Let's talk about Ichneumonidae

[Grumpy Old Man]

I recently finished reading Dawkin's The Greatest Show On Earth, a good (though sometimes technical) book about evolution. In one of the later chapters Dawkins mentions the Ichneumon wasp. Basically, the Ichneumon wasp injects its eggs into caterpillars. The egg hatches and the larvae basically eat their way out of the caterpillar in such a way as to keep the caterpillar alive as long as possible. Dawkins quoted Darwin as saying;

I own that I cannot see as plainly as others do, and as I should wish to do, evidence of design and beneficence on all sides of us. There seems to me too much misery in the world. I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent and omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidae with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars, or that a cat should play with mice.

This quote can also be found at Ichneumonidae - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, which has more information on Ichneumonidae.

Anyway, on to my question. Why did God create such a twisted creature? For that matter, why do we have such other such horrible creations; like parasitic worms that are making innocent African children go blind; or head lice; harmful bacteria and germs; etc? As an atheist I fully understand these things to have naturally evolved. However, I'm interested in how a Christian can reconcile the daily violence of nature (specifically the Ichnaeumonidae I have mentioned) with the notion of a benevolent deity.

EDIT: Before anyone says "sin", I would like clarification (because I've heard this weak answer before). How exactly did Adam's sin cause wasps to instantly evolve so they had to breed by injecting their eggs into living caterpillars? How did sin create harmful germs and bacteria? What did lions eat before sin entered the world? If human sin can therefore change animal behaviour then shouldn't this be testable under lab conditions - have any Christian scientists attempted this?

 

[bling]

I hate to break the news to you, but this world is not a happy place, was never intended to be a happy place and will never be a happy place.

This world is not to be man’s home, but is ideally (perfectly) arranged to provide the greatest and best opportunity for willing individuals to fulfill their earthly objective, since this objective cannot be fulfilled any place else and later go home.

All these tragedies are allowed by God to provide opportunities to see, feel, experience, give, receive and grow Godly type Love, so man, if man is just a little willing, will desire Godly type Love to the point of accepting that Love as a free undeserving gift (Charity).

 

[Grumpy Old Man]

I hate to break the news to you, but this world is not a happy place, was never intended to be a happy place and will never be a happy place.

Er, yeah, I know this. But from the Christian perspective, when did the world become bad? God, after he created it, said it was good. Did this include earthquakes and volcanoes and bacteria and germs? You didn't really answer my questions very well.

This world is not to be man’s home, but is ideally (perfectly) arranged to provide the greatest and best opportunity for willing individuals to fulfill their earthly objective, since this objective cannot be fulfilled any place else and later go home.

Where are we meant to be living then? Should I have my mail forwarded?

All these tragedies are allowed by God to provide opportunities to see, feel, experience, give, receive and grow Godly type Love, so man, if man is just a little willing, will desire Godly type Love to the point of accepting that Love as a free undeserving gift (Charity).

So you're saying that God made the world a crap place so man could learn love? What is Godly love anyway? I see little love in the Bible. Compare 1 Corinthians 13 (the famous chapter on love) to God in the Old Testament. Which love should I practice?

In all this you didn't actually answer any of the questions in my OP. I'd rather you answered that directly.

 

[elman]

I recently finished reading Dawkin's The Greatest Show On Earth, a good (though sometimes technical) book about evolution. In one of the later chapters Dawkins mentions the Ichneumon wasp. Basically, the Ichneumon wasp injects its eggs into caterpillars. The egg hatches and the larvae basically eat their way out of the caterpillar in such a way as to keep the caterpillar alive as long as possible. Dawkins quoted Darwin as saying;



This quote can also be found at Ichneumonidae - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, which has more information on Ichneumonidae.

