God and the Apparent Evil in Nature

There exists a mystery in the natural world, one that spans throughout all of nature and which has plagued the minds of many seekers and followers of God since nature has been studied. All attempts to solve it have been ineffectual, and rapid scientific advancements and increased understanding of the machinations of our natural world have only added to the confusion. The conundrum is this: If God is benevolent, and loves all creatures in his kingdom, why does he allow and even cause suffering and painful death to his loved ones?

This question, and its apparent lack of a resolution, is why so many people believe science and true religion are incompatible. The idea that God would create living creatures to watch them kill each other seems quite contradictory to how God has been portrayed both in the Bible and by every genuine speaker of the Word since it was first written. In "Nonmoral Nature," Stephen Jay Gould states that the idea of the lion and the lamb is impossible according to the laws of nature, as there exists a natural balance between predacious "carnivorous races" and their prey (600).

But the quick, relatively painless death dealt by a carnivorous predator to its prey is not, according to Gould, where the real dilemma lies. Rather, it is the contemptuous parasite, who feeds off his host while slowly and painfully killing it, that most clearly sheds light on the nature of human suffering, and in consequence, brings great doubt to the nature, or very existence, of God (601). Gould describes the ichneumons, wasps that use other animals as hosts for their larvae. Ichneumons inject their larvae into the victim host, which is, strangely, always a member of the ichneumons' own Arthropoda phylum. The larvae then feed off every part of the paralyzed victim but its vital organs, keeping it alive for as long as possible.

Gould considers the ichneumons among the best examples of the cruelty of nature. In his opinion their behavior strongly reflects Darwin's views that nature is just as we see it, with no purpose beyond the perpetuation of the strongest members. To Gould, a benevolent Creator could never allow such pain as the ichneumons inflict on their victims to be wrought on his own creation. Ironically, Gould himself states that Darwin would never deny that a higher power was at work. Darwin considered the working of nature "too profound for the human intellect (610)," and, though he never professed a faith, could not entirely discount God.

Michio Kaku in his book Hyperspace claims that, in every era of scientific advancement, certain notions of common sense are disproved (Kaku 17). So what we believe about our universe now could one day be completely turned upside down by a new discovery or revelation. But to discredit the possibility of a deity as Gould does is to contradict the inquisitive nature of science, to close off the possibility that there is an explanation outside our current realm of understanding. This is especially true when considering the sheer complexity of the universe as we know it, and the impossible odds that it came together out of nothing, by chance. The ichneumons themselves are a great example. The care and resourcefulness by which their larvae devour their victims is staggering and, like the brilliant design of a bird's wings or a fish's fins, beyond human imitation.

But even if one accepts the possibility that our universe was designed by a superior intelligent being, that does not resolve the apparent amorality in nature. Again, why create something only to watch it destroy itself? In order to resolve this, one need only understand the motives of the Creator himself (since questioning the Creator requires believing there is a Creator).

If God spoke his own heart into the hearts of man, then we need look no further than the Bible for his reason for making us. Genesis 1:27 says "God created man in his own image." Humanity is a representation of himself, and the rest of nature is subservient. He gave mankind a soul, a conscience, a sense of reason that is possessed by no other creature on earth. The ichneumon's treatment of the caterpillar host is part of nature's brilliant balance. But the slow torture of one human being by another would be unnatural and contrary to God's reasons for making us.

Our Creator is brilliant, as be seen in both the beauty and harshness of nature. But as our knowledge of our universe continues to expand, it will become more difficult to reconcile true Christianity with nature. There will always be a fear of the unknown, of a being whose wisdom and capabilities are greater than ours. That is why even evangelical Christians should take a scientific approach to understanding nature and why scientists should keep an open mind about things they have yet to see or discover. And the bottom line for Christians is, even if we cannot understand God's plans, the knowledge mankind has gained about his creation should lead us toward him, not away from him.