Pain is a positive existence and creation, not a deprivation of anything

[Xavier]

There was no suffering in the Garden of Eden in Paradise. There would have been no suffering if the human will had conformed itself to the Divine Will. All man's suffering and all suffering in the whole creation originates in one way or the other, and is even caused by, primarily and principally the original sin, but secondarily and subordinately also, all the very many billions of mortal sins that are committed each day, all of which has hidden and unseen effects beyond what we think, according to many Saints and Mystics.

This doesn't address the ontological cause of pain's existence and it being what it is. That's the whole point. Suffering from pain is only possible because pain exists and is awful, and if we go with the model of creation ex nihilo, someone had to have created it.

Pain ought to be seen by Christians as a remedy, a medicine for sin. Think of sin as a virus, a coronavirus say, since everyone is talking about that, that infected us when we sinned in Adam. Then pain, although originating from the devil's power and man's evil choices, is nonetheless used by the Great Physician of souls to progressively remove all traces of that virus from our system. This painful purification must be completed either in this life or the pain of Purgatory.

Now that pain is a given in Creation, God re-directs the evil the devil intends for a higher purpose, I.e to (1) create personal merits for eternity, such as we behold on the 12 stars in Mary's Crown in Heaven (12:1) for Her great suffering in Union with Christ and Her great pains, such as we are all called to bear heroically and well in our own measure in our own life, for each of which sufferings borne well we will also have a specific reward in Heaven in our own Crowns (2) to advance one's own purification from all sin. Thus, some Saints have completed their Purgatory in this world and gone straight to Heaven; as all of us can do by the Life Offering to Jesus and Mary. Indeed it is wise to see this world itself now after the fall as having become a kind of Purgatory, and time as our most precious resource that is rapidly running out, and which we must utilize to sacrifice and to save souls before it is too late; (3) to also pays the debts of other souls to Divine Justice, as we can do both for the Poor Souls, and for other living souls. This is how the Martyrs of the Church have taught us to see the Wisdom of the Cross, though it is folly to those outside Christ.

So sin is the virus. The virus itself causes pain. But pain can also become medicinal and even salvific for oneself and for others by meriting graces for us and for them in Union with Christ Crucified, Whose pains are the very greatest, and Who still suffers for love of souls and desire for the salvation of all 24*7 in the Blessed Sacrament. The pains of all the whole world united are vastly vastly less than the pains of Christ alone, on account of which the Holy Doctors call the Savior the King of Martyrs. To console Him for those pains before the Blessed Sacrament and wherever else we can as often as we can and bear our own cross much lighter than His well should be one of the foremost duties in our life. Pain is a mystery now but it has a role to play in the present order of Creation. It will all become very clear in the end when we understand all things in the light of the beatific vision, when every tear will be wiped away, pain will be no more and endless happiness awaits us.

[Mono no aware]

Pain ought to be seen by Christians as a remedy, a medicine for sin. Think of sin as a virus, a coronavirus say, since everyone is talking about that, that infected us when we sinned in Adam. Then pain, although originating from the devil's power and man's evil choices, is nonetheless used by the Great Physician of souls to progressively remove all traces of that virus from our system. This painful purification must be completed either in this life or the pain of Purgatory.

This would hold true, Xavier, if pain was only something that was experienced by humans above the age of reason with access to the Church and the sacraments.  The problem being set forth by Kreuzritter, so far as I understand him from some other threads where he criticized theistic evolution, is the preponderance of what can only be called gratuitous pain.  The suffering of, say, an animal as it gets eaten alive in the wild, or languishes in misery on a factory farm, cannot be redemptive for that animal.

Similarly for a malarial baby born to famished impoverished naked primitives ignorant of the gospel.  When it dies after a brief life of knowing only pain and want, that infant's soul is going to Limbo.  The fact of its earthly suffering did nothing to merit its eternal fate: its eternal fate was determined by the sheer lottery of its birth.  (Kreuzritter himself, I should add, would probably disagree with this last sentence, as his soteriology comes across to me as being of a different sort from the orthodox Catholic view as I received it.  But you get the general idea).

[Kreuzritter]

Pain ought to be seen by Christians as a remedy, a medicine for sin. Think of sin as a virus, a coronavirus say, since everyone is talking about that, that infected us when we sinned in Adam. Then pain, although originating from the devil's power and man's evil choices, is nonetheless used by the Great Physician of souls to progressively remove all traces of that virus from our system. This painful purification must be completed either in this life or the pain of Purgatory.

This is fine, in context. Indeed, it's the answer presented to Job regarding suffering. But I defer to Pon's reply.

Also, it still doesn't address the ontological cause of the existence of pain, which is a fundamental focus of this thread. Sin may lead us into a world of pain, given the possibility of pain, but that doesn't account for the existence of such a thing as pain. Again I draw attention to the analogy of black. Withdrawing all the colours associated with the spectrum of light from my vision doesn't account for what black is; taking everything having a positive existence out of an image ought to leave one with nothing at all, but blackness is not nothing; it is something with its own essence and character, just as much as any colour. Either it was created or it just exists, but what it is not is a mere absence.

It is that, coupled with the existence of gratuitous pain, pain that doesn't redeem or edify but is so extreme that it in fact casts down and destroys, turning innocent children or dignified men into squealing animals as all will and reason, even consciousness itself, departs from their earthly existence, that leads me to the position I have presented here.

[Daniel]

edit - post deleted. But I will say that I'm pretty sure that the experience of pain owes its ontological status to God. This doesn't mean that God ever wanted us to experience it though. (It's clear that God didn't want Adam to experience it. And it's clear that He doesn't want the saints in heaven to experience it.)

Why did God make it in the first place? Why not make something nicer--something less painful? I will say that none of us are in the position to be answering that, seeing as none of us are God and this isn't something He ever revealed.
Though Xavier's answer is pretty good--the experience of pain has been supernaturalized such as to be the remedy for sin. (Though it does raise more questions, such as, why couldn't God have made a nicer, less-painful remedy for sin? Again I'd say that none of us are in the position to be answering that. Whatever reason God may have had, it's obviously a very good reason albeit beyond our comprehension.)

[Vetus Ordo]

edit - post deleted. But I will say that I'm pretty sure that the experience of pain owes its ontological status to God. This doesn't mean that God ever wanted us to experience it though. (It's clear that God didn't want Adam to experience it. And it's clear that He doesn't want the saints in heaven to experience it.)

He certainly wants the sinners in Hell to experience it, that much is certain.

And it would be extremely difficult to argue that God doesn't want people to feel pain in this life when He ordained and created whatsoever there is. Even by way of permission, it is still an act of His sovereign will.

[Xavier]

Hi dear friends, Daniel, Pon and Kreuz [Edit] and Vetus, just passing through for now. I'll respond in more detail later. I would encourage everyone who can, especially those who may be experiencing acute pain in their life, and would like additional Heavenly Helps and Super-Abundant Graces to heroically and victoriously overcome the difficulties, to try to make the Life Offering to Jesus and Mary revealed by the Twin Hearts, specifically for this purpose, which has had amazing effects in so many suffering souls who made them. Fully Church approved, Our Lady and Our Lady promised full salvation and final perseverance, and even Heaven without Purgatory, and the Salvation of all our family members, if we make this Life Offering to Jesus and Mary. It is like Total Consecration to Jesus through Mary or the Heroic Vow. All who receive Holy Communion daily, or at least weekly, are called by Jesus and Mary to make it. You will experience immense relief when you do; I will post some testimonies of those who've made it and who've experience that. From: https://marianapostolate.com/life-offering/

LIFE OFFERING

A Call to be a quiet modern apostle!

"My children, I am calling you to apostolic privilege!" -Our Lady

LIFE OFFERING TO THE INTENTION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY

The following messages, prayers, and promises were received by a privileged Hungarian nun, a consoling soul, who in her humility and obedience to her spiritual director wished to remain anonymous while living (her name was Sr. Maria Dolores, O.S.M., born Elizabeth Krizsan).  She died on May 27, 1998, at the age of 96.

Mary, our Heavenly Mother, implores those who receive Holy Communion daily, or at least weekly, to offer their lives for the greater glory of God and the salvation of souls, that the souls of sinners may not be damned but receive, at least at their last hour, the graces of eternal life.

THE FIVE PROMISES OF OUR HEAVENLY MOTHER TO THOSE WHO OFFER THEIR LIVES TO HER

I. Their names will be written in the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, inflamed by love.
II. Their life offering, together with the infinite merits of Jesus, can save many souls from damnation.  All souls who will live until the III. end of the world will benefit from their life offering.
III. None of their family members will go to hell, even if it seems otherwise, because they will receive, in the depths of their souls, the grace of sincere contrition before the soul departs from their bodies.
IV. On the day they offer their lives, their loved ones suffering in Purgatory will be released.
V. I will be with them at the hour of their death.  They will not know Purgatory.  I will carry their souls straight to the presence of the Glorious Trinity, where they will live with me in a special place created by God and will rejoice forever.