Anyway, on to my question. Why did God create such a twisted creature? For that matter, why do we have such other such horrible creations; like parasitic worms that are making innocent African children go blind; or head lice; harmful bacteria and germs; etc? As an atheist I fully understand these things to have naturally evolved. However, I'm interested in how a Christian can reconcile the daily violence of nature (specifically the Ichnaeumonidae I have mentioned) with the notion of a benevolent deity.

EDIT: Before anyone says "sin", I would like clarification (because I've heard this weak answer before). How exactly did Adam's sin cause wasps to instantly evolve so they had to breed by injecting their eggs into living caterpillars? How did sin create harmful germs and bacteria? What did lions eat before sin entered the world? If human sin can therefore change animal behaviour then shouldn't this be testable under lab conditions - have any Christian scientists attempted this?

I don't have an answer to this and I have thought about it and searched for an answer. However this being one indication against a benevolent Creator is not proof that there is no Creator nor is it proof that any Creator would be evil or non benevolent. There is also the question of why is there so much beauty and good and love in the world which would be an indicator of a benevolent Creator--but not proof of course. Also there is the point that believing we exist by accident of nature or for no particular purpose is not proven to be a fact and seems less likely to me than the assumption we do exist because there is some intelligence that has caused it to happen and therefore some reason for our existence that transcends our puny time and space and perhaps some ultimate destiny for us other than oblivion.

 

[Grumpy Old Man]

I don't have an answer to this and I have thought about it and searched for an answer. However this being one indication against a benevolent Creator is not proof that there is no Creator nor is it proof that any Creator would be evil or non benevolent. There is also the question of why is there so much beauty and good and love in the world which would be an indicator of a benevolent Creator--but not proof of course. Also there is the point that believing we exist by accident of nature or for no particular purpose is not proven to be a fact and seems less likely to me than the assumption we do exist because there is some intelligence that has caused it to happen and therefore some reason for our existence that transcends our puny time and space and perhaps some ultimate destiny for us other than oblivion.

It's just one indication against a benevolent creator. The whole of nature is vicious. Have you ever watched a nature programme? Ever seen lions, cheetahs, etc, hunt and eat their prey; they don't die quickly - they get eaten slowly. This is why I have a problem with Christians who happily chirp that "God is good". No, nature says otherwise. These are also the Christians who, with a glazed expression, say that man's sin is the cause of all suffering. I would like to know just how they qualify this. Where is the science that says Adam and Eve's fruit eating contest caused lion's to hunt and eat the flesh of other animals?

Also, your argument that we exist because we were created is one often debated. I'm seen both sides and I am, as yet, unconvinced by the notion that some benevolent creator made the entire universe (over 100 billion galaxies) and then spends his entire time focussed on one small planet. Science doesn't actually have any solid answers on the origin of the universe; there is only speculation. However, evolution itself is a testable fact proven many times over. But I'm not here to debate that. Go read a book on evolution (the Dawkins book I mentioned in the OP is a good place to start). I'm here to ask how Christians reconcile the evils of nature with the notion of a benevolent creator.

 

[elman]

Grumpy Old Man;58803303]It's just one indication against a benevolent creator. The whole of nature is vicious. Have you ever watched a nature programme? Ever seen lions, cheetahs, etc, hunt and eat their prey; they don't die quickly - they get eaten slowly. This is why I have a problem with Christians who happily chirp that "God is good". No, nature says otherwise.

Nature also says God is good. Neither is provable.

These are also the Christians who, with a glazed expression, say that man's sin is the cause of all suffering. I would like to know just how they qualify this. Where is the science that says Adam and Eve's fruit eating contest caused lion's to hunt and eat the flesh of other animals?

I don't say that.

Also, your argument that we exist because we were created is one often debated. I'm seen both sides and I am, as yet, unconvinced by the notion that some benevolent creator made the entire universe (over 100 billion galaxies) and then spends his entire time focussed on one small planet.

I can believe I exist on purpose and not by accident or assume that and not deal at all with what may be on other planets and in other universes. I don't defend and did not say God focuses on on one small planet.

