News1 min ago
Japanese Tsumami
61 Answers
Lets just assume that there is a God, the God of the NewTestament, Torah and Qur'an, then what would be his/her role in this catastrophe?.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Lonnie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
So to recap...... when a baby is born it is a gift from God but when that baby dies a few months/weeks later it is a test of our faith!
I can not imagine that anyone could ever convince me that this God is the same one that was rammed down my throat at school; Good, Forgiving and Omnipotent.
I wonder what He will make of the Muslims killing other Muslims enmasse because they don't agree!
I can not imagine that anyone could ever convince me that this God is the same one that was rammed down my throat at school; Good, Forgiving and Omnipotent.
I wonder what He will make of the Muslims killing other Muslims enmasse because they don't agree!
Huderon -
I've read some codswallop in my time on this website... but this takes the biscuit.
“... it's better for them [children] to find out for themselves [the dangers of the world] by falling off the chair than by falling off the top of a building.” - I agree. Who couldn't? But this has nothing whatsoever to do with my earlier statement and questions – dealing as we are, with a natural disaster and not a parenting issue.
“... For the faithful such disasters are a test...” - But to what end? If you know the outcome of all events (as God surely does), then the test becomes irrelevant and if that 'test' results in innocent people being killed, I think it's fair to say that the test itself is quite wicked. Unless of course you believe that every single person who died in this tragedy is a sinner, which you apparently do as you continue with, “... follow them [God's rules] and you will get to heaven, don't follow them and you'll be sorry...” - I find this statement rather sinister, threatening and familiar. It's a position that I've heard many time before – the gloating of the believer as they enjoy the idea of sinners burning forever in hell.
“.. So when you are faced with a disaster of some kind, it's how you behave that matters. ”
Which brings us right back to the very point of my previous post and this one too. When God 'tests' a person it is not a test in any meaningful sense as God already knows the outcome.
I've read some codswallop in my time on this website... but this takes the biscuit.
“... it's better for them [children] to find out for themselves [the dangers of the world] by falling off the chair than by falling off the top of a building.” - I agree. Who couldn't? But this has nothing whatsoever to do with my earlier statement and questions – dealing as we are, with a natural disaster and not a parenting issue.
“... For the faithful such disasters are a test...” - But to what end? If you know the outcome of all events (as God surely does), then the test becomes irrelevant and if that 'test' results in innocent people being killed, I think it's fair to say that the test itself is quite wicked. Unless of course you believe that every single person who died in this tragedy is a sinner, which you apparently do as you continue with, “... follow them [God's rules] and you will get to heaven, don't follow them and you'll be sorry...” - I find this statement rather sinister, threatening and familiar. It's a position that I've heard many time before – the gloating of the believer as they enjoy the idea of sinners burning forever in hell.
“.. So when you are faced with a disaster of some kind, it's how you behave that matters. ”
Which brings us right back to the very point of my previous post and this one too. When God 'tests' a person it is not a test in any meaningful sense as God already knows the outcome.
Continued...
If I were to say to you, “I am going to test a theory. My theory is that squirrels will drown if I hold them down in a bucket of water for a few minutes. I now have my squirrels and I will proceed with my test.... My test is now complete and all of the test subjects are now dead.”
I think you'd agree that my hypothetical 'test' is nothing of the sort. It is not a 'test' because I knew without doubt that 100% of my squirrels would be killed. There was never any doubt about the result. Therefore it is an unnecessary cruelty.
God is all knowing and therefore does not need to 'test' people but according to believers, still chooses to do so. In the Old Testament, God 'tested' Job's faith after Satan made a bet with God that if enough misery was piled upon this poor hapless mortal, his faith would falter. God, knowing the outcome of any such wager, made the bet anyway and nailed old Job's hat on good and proper - his livestock was stolen, his servants murdered, all his kids killed and finally Job was infected with appalling diseases. Job still retained his faith (as God knew he would) and therefore God won His completely unnecessary gambit with Satan.
And this story is seen by Christians as a evidence of God's love. If this is God's love then I think the human race is better off without it.
If I were to say to you, “I am going to test a theory. My theory is that squirrels will drown if I hold them down in a bucket of water for a few minutes. I now have my squirrels and I will proceed with my test.... My test is now complete and all of the test subjects are now dead.”
I think you'd agree that my hypothetical 'test' is nothing of the sort. It is not a 'test' because I knew without doubt that 100% of my squirrels would be killed. There was never any doubt about the result. Therefore it is an unnecessary cruelty.