TEXT OF THE LIFE OFFERING

     My dear Jesus, before the Holy Trinity, Our Heavenly Mother, and the whole Heavenly Court, united with your most precious Blood and your sacrifice on Calvary, I hereby offer my whole life to the intention of your Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Together with my life, I place at your disposal all Holy Masses, all my Holy Communions, all my good deeds, all my sacrifices, and the sufferings of my of my entire life for the adoration and supplication of the Holy Trinity, for unity in our Holy Mother Church, for the Holy Father and priests, for good priestly vocations, and for all souls until the end of the world.

     O my Jesus, please accept my life sacrifice and my offerings and give me your grace that I may persevere obediently until my death.  Amen.

*     *     *

This life offering must be made with a humble heart, firm resolution, and clear intent.  All prayer, good deeds, suffering, and work done with a pure intention has great merit, if it is offered together with the merits, the sufferings, and the Blood of Jesus Christ.

It is recommended that you make this life offering as soon as you feel ready, and to renew it from time to time."

[Xavier]

From the link, OUR LADY (to those who offer their lives):  "If the Eternal Father chooses to give a soul the grace of being among the elect, He will order that soul to become similar to His only-begotten Son while on earth; but in what way should this soul be like His Son?  In love and acceptance of sufferings.  If you follow your Jesus in these two ways, then the Eternal Father will recognize His Holy Son in you.

"Souls chosen by the Eternal Father to offer their lives must strive to save as many other souls as possible.  This can be done through fervent prayer, through the practice of love, through meekness, humility and self-denial, but above all through the patient acceptance of sufferings.  I believe that my Motherly Heart will find among my children souls who love God with the love of the martyrs.

"My children, even during the greatest trials, hold my motherly hand with unbounded trust.  Come together with me to the Sacred Heart of Jesus:  He is your strength on your earthly pilgrimage.  Thus, strengthened by Him daily, you will march toward your eternal dwelling place of happiness where you will recognize each other in glorious ecstasy, you who sacrificed your lives for the glory of God and the salvation of souls.  Then my Holy Son will embrace you to His flaming Heart, and He will immerse you in the ecstasy of the united love of the Trinity.  In this state of eternal bliss, you will rejoice forever, together with those souls who were able to gain eternal life because of your selfless life sacrifice.

"Hope and love, because God is with you.  My children, each offered life is pleasing to God.  Therefore, do not limit your sacrifice.  This should be your life slogan:  Give more and love better!

"The design of my Holy Son included the deeds of the elect.  He is eagerly waiting to see if they fulfill His plan or cross it.  He could realize His plan without them, but in His merciful goodness, He wants them to participate in the distribution of the fruits of redemption throughout the world.  Do you know why I am telling you all this?  Because I watch, with great anguish, the fight of the souls in the Church.  It is very painful for my motherly heart that there are many, even among the elect,  who do not believe that God can do whatever He wants!  Unfortunately, they are using their knowledge not to increase faith and unity, but to encourage disbelief.

"You, however, my life-offering children, should believe with a living faith.  You should strive to increase in your hearts the flame of faith, because when faith becomes stronger, it will increase your hope and love too.

"Once you surrender yourself to great sufferings of either body or soul, the experience can be a fountain of immeasurable grace.  You can pay for the sins of your life, or for the things you have failed to do.  Or if this has already been paid, then the merit of your patient sufferings can be applied to conversion of hardened sinners.  By that you can glorify God.  The souls you save by your obedient acceptance of sufferings may even become saints.  When the weight of suffering lies heavily on you, whether illness or suffering in the soul, always remember that you are just a pilgrim on this earth.  Beyond the grave there is a wonderful world that was prepared by God for His faithful children, where your happiness will be greater than that which your patient and obedient sufferings could possibly merit.  As it is written: your soul will forever be immersed in such happiness that eye has not seen, ear has not heard, neither has it entered into the heart of man, what things God has prepared for those that love Him (1 Cor. 2:9).

"No matter how heavy your suffering on earth, it will last but a short time.  Rejoice while you suffer, because you are proceeding toward a sure goal, and at the end of this road, your Heavenly Mother is waiting for you to embrace you with the eternal love of the Trinity.

