Challenge to Creationists: Ichneumon Wasp

[nPeace]

The question wasn't about the context of the spiritual in the ichneumon wasp and I cannot make any sense out of what you posted in response. If someone else can, then maybe they can fill us in.

The question is straight forward and my answer is "I do not know". Knowing that creating something that literally eats another living thing to death does not make sense, in light of my conception of a benevolent and loving God, I simply do not know why it, or any creature like it--the entire natural world is not very kind and loving in many ways--would be created in that light.

From your profile, you identify yourself as Methodist. is this a Christian religion?
If God started evolution, would he not be responsible for the behavior of the ichneumon wasp? Based on your answer, how do you explain it?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

From your profile, you identify yourself as Methodist. is this a Christian religion?
If God started evolution, would he not be responsible for the behavior of the ichneumon wasp? Based on your answer, how do you explain it?

Yes it is. It is pretty widely known to be. What is your point for asking?

God's responsibility for the ichneumon wasp is not a question I have and not a question of the OP. The question is why a benevolent and loving deity would create things that do not act in a benevolent and loving way. I would say that the example of the ichneumon wasp and many others in nature show a life style that must exist on not being benevolent or loving. Cancer would be another why question?

Did you not see my answer? I do not know. I am unaware of what the answer is. I have no answer for that. How many ways do I need to rephrase that?

My real interest in responding to you was the incomprehensible nature of your responses and how they related to the question.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

From your profile, you identify yourself as Methodist. is this a Christian religion?
If God started evolution, would he not be responsible for the behavior of the ichneumon wasp? Based on your answer, how do you explain it?

My apologies. I thought you were the previous person I was responding to. If there was anything in my post that was specific to the statements of another poster, please do not consider them directed to you.

 

[nPeace]

Yes it is. It is pretty widely known to be. What is your point for asking?

God's responsibility for the ichneumon wasp is not a question I have and not a question of the OP. The question is why a benevolent and loving deity would create things that do not act in a benevolent and loving way. I would say that the example of the ichneumon wasp and many others in nature show a life style that must exist on not being benevolent or loving. Cancer would be another why question?

Did you not see my answer? I do not know. I am unaware of what the answer is. I have no answer for that. How many ways do I need to rephrase that?

My real interest in responding to you was the incomprehensible nature of your responses and how they related to the question.

Sorry. I did not see your answer before.
So you know that God is responsible for the wasp, and it's behavior , It conflicts with the nature of the God you believe in, but you don't know why.
Thanks for your answer.

What's your response to one who says that this is proof that your God is not benevolent or loving?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Sorry. I did not see your answer before.
So you know that God is responsible for the wasp, and it's behavior , It conflicts with the nature of the God you believe in, but you don't know why.
Thanks for your answer.

I believe God is the ultimate responsibility and I know why I believe. You are welcome.

What's your response to one who says that this is proof that your God is not benevolent or loving?

I have given my response. I do not know why God, described as benevolent and loving would institute a process that leads to something with certain aspects of its biology playing out as it does in the ichneumon wasp. I know that many others will claim to know the reasons, but I find it difficult to believe them and in many cases, I do not believe them at all.

 

[nPeace]

I believe God is the ultimate responsibility and I know why I believe. You are welcome.

I have given my response. I do not know why God, described as benevolent and loving would institute a process that leads to something with certain aspects of its biology playing out as it does in the ichneumon wasp. I know that many others will claim to know the reasons, but I find it difficult to believe them and in many cases, I do not believe them at all.

So you would decline to answer the person who says...
The ichneumon wasp is proof that your God is not benevolent or loving. ?
@Dan From Smithville Or would your response be, that no one knows?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Sorry. I did not see your answer before.
So you know that God is responsible for the wasp, and it's behavior , It conflicts with the nature of the God you believe in, but you don't know why.
Thanks for your answer.

What's your response to one who says that this is proof that your God is not benevolent or loving?

I would say it is fair to say that the evidence conflicts with my beliefs. I have resolved this in part by the determination and understanding that the claims of God that I am familiar with are based on the Bible. The Bible was written by man and contains errors of fact. This does not mean that the Bible is wrong in promoting a theology. It just means that the men that wrote the passages were flawed and incomplete in their own understanding of God.

I do not know anyone that understands God. I am just honest in saying so about myself.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So you would decline to answer the person who says...
The ichneumon wasp is proof that your God is not benevolent or loving. ?

I would be inclined to agree that it does seem that way and there is no solid response to contradict it. I can offer my personal feelings and beliefs, but those would not hold up any better than the personal views that others have used to file their claims.

 

[nPeace]

I would say it is fair to say that the evidence conflicts with my beliefs. I have resolved this in part by the determination and understanding that the claims of God that I am familiar with are based on the Bible. The Bible was written by man and contains errors of fact. This does not mean that the Bible is wrong in promoting a theology. It just means that the men that wrote the passages were flawed and incomplete in their own understanding of God.

I do not know anyone that understands God. I am just honest in saying so about myself.

So your view is that the Bible is not to be followed as a source of truth.
You believe in God... that's it.
May I ask, why you believe in God?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So you would decline to answer the person who says...
The ichneumon wasp is proof that your God is not benevolent or loving. ?
@Dan From Smithville Or would your response be, that no one knows?

The real reason I am interested in this thread is because the ichneumon wasp is at the center of the question. I do not expect to get a "one size fits all" answer offering a valid response to the question that is raised and recognize that based on the evidence it does call the claims of loving and benevolent into question. It is a fair question.

That same question can be applied to numerous examples in the natural world and even in the human world. Why cancer? Why does a small child survive watching his or her family be slaughtered in a car accident?

I do not think we have the answer. At least not an answer that can be applied across the board that puts this to bed.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So your view is that the Bible is not to be followed as a source of truth.
You believe in God... that's it.
May I ask, why you believe in God?

Did I say that? No.

You can ask, but I will not go into the specifics of my own beliefs. They are nobodies business but my own.

I will only say that I am analytical and a believer. I am not emotive and a believer. I have a passion about what I believe, but it is not over the top or to the point that I am not capable of reason.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So your view is that the Bible is not to be followed as a source of truth.
You believe in God... that's it.
May I ask, why you believe in God?

Enough about me. I am not that interesting. What is your answer to why the ichneumon wasp exists in the light of the question raised in the OP?

 

[nPeace]

Did I say that? No.

You can ask, but I will not go into the specifics of my own beliefs. They are nobodies business but my own.

I will only say that I am analytical and a believer. I am not emotive and a believer. I have a passion about what I believe, but it is not over the top or to the point that I am not capable of reason.

Okay. You are not obligated to do what you don't want.
However, the topic of God, creation, evolution, etc. does come up, and questions are raised on them.
Have you ever asked someone, why they don't believe in evolution? You don't have to answer, if you don't want to, but I am surprised that someone on a religious debate forum would refuse to answer a question, that is not personal, but related to their faith, or lack of it.
Especially, it is expected of one who claims to have faith...
1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect.

I'm not pushy though, but I think others will be watching the person's questions and responses in the future.

 

[nPeace]

Enough about me. I am not that interesting. What is your answer to why the ichneumon wasp exists in the light of the question raised in the OP?

Suppose it's personal to me, would you accept that?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Okay. You are not obligated to do what you don't want.
However, the topic of God, creation, evolution, etc. does come up, and questions are raised on them.
Have you ever asked someone, why they don't believe in evolution? You don't have to answer, if you don't want to, but I am surprised that someone on a religious debate forum would refuse to answer a question, that is not personal, but related to their faith, or lack of it.
Especially, it is expected of one who claims to have faith...
1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect.

I'm not pushy though, but I think others will be watching the person's questions and responses in the future.

I have asked numerous people why they do not believe in evolution and I have received pretty much the same answer every time. It may take different forms, but it is the same. Asking the question in the way that you have posed it tells me something about the understanding of science that the person has. There is much information in what people communicate if you look for it.

I do not get into the religious aspects of the discussion for many reasons, but one significant one is that most creationists I have discussed the subject with often try to trap me or other Christians that feel as I do, as not being "true Christians". The responses veer away from the topic into ad hominem attacks that are very unChristian.

You are entitled to be as surprised as you like. Testing my faith will not get you anywhere in the debate about evolution or even the question of the OP.

 

[nPeace]

I have asked numerous people why they do not believe in evolution and I have received pretty much the same answer every time. It may take different forms, but it is the same. Asking the question in the way that you have posed it tells me something about the understanding of science that the person has. There is much information in what people communicate if you look for it.

I do not get into the religious aspects of the discussion for many reasons, but one significant one is that most creationists I have discussed the subject with often try to trap me or other Christians that feel as I do, as not being "true Christians". The responses veer away from the topic into ad hominem attacks that are very unChristian.

You are entitled to be as surprised as you like. Testing my faith will not get you anywhere in the debate about evolution or even the question of the OP.

Yes. There is much information in what people communicate if you look for it. I get it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Suppose it's personal to me, would you accept that?

Sure. I can except tit for tat. I am surprised given the volume of responses on the subject I have seen from you. But you are entitled to ebb and flow as you please.

Just be aware that I do not challenge your claims of holding whatever religious view you have. If you claim to be a Christian I accept that as true. I have no way to determine if another truly follows their professed belief in his or her heart, is not a follower of it under the same conditions, is only pretending to follow or is a sincere adherent and just bad at it. Since all people sin, that is not a litmus test of Christianity.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Okay. You are not obligated to do what you don't want.
However, the topic of God, creation, evolution, etc. does come up, and questions are raised on them.
Have you ever asked someone, why they don't believe in evolution? You don't have to answer, if you don't want to, but I am surprised that someone on a religious debate forum would refuse to answer a question, that is not personal, but related to their faith, or lack of it.
Especially, it is expected of one who claims to have faith...
1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect.

I'm not pushy though, but I think others will be watching the person's questions and responses in the future.

If I tell you that God personally spoke to me and told me that the theory of evolution was the answer, would you believe me? How do you know that God did not?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yes. There is much information in what people communicate if you look for it. I get it.

Of course, sometimes we do get it wrong, because we slant our interpretations to what we want or misunderstand.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yes. There is much information in what people communicate if you look for it. I get it.

Do you think that scientists and the intent of science is to have people believe the theory of evolution, or any scientific theory or claim, in the same way that people believe in their personal religious views?

Do you see any flaw in looking at the world around us and wondering at the sense of what we are told from one source when the evidence we find does not suggest it?

Do you think that questioning a claim of the Bible is the same as questioning the existence of God?

Does the existence of a parasitoid like the ichneumon wasp and the subsequent questions regarding a loving God make sense to you as a reasonable question?