The catastrophic tsunami in Asia was....
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
A very wise man, David I believe, said, " The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. (Ps 53:1)." Just because you choose to reject Christ and the judgment does not negate its happening. "stuff happens" might be your answer to the ills of the world but it sounds like a cop out to me
1. God knew this was going to happen.
2. God allowed it to happen.
3. He was not caught by suprise.
4. He did not fall asleep at the wheel. The creator of the universe does not require sleep.
5. Was He deliberately vicious. I don't know but he has every right to be so if He choses.
6. Did He fall down on the job? Most certainly not! He does not possess our frail human traits. He is God!
7. I will pray to him just as many of those who fell victim to this tragedy because He is God and He created me for the sole purpose of worship.
1Way
+OL remote satellite affiliate
Granite and Knight, Knight is right on the money. Granite is a nay-sayer, destruction is always easier than construction. A three year old can cut down an argument, but it takes matured wisdom to discern the truth of a matter. More to the point, your assertion
My theology fits your answer pretty well, but for some reason your question does not reflect our agreement that God was not behind the disaster, it just happened.
There were plenty of times in the not so recent past when God superceded the natural laws in remarkable ways. Sometimes God performed miracles on a fairly common basis while rising up Israel as His unique spokesnation to the world. However in this current dispensation that God specifically describes as Mystery and Grace and contrasts it against His previously revealed prophetic program, it is apparent that God is with all people of all nations in a new and different way, which is not typified by miraculous intervention. Despite a lot of hocus pocus Tomfoolery and much unverifiable accounts of the miraculous, God has not been known to do miracles for the last 2,000 years or so. So for you to rule out of hand that God had no involvement in a national disaster is simply wrong. God's hand was not in the earthquake nor the disastrous tidal wave that already killed scores of thousands.
It just happened, no need to necessarily impugn God for not doing what He did not do.
neglects the very truth that you yourself suggested is true. Why do you assume that God can not be the God of the bible, and not simply let natural processes happen without implying that He specifically caused it to happen or not?
My theology fits your answer pretty well, but for some reason your question does not reflect our agreement that God was not behind the disaster, it just happened.
There were plenty of times in the not so recent past when God superceded the natural laws in remarkable ways. Sometimes God performed miracles on a fairly common basis while rising up Israel as His unique spokesnation to the world. However in this current dispensation that God specifically describes as Mystery and Grace and contrasts it against His previously revealed prophetic program, it is apparent that God is with all people of all nations in a new and different way, which is not typified by miraculous intervention. Despite a lot of hocus pocus Tomfoolery and much unverifiable accounts of the miraculous, God has not been known to do miracles for the last 2,000 years or so. So for you to rule out of hand that God had no involvement in a national disaster is simply wrong. God's hand was not in the earthquake nor the disastrous tidal wave that already killed scores of thousands.
It just happened, no need to necessarily impugn God for not doing what He did not do.
1Way
+OL remote satellite affiliate
JRH, welcome to TOL! I've been gone for a while, not sure how long I'll be staying, but I hope you will enjoy your stay here.
The little I've seen of you, I think I like your style, you tend to quote God's word as though that is the ultimate source of truth and righteous faith. But I wonder about the accuracy and completeness of your response. Specifically to 1,2,4,6. In particular, God does not posses our human traits, but we posses His traits, like being rational, moral, social, intelligent creatures? I would not so quickly dismiss God's attributes as not being like ours, with the exception that God seems have a perfect record of doing right, and we have a terrible record of not doing right.
Despite how we perform with these traits, the bible explains that our traits are remarkably similar to God's. A case in point would be when Jesus wept over Israel and sighted that although He wanted to have a warm intimate relationship with her, BUT SHE WAS NOT WILLING. I find God's vulnerability and personal sense of loss there to be consoling and reminiscent of love lost that I have experienced as a "mere human".
In the movie "The Matrix", the bad guys viewed us humans in a terribly demeaning way. At one point one bad guy was about to assassinate the human hero, and said, "only human", as if to justify his actions. Tragically, many Christians have an all to similar view of the difference between humanity and God. But in God's eyes, He does not act like we are so undesirable. Instead, we are made after the image of God, we are created in His likeness, and of all of His creation, we are His most prized possession. He lavishly gave the largest sacrifice to make a way for us to live with Him forever. He only did that for us who are "human" and are called to His intimate fellowship.
Jesus is God, right? Didn't He need sleep like we do?
Lastly, just how far into the past do you think that God knew about that specific national disaster?
The little I've seen of you, I think I like your style, you tend to quote God's word as though that is the ultimate source of truth and righteous faith. But I wonder about the accuracy and completeness of your response. Specifically to 1,2,4,6. In particular, God does not posses our human traits, but we posses His traits, like being rational, moral, social, intelligent creatures? I would not so quickly dismiss God's attributes as not being like ours, with the exception that God seems have a perfect record of doing right, and we have a terrible record of not doing right.
Despite how we perform with these traits, the bible explains that our traits are remarkably similar to God's. A case in point would be when Jesus wept over Israel and sighted that although He wanted to have a warm intimate relationship with her, BUT SHE WAS NOT WILLING. I find God's vulnerability and personal sense of loss there to be consoling and reminiscent of love lost that I have experienced as a "mere human".
In the movie "The Matrix", the bad guys viewed us humans in a terribly demeaning way. At one point one bad guy was about to assassinate the human hero, and said, "only human", as if to justify his actions. Tragically, many Christians have an all to similar view of the difference between humanity and God. But in God's eyes, He does not act like we are so undesirable. Instead, we are made after the image of God, we are created in His likeness, and of all of His creation, we are His most prized possession. He lavishly gave the largest sacrifice to make a way for us to live with Him forever. He only did that for us who are "human" and are called to His intimate fellowship.
Jesus is God, right? Didn't He need sleep like we do?
Lastly, just how far into the past do you think that God knew about that specific national disaster?
"Why do you assume that God can not be the God of the bible, and not simply let natural processes happen without implying that He specifically caused it to happen or not?"
What kind of nonsense is this? "The natural process"? You saying he let nature take its course? So did he know specifically that this was going to send 100,000 people to hell, and he simply didn't care, or was this a surprise for him? That he didn't specifically cause it to happen tells me that natural disasters are just one more thing Christians are willing to write off--whoops, that can't POSSIBLY be God--because the implications otherwise are too uncomfortable.
"It just happened..."
All right. So answer me this: if we both agree this "just happened," what's the advantage in approaching this from a Christian perspective? We agree on its causes in nature and certainly on the aftermath. We agree it's random and tragic. What do you have to offer by way of explanation that's any different from mine?
"...no need to necessarily impugn God for not doing what He did not do."
Oh sure there is. By kicking his feet back this God of yours just consigned 100,000 mostly pagan and certainly unChristian souls to torture for eternity. Your loving and merciful deity could have stopped this puppy whenever he pleased. Sounds more like we live on an ant farm than anything else.
If this kind of sadistic mass murderer is the kind of deity you want to worship, thanks but no thanks.
What kind of nonsense is this? "The natural process"? You saying he let nature take its course? So did he know specifically that this was going to send 100,000 people to hell, and he simply didn't care, or was this a surprise for him? That he didn't specifically cause it to happen tells me that natural disasters are just one more thing Christians are willing to write off--whoops, that can't POSSIBLY be God--because the implications otherwise are too uncomfortable.
"It just happened..."
All right. So answer me this: if we both agree this "just happened," what's the advantage in approaching this from a Christian perspective? We agree on its causes in nature and certainly on the aftermath. We agree it's random and tragic. What do you have to offer by way of explanation that's any different from mine?
"...no need to necessarily impugn God for not doing what He did not do."
Oh sure there is. By kicking his feet back this God of yours just consigned 100,000 mostly pagan and certainly unChristian souls to torture for eternity. Your loving and merciful deity could have stopped this puppy whenever he pleased. Sounds more like we live on an ant farm than anything else.
If this kind of sadistic mass murderer is the kind of deity you want to worship, thanks but no thanks.
1Way
+OL remote satellite affiliate
granite,
Why impugn God for something that He did not do? We both agree that God did not do it, that it's a random tragedy, but why blame God for something that He did not do?
Let me try to bring this home to you. You are rightly defending those who's demise was of none of their own doing. You don't blame them as some might do. Yet you attack God for doing something that He did not do. So why try to defend those who did not bring about their own destruction, but you blame God who also did not bring about their destruction?
It just happened like a natural random event.
The thousands going to hell part is a separate issue that you apparently invented assumedly for the sake of progressing the discussion along probable lines. Ok then, I'll bite.
Naturally speaking, it is 99.9999999999% likely that we will die of natural causes! Very few in comparison die because of supernatural causes, especially after the flood, which we are assured by the sign of the rainbow that it will not happen again. So there is no meaningful difference if you die because of; old age, or if an accident took your life, or if a tornado tore you into pieces, or a fire took your life, or if you drowned in the depths of the ocean, or if you died in your sleep, everyone lives life with the same assurances of a prolonged life, which is about zero amount of assurance. As they say, the only things guaranteed in life is death and taxes, or as God says, man is appointed once to die, and then the judgment. There is also taxes but lets not get sidetracked.