"My children!  I am calling you to apostolic privilege.  You are chosen to suffer martyrdom of the heart for the sins of others.  And by this voluntary life sacrifice – coming from your good heart – God will be able to pour out the flood of His mercy.  Think about that!

"My beloved children!  If you carry patiently the little thorn from the cross of my Son that He has given to you, you can save countless souls from eternal damnation.  Thus, holding the hand of your Heavenly Mother, you too will partake in the work of redemption.  My Children!  Do not ask for sufferings, but always accept with humility and selflessness those that the Lord hands to you.

"My dear children!  You should burn with fervor to help save those who suffer in the slavery of sin.  In life, captivity often results in freedom and uplifting of the soul.  But most prisoners of sin are more pitiable than those in earthly prison because they are not aware that they are imprisoned by their depravity, and thus they do not even ask for freedom.  The blindness of the soul, with its darkness, is more pitiable than anyone in a dark prison.  I would like to free these souls.  Since they do not want to be set free, I need the help of my faithful children and their life-offering, the patient acceptance of sufferings and trials, in order that I may save them.  Combined with the treasures of my Holy Son, that will enable me to save not only your loved ones, but a multitude of souls from everlasting darkness – even those who will be born later, until the end of the world.

"My children!  Give everything to me and I will give everything to my Holy Son, united with my interceding prayers.  I am the Woman who sets slaves free."

"My beloved Children:  My Holy Son finished the work of redemption.  His own sacrifice was enough, but He left a little part to you.  He calls and elects certain souls to share His sacrifice in an intimate union with Him.  He suffered for the glory of God and for the salvation of souls.  It is a joy for my Son to see Himself in them."

[Mono no aware]

Why did God make it in the first place? Why not make something nicer--something less painful? I will say that none of us are in the position to be answering that, seeing as none of us are God and this isn't something He ever revealed.
Though Xavier's answer is pretty good--the experience of pain has been supernaturalized such as to be the remedy for sin. (Though it does raise more questions, such as, why couldn't God have made a nicer, less-painful remedy for sin? Again I'd say that none of us are in the position to be answering that. Whatever reason God may have had, it's obviously a very good reason albeit beyond our comprehension.)

The problem with this is that the same principle could be used to defend Calvinism.  A person could even posit an extreme form of theistic Satanism, where the deity actually delights in creaturely suffering, and theologically justify it with "he has his reasons."  It's not that God might have an occult reason beyond our understanding, which is possible, but it doesn't compute with gratuitous suffering, or even omnibenevolence.  As the forum user QMR used to point out, in his attempts to defend theistic evolution, the fact of God allowing even the tiniest pinprick contradicts omnibenevolence, technically speaking. 

I think it's possible to qualifiedly refute QMR there, though, since some forms of suffering seem necessary for a heightened experience of pleasure.  Such as when learning how to play the guitar, there's the physical pain from getting the blisters that will eventually form callouses.  And there's the psychological pain of frustration when making mistakes, or despair that you'll never master it.  But when the skill is finally acquired, it's almost as if the pain that was endured in the process helps you to appreciate the mastery.  From a creaturely standpoint, some measure of suffering might be needed to experience bliss.  The problem with gratuitous suffering, on the other hand, is that it isn't the means to any end at all.

[Vetus Ordo]

The problem with gratuitous suffering, on the other hand, that it isn't the means to any end at all.

Except we are not in a position to establish that with any confidence. What seems gratuitous or pointless to us, like babies dying of cancer, can make perfect sense when all things are considered.

Only God knows the time and space continuum to its fullest extent and the end point of all the effects of all the causes. Existence is His sublime puzzle after all. The burden of proof in your proposition, namely that some suffering is gratuitous and that it isn't the means to any end at all, is simply too heavy. The best you could posit is that it doesn't seem likely that there's any end to some forms of suffering but even then you'd end up in a probabilistic guess that cannot be reasonably proven.

[TheReturnofLive]

The problem with this is that the same principle could be used to defend Calvinism.  A person could even posit an extreme form of theistic Satanism, where the deity actually delights in creaturely suffering, and theologically justify it with "he has his reasons."  It's not that God might have an occult reason beyond our understanding, which is possible, but it doesn't compute with gratuitous suffering, or even omnibenevolence.  As the forum user QMR used to point out, in his attempts to defend theistic evolution, the fact of God allowing even the tiniest pinprick contradicts omnibenevolence, technically speaking. 