God is all knowing and therefore does not need to 'test' people but according to believers, still chooses to do so. In the Old Testament, God 'tested' Job's faith after Satan made a bet with God that if enough misery was piled upon this poor hapless mortal, his faith would falter. God, knowing the outcome of any such wager, made the bet anyway and nailed old Job's hat on good and proper - his livestock was stolen, his servants murdered, all his kids killed and finally Job was infected with appalling diseases. Job still retained his faith (as God knew he would) and therefore God won His completely unnecessary gambit with Satan.
And this story is seen by Christians as a evidence of God's love. If this is God's love then I think the human race is better off without it.
Huderon..'Irrationalisation' wasn't meant as a put down, it was meant to describe what you were saying as concisely as possible without a lot of long winded argument. Since logic is not applicable to arguments about religion with people of deeply held faith and you appear to be one of the aforementioned I thought it pointless to persue any line of reasoning. If however there is anything in the bible that you find difficult to accept thus showing that your faith is not completely blind then I will be happy to discuss the irrationality (or not) of 'faith'.
Oh, right - the first part shouldn't have been there - entirely my fault, I was thinking about something else and got distracted. Perhaps it will teach me to read over what I've written before posting in future.
You also miss the point - well a little bit anyway. We have free will, so are at liberty to choose whether or not to follow the rules laid down by God. God may well know the outcome, but the choice is ours to make.
It's easy to become complacent, so the point of the testing is to exercise faith. For most believers that happens in small ways, enough to keep their hand in as it were, so that should they ever have to face a major test of their faith they have at least a reasonable chance of keeping it.
Oh, and as I recall Job, Satan tells God that Job is only faithful because he is cosseted and that Job would lose faith if really put to the test, whereupon God gives Satan permission to do his worst.
You also miss the point - well a little bit anyway. We have free will, so are at liberty to choose whether or not to follow the rules laid down by God. God may well know the outcome, but the choice is ours to make.
It's easy to become complacent, so the point of the testing is to exercise faith. For most believers that happens in small ways, enough to keep their hand in as it were, so that should they ever have to face a major test of their faith they have at least a reasonable chance of keeping it.
Oh, and as I recall Job, Satan tells God that Job is only faithful because he is cosseted and that Job would lose faith if really put to the test, whereupon God gives Satan permission to do his worst.
I think plate tectonics is easier to believe in than the concept of 'god' I like Gaian theory myself that the planet is a single self regulating organism.... and we are temporary bugs and our damage will be repaired over the millenia when we no longer exist....
But learning compassion for the troubles of others is of value of itself and does not need the involvement of hypothetical deity
But learning compassion for the troubles of others is of value of itself and does not need the involvement of hypothetical deity
Perhaps everlasting life is true inasmuch as our bodies become fertiliser. eventually, for the next crop of whatever is growing, which provides food for whatever is eating it and so on - in fact the circle of life. So one way or another the stuff our bodies are made of goes on, only in smaller bits. I'm not explaining it very well I know. Also, of course if you have children your genes go on in some way. The world we live on and the sun that gives us energy are the only important things. What I find distressing is the thought that our knowledge will die with us. Sometimes I wonder why we bother to learn, although I suppose we can pass on our knowledge to others if we can find someone who will stand still long enough to listen.
Hi Rowan.. The Gaia theory is very seductive especially as there seem to be many self regulating mechanisms, both living and geophysical. I'm sure that there is something in it, rather more a super ecosystem than a world sized organism. Even so I think that we can assume that it's'wrath' is not as cruel and vindictive as 'god's'
Huderon I think you will find that most of the rules that your religion adheres to are man made.
The only rules you could argue, and I stress could, came from god are the 10 commandments and as there were more than 10 you can argue that man was very selective there.
Most of the observed rules concepts and indeed perceptions are man made as succesive Popes and other ecclesiastic leaders bent the "word" of god to thier own will.
The only rules you could argue, and I stress could, came from god are the 10 commandments and as there were more than 10 you can argue that man was very selective there.
Most of the observed rules concepts and indeed perceptions are man made as succesive Popes and other ecclesiastic leaders bent the "word" of god to thier own will.
Davethedog, where on earth did you get the notion that I adhere to any faith ?
By the other commandments, I'm guessing that you are referring to the Book of the Covenant which was incorporated into the Torah. Since Christianity didn't really take in Judea, but did in Greece and Rome, I don't find it very surprising that the early church didn't adopt it. Selective ? Certainly, but don't ask me why they did that - I wasn't there :-)
By the other commandments, I'm guessing that you are referring to the Book of the Covenant which was incorporated into the Torah. Since Christianity didn't really take in Judea, but did in Greece and Rome, I don't find it very surprising that the early church didn't adopt it. Selective ? Certainly, but don't ask me why they did that - I wasn't there :-)
Huderon
Talk about missing the point:
“... We have free will, so are at liberty to choose whether or not to follow the rules laid down by God. God may well know the outcome, but the choice is ours to make.”
