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

[SkyWriting]

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.

That's not correct. Lay people are critical to the advancement of science.
There are no qualifications required for critical analysis of anything.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

That's not correct. Lay people are critical to the advancement of science.
There are no qualifications required for critical analysis of anything.

My goodness, if I as a lay person am critical to the advancement of science and have no need of qualifications required for ciritical analysis of anything, why, then, I must have been right.

 

[SkyWriting]

My goodness, if I, as a lay person, am critical to the advancement of science and have no need of qualifications required for ciritical analysis of anything, why, then, I must have been right.

You have the right to question, be critical, and offer scathing rebukes.
Absolutely.

Not in nature , mind you.
Under animal law, I can kill you and eat your children for any reason at all.
But humans are not animals.

 

[Davian]

You have the right to question, be critical, and offer scathing rebukes.
Absolutely.

Not in nature , mind you.
Under animal law, I can kill you and eat your children for any reason at all.

What stops a wolf pack from killing and eating its own young?

But humans are not animals.

How so?

 

[justlookinla]

What stops a wolf pack from killing and eating its own young?

DNA? Behavior by DNA?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

You have the right to question, be critical, and offer scathing rebukes.
Absolutely.

Not in nature , mind you.
Under animal law, I can kill you and eat your children for any reason at all.
But humans are not animals.

Since we are equally able to assert the other is wrong, I propose that we use evidence to decide between us when we differ. What say you, while you have a coccyx and useless ear wiggling muscles and a little muscle for lifting each hair attached to it and a broken vitamin c gene shared with other primates and having had a weak, useless grasping reflex once as an infant, and having the weird loop in the nerve that goes from the brain to the larynx, taking a detour all the way down to the heart and back up again?

 

[Davian]

DNA? Behavior by DNA?

1) I find it odd that you ask this question. If I were arguing a highly technical subject with someone, I would make an effort to understand the subject, and its supporting material, even if I did not accept it. Understand it better, if I could.
2) In the context of the post to which I was responding, we were examining the potential differences between humans and (other) animals.

How would you propose to test that the basis for the wolves behaviour to their own kind was fundamentally different from our own?

 

[justlookinla]

1) I find it odd that you ask this question. If I were arguing a highly technical subject with someone, I would make an effort to understand the subject, and its supporting material, even if I did not accept it. Understand it better, if I could.
2) In the context of the post to which I was responding, we were examining the potential differences between humans and (other) animals.

How would you propose to test that the basis for the wolves behaviour to their own kind was fundamentally different from our own?

You asked the question concerning why wolves do not eat their young. There is a reason, apparently. I simply asked, was it behavior shaped by DNA?

DNA driven behavior for humans and wolves and all life forms? In other words, we're not responsible for our behavior, wolf or human or fish, our DNA is?

 

[Davian]

You asked the question concerning why wolves do not eat their young. There is a reason, apparently. I simply asked, was it behavior shaped by DNA?

DNA driven behavior for humans and wolves and all life forms? In other words, we're not responsible for our behavior, wolf or human or fish, our DNA is?

I do not feel that this needs to be a dichotomy. Do you?

 

[bhsmte]

That's not correct. Lay people are critical to the advancement of science.
There are no qualifications required for critical analysis of anything.

Correct.

Anyone can be a critic. But, if one claims to have a valid opinion on a topic, a bit of knowledge of the topic comes in handy.

 

[justlookinla]

I do not feel that this needs to be a dichotomy. Do you?

I feel that folks aren't going to address the DNA behavior issue.

DNA driven behavior for humans and wolves and all life forms? In other words, we're not responsible for our behavior, wolf or human or fish, our DNA is?

 

[7angels]

could it be symbolic? everything was made by God and for God according to scripture. so would it not make sense that creation is a reflection of God and the things of God?

for example how animals eat each other could be referring to how we are supposed to eat/meditate on the Word/Christ.

God bless

 

[Davian]

I feel that folks aren't going to address the DNA behavior issue.

DNA driven behavior for humans and wolves and all life forms? In other words, we're not responsible for our behavior, wolf or human or fish, our DNA is?

Answer my question. I do not feel that this needs to be a dichotomy. Do you?

 

[justlookinla]

Answer my question. I do not feel that this needs to be a dichotomy. Do you?

Answer my question....are behaviors, humans and wolves, DNA driven?

 

[Davian]

Answer my question....are behaviors, humans and wolves, DNA driven?

For the third time, I do not feel that this needs to be a dichotomy. That is my answer.

Now, do *you* think it must be a dichotomy?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

I feel that folks aren't going to address the DNA behavior issue.

DNA driven behavior for humans and wolves and all life forms? In other words, we're not responsible for our behavior, wolf or human or fish, our DNA is?

DNA plays a role of course. So does our nurture, our upbringing. So does the nature of the choices we make in our lives.

Take a drug addict. His physical chemistry, ultimately derived from DNA, is clearly involved in his drug seeking activities. But we also consider how he disregarded societal advice to stay away from drugs, and thus became addicted.

 

[AV1611VET]

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

I don't know.

Perhaps they didn't need to at the time?

Even the angels eat.

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?

Now it looks like you're jumping ahead to the Fall.

In the beginning, the animals were herbivores.

Genesis 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

So carnivores must have started to appear after the Fall.

So, in the beginning, God didn't make it so animals needed to eat [other animals] to survive.

 

[Davian]

I don't know.

Perhaps they didn't need to at the time?

Even the angels eat.



Now it looks like you're jumping ahead to the Fall.

In the beginning, the animals were herbivores.

So was Mr. T here a grazer, or did he prefer fruit?

Pull the other leg - it has bells on.

Genesis 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

So carnivores must have started to appear after the Fall.

So, in the beginning, God didn't make it so animals needed to eat [other animals] to survive.

The plants were probably not happy about that.

 

[AV1611VET]

So was Mr. T here a grazer, or did he prefer fruit?

Mr. T, if he existed at the time, was a grazer.

Even lions could obtain nutrients from straw.

Isaiah 11:7b ... and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

Something I don't think our best machines can do.

The plants were probably not happy about that.

Weez disgusting anamols.

 

[mmksparbud]

I've been reading through some of these posts and it seems some are of the opinion that because animals, and everything else, have to eat in order to live, that there is no God, that somehow this proves that evolution is the only answer to all this. How does one fact lead to another opinion?? Everything consumes energy in order to survive--if there is no God--no evolutionists have ever explained to me, how anything on this planet came about when that first thing had to have something to consume, and so did anything else. How could anything survive long enough for it to evolve into anything when there was no fuel to consume in the first place.
And as for everything had to have their digestive tracts and teeth changed after the fall, so what??---You're talking about a God that spoke a world into existence in 6 days--you think changing their digestive tracts is a problem? A caterpillar crawls around eating leaves--than his whole body, as well as digestive tract is changed into a nectar sucking flying creature that travels long distances to places unknown to it to mate. How in the world did that first caterpillar decide it was going to spin itself a chrysalis and come out an entirely different creature? How did it survive long enough for it to evolve into such a condition and why can't an elephant hibernate and end up a flying trout of some kind after all these millions and millions of years? How come we haven't evolved into some kind of creature that needs no fuel to survive?
If some one is going to say that a caterpillar evolved into a nectar sucking creature because there was shortage of leaves, please don't bother--the thing would have starved to death before it could have evolved into anything.
And have you seen the teeth on a gorilla??---Any lion would be proud to have them, Them things could crack your legs bones, but they are vegetarian.