Science doesn't actually have any solid answers on the origin of the universe; there is only speculation. However, evolution itself is a testable fact proven many times over. But I'm not here to debate that.

I don't debate against evolution, but what has not been proven many times over is that life will naturally evolve from non life.

Go read a book on evolution (the Dawkins book I mentioned in the OP is a good place to start). I'm here to ask how Christians reconcile the evils of nature with the notion of a benevolent creator.

I just told you I cannot reconcile it, but the suffering in nature does not prove there is no benevolent Creator just as the beauty and love that can be seen in this world does not prove as absolute fact there is a benevolent Creator.

 

[Grumpy Old Man]

I don't debate against evolution, but what has not been proven many times over is that life will naturally evolve from non life.

Evolution isn't a study on the origin of life. It's the study of species. The study of the origin of life is called abiogenesis. As with the origins of the universe, scientists only have speculations on the origins of life on our planet. What we do know is that all life on this planet shares the same DNA structure, indicating that we are all related. This tells us that we evolved from one single entity back when the earth was very young.

 

[elman]

Evolution isn't a study on the origin of life. It's the study of species. The study of the origin of life is called abiogenesis. As with the origins of the universe, scientists only have speculations on the origins of life on our planet. What we do know is that all life on this planet shares the same DNA structure, indicating that we are all related. This tells us that we evolved from one single entity back when the earth was very young.

Perhaps but it does not prove life evolved from non life.

 

[Grumpy Old Man]

Perhaps but it does not prove life evolved from non life.

Again, the theory of evolution doesn't tell us how life on this planet started. It merely explains how life, as it exists now, evolved from a single dangly bit of DNA some 3 or 4 billions of years ago. Evolution can show you, from fossil records and DNA samples, the descendents of a species.

Furthermore, I don't really find it such a great leap of faith to believe that life on this planet started from a passing (or crashing) asteroid/meteor. Compare this to believing in the creation story as described in Genesis. I actually find it harder to believe the Genesis story, given what we know about modern science, rather than believing in the passing asteroid/meteor hypothesis.

 

[bling]

Er, yeah, I know this. But from the Christian perspective, when did the world become bad? God, after he created it, said it was good. Did this include earthquakes and volcanoes and bacteria and germs? You didn't really answer my questions very well.

Everything was “very good” but not perfect. Humans were made as good as they could be made, but they are not perfect like Christ, since Christ is not a created being and thus has always had Godly type Love.

The earth with all its tragedies is made the best it can be made to help willing humans fulfill their objective in life.

One of the facts we gain from the Garden story (you do not have to believe it is real to learn the massages) is God really wants us to be in a heavenly place.

Where are we meant to be living then? Should I have my mail forwarded?

We are meant to fulfill our purpose while here on earth, so we can take that result to heaven where it cannot be fulfilled.

So you're saying that God made the world a crap place so man could learn love? What is Godly love anyway? I see little love in the Bible. Compare 1 Corinthians 13 (the famous chapter on love) to God in the Old Testament. Which love should I practice?

Here is something I have written on the subject before:

Agape (Love) is really defined by Christ’s words and actions (you can also use 1 Cor. 13 and 1 John 4). It is much more than Parent to Child love, spousal love, love of nation and love for a friend, although Agape can be added to these loves and these loves alone can be extremely strong to the point of sacrificing your life. Books have been written on Agape Love and you might read some like CS Lewis “Four Loves”. I developed the following definition: Godly type Love is: selfless, sacrificial, originates from God, thought out, the result of a moral decision to humbly submit to God, chosen over likely perceived alternatives, unconditional, undeserved, required for Christians to do anything righteous, all consuming, initially requires trust, is the major or only motivation for Christians and is a transaction.

Obtaining Godly type Love so we can love like God (the greatest possible gift He could give us) is our objective so we can Love God and others with all our heart soul, mind, and energy.

The big difference between Godly type Love and other loves is it is totally unselfish, we Love not in any way or portion of the Love for something we might or will get out of it or to pay something back, but totally because that is the way we are. It has nothing to do with whom we are Loving (not because they are fellow citizens of earth, even). We expect nothing in return, but sometimes do get something back but that was not the intension. We do not “have” to Love the person to fulfill some task or achieve something, but get to Love the person because we are lovers. That does not mean everyone we try to Love accepts our Love as it was given and thus completes the transaction of Love (Actual Love for a person will not take place if the receiver of the Love does not accept the Love as it was given unconditionally).

Our free will on earth is only need to enable us to make Godly type Love our choice, because an instinctive Love would be a robotic type of love and not Godly type Love. We have free will to choose to accept God’s free undeserving gift of Love in the form of forgiveness or we can choose to continue sinning for the perceived pleasures of sin for a season.

One of the unique things about “Godly type Love” is that if a being extends that Love to another being and the second being accepts that Love as it was given (unconditionally and undeserving) that the second being will Love the first being back with even greater love than was expressed initially. Now, God is not trying to Love us to get us to Love Him back (that would be selfish on His part), but that is part of the definition to Godly type Love and it happens automatically. The problem is always getting people to accept God’s Love.

Adam and Eve did not “obey” God because they did not Love God with a Godly type Love, but they would certainly love God with a wonderful child to a wonderful parent type of love. Parental love is not strong enough and to make the leap to Godly type Love is not possible for humans by themselves, but God can give them that power if they want it. Wanting Godly type Love is like wanting to be selfless instead of selfish.

It appears that God is doing everything He can and allowing things He does not like in order to help those “will” humans to initially accept His Love and grow the Love they have obtained. The only initial way for humans to possible obtain Godly type Love seems to be through finally accepting God’s Love in the form of forgiveness of our sins (this takes faith and humility) and then “…he that is forgiven much will Love much…” Once we have the gift of Godly type Love then we can grow that Love through use and His help. Trusting (faith) God can be the result of realize nothing else (including ourselves) can be trusted. Humility to some degree happens to all of us at some times in our lives. The lack of faith and humility seems to be the problem (pride).

This is no small subject and I have personally thought about it long and hard. I find few theologians expounding these ideas, but from many adult classes I have taught, discussion on boards like this and especially using these ideas in serving others, I have honed my believes.

This is actually the same “Love” we find in the OT, but not as easily seen because people get in the way. Christ is a direct observation of God’s Love.

 

[Grumpy Old Man]

Everything was “very good” but not perfect. Humans were made as good as they could be made, but they are not perfect like Christ, since Christ is not a created being and thus has always had Godly type Love.

The earth with all its tragedies is made the best it can be made to help willing humans fulfill their objective in life.

One of the facts we gain from the Garden story (you do not have to believe it is real to learn the massages) is God really wants us to be in a heavenly place.

We are meant to fulfill our purpose while here on earth, so we can take that result to heaven where it cannot be fulfilled.

Here is something I have written on the subject before:

Agape (Love) is really defined by Christ’s words and actions (you can also use 1 Cor. 13 and 1 John 4). It is much more than Parent to Child love, spousal love, love of nation and love for a friend, although Agape can be added to these loves and these loves alone can be extremely strong to the point of sacrificing your life. Books have been written on Agape Love and you might read some like CS Lewis “Four Loves”. I developed the following definition: Godly type Love is: selfless, sacrificial, originates from God, thought out, the result of a moral decision to humbly submit to God, chosen over likely perceived alternatives, unconditional, undeserved, required for Christians to do anything righteous, all consuming, initially requires trust, is the major or only motivation for Christians and is a transaction.

Obtaining Godly type Love so we can love like God (the greatest possible gift He could give us) is our objective so we can Love God and others with all our heart soul, mind, and energy.

