Another hypothetical for theists.

[Catholic_Lady]

I think that every species, including humans would be vegan. Assuming Allah / Yahweh / Mr God was a good god. why create animals that have to survive by painfully tearing apart other animals?

Wow, there sure would need to be a lot of plants.

Anyway, would you be ok with animals that eat insects, or is that evil too?

[RoadRunner79]

I think that every species, including humans would be vegan. Assuming Allah / Yahweh / Mr God was a good god. why create animals that have to survive by painfully tearing apart other animals?

Wow, there sure would need to be a lot of plants.

Anyway, would you be ok with animals that eat insects, or is that evil too?

I can't remember where it was, but I recall an article I read recently where they introduced predators back into an ecological system (I believe it was wolves).  The results where that everything became stronger and better.

[The Grand Nudger]

Presumably, god could have created as many plants as he wanted..and made us as better and stronger as all get out..without the need for a bunch of being eaten alive asshole first.

To be honest, as long as magic is an option..there's no real reason we'd need to be created to eat...at all, or have any environmental dependencies..at all. I could be standing, un-hungry, exactly as I am today but in the middle of a pulsar, unharmed. This would be a far better indication that I;d been spoken into existence and sustained by the power of a cantrip...than finding myself exactly as I would be if that were not the case..naked, hungry, struggling on a meatgrinder.

People who justify the immense suffering of others by referring to some improvement in the few who remain,....well...GLaDOS worshippers. "For the good of all of us....except the ones who are dead."

[GrandizerII]

The likelihood that a loving and personal God does not exist in light of how the actual world functions is higher than the likelihood that such a God exists. This is the actual world. Therefore, the credence assigned to the explanation "God exists and created this world" is lower than the credence assigned to naturalism.

I fucked up the order of things in the first sentence. It should say instead:

The likelihood that the actual world as it is exists in the absence of a loving and personal God is higher than the likelihood that the actual world exists due to such a God.

[I_am_not_mafia]

I think that every species, including humans would be vegan. Assuming Allah / Yahweh / Mr God was a good god. why create animals that have to survive by painfully tearing apart other animals?

Wow, there sure would need to be a lot of plants.

Anyway, would you be ok with animals that eat insects, or is that evil too?

Actually there wouldn't need to be so many plants. It is far more efficient eating plants directly than eating an animal that survives by eating plants,


https://michaelbluejay.com/veg/environment.html

We put far more energy into animals per unit of food than we do for any plant crop. The main reason is that cattle consume 16 times more grain than they produce as meat so right there we have 16 times as much energy just to grow those crops, just so we can waste them on livestock.

http://news.cornell.edu/stories/1997/08/...estock-eat

As far as insects are concerned, they probably also have a capacity to suffer, which is why they avoid aversive stimuli. So no, a world that was designed by a god would not have insects being eaten either.

Wow, there sure would need to be a lot of plants.

Anyway, would you be ok with animals that eat insects, or is that evil too?

I can't remember where it was, but I recall an article I read recently where they introduced predators back into an ecological system (I believe it was wolves).  The results where that everything became stronger and better.

I know what you are referring to. But it's because what we think of natural environments are often extremely unbalanced because of human activity. It wouldn't have to be designed that way. In this case it was yellowstone where wolves had already died out and this created the imbalance that was then rectified by reintroducing them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of...ellowstone

[The Grand Nudger]

It;s sort of amusing..because what we have in this conjecture are three distinct options for a god.

God could have just made us better and not need to kill anything..not even plants, to survive.
God could have made alot of fuckin plants
God could have made us to eat shit asshole first, for the good of all of us..except the ones who are dead.

Not only does god not go with the least objectionable theoretical option...he chooses not to go with the option he did make -for- the plants..which he did make alot of.  It's hard to make anything but spite or sick enjoyment out of that one (leaving aside base incompetence). OFC, none of this has anything to do with why or what god did..because pixies don;t exist. It's an effect of the lazy rationalizations of believers.

(and yes, I realize that the hopelessly afflicted will assert that god didn;t do this..that, somehow, because two naked apes disobeyed god..wolves started eating bison asshole first - but that's even more batshit crazy than everything that preceded it)

---

Actually there wouldn't need to be so many plants. It is far more efficient eating plants directly than eating an animal that survives by eating plants,

Efficient, but environmentally impractical.....yet again a failure gods grand design.  One that we're attempting to remedy with the application of the "curse" he put on us.  

Bet that pisses him off.

(I giggle when I think about how the faithful imagine some prior idyllic state created by god where people eat fruits and berries and nuts and shit..not knowing that we made those fruits and berries and nuts and shit. There were no bananas in the garden of eden, no apples...no tomatoes, no corn, no wheat, no strawberries..none of it. God..in his omni-all-of-it, omitted the things we eat in the act of creation. If this shit were naturally occurring we wouldn't have needed to terraform the earth in the first place, or hunt down all of his other creatures. The impetus of expansion and extinction would be absent in the world.)

[emjay]

Men wouldn't have nipples or hairy arse cracks (think about it, who designed arse cracks to be hairy and why?)

Duh! It was left over from their armpits

[Neo-Scholastic]

I guess I don't even understand the OP. The underlying assumption seems to be that this is not the best of all possible worlds. I don't know if it is or isn't. Seems like an unanswerable question. That's what makes the Problem of Evil moot.

[Catholic_Lady]

Wow, there sure would need to be a lot of plants.

Anyway, would you be ok with animals that eat insects, or is that evil too?

I can't remember where it was, but I recall an article I read recently where they introduced predators back into an ecological system (I believe it was wolves).  The results where that everything became stronger and better.

Yeah, there's a reason why we evolved to eat each other. We live in a natural world, not a supernatural one, and this is just how it has to be.

[Whateverist]

Men wouldn't have nipples or hairy arse cracks (think about it, who designed arse cracks to be hairy and why?)

Thank you!  I wish you were my gawd instead of the Wanker who gave me Chewbacca's ass crack.  (Not trying to get you excited here, Vorlon.)

---

I think that every species, including humans would be vegan. Assuming Allah / Yahweh / Mr God was a good god. why create animals that have to survive by painfully tearing apart other animals?

Alright, next applicant for gawd please.  What do you have against plants anyway?