Natural Disasters and God.

[Magnetic]

And how is God manipulating people? Unlike a dictator, he has no direct material influence over this world. I can make you do something by holding a gun to your head, but how does God make people do anything unless we do not have free will from him?

Now that is an interesting question. I have no answer for that. Could we go back to temporary supression of free will? Of course, that gives all kinds of new and interesting ethics dilemas for Fundies.

I would see this as a rather simple question to answer. Yes, we have free will, but if God tells you to "completely destroy the Amalakites" and you don't, you'll receive the punishment from God himself. For instance, let's take a look at those tribes that "failed to assemble before the Lord at Mizpah." Because they didn't (free will?) they were all killed.

As for the idea that the crusifixion was planned, of course it was. That was the whole idea all along, that man's sins would be paid in full by the atoning sacrifice of Christ. The sacrifice of bulls or lambs in the OT were substitute sacrifices, a template for what would eventually come through the Messiah.

[Lord Zentei]

Well, I believe in God and I believe that science is an explanation of how he does things. I also don't feel that God causes bad things to happen.

Contradiction. Science does not require the presence of an intelligent agency. Anyway, if god is behind natural processes, he is responsible if bad things happen as a result of them.

He gave you free agency to do what you want. So when something like 9/11 happens and people blame it on God I just want to smack them.

Failure to prevent calamity when it is in your power to do so is reprehensible. Anyway, did god not create nature in the first place? So: according to you he creates a hazardous environment for humans to live in, refuses to help when calamity strikes and then you claim he is not responsible?

As for natural disasters, I believe that he can prevent them, but let's look at a recent one hurricane Katrina. I feel he didn't prevent that because of how wicked a lot of the people there are. Had they been living a descent life then perhaps he would have prevented that.

Oh, how cute. This is the exact same garbage that was used to excuse the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. And I suppose that 100% of the population were wicked there including the children? Gosh, perhaps we should never help people who suffer because of natural disasters because clearly they were wicked if god didn't help them.

What about all the other natural disasters that hit areas where there aren't these 'wicked people'? How can you tell which natural disasters are because of people being wicked, and which aren't? Clearly there were people affected/killed by Katrina that didn't fall in this category. Or does God enjoy collatoral damage, lol.

Heh.

I don't believe that he intentionally causes natural disasters. I was just saying that he can prevent them.

Ok, so he causes them unintentionally? He is a clutz? And he chooses not to prevent them/does not care/doesn't get it/is unaware of the problem? