2

Human beings are trichromats meaning that they have three color receptors in the eye which enable them to see all seven colours of sunlight. Animals are dichromats meaning that they have only two colour receptors, which restrict their color vision. For instance a human being can easily see a tiger with bright orange colour fur lurking at a distance against green foliage in daylight. On the other hand, deer and other animals which are blind to red-green , can hardly spot the same tiger. Evolutionists fail to explain why nature has given colors to the animals if most of them are sensitive only to a limited spectrum of colors. My question is: How do Creationists interpret the faculty of color perception available to human beings vis- a- vis that available to other living beings.

9
  • Same way God created the bat blind but let them rely on echolocation for movement which is one hundred percent accurate. Those dicromat animals are lucky to have a green red vision Oct 19, 2023 at 8:13
  • 6
    1. I do not understand how, or why, a Creationist would 'interpret' a faculty. A creature is created with certain faculties. according to the desire of the Creator. Are you asking someone to suggest why the Creator created certain faculties in some creatures and not in others ? 2. Could you substantiate the statement 'Evolutionists fail to explain . . . . etc'.
    – Nigel J
    Oct 19, 2023 at 11:22
  • 5
    Agree with @NigelJ . The question is unclear and need to be more specific. We might as well ask why God gave long nose to elephants, long neck to giraffes, and long beak to pelicans. Oct 19, 2023 at 11:57
  • Well, I wanted to pose a question on the issue to the Evolutionists . But, CSE is not the appropriate forum for it. Hence the question to Creationists. Oct 19, 2023 at 12:32
  • You could pose the question to "Christian Evolutionists" or Christians who do not deny evolution. The moderators sometimes object if you try to cover both groups in one post... so I think this would be a good to make it a separate question. Oct 19, 2023 at 15:08

1 Answer 1

3

After God created all the sea creatures and all the winged birds he saw that it was good (Genesis 1:20-23).

After God created all the wild animals, livestock, and all the creatures that move upon the ground he saw that it was good (Genesis 1:24-25).

After God created man (in his image and likeness) to rule over all of God's creation, God saw that it was good (Genesis 1:26).

Indeed, all that God created was very good (Genesis 1:31). Perfect, in other words.

With regard to the sumit of God's creation, the Psalmist reminds us of our relationship to our Creator:

Psalm 139:13-16

13 For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. 14 I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. 15 My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. 16 Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.

Isaiah 29:16; 45:9; 64:8 sums up the reality of God's creation - God is the potter and we are the clay. Who are we to question how we have been made? In God's eyes, it is good, it is very good indeed.

Afterthought, it's just as well we have three colour receptors in order to spot a tiger lurking in the forest.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .