So God Punishes People With Weather?

[GenesisNemesis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNxg7xGZDTc

Why was no one hurt, then?

[Avatar]

Wow.

Damn, I bet that was scary. And real damn cool too.

[Ojuice5001]

<link snipped; I haven't downloaded the right software to watch a YouTube video>

Why was no one hurt, then?

It's quite easy to say how a weather disaster could have been sent as a punishment from the gods even though no one was hurt. Perhaps the punishment consists in the property destruction that took place.

I do think that the gods are responsible for why the weather turns out the way it does, both in terms of disasters and in terms of ordinary, benign weather. But that doesn't mean that they are always, or usually, thinking in terms of punishing or rewarding humans. For example, the gods might decide that a particular location should be hit by a storm, but that might not mean that they are angry with the humans who live there. Maybe they just thought there was so much garbage lying around that a storm would be a good way to wash it all away.

[Clivedurdle]

Of course, the gods must use non-linear dynamic methods! (and butterflies flapping wings).

[AthenaAwakened]

Pat Robertson said that Katrina was a punishment for homosexuality.

He also said the the WTC bombings were a punishment for feminism.

God does some weird punishing.

[espritch]

It's quite easy to say how a weather disaster could have been sent as a punishment from the gods even though no one was hurt. Perhaps the punishment consists in the property destruction that took place.

I do think that the gods are responsible for why the weather turns out the way it does, both in terms of disasters and in terms of ordinary, benign weather. But that doesn't mean that they are always, or usually, thinking in terms of punishing or rewarding humans. For example, the gods might decide that a particular location should be hit by a storm, but that might not mean that they are angry with the humans who live there. Maybe they just thought there was so much garbage lying around that a storm would be a good way to wash it all away.

If God (or gods) are not responsible for how weather turns out, it is because they are not responsible for weather at all. What else are gods not responsible and what are they responsible for? And how do you tell the difference? If they are responsible for nothing, why have them?

[GenesisNemesis]

It's quite easy to say how a weather disaster could have been sent as a punishment from the gods even though no one was hurt. Perhaps the punishment consists in the property destruction that took place.

I do think that the gods are responsible for why the weather turns out the way it does, both in terms of disasters and in terms of ordinary, benign weather. But that doesn't mean that they are always, or usually, thinking in terms of punishing or rewarding humans. For example, the gods might decide that a particular location should be hit by a storm, but that might not mean that they are angry with the humans who live there. Maybe they just thought there was so much garbage lying around that a storm would be a good way to wash it all away.

...nvm. :p

How do you know there are gods?

[Von Zipper]

Pat Robertson said that Katrina was a punishment for homosexuality.

He also said the the WTC bombings were a punishment for feminism.

God does some weird punishing.

Pat's full of it. I've sincerely prayed for guidance on this issue, and God told me that he was punishing America for Pat Robertson both times.

[ziffel]

Pat Robertson said that Katrina was a punishment for homosexuality.

He also said the the WTC bombings were a punishment for feminism.

God does some weird punishing.

So God was punishing little old heterosexual ladies by slowly terrorizing and then drowning them in the attics of their homes? not to mention infants. And does he then punish the 9/11 bombers for murder, or are they rewarded for carrying out the will of God?

You're right, weird. I would love to have a conversation with Pat Robertson. I bet I'd get some hand waving before it was over.

[EthnAlln]

I would love to have a conversation with Pat Robertson.

Be careful what you wish for! (Unless you enjoy explaining arithmetic to a turnip.)

[Ojuice5001]

If God (or gods) are not responsible for how weather turns out, it is because they are not responsible for weather at all. What else are gods not responsible and what are they responsible for? And how do you tell the difference? If they are responsible for nothing, why have them?

The gods are responsible for the events that are matters of chance. For instance, the weather is a matter of chance, and I think they are responsible for how the weather turns out. That's what I was saying in my earlier post.

(I'm rather confused by your response to me. You seem to think I was saying something other than I was. :huh:)

[I_Can_See]

Hi all,

Brand new here. I currently believe in God but am questioning why. So be gentile with me. I came to this site at the direction of my wife who has gone through a deconversion over the past couple years. I admire her courage and would like to do my own research to get answers to questions that I have always ignored or simply just accepted out of conformity.