The big difference between Godly type Love and other loves is it is totally unselfish, we Love not in any way or portion of the Love for something we might or will get out of it or to pay something back, but totally because that is the way we are. It has nothing to do with whom we are Loving (not because they are fellow citizens of earth, even). We expect nothing in return, but sometimes do get something back but that was not the intension. We do not “have” to Love the person to fulfill some task or achieve something, but get to Love the person because we are lovers. That does not mean everyone we try to Love accepts our Love as it was given and thus completes the transaction of Love (Actual Love for a person will not take place if the receiver of the Love does not accept the Love as it was given unconditionally).

Our free will on earth is only need to enable us to make Godly type Love our choice, because an instinctive Love would be a robotic type of love and not Godly type Love. We have free will to choose to accept God’s free undeserving gift of Love in the form of forgiveness or we can choose to continue sinning for the perceived pleasures of sin for a season.

One of the unique things about “Godly type Love” is that if a being extends that Love to another being and the second being accepts that Love as it was given (unconditionally and undeserving) that the second being will Love the first being back with even greater love than was expressed initially. Now, God is not trying to Love us to get us to Love Him back (that would be selfish on His part), but that is part of the definition to Godly type Love and it happens automatically. The problem is always getting people to accept God’s Love.

Adam and Eve did not “obey” God because they did not Love God with a Godly type Love, but they would certainly love God with a wonderful child to a wonderful parent type of love. Parental love is not strong enough and to make the leap to Godly type Love is not possible for humans by themselves, but God can give them that power if they want it. Wanting Godly type Love is like wanting to be selfless instead of selfish.

It appears that God is doing everything He can and allowing things He does not like in order to help those “will” humans to initially accept His Love and grow the Love they have obtained. The only initial way for humans to possible obtain Godly type Love seems to be through finally accepting God’s Love in the form of forgiveness of our sins (this takes faith and humility) and then “…he that is forgiven much will Love much…” Once we have the gift of Godly type Love then we can grow that Love through use and His help. Trusting (faith) God can be the result of realize nothing else (including ourselves) can be trusted. Humility to some degree happens to all of us at some times in our lives. The lack of faith and humility seems to be the problem (pride).

This is no small subject and I have personally thought about it long and hard. I find few theologians expounding these ideas, but from many adult classes I have taught, discussion on boards like this and especially using these ideas in serving others, I have honed my believes.

This is actually the same “Love” we find in the OT, but not as easily seen because people get in the way. Christ is a direct observation of God’s Love.

Yes, but why did a loving God create Ichneumonidae? Would you say that these "creations" are the work of a loving, benevolent God? Nothing you've said above answers this. I don't want this thread to get sidetracked on the nature of God's love. I just want to understand how a benevolent deity, as Christians believe, could create such horrible creatures.

 

[razeontherock]

The whole of nature is vicious.

Yes it is. That's why the idea of omni-benevolence is ruled out.

Benevolence is no problem, seeing it is coupled with personal responsibility.

I refer you to this thread:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7472380-7/

 

[aiki]

Anyway, on to my question. Why did God create such a twisted creature? For that matter, why do we have such other such horrible creations; like parasitic worms that are making innocent African children go blind; or head lice; harmful bacteria and germs; etc? As an atheist I fully understand these things to have naturally evolved. However, I'm interested in how a Christian can reconcile the daily violence of nature (specifically the Ichnaeumonidae I have mentioned) with the notion of a benevolent deity.

EDIT: Before anyone says "sin", I would like clarification (because I've heard this weak answer before). How exactly did Adam's sin cause wasps to instantly evolve so they had to breed by injecting their eggs into living caterpillars?

The Bible doesn't say. It does give us to understand that sin and the pain, disease and death of this world are related, however.