While I've yet to find a logical reason which definitively demonstrates why God is omnibenevolent (other than my own spiritual experiences, which anecdotally cannot be used for argumentation) and perhaps that's a fool's errand given that God's Essence is, in its entirety, incomprehensible, isn't Christ Himself an example which heavily suggests that God is omnibenevolent? Why would a God who creates a world of pure suffering and pain lower Himself to the level of such a world and experience pain and suffering to an exact degree his "victims" does? The Crucifixion not withstanding, Jesus weeping over Lazarus and John the Baptist, for example.

I think it's possible to qualifiedly refute QMR there, though, since some forms of suffering seem necessary for a heightened experience of pleasure.  Such as when learning how to play the guitar, there's the physical pain from getting the blisters that will eventually form callouses.  And there's the psychological pain of frustration when making mistakes, or despair that you'll never master it.  But when the skill is finally acquired, it's almost as if the pain that was endured in the process helps you to appreciate the mastery.  From a creaturely standpoint, some measure of suffering might be needed to experience bliss.  The problem with gratuitous suffering, on the other hand, that it isn't the means to any end at all.

Charity? Love? Growth? Desire to go back to God? For example, the death of a loved one, while bringing about suffering, allows the opportunity for people to go back to God, to express love to each other, and to grow as people.

And in the case of Hell, Free Will? (Assuming one defines God's Judgment of people to Hell as nothing more than the spiritual consequences of people's choices)

[Mono no aware]

While I've yet to find a logical reason which definitively demonstrates why God is omnibenevolent (other than my own spiritual experiences, which anecdotally cannot be used for argumentation) and perhaps that's a fool's errand given that God's Essence is, in its entirety, incomprehensible, isn't Christ Himself an example which heavily suggests that God is omnibenevolent? Why would a God who creates a world of pure suffering and pain lower Himself to the level of such a world and experience pain and suffering to an exact degree his "victims" does? The Crucifixion not withstanding, Jesus weeping over Lazarus and John the Baptist, for example.

I think there are theological ramifications to this that would probably entail a different thread.  The notion of God suffering, just like the notions of God creating, intervening, or incarnating, seem to contradict at least the classical Platonic notions of God's perfection.  Hence why so many pagans resisted Christianity as adding even more problems to what they had already considered the anthropomorphic God of the Jews.  "A stumbling-block to the Jews, and to the Greeks, foolishness."  But even granting it, I will concede that an incarnate God can certainly mourn for his friends, or undergo scourging, mockery, and crucifixion.  Pardon any impiety, but what good does that do for the gazelle being devoured alive, or the pig suffering in the factory farm?  I ask in all seriousness, because such instances, of which there are myriad, seem to be gratuitous suffering.

Charity? Love? Growth? Desire to go back to God? For example, the death of a loved one, while bringing about suffering, allows the opportunity for people to go back to God, to express love to each other, and to grow as people.

Sure.  In which case, we can understand how these things, in a grander scheme, aren't purely gratuitous suffering since they are the means to an end.  These would be amplified versions of the comparatively minor suffering involved in learning how to play the guitar.  A good deal of human suffering can be theologically justified.

One thing to consider is animal suffering.  Things would be a lot easier if Descartes had been correct: if animals were merely automatons.  But we know from a biological standpoint that animals have brains and nervous systems, and that they suffer, at least physically, in much the same way that we do.  Certain of other mammalian species probably even suffer emotionally, if not near to the same extent as us.  But their souls are said to be mortal, not immortal.  What can their suffering be other than gratuitous?  Their eternal end is annihilation; there's no compensation for their suffering in an afterlife.

And in the case of Hell, Free Will?

Except for the fact that unbaptized infants are denied heaven through no exercise of free will, and baptized infants who die before the age of reason are given heaven without it as well.  We also have to consider all the souls who died ignorant of the gospel.  Limbo, strictly speaking, is a part of hell.

[Mono no aware]

The burden of proof in your proposition, namely that some suffering is gratuitous and that it isn't the means to any end at all, is simply too heavy. The best you could posit is that it doesn't seem likely that there's any end to some forms of suffering but even then you'd end up in a probabilistic guess that cannot be reasonably proven.

That's true, but doesn't the Church's teaching on animals as mortal souls definitively rule out any end for them?  God is essentially Sadducean when it comes to the brutes.  When they die, their creator is done with them.  To paraphrase Galileo, "and yet they suffer."

