Why did God make it so animals need to eat in order to survive?

[Paul of Eugene OR]

. . . . The spiritual is free of entropy. . .

You can't know that, this is sheer speculation.

 

[justlookinla]

You can't know that, this is sheer speculation.

I can find none. How about you?

 

[SkyWriting]

But couldn't God, being All Powerful, have made that possible if He'd wished? I think the question is why is life, for humans and other types of animal, so cruel when God could have made it different. No-one seems able to answer.

God did make it different.

Man has chosen not to have God in his heart as Lord and Master.
Likely, you've noticed.
As a result of Free Will, we can only have a relationship by choice.

This choice we've made, has the benefit of freedom from rule and rules,
but the downside is that creation is not under the direct controlling
force of the Father.

It's like God is water, and we are salt. He made the salt, but you can
imagine the results if we were as one again.

So we are the salt of the earth, and God is water. So God sent his Son
to bridge the gap. We need to be changed before we can get back with God.

In the meantime, our salty world stinks.

 

[SkyWriting]

No sir. Mutation is the sole, only, creator of new life forms in atheistic Darwinist creationism. All natural selection does is allegedly take these changes and moves them forward, if the criteria is correct. Natural selection does not produce a single new life form, it only acts on existing life forms.

"Mutation" is nothing more than the process as defined by the information code in DNA.
On your stove, there is gas, and your pot. Mutation is the defined process of conversion
of gas to heat to get stuff done in the pot.
The reproduction process is tightly controlled and monitored by DNA so that only certain
variations are allowed. It's not perfect, and disease get through, but the goal is
a particular range of variation.

 

[SkyWriting]

A close reading of Gen 1 indicates that the original design criteria for both beast and man included vegetarianism. I myself spent several months eating a near-vegetarian diet and experienced a measureable improvement in my health. I'm thinking of returning to it again.


Eating is one of the pleasures of life. And God put Adam in a pre-planted garden where every tasty thing grew. That was a good deal. But after he rebelled, part of his punishment was that he became responsible for feeding himself. And that's why we can go hungry; sustaining ourselves is now our job.

And helping others is good for the soul.

Nobody likes a lazy bum except for fellow slobs.

 

[justlookinla]

"Mutation" is nothing more than the process as defined by the information code in DNA.
On your stove, there is gas, and your pot. Mutation is the defined process of conversion
of gas to heat to get stuff done in the pot.
The reproduction process is tightly controlled and monitored by DNA so that only certain
variations are allowed. It's not perfect, and disease get through, but the goal is
a particular range of variation.

Random/chance mutation is the only process whereby there are life changes in atheistic Darwinist creationism, there is no other impetus. Reproduction after the change simply populates the new life forms.

 

[Davian]

Creation by only random/chance mutation offers much more to one's worldview than the price of milk.

Tell that to Wal-Mart.

The change is on the individual level within populations. The population isn't a life form, the individuals in the population are the life forms.

The 'population' is the subject of 'survival of the fittest' (straw-man representations notwithstanding).

No straw whatsoever, according to UC-Berkley.

No, theirs is not the straw-man, is it?

We aren't in the same boat. Your boat was created from only alleged random/chance events, my boat had a designer and creator. You boat is going to sink one of these days, mine stays afloat.

Just not in any way that you can demonstrate, correct? Same boat, like it or not.

Scripture is reality.

Again, not in any way that you can demonstrate.

The reality is that you're controlled by an antichrist spirit.

And the antileprechauns, antipixies, anti-extraterrestrial aliens, antiBermuda Triangle, antigremlins, anti-elves, antignomes, and antifairies spirits. It's crazy in here!

Can you offer anything but antichrist handwaving?

I cannot offer anything from the imaginary.

My original answer was concerning the natural, humanity. You then asked another question concerning the spiritual. Two questions, two different answers.

You made no such distinction when initially answering the question. Too bad.

You described your god/spirits/angels/souls/heaven/hell as working free of entropy. How is that not impossible? Can you offer anything more than religious handwaving?

The spiritual is free of entropy.

I didn't think so. As you have been reduced to simply being argumentative, I think we can let this derail die, but you can get in the last word if you must.

 

[Doveaman]

Why did God make it so animals need to eat in order to survive?

As a constant reminder of our dependence upon the God who provides for our survival.

“You shall remember the LORD your God, for it is He who gives you power to get wealth” – (Deut 8:18).

The need for food reminds us of our need for the God who provides that food.

It's not complicated.

May sound like an insane question, but bear with me.
It's just much easier to explain with an evolutionary worldview.

This is only if you already have an evolutionary worldview. I reject your evolutionary worldview in favor of the creationist worldview.

Animals competing in evolutionary arms races to kill each other is a cruel process. Why would God endorse such a system, dog-eat-dog, survival of the fittest?

This wasn't endorsed by God. This was the consequence of Man eating from the forbidden tree.

“You must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” – (Gen 2:17).

When Man ate from the forbidden tree, all the animals began to eat what was forbidden. They all, for some reason, followed their human master in eating what was forbidden. They were loyal to their master, I suppose.

But anyway, why would God make it so that humans die without food?

As a constant reminder that humans will die without Him.

“Man shall not live by bread alone” – (Matt 4:4).

Surely he knew that, in the future, people would die because they didn't have enough money to get food. A lot of people, I mean.
If the human body is so "perfect" as creationists claim, why can't it just generate its own energy? lol.

