Yes, thanks for the link. That article makes a strong case for looking at the big picture, which includes postmortem existence. Of course, my argument did not imply there was no postmortem existence.
Even given the view expressed in that article, however, I wonder about (1) living things who suffer in earthly life but whose postmortem existence is not clear and (2) why so much suffering need be felt by earthly life, even given postmortem existence, if God created organisms without employing evolution. After all, our earthly suffering is very important to us now.
If God did not employ evolution to create organisms, then the excesses of natural disasters make little sense, for why are the forces causing these disasters needed otherwise? If He did not employ evolution to do the job, then the excesses of suffering felt by so many organisms lower in the food chain make little sense, too. I mean, if God’s goal in creation is to directly produce sentient beings made in His image and capable of understanding and embracing Him freely, all we really need in life are green plants (autotrophs), which have no central nervous system and so cannot suffer when they are harvested and consumed, and humans (and a few decomposer bacterial species to return elements to green plants). Why create a world ecology with so many superfluous species that do little more than contribute to earthly suffering? Only under the evolutionary scenario do these things make sense.