Why did God/Jehovah/Jesus create Viruses and bacteria that can kill humans and animals?

by Jon Preston 63 Replies latest jw friends

  • jw07

    @Jon Preston - If there were no aggressive, flesh eating bacteria dinosaur carcasses would still be laying around. Don't let me get started on dinosaurs, some of which were brutal killing machines created by a 'loving' God. aaaaaaawww

  • TheWonderofYou

    A possible answer: God gives the life the opportunity to develop itself into whatever direction it wants to develop,
    Into the evil and bestial as well as into the spiritual and loving. "Selfdeveloped creation" and "Freedom-optimized" creatures
    would be the tradmark than.

  • redvip2000

    ..and why animals that kill and eat other animals....and why sharks...and why venemous snakes etc....and piranhas?...etc etc....all killing machines...designed by a ..loving god...whose creations reflect his loving personality..? really?...

    One of my JW facebook friends had a post the other day about how he was stung by a bee, and that how terrible it was that Satan made all the animals be agressive at some point. Imagine that, the devil is responsible for animal agression. I guess the thought of why God would have made the stinger in the first place never crossed his mind.

  • Apognophos

    One of my JW facebook friends had a post the other day about how he was stung by a bee, and that how terrible it was that Satan made all the animals be agressive at some point.

    Oh my God, can you post a picture of that here (obviously censoring the names and faces)? That's great.

  • Seraphim23

    Jon Preston I think you misunderstood my post. I was arguing that God cannot be just good; he has to be bad as well because good cannot logically exist without bad if freedom to choose is seen as desirable. Or it could be that God is nether good or bad, as being infinitely good and infinitely bad cancel each other out. So the question arises that if God exists, is God restricted to only what is logically possible or is he beyond the paradigm of logic. If it is the first option then God is all powerful within the realm of logic and mathematics and so God cannot do what is logically impossible. Thus good and bad will always both exist even if God is all powerful. So the all-powerful God argument seems to fail to make the case that God is evil by implication.

  • Jon Preston
    Jon Preston

    Wonder of you--then how does he have the right to punish anyone? Look at it like this if you wish:

    God created Adam and Eve with free will. He tells them they shouldnt eat of the tree of knowledge of good and bad. He says theyll die if they do. He doesnt tell them what death is or what it try means to eat of the fruit. Yet he punishes them after they listen to a talking snake that convinces them to eat it....makes all snakes go without legs afyer that and eat dust (they eat animals, right?). But he doesnt punish satan till he allows him to test us to our deaths for thousands of years and yadda yadda.

    which part of any of this is loving?

    To me, gods ego beats his love for us because he got into a d*ck measuring contest with satan whom he couldve destroyed in the first place and save us all the BS.


  • Jon Preston
    Jon Preston

    Seraphim--do you believe in the God of the Bible?

    he claims perfection, Love......yet youre right he has allll the emotions and "imperfections"--jealousy, hatred, a need for jusification, etc etc

    So is he limited? He claims he isnt. To me, it means either:

    1) God is an invention of the human mind (read any fantastical, yet realistic and believable books?)

    2) Or he is what you said: good and bad....and a liar if he indeed did give people divine talent to explain his traits.

    3)He is what he is and we are the ones who have exaggerated him.

  • Jon Preston
    Jon Preston


  • Vidiot

    Certain types of viruses sometimes act as carriers of genetic material that - by the virus' actions - gets shuffled and recombined from one organism to another, thus helping trigger the types of random mutations that natural selection inevitably uses in speciation.

  • Terry

    IS IT USEFUL to assume into evidence a premise which cannot be established with evidence?

Share this