The human body would have generated its own energy if Man had chosen to eat from the other tree that God made available in the garden. Man refused to eat from that tree so God took it away preventing Man's body from generating its own life sustaining energy.

“He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” – (Gen 3:22).

There are just so many simple things like this that are missed in the debate between creationism and atheism.

You are obviously new to the debate.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

I can find none. How about you?

Lol, that's a funny one . . . But we can do some deducting. If Manna was spiritual food, that it could be assimilated and provide energy to the folks in the wilderness shows it was subject to the laws of thermodynamics, including entropy.

 

[justlookinla]

Tell that to Wal-Mart.

What does Walmart, or the price of milk, have to do with the atheistic Darwinist creationist worldview that mankind is the product of only a random/chance, meaningless, mindless, purposeless and goalless naturalistic mechanism acting on an alleged single life form from long long ago?

The 'population' is the subject of 'survival of the fittest' (straw-man representations notwithstanding).

No, each individual is the subject of the survival of the fittest. Individual life forms compete for survival, one by one.

No, theirs is not the straw-man, is it?

No, it's a worldview.

Just not in any way that you can demonstrate, correct? Same boat, like it or not.

Nope, different boats, different creators/designers, different desinations.

Again, not in any way that you can demonstrate.

I'm living proof.

And the antileprechauns, antipixies, anti-extraterrestrial aliens, antiBermuda Triangle, antigremlins, anti-elves, antignomes, and antifairies spirits. It's crazy in here!

Yet another example of the antichrist spirit which controls you.

I cannot offer anything from the imaginary.

Ok.

You made no such distinction when initially answering the question. Too bad.

The subject was only the natural, not the spiritual. You introduced the spiritual with another question subsequent to that.

I didn't think so. As you have been reduced to simply being argumentative, I think we can let this derail die, but you can get in the last word if you must.

Fine with me.

 

[justlookinla]

Lol, that's a funny one . . . But we can do some deducting. If Manna was spiritual food, that it could be assimilated and provide energy to the folks in the wilderness shows it was subject to the laws of thermodynamics, including entropy.

Once the natural is involved, it becomes subject to the natural. Jesus Christ is a perfect example of that. Of course He's not subject to entropy today because His is a completely spiritual existence. Same with us, when we receive our spiritual bodies, entropy is no longer present.

 

[J0hnSm1th]

People and animals still needed to eat before the fall.

Originally all living creatures were vegetarian according to Gen 1:30
"And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food"

Then, after the flood, God condoned the eating of meat - Gen 9:3
"Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything"

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Once the natural is involved, it becomes subject to the natural. Jesus Christ is a perfect example of that. Of course He's not subject to entropy today because His is a completely spiritual existence. Same with us, when we receive our spiritual bodies, entropy is no longer present.

And there you go again, just making up stuff as if you knew all about it. Sorry, you don't know about entropy in heaven. You should stop making such definite statements without knowledge.

 

[loveofourlord]

Well the fall can't explain animals eating each other, because the fall wasn't concious, so you left with god or Satan creating a perfectly balanced world to punnish animals because Adam and Eve ate a fruit? it can't be some abstract concept like the fall, because then how did conicdently the animals most capable of eating meat just happened to eat meat? And so on, seems it's a bit too weird a idea to use the fall as it raises too many theological problems.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

No, each individual is the subject of the survival of the fittest. Individual life forms compete for survival, one by one.

.

This is wrong. How many spider males have struggled to be able to mate, only to be eaten? How many salmon have struggled to get upstream and spawn, only to die there?

Your understanding of life and evolution is flawed, and you are therefore not qualified to critique the science.

 

[justlookinla]

And there you go again, just making up stuff as if you knew all about it. Sorry, you don't know about entropy in heaven. You should stop making such definite statements without knowledge.

Would not eternal life be an indicator of no entropy in heaven?

 

[justlookinla]

This is wrong. How many spider males have struggled to be able to mate, only to be eaten? How many salmon have struggled to get upstream and spawn, only to die there?

Your understanding of life and evolution is flawed, and you are therefore not qualified to critique the science.

Spider males and salmon are struggling to survive on an individual basis.

 

[ChetSinger]

The idea of entropy in heaven is an interesting one. Clearly God is beyond it because he is from everlasting to everlasting. All of heaven, as well? Perhaps, but I wouldn't know.

 

[SkyWriting]

Random/chance mutation is the only process whereby there are life changes in atheistic Darwinist creationism, there is no other impetus. Reproduction after the change simply populates the new life forms.

SO you're ruling out that when offspring are born during times of drought
the offspring are more drought resistant than other broods and they
produce drought resistant offspring even when the drought no longer
exists?

Or that an individual physiology will change to adapt to environmental stresses?

Or that in the absence of a male some species will change so they can
self-reproduce?

Or that traits or features can express themselves when needed, then
disappear for generations, then reappear again? That don't sound random.

That sounds like good design engineering.

 

[SkyWriting]

The idea of entropy in heaven is an interesting one. Clearly God is beyond it because he is from everlasting to everlasting. All of heaven, as well? Perhaps, but I wouldn't know.

The reason for the most interesting aspects of God is that He
exists outside of our experience of time, or increasing entropy.

Man and the earth were both originally created in this other
place, but Adam pulled away and sinned. His actions resulted
in our reality changing to one of decay and death, or entropy.

Adam was banished from this "Garden Paradise" and as a result
his children were all born outside the "Paradise zone". This results
in the phrase "Born into Sin."