Please, please, please try to understand. If God knows the outcome then we have no real choice – only the illusion of choice. According to you and other believers, God knows all the outcomes of everything so the 'choices' that you're talking about are actually predetermined futures and therefore not choices at all. God knows when you will falter or triumph.
There is another theory. God doesn't exist and the future is unknown and unwritten and we make of it what we will.
Talk about missing the point:
“... We have free will, so are at liberty to choose whether or not to follow the rules laid down by God. God may well know the outcome, but the choice is ours to make.”
Please, please, please try to understand. If God knows the outcome then we have no real choice – only the illusion of choice. According to you and other believers, God knows all the outcomes of everything so the 'choices' that you're talking about are actually predetermined futures and therefore not choices at all. God knows when you will falter or triumph.
There is another theory. God doesn't exist and the future is unknown and unwritten and we make of it what we will.
burdie, missing the point works both ways :-)
The nearest analogy I can come up with is this ...
A teacher sets up an old, but obscure, experiment for a student to do, so the outcome is known to the teacher but not the student. The student is given the option to perform the experiment or not - he or she can walk away with no comeback or do the experiment and learn something new.
With these tests of faith, God knows the outcome, but we, the ones who have to make the choices, don't.
The nearest analogy I can come up with is this ...
A teacher sets up an old, but obscure, experiment for a student to do, so the outcome is known to the teacher but not the student. The student is given the option to perform the experiment or not - he or she can walk away with no comeback or do the experiment and learn something new.
With these tests of faith, God knows the outcome, but we, the ones who have to make the choices, don't.
jomifl, I was brought up in one branch of Christianity, and attended faith schools, at a time when it was considered important that the faithful should have an understanding of the basis of that belief.
The end result is that I have a basic grasp of some of the theology associated with Christianity, and can understand where they are coming from, without being a believer myself.
I'm sure there are all kinds of faith - for some it is science, for others it could be any one or more of the hundreds of Gods people of various faiths have. It is quite possible for a believer to accept the results of scientific understanding and still believe in God. The two are not, to my mind, mutually exclusive.
The end result is that I have a basic grasp of some of the theology associated with Christianity, and can understand where they are coming from, without being a believer myself.
I'm sure there are all kinds of faith - for some it is science, for others it could be any one or more of the hundreds of Gods people of various faiths have. It is quite possible for a believer to accept the results of scientific understanding and still believe in God. The two are not, to my mind, mutually exclusive.
Hudron - “A teacher sets up an old, but obscure, experiment for a student to do, so the outcome is known to the teacher but not the student. The student is given the option to perform the experiment or not - he or she can walk away with no comeback or do the experiment and learn something new.”
Sorry, but your analogy doesn't work at all. In fact, it's completely inappropriate. The reason being because the teacher (ie. God) gives the student (ie. humanity) the option to perform the experiment or not.
This is not the case in my above example of Job, as his participation in the 'experiment' was imposed upon him and was not in any way his own choice by any stretch of the imagination. Nor is it the case in the Japanese Tsunami – the participation of the 'student' was not an option. The human race could not casually opt out of the Tsunami 'experiment' – it was imposed upon them by the 'teacher' – who knew what the results of His 'experiment' would be, but chose to force it on His students regardless.
I shall repeat my earlier plea, “Please, please, please try to understand”, because right now you ARE missing the point – God knows the outcome of everything. He knows the good people from the bad. You cannot fool God. So why 'test' a person if you already know the outcome? That's just cruel.
Sorry, but your analogy doesn't work at all. In fact, it's completely inappropriate. The reason being because the teacher (ie. God) gives the student (ie. humanity) the option to perform the experiment or not.
This is not the case in my above example of Job, as his participation in the 'experiment' was imposed upon him and was not in any way his own choice by any stretch of the imagination. Nor is it the case in the Japanese Tsunami – the participation of the 'student' was not an option. The human race could not casually opt out of the Tsunami 'experiment' – it was imposed upon them by the 'teacher' – who knew what the results of His 'experiment' would be, but chose to force it on His students regardless.
I shall repeat my earlier plea, “Please, please, please try to understand”, because right now you ARE missing the point – God knows the outcome of everything. He knows the good people from the bad. You cannot fool God. So why 'test' a person if you already know the outcome? That's just cruel.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.