt not to watch, I'll start with the following question? (Which may then lead to many others, as this is a fairly new concept of thought for me)....

Why does YHWH allow for so much animal suffering? Before you Christians answer, I trust you are already aware of this guy's counter points?

[TRANSPONDER]

... paleontology alone demonstrates that plenty of 'natural evil' prevailed, prior to the onset of humans

I was not aware that paleontology addressed the question of evil. To my knowledge paleontology is "the branch of science concerned with fossil animals and plants" . Evil is a philosophical /theological question related to morals.

Perhaps you can clarify your claim and support it with some evidence.



Thanks


JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

Palaeontology shows evidence of hunting, killing, scavenging, battling and even cannibalisation amongst prehistoric species (e.g T Rex toothmarks on T Rex bones, as well as illness and natural disasters and accidents, such as a herd or Carnosaurus drowned crossing a river.

Just the sort of thing one would expect with evolutionary competition, but not what one would get with animals that hadn't sinned. And they didn't. So the evil dished out to humans because of Adam's sin (if we even accept that as just) was extended to animals that hadn't. This is unjust by even modern human standards and is just another reason to doubt the credibility of what the Bible says.

[JehovahsWitness]

Palaeontology shows evidence of hunting, killing, scavenging, battling and even cannibalisation amongst prehistoric species (e.g T Rex toothmarks on T Rex bones, as well as illness and natural disasters and accidents, such as a herd or Carnosaurus drowned crossing a river.

And where is the above classified by a Palaeontologist as "evil"?

[POI]

Palaeontology shows evidence of hunting, killing, scavenging, battling and even cannibalisation amongst prehistoric species (e.g T Rex toothmarks on T Rex bones, as well as illness and natural disasters and accidents, such as a herd or Carnosaurus drowned crossing a river.

And where is the above classified by a Palaeontologist as "evil"?

You are addressing this question to the wrong party. Why don't you ask God if He will allow in this future (Paradise), "hunting, killing, scavenging, battling and even cannibalisation amongst prehistoric species (e.g T Rex toothmarks on T Rex bones, as well as illness and natural disasters and accidents, such as a herd or Carnosaurus drowned crossing a river.".

I think I already know what you have surmised, as such an answer... The answer is God will not allow such activity. Which means He must assure such current practices end. Which means He must deem such practices as 'evil'

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #80]

Moral evil - This covers the willful acts of human beings (such as murder, rape, etc.)
Natural evil - This refers to natural disasters (such as famines, floods, etc.)

These definitions seem to suppose that humans are not natura?

Morality appears to be the cause, and since morality is an invention of human - minds, by also assigning evil to acts of nature, that appear to be an overstep...unless those saying so also think there is an overall mind involved with nature - like the planet itself being mindful - self aware et al...then perhaps one could argue evil intent re natural events.

[TRANSPONDER]

Palaeontology shows evidence of hunting, killing, scavenging, battling and even cannibalisation amongst prehistoric species (e.g T Rex toothmarks on T Rex bones, as well as illness and natural disasters and accidents, such as a herd or Carnosaurus drowned crossing a river.

And where is the above classified by a Palaeontologist as "evil"?

It isn't. Moral judgements are irrelevant to the evidence of Palaeontology. Evil is more a religious concern, and the K2 extinction even is, for Palaeontology, a evident historical fact to be investigated and not a matter to debate morally. But from a religious -debate perspective (such as we are having here) the question might be asked 'Why did God do that, or allow it to happen?" Or, if they deny the evidence for the event, 'why the Flood, taking out the whole of creation, when it hadn't sinned?'

[JehovahsWitness]

And where is the above classified by a Palaeontologist as "evil"?

It isn't.

So what did you mean when you said that "paleontology .... demonstrates 'natural evil' "?

Did you mean that you have inferred what you call "natural evil" by how you interpret the scientific findings of paleontologists?

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #80]

Moral evil - This covers the willful acts of human beings (such as murder, rape, etc.)
Natural evil - This refers to natural disasters (such as famines, floods, etc.)

These definitions seem to suppose that humans are not natura?

Morality appears to be the cause, and since morality is an invention of human - minds, by also assigning evil to acts of nature, that appear to be an overstep...unless those saying so also think there is an overall mind involved with nature - like the planet itself being mindful - self aware et al...then perhaps one could argue evil intent re natural events.

Go back to the topic of the thread... "Christianity's Biggest Problem Yet?"

This thread is aimed at the Christian. Now, that, in and of itself, opens up Pandora's box, as already seen here. Most won't engage. The one's that do, namely Tam, 1213, and JW, carefully pick and choose. The video, in the OP, points to Dr. Craig; arguably the largest known apologist and public crusader for "Christianity". His 'best' defense is to make an argument for (first, second, and third order pain). This means that he too, looks to acknowledge/address the needless "suffering" of animals.

Your response is noted. And I, in part, agree with what you have said above. But the focus of this thread is directed to the 'Christian', and their view on 'morality'. I would enjoy delving into what you have explained above. However, I do not want to derail the intended focus. My purpose, in this thread, is to challenge the Christian, and this apparent given contradiction.

Based upon the flavor of Christian, who decides to engage, the conversation will go in differing directions. Why? Well, I guess this is why I also recently brought up another topic (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38748). --- Christians will not universally come away, reading the Bible, with the same message(s). Case/point... Read the recent response(s) from Theophile (vs) JW in this thread

Stay tuned

[POI]

And where is the above classified by a Palaeontologist as "evil"?

It isn't.

So what did you mean when you said that "paleontology .... demonstrates 'natural evil' "?

Did you mean that you have inferred what you call "natural evil" by how you interpret the scientific findings of paleontologists?

You look to be avoiding the obvious elephant in the room. It's (you) that view such dinosaur interaction as evil.

However, the PROBLEM FOR YOU still presents.........(i.e.) (https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesse ... s-beliefs/)

"Evil and suffering. These began when one of God’s angels rebelled. (John 8:​44) This angel, who after his rebellion was called “Satan” and “Devil,” persuaded the first human couple to join him, and the consequences have been disastrous for their descendants. (Genesis 3:​1-6; Romans 5:​12) In order to settle the moral issues raised by Satan, God has allowed evil and suffering, but He will not permit them to continue forever."

Your problem remains as follows. According to JW's, earth was once void of 'evil and suffering'. If you reconcile the science, that animals can feel pain and suffer, then you have a big problem. This is also why Dr. Craig desperately tries to hand-wave away this issue with the argument for 3rd order pain.

Since 'suffering' or 'natural evil' existed before the 'creation' of man, then the Bible is objectively wrong. Unless you now wish to deny 'science', like Dr. Craig?

And as the video states.... Maybe it's time to now relegate your once perceived 'authoritative doctrine' to the history books.


-

[JehovahsWitness]

You look to be avoiding the obvious elephant in the room. It's (you) that view such dinosaur interaction as evil.

No I do not.



JW

[POI]

You look to be avoiding the obvious elephant in the room. It's (you) that view such dinosaur interaction as evil.

No I do not.



JW

Here we go again on the hamster wheel. So the discovered activities of dinosaurs would someday be allowed in 'Paradise"? The answer would be no, as all creatures and man will merely live harmoniously.

Your lack in response is further becoming quite telling.... I trust you read post #87 as well....

Are you going to engage my assessment, or not?