The question I would pose to you is this. Why does weather have to be God's fault? Weather is science and although I believe in His existence (so far) I am puzzled as to why people attribute all unfortunate events that are easily explained by science as being God's fault as if He is being irresponsible, unfair or "weird". Science/weather happens everywhere. People exist in a lot of that same everywhere. Therefore people are victims of science and the unfortunate events it causes. BUT... they are also blessed by the beauty that science can display. I do believe God created the existence of what we can define as science. I do not believe he is sitting up there with a remote looking for someone to punish.

I would have to say the vast majority of Christians do NOTvalue Mr. Robertson's opinions. I did not know he made such ridiculous claims (I have always been very much against Christian TV anyway) but if he truly did his opinions of these events are certainly not shared in the world of fundamental Christianity. Trust me!! The Christians with heads on their shoulders are not so shallow as some may think.

Thanks!!

[Ruiner]

Hi all,

Brand new here. I currently believe in God but am questioning why. So be gentile with me. I came to this site at the direction of my wife who has gone through a deconversion over the past couple years. I admire her courage and would like to do my own research to get answers to questions that I have always ignored or simply just accepted out of conformity.

The question I would pose to you is this. Why does weather have to be God's fault? Weather is science and although I believe in His existence (so far) I am puzzled as to why people attribute all unfortunate events that are easily explained by science as being God's fault as if He is being irresponsible, unfair or "weird". Science/weather happens everywhere. People exist in a lot of that same everywhere. Therefore people are victims of science and the unfortunate events it causes. BUT... they are also blessed by the beauty that science can display. I do believe God created the existence of what we can define as science. I do not believe he is sitting up there with a remote looking for someone to punish.

I would have to say the vast majority of Christians do NOTvalue Mr. Robertson's opinions. I did not know he made such ridiculous claims (I have always been very much against Christian TV anyway) but if he truly did his opinions of these events are certainly not shared in the world of fundamental Christianity. Trust me!! The Christians with heads on their shoulders are not so shallow as some may think.

Thanks!!
Welcome to IIDB. Come for the debate, stay for the debauchery. :)


If God is powerful enough to do anything He desires, then He can control the weather. If God leaves it up to determinism (natural causation) and God can do anything, then it is God's inaction which makes it His fault. We can then blame God for allowing the laws He set up from the beginning to run their course.

If it is not God's fault, we must redefine God to fit the circumstance. We can absolve God of responsibility if He isn't powerful enough to intervene. If this less than omnipotent god exists, then there is no real point in intercessory prayer.

We can also say that God is only powerful enough to intervene on a spiritual level, saving souls and all that rot which is most important to Him. It also means that God may not be powerful enough to have caused this universe, which absolutely absolves God but leaves us questioning what then created this universe? This less than omnipotent god had no choice in the creation of man since God isn't powerful enough to affect the natural - this implies man arises naturally but was chosen above all other creatures to have a 'soul' and spiritual connection with God. Is this more like the God you worship? Or is it the God which allows bad things to happen for His 'plan'?

[I_Can_See]

I am the father of seven children. When I was younger and only had one or two I would react to my children's mishaps, stumbles, disobedience and bad decisions by rushing to their aid, doing whatever was needed to prevent unfortunate circumstances or by punishment that I felt, at the time, was for their own good. Today my kids range from 3 years to 15 years old. I have learned a lot. They are going to experience things that will shape their lives. They will ask questions and may make decisions that will go against my direction for them. I may even loose one or more of them to some fatal accident, disease or whatever. My point is I can show them , by example and teaching, how to live a good life and hopefully they will move in that direction but it's really up to them. So I find myself leaning back watching more (even with the little ones) and letting them learn for themselves. Sometimes they watch each other and observe patterns and behaviors (I suppose this is why siblings tend to act similarly) and I may let them experience and/or observe the 'pain' (science) in order to permit life to be learned.

If God leaves it up to determinism (natural causation) and God can do anything, then it is God's inaction which makes it His fault.

Yes, I see your point on that. I can equate this theory with my own children. If I were able to be with them every moment of everyday and if I were to guard them from the things science teaches us then they would grow up needing me for everything unable to think, reason and shape themselves how they see fit. I know first hand the results this sort of parenting.

God must not be everything to everyone when science (weather) shows up. I bet you would be a different person today if God showed His glory in every natural disaster. What if God baffled scientists when every storm headed for Florida was suddenly and completely calmed 5 miles off the coast... Everytime? This is what I hear you suggesting. God has control of the storm and since He didn't stop it... everytime... the tragedy, as a result, is His fault. I would say that if God exists then yes, he has control. But as a parent who knows the benefits of allowing people to grow through their own experiences as well as observing others', I am grateful He would allow me to live and learn instead of being so sheltered as you seem to suggest.

And I too may very well be one who's path crosses with that of an unfortunate event offering some sort of lesson to someone... someday. That's science.

We can also say that God is only powerful enough to intervene on a spiritual level, saving souls and all that rot which is most important to Him. It also means that God may not be powerful enough to have caused this universe, which absolutely absolves God but leaves us questioning what then created this universe? This less than omnipotent god had no choice in the creation of man since God isn't powerful enough to affect the natural - this implies man arises naturally but was chosen above all other creatures to have a 'soul' and spiritual connection with God. Is this more like the God you worship? Or is it the God which allows bad things to happen for His 'plan'?

Now this point is just beyond my position so far. You sort of lost me and I'm sure it's just because I'm in the beginning stages of my journey. But I'll take a stab at it. Let's see how I do?

I get the reasoning (within this debate) that perhaps He may only be "powerful enough to intervene on a spiritual level" and therefore "may not be powerful enough to have caused this universe, which absolutely absolves God" (I'm guessing you mean from the responsibility of things like weather) and finally that this "leaves us questioning what then created this universe?"... Yeah, I understand this line of questioning. I think my thoughts above allow us to bypass this, though.

But the thought that a "less than omnipotent god had no choice in the creation of man since God isn't powerful enough to affect the natural - this implies man arises naturally but was chosen above all other creatures to have a 'soul' and spiritual connection with God"... I'm not clear on this. Are you suggesting that if He were only "powerful enough to intervene on a spiritual level" He still had the power to control what living creatures were created with a 'soul'? That He was able to choose humans to connect with?

[Clivedurdle]

Welcome!

On weather may I strongly recommend James Gleick Chaos? There have been some interesting assertions here, but when you look at the equations, you don't need a god or twenty eight to make it all add up!

One of the big things theists need to do is to attempt to model life universe and everything without god and gods. Once you start asking, do I need those supernatural bits of the jigsaw puzzle, and realize it does all work very well from a materialist perspective (was it the gods or humans working together rationally that enables us to communicate with each other?) it will all fall away.


Come on in, the water is lovely!:cool:

[Ruiner]

I am the father of seven children.You are indeed a braver man than I. Especially if they are all boys!

When I was younger and only had one or two I would react to my children's mishaps, stumbles, disobedience and bad decisions by rushing to their aid, doing whatever was needed to prevent unfortunate circumstances or by punishment that I felt, at the time, was for their own good. Today my kids range from 3 years to 15 years old. I have learned a lot. They are going to experience things that will shape their lives. They will ask questions and may make decisions that will go against my direction for them. I may even loose one or more of them to some fatal accident, disease or whatever. My point is I can show them , by example and teaching, how to live a good life and hopefully they will move in that direction but it's really up to them. So I find myself leaning back watching more (even with the little ones) and letting them learn for themselves. Sometimes they watch each other and observe patterns and behaviors (I suppose this is why siblings tend to act similarly) and I may let them experience and/or observe the 'pain' (science) in order to permit life to be learned.

So, pardon my hostility, what the hell is the purpose in this sadistic god allowing a 16 year old to suffer through cancer, a child to survive with harlequin ichthyosis, a natural disaster to kill 300,000? Is the lesson really worth learning? Is this how god shows his love for people? Is all this suffering and death necessary for us to learn some lesson while preserving free-will? You can hardly compare a scrape on your child's leg with the totality of human suffering. It's just.. wrong.



If God leaves it up to determinism (natural causation) and God can do anything, then it is God's inaction which makes it His fault.

Yes, I see your point on that. I can equate this theory with my own children. If I were able to be with them every moment of everyday and if I were to guard them from the things science teaches us then they would grow up needing me for everything unable to think, reason and shape themselves how they see fit. I know first hand the results this sort of parenting.

God must not be everything to everyone when science (weather) shows up. I bet you would be a different person today if God showed His glory in every natural disaster. What if God baffled scientists when every storm headed for Florida was suddenly and completely calmed 5 miles off the coast... Everytime? This is what I hear you suggesting. God has control of the storm and since He didn't stop it... everytime... the tragedy, as a result, is His fault. I would say that if God exists then yes, he has control. But as a parent who knows the benefits of allowing people to grow through their own experiences as well as observing others', I am grateful He would allow me to live and learn instead of being so sheltered as you seem to suggest. I would point out the Problem of Evil as a starting point for understanding what I'm trying to drive home. I'll also assume you believe in a heaven, but I have to invoke the comparison to Earth - If suffering and death are necessary for free-will on earth, then in heaven we are happy, choice-free robots, lesson-learned robots, with no free-will. And should this place exist called Heaven, then God is capable of creating a place where evil does not exist, but chose not to create the same conditions for earth.


And I too may very well be one who's path crosses with that of an unfortunate event offering some sort of lesson to someone... someday. That's science. Just a small correction to avoid confusion in the future, science is something else entirely. I think a better word would be fate or nature.



We can also say that God is only powerful enough to intervene on a spiritual level, saving souls and all that rot which is most important to Him. It also means that God may not be powerful enough to have caused this universe, which absolutely absolves God but leaves us questioning what then created this universe? This less than omnipotent god had no choice in the creation of man since God isn't powerful enough to affect the natural - this implies man arises naturally but was chosen above all other creatures to have a 'soul' and spiritual connection with God. Is this more like the God you worship? Or is it the God which allows bad things to happen for His 'plan'?

Now this point is just beyond my position so far. You sort of lost me and I'm sure it's just because I'm in the beginning stages of my journey. But I'll take a stab at it. Let's see how I do?

I get the reasoning (within this debate) that perhaps He may only be "powerful enough to intervene on a spiritual level" and therefore "may not be powerful enough to have caused this universe, which absolutely absolves God" (I'm guessing you mean from the responsibility of things like weather) and finally that this "leaves us questioning what then created this universe?"... Yeah, I understand this line of questioning. I think my thoughts above allow us to bypass this, though.

But the thought that a "less than omnipotent god had no choice in the creation of man since God isn't powerful enough to affect the natural - this implies man arises naturally but was chosen above all other creatures to have a 'soul' and spiritual connection with God"... I'm not clear on this. Are you suggesting that if He were only "powerful enough to intervene on a spiritual level" He still had the power to control what living creatures were created with a 'soul'? That He was able to choose humans to connect with?I don't equate god with reality as it is. I'm basically giving the benefit of doubt to a god whose motive was a relationship with humans, but wasn't powerful enough to create a perfect world void of suffering.

If there is anything to take away from all this it's that there are as many gods and as many reasons for god as there are people whom believe in god. Instead of holding god accountable, we make excuses.

[Moonbeam]

[QUOTE=I_Can_See;4445040]"I am the father of seven children. When I was younger and only had one or two I would react to my children's mishaps, stumbles, disobedience and bad decisions by rushing to their aid, doing whatever was needed to prevent unfortunate circumstances or by punishment that I felt, at the time, was for their own good. Today my kids range from 3 years to 15 years old. I have learned a lot. They are going to experience things that will shape their lives. They will ask questions and may make decisions that will go against my direction for them. I may even loose one or more of them to some fatal accident, disease or whatever. My point is I can show them , by example and teaching, how to live a good life and hopefully they will move in that direction but it's really up to them."

Yes, but you are trying to teach your children to live in the world in which we exist. You have to teach your child to look both ways before crossing the street or to wear a seat belt.....but you didn't create car accidents, you just teach your child how to best avoid/survive them. We had no say in how the world was set up.

But according to you, God chose to create a world with hazards...for what reason? To teach us lessons? But if he had created a perfect world with no cancer or car accidents, we wouldn't need lessons. He set up the parameters, not us, then blames us when we don't meet his expectations.....

[Moonbeam]

And I guess I don't know yet how to quote other people correctly......