It seems to me that implicit in your question is whether or not the immaterial can affect the material. The answer is "yes," if the record of the Bible is to be believed. Actually, in a small way we see this occurring among people who are depressed, or bitter, or fearful. One cannot test fear or bitterness itself in a lab; one cannot extract depression from a person and boil it in a test tube. Nonetheless, these intangible emotions of the human person have powerful physical effects upon them. A person who is fearful experiences increased heart rate and blood pressure, breathing accelerates, hormones are released and muscles tense. Depressed people suffer decreased levels of serotonin, they feel constantly fatigued and listless, they often gain weight, and prolonged periods of depression can seriously effect the biochemistry of the brain.

How did sin create harmful germs and bacteria?

As a primarily spiritually-oriented text, the Bible doesn't bother to go into scientific detail about how harmful germs and bacteria developed. We do know from Scripture that sin corrupts, turning the harmless into the harmful, the helpful into the destructive.

What did lions eat before sin entered the world?

Not other animals, obviously. But the Bible doesn't take pains to detail the diet of pre-Fall lions.

If human sin can therefore change animal behaviour then shouldn't this be testable under lab conditions - have any Christian scientists attempted this?

Not that I know of. How would you go about testing the connection between sin and animal behaviour?

Selah.

 

[lesliedellow]

Anyway, on to my question. Why did God create such a twisted creature? For that matter, why do we have such other such horrible creations; like parasitic worms that are making innocent African children go blind; or head lice; harmful bacteria and germs; etc?

Personally I think the only way to account for suffering is to ditch the idea that God's number one objective is to make life as comfortable as possible for us. Not all branches of Christianity have believed that anyway; only those evangelicals who prefer their God to come sugar coated.

 

[drich0150]

Anyway, on to my question. Why did God create such a twisted creature? For that matter, why do we have such other such horrible creations; like parasitic worms that are making innocent African children go blind; or head lice; harmful bacteria and germs; etc? As an atheist I fully understand these things to have naturally evolved. However, I'm interested in how a Christian can reconcile the daily violence of nature (specifically the Ichnaeumonidae I have mentioned) with the notion of a benevolent deity.

Two big things... To what standard do you, or can you judge these creatures as "twisted."

And two, where does the bible say God is an omni benevolent Deity?

Can you see the problem you seem to be having over and over? is that you have created your own image of God and then find things that contradict this image to use as "evidence" to doubt the very existence of God to begin with.

My question is that even if you do not believe in God, why would you think God would model Himself after what you perceive God to be?

Wouldn't it be more logical to address the God of the bible as the bible has described Him, rather than to address the God of the bible as you have created Him?

 

[Question.Everything]

I'm thankful for this thread because I've never read about the Ichneumonidaes before. Fascinating creatures, reminds me of Aliens. What I think is amazing is how scientists (with today's technology) don't quite know how they pierce through deep, solid wood.

The argument here boils down to a classic philosophical argument: if everyone were beautiful, would anyone be beautiful?

I think so. The Christian perspective is the opposite (you can only love because you know what non-love (sin) is).

 

[razeontherock]

The Christian perspective is the opposite (you can only love because you know what non-love (sin) is).

That is not the Christian perspective.

 

[Question.Everything]

That is not the Christian perspective.

I agree! You've convinced me to change my mind. I believe in your written testimony.

...

More seriously, why didn't God create every human to be loving and genuine like Jesus? Why does God allow Satan to corrupt Earth, instead of keeping him locked in the cage he locked him in before?

 

[razeontherock]

What makes you think satan was locked in a cage, "before?" More importantly, when are you going to be responsible with the keys you've got?

And for the record, G-d did not create every man. Only 3.

 

[Question.Everything]

What makes you think satan was locked in a cage, "before?" More importantly, when are you going to be responsible with the keys you've got?

I'm sorry, you're correct. Biblical prophesy says Satan will be locked up for 1,000 years in the future (after).

This also changes nothing about my point. In both cases, God has the ability to lock Satan from Earth.

And for the record, G-d did not create every man. Only 3.

So God didn't create everything?