[Mono no aware]

Just for clarification, ReturnofLive, in order that I might explain myself better, can I ask whether you are a creationist, or whether you accept the theory of evolution?

[Vetus Ordo]

The burden of proof in your proposition, namely that some suffering is gratuitous and that it isn't the means to any end at all, is simply too heavy. The best you could posit is that it doesn't seem likely that there's any end to some forms of suffering but even then you'd end up in a probabilistic guess that cannot be reasonably proven.

That's true, but doesn't the Church's teaching on animals as mortal souls definitively rule out any end for them?  God is essentially Sadducean when it comes to the brutes.  When they die, their creator is done with them.  To paraphrase Galileo, "and yet they suffer."

We can't rule out the existence of animals in the eschatological New Jerusalem. Regardless, the point stands. We're in no position to confidently rule out that God has sufficient moral reasons to permit, or foreordain from all eternity, the evil and suffering the whole creation experiences in this world, groaning as in the pains of childbirth (Rom. 8:22).

[TheReturnofLive]

Just for clarification, ReturnofLive, in order that I might explain myself better, can I ask whether you are a creationist, or whether you accept the theory of evolution?

I don't have a definite position on it except for some extremes which I reject on both ends. Yeah, I know, to quote the band Rush and the song "Freewill,"
"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."

I fundamentally reject the idea that the Earth is merely 6000 years old, and more or less that Adam and Eve were on a physical place on Earth chilling out with flamingos, dolphins, and T-Rex's all eating leaves in the Garden of Eden, standing around with highly detailed, but nonfunctional and nonpurposeful reproductive organs which suddenly were given a purpose when they fell.

I'm also hostile towards certain aspects (not all, like the idea of Eden being "separate and above" the Earth seems heavily plausible) of an Enochian / Talmudist interpretation of Genesis. I don't believe that Eve had an affair with an angel, nor that angels reproduced with humans to produce demon DNA giants, and that's what the Fall from Heaven was. That's so absurd to me in what it implies that even St. John Chrysostom, St. John Cassian, and St. Augustine explained how illogical and nonsensical it was.

On the other hand, I reject the idea that humanity is nothing more than an animal, that we were always in a state of existence as we are now, and that our search for meaning, God, art, beauty, etc. is nothing more than an evolutionary development of our growing intellect. Not only does it seem, to me, statistically improbable that we would be the only species who would develop based on what conditions led to this development, but it doesn't make sense what short-term evolutionary benefits would result from crippling existentialism and incessant boredom with our lives. Sure, long term there may be benefits in the form of the search for meaning driving us forward so we can be the best animals we can be, but evolution seems adept at producing beneficial short term changes that aggregate over time.

I don't get why the optimal or sub-optimal result for humanity wouldn't be that of an ant-colony that is unable to think about our own existence, which mechanically just does what they are there to do without question, considering that Evolution implies so much nuance is in our DNA that is optimal - for instance, why we see more shades of the color green (forest survival) than any other color, why we have different skin colors (different environments), why we find cute things adorable (to protect children from harm to continue the species).

That's also not to mention the various holes in contemporary anthropology that actually exist in academia that cause me to raise an eyebrow, which legitimately exist outside of the Kent Hovind / Ken Ham propaganda machine. For example, anthropologists are still wondering how new world monkeys got there based on what radiometric dating tells us they were therefrom, with some anthropologists proposing some kind of landbridge which there is no evidence for or even monkeys riding on giant leaves. It doesn't dismiss Evolution in that abundance of quantitative evidence which we have that's available, of course, but at the same time, it shows that perhaps all the answers aren't strictly available from purely uniformitarian study.


I think that the "Pre-Fallen, sinless, communion with God, non-death" / "Rebellious, Post-Fallen, fundamentally broken or sinful, death" motif of Genesis is absolutely necessary for the Christian worldview, and in some form, that has to come to fruition in whatever anthropological view one has in Christianity. What form that is, I don't know.


For me, I think a more definite answer would result if I studied Geology, because that's where a lot of the answers lie, but I haven't been exposed to that field outside of high school. That's outside of the fact that I would have no interest in the field outside of reconciling Genesis, which honestly would just be a giant temptation for me with my already existing questions with God. But for now, I'm open to answers that fit within these defined parameters.


The one problem that YEC fails with in my opinion is not so much a philosophical critique of Evolutionary theory, but the absolute failure to engage with the quantitative data we have available - not only the abundance of skeletons which progressively show differentiation from apes to ape-like humanoids to humans, but also radiometric dating.