Lampion Press recently released a book titled God and the World of Insects, edited by Josh Shoemaker and Gary Braness. I contributed to the book by writing a chapter titled, ‘Are Insects Capable of Suffering?’
In the chapter I explore the question of whether insects are able to feel pain. This is important from a Christian perspective because if insects are capable of suffering, then this would exponentially multiply the problem of animal suffering, which is the philosophical claim that God most likely does not exist since it seems that so much animal suffering has occurred.
In the chapter, I first describe two philosophical Christian views of animal minds: neo-Cartesianism and Thomism. After this I discuss the scientific study of animal consciousness, pain, and self-consciousness. Next, I explain the current scientific consensus regarding whether insects are conscious, feel pain, and are self-conscious. Finally, I conclude that the scientific evidence indicates insects do not add to the problem of animal suffering regardless of whether someone holds to a neo-Cartesian or Thomistic view.
This book is mainly a scientific exploration of the world of insects. The first part of the book discusses the design and nature of insects from a Christian perspective. The second, smaller part, considers theological topics such as the purpose of insects and humanity’s role as caretakers of insects.
Other contributors include Ann Gauger and Paul Nelson from the Discovery Institute, Fazale Rana from Reasons to Believe, and many more people who are much smarter than me!
You can order the book on Amazon or directly from Lampion Press. It is available on Kindle and in paperback.
I recently had an article published in the Christian Apologetics Journal (my seminary’s semiannual publication) that is titled ‘Thomistic Moral Arguments’.
In the article, I argue that contemporary philosophers have misinterpreted Aquinas’ Fourth Way as a type of moral argument for God’s existence, when it is in fact mainly a metaphysical argument for God’s existence. After this, I emphasize that Aquinas doesn’t have an argument that is similar to the contemporary version of the moral argument for God’s existence, but does have several arguments that deal with God and morality.
In particular, I discuss and explain two arguments that Aquinas uses regarding morality. The first I discuss is an argument for the existence of the moral law. The second is an argument for the enforcement of the moral law, which Aquinas believes can only be eternal separation from God.
I believe that these Thomistic moral arguments can be beneficial for Christian apologists who use the classical approach to defend Christianity. Specifically, they can bridge the gap between arguments for God’s existence and the historical evidence for Jesus’ resurrection. These Thomistic moral arguments follow-up arguments for God’s existence by showing that God created a moral law and that the only proper punishment for breaking this law is separation from God. They are easy to memorize and should make it clear that we all are in need of a Savior. Hopefully they will generate more interest in hearing evidence’s for Christ.
Above I have posted a link to my seminary’s website where the issue with my article can be purchased, and also a link to the paper that I have stored on my website.
I hope you check it out!
I will be speaking at this year’s National Conference on Christian Apologetics in Charlotte, North Carolina. My session is titled ‘Would a Good God Allow Death Before the Fall?’ Using concepts from Thomistic philosophy, I will discuss whether it is logically compatible to believe that God is good and that animals died before Adam and Eve sinned.
There will be over 60 speakers, including Norman Geisler, Gary Habermas, Richard Land, Josh McDowell, Sean McDowell, Hugh Ross, Fazale Rana, Lee Strobel, and J. Warner Wallace. Registration is open now: conference.ses.edu. I hope to see you there! #NCCA