By assuming as you do that God must be expected to intervene if there's a natural disaster, you presuppose way too much.
The least you could do is explain why it's wrong for God to set the world in motion and let nature take it's course. Plainly, why would it be wrong for God to do that if He so chooses? And, if you can not explain, then why only defend the thousands who did not bring their demise but yet you blame God who also did not bring about the disaster?
Moving on to a likely rejoinder
"But God used to do lots of miracles"
Just because there was a time that God was known to do miracles, does that necessarily mean that He always must do miracles? Also, isn't it possible that God's curse on the land included much grace? Namely, the fact is that life is hard, earning a living is difficult and when it's all said and done, life is short. All that highlights the importance of the message that we only have fleeting time to get our lives right with God, so you'd better do it now before it's too late.
Why impugn God for something that He did not do? We both agree that God did not do it, that it's a random tragedy, but why blame God for something that He did not do?
Let me try to bring this home to you. You are rightly defending those who's demise was of none of their own doing. You don't blame them as some might do. Yet you attack God for doing something that He did not do. So why try to defend those who did not bring about their own destruction, but you blame God who also did not bring about their destruction?
It just happened like a natural random event.
The thousands going to hell part is a separate issue that you apparently invented assumedly for the sake of progressing the discussion along probable lines. Ok then, I'll bite.
Naturally speaking, it is 99.9999999999% likely that we will die of natural causes! Very few in comparison die because of supernatural causes, especially after the flood, which we are assured by the sign of the rainbow that it will not happen again. So there is no meaningful difference if you die because of; old age, or if an accident took your life, or if a tornado tore you into pieces, or a fire took your life, or if you drowned in the depths of the ocean, or if you died in your sleep, everyone lives life with the same assurances of a prolonged life, which is about zero amount of assurance. As they say, the only things guaranteed in life is death and taxes, or as God says, man is appointed once to die, and then the judgment. There is also taxes but lets not get sidetracked.
By assuming as you do that God must be expected to intervene if there's a natural disaster, you presuppose way too much.
The least you could do is explain why it's wrong for God to set the world in motion and let nature take it's course. Plainly, why would it be wrong for God to do that if He so chooses? And, if you can not explain, then why only defend the thousands who did not bring their demise but yet you blame God who also did not bring about the disaster?
Moving on to a likely rejoinder
"But God used to do lots of miracles"
Just because there was a time that God was known to do miracles, does that necessarily mean that He always must do miracles? Also, isn't it possible that God's curse on the land included much grace? Namely, the fact is that life is hard, earning a living is difficult and when it's all said and done, life is short. All that highlights the importance of the message that we only have fleeting time to get our lives right with God, so you'd better do it now before it's too late.
Ecumenicist
New member
Since God created the physical laws which dictate the movement
of and interaction between mass and energy on this planet and
in this universe, this physical event was pre-ordained to happen,
and God knew about it, knows about it, and technically caused it,
or at minimum allowed it to happen.
The only "other" option is a statement of faith and hope: greater
good can and will come of this horrible tragedy. It may be humanity
pulling together, reaching out, in the name and hope of God and
all that is good and Holy, to act collectively as the Body of Christ,
to bring about healing and hope and new life rather than war and
death and destruction.
Dave
of and interaction between mass and energy on this planet and
in this universe, this physical event was pre-ordained to happen,
and God knew about it, knows about it, and technically caused it,
or at minimum allowed it to happen.
The only "other" option is a statement of faith and hope: greater
good can and will come of this horrible tragedy. It may be humanity
pulling together, reaching out, in the name and hope of God and
all that is good and Holy, to act collectively as the Body of Christ,
to bring about healing and hope and new life rather than war and
death and destruction.
Dave
"Why impugn God for something that He did not do?"
I'd ask another question: why not? But to answer more directly, this is the God you people insist is merciful and loving. And refusing to intervene and instead allowing 100,000 more Asians to rot in hell eternally is pretty reprehensible. Put another way, if I'm a security guard in an office park and I let in three guys to the building with Uzis, who tell me they're planning to kill as many cube farmers as they can find, would I be morally responsible for the ensuing death or not?
Lack of action is something you can criticize. Without a doubt.
"The thousands going to hell part is a separate issue that you apparently invented..."
INVENTED? What, exactly, am I supposedly making up here? These people were Asians, certainly not Christians by and large. If you had to make a guess, where do you suppose the lion's share of these souls are right now? In paradise or enduring eternal torture? Use your head, man.
