Claim CA650:
Evolution implies that animals suffered and died for billions of years before human beings appeared. This implies that God is not really a god of mercy and grace, because the suffering was not necessary to create human beings for fellowship with himself. This, in turn, implies that the loving God of the Bible does not exist.
Source:
CreationWiki response:
Talk.Origins is taking this out of context. It is not an argument against the theory of evolution itself but attempts to reconcile the biblical account with evolution.
(Talk.Origins quotes in blue)
1. Evolution assumes that the conditions of death and suffering in the past were much like they are now. If death and suffering mean God was not a god of grace and mercy before humanity, then the same conditions today mean he still is not such a god.
Thank you Talk.Origins for proving Morris' point, which is that if evolution is true, then the “the loving God of the Bible does not exist.” This proves that reconciling the biblical account with evolution is impossible.
2. It is not for us to tell God how to do his job. There is no justification to claim that from God's point of view, death and suffering are not the best way to get things done.
While there is some truth to this, based on what the Bible says about God it would be inconsistent with His nature, which is the point of Morris' claim.
3. Creationism does not solve the problem. It still proposes a god that allowed 2,000 years or more of suffering and dying before redemption came. If God is cruel for allowing billions of years of suffering, he is still cruel for allowing thousands of years of suffering.
Once again Talk.Origins shows that they did not get the point. It's not a question of time but of cause. If animals were suffering and dying for billions of years before man, then God is the cause of death and suffering; but according to the Bible man’s sin is the cause of death and suffering as stated in Romans 5:12 and 1 Corinthians 15:21 (KJV).
4. Origins are not determined by our personal decisions of what religion to follow.
Not relevant since this claim is an issue of Biblical interpretation and its incompatibility with evolution, and not about which view is actually correct.
|
|||||||||||||||||