Your God was disinterested or ineffectual on this one, and I can't imagine worshipping a deity so indifferent that he would just kick his feet up and "let nature its course." If we both agree this is a random tragedy the Christian mindset has no advantage over a humanistic one. We explain the tragedy in exactly the same way.
I'd ask another question: why not? But to answer more directly, this is the God you people insist is merciful and loving. And refusing to intervene and instead allowing 100,000 more Asians to rot in hell eternally is pretty reprehensible. Put another way, if I'm a security guard in an office park and I let in three guys to the building with Uzis, who tell me they're planning to kill as many cube farmers as they can find, would I be morally responsible for the ensuing death or not?
Lack of action is something you can criticize. Without a doubt.
"The thousands going to hell part is a separate issue that you apparently invented..."
INVENTED? What, exactly, am I supposedly making up here? These people were Asians, certainly not Christians by and large. If you had to make a guess, where do you suppose the lion's share of these souls are right now? In paradise or enduring eternal torture? Use your head, man.
Your God was disinterested or ineffectual on this one, and I can't imagine worshipping a deity so indifferent that he would just kick his feet up and "let nature its course." If we both agree this is a random tragedy the Christian mindset has no advantage over a humanistic one. We explain the tragedy in exactly the same way.
1Way
+OL remote satellite affiliate
Neither did a trillion other people say that to Knight in this discussion! Are you so purposefully incompetent and subversive that you can only digress a discussion just because you are being exposed for presenting a contradiction as though it's spiritual truth?
- It's like you calling up someone on the phone,
they answer the phone by saying "Hello",
and you say the purely unhelpful, "I didn't say hello, you said hello, I didn't..."
and then you leave having said nothing else,
and they are thinking, ... "What kind of a childish fruitcake was that???"
:think: Hmmm
Were you raised by a pack of wild wolves?
Christine
New member
OneWay, why do you, and most Open View'ers, insist on limiting God and His infinite knowledge? God is not a man, that His knowledge of future events is limited. There is absolutely no reason to doubt that God knew prior to forming the world that a tsumami would occur in Dec, 2004 that would killing hundreds of thousands of people, and cause millions of dollars in damage. What prevents God from knowing this?
Psalm 147:5 "Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite."
Isaiah 46:10 "Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure"
Uh.... do you really think people are so dumb as to let you off the hook here?
You stated....
The BOLD part pretty much seals the deal.
So... now that we have cleared that up maybe you could respond to my last post. I will repost it so you kmow just what to respond to....
Z Man.... turn on the ol' brain for a second..... please!!!Originally posted by Z Man
What's so hard about understanding that God can be in complete control, and yet, He is not directly 'thinking' for us?
IF.... God does not directly do all of our thinking for us through His control or ordination then....
A. The future is at least partially open and you are promoting open theism.
And....
B. God does NOT control EVERYTHING. (our thoughts being the obvious exclusion)
But IF.... God is in exhaustive COMPLETE control and ordains EVERYTHING (as you have stated multiple times in the past) then....
A. The future is completely closed.
And....
B. We have no ability to do any of our own thinking as you have just stated.
You can't have it both ways Z Man. This is NOT a "minor" point but a MONUMENTAL point.
So please verify the following TWO statements with a TRUE or FALSE answer.
TRUE or FALSE? There is NOTHING (not a single detail not even a single thought of any man in history) that God does not control.
TRUE or FALSE? Humans have the ability to do some things (like have thoughts) that God does not directly control.
God.
God is the answer.
God sovereignly created beings with a true freewill. And to accomplish this God had to create us in such a way that gave us the real ability to choose Him without coercion. Therefore God chose to leave the future open to the extent of His desire.
This is the true power of God! Working His plan in the mix with billions and billions and billions of freewill creatures. Now THAT is power.
A completey sovereign God. So sovereign that He is even sovereign over His own sovereignity.
God's understanding is infinite. God understands everything that is understandable.
You continue...
Your theology causes you to see something in this verse that simply isn't there.
The verse states that if God wants something to come to pass it will indeed come to pass. And how does it come to pass? Well.... keep reading the rest of the chapter to find out...
Isaiah 46:11 Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man who executes My counsel, from a far country. Indeed I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it; I will also do it.
There are certain things that are part of God's plan that He intends to do and who can stop Him?
But like it or not the verse says NOTHING about God having exhaustive foreknowledge of ALL future events.
He does know it all.
God knows everything that is knowable and that He chooses to know.
Christine.... why do you think God is incapable of choosing to create in any manner He desires?
I say God has control over His own power! Isn't it possible that God has the ability to create in such a way so that He could work with His creation and get a true un-coerced love from them?
You seem to be saying God does not have the power to create unless He created in a way that conforms to your own presuppositions about God.
1Way
+OL remote satellite affiliate
Stone, I hear you are a closed viewer. Welcome to TOL. I'm an open viewer with a difference, I'm biblically cogent (although still a budding bible student). So I'm perplexed by your response. It is impossible have genuine love shared between two or more people if one person is a control freak and nothing happens unless the one causes it to happen. You have no genuine love with a puppet, but if you freely give of yourself as Jesus did for all of humanity, then and only then can true love happen.
Or, do you believe that Jesus had no choice but that He had to die for us, He did not do so willingly of His own free will? What do you think?
Every closed theist I've ever heard "freely" of admits that God has "free will". Sometimes they brag that He is the only being that has a free will. Of course if you sometimes don't have free will, then you never truely had it in the first place. Sort of like being pregnant, after you are with baby, you can't say that sometime you are not pregnant, either you are or you are not.
So God has free will, and that is great to recognize that fact. If the greatest love was shown by freely giving His life for His friends, and our saving relationship is supposed to be typified by God's awesome love, then why can't we ever have or share that kind of love since are never free to offer it? The only way anyone who does not have a free will is able to love anyone is when the one who controls the puppet makes it supposedly love others. But, God already demonstrated that godly love is freely offered, it can not be forced.
Can a rapist kidnapper force his victim to love him, of course not, he can't because being such a control freak is closer to being criminally insane than it is being the loving God of this universe. Freedom is essential to true righteous godly love, and personal freedom is why God repeatedly expects us to choose right from wrong, life from death, etc. If we have no personal free will, then God is dishonest when He expects us to choose, when He requires us to respond to the gospel message unto salvation, etc.
Or, do you believe that Jesus had no choice but that He had to die for us, He did not do so willingly of His own free will? What do you think?
Every closed theist I've ever heard "freely" of admits that God has "free will". Sometimes they brag that He is the only being that has a free will. Of course if you sometimes don't have free will, then you never truely had it in the first place. Sort of like being pregnant, after you are with baby, you can't say that sometime you are not pregnant, either you are or you are not.
So God has free will, and that is great to recognize that fact. If the greatest love was shown by freely giving His life for His friends, and our saving relationship is supposed to be typified by God's awesome love, then why can't we ever have or share that kind of love since are never free to offer it? The only way anyone who does not have a free will is able to love anyone is when the one who controls the puppet makes it supposedly love others. But, God already demonstrated that godly love is freely offered, it can not be forced.
Can a rapist kidnapper force his victim to love him, of course not, he can't because being such a control freak is closer to being criminally insane than it is being the loving God of this universe. Freedom is essential to true righteous godly love, and personal freedom is why God repeatedly expects us to choose right from wrong, life from death, etc. If we have no personal free will, then God is dishonest when He expects us to choose, when He requires us to respond to the gospel message unto salvation, etc.
Z Man
New member
Knight, I clarified what I meant by that statement in post #86.
Do you really think that I'm so dumb to let you get away with lying? I made my point that I had never implied that you surrender your will to God, yet you turn right around and declare that that is what I said. If I had lied about you like that, you'd get all worked up about it and ask that I apologize. So I ask that you don't lie about me either. Practice what you preach.
Knight,So... now that we have cleared that up maybe you could respond to my last post. I will repost it so you kmow just what to respond to....
Z Man.... turn on the ol' brain for a second..... please!!!Originally posted by Z Man
What's so hard about understanding that God can be in complete control, and yet, He is not directly 'thinking' for us?
IF.... God does not directly do all of our thinking for us through His control or ordination then....
A. The future is at least partially open and you are promoting open theism.
And....
B. God does NOT control EVERYTHING. (our thoughts being the obvious exclusion)
But IF.... God is in exhaustive COMPLETE control and ordains EVERYTHING (as you have stated multiple times in the past) then....
A. The future is completely closed.
And....
B. We have no ability to do any of our own thinking as you have just stated.
You can't have it both ways Z Man. This is NOT a "minor" point but a MONUMENTAL point.
So please verify the following TWO statements with a TRUE or FALSE answer.
TRUE or FALSE? There is NOTHING (not a single detail not even a single thought of any man in history) that God does not control.
TRUE or FALSE? Humans have the ability to do some things (like have thoughts) that God does not directly control.
We've been over this discussion before. Here are my responses from the thread "ARGH!!! Calvinism makes me furious!!!":
And here was your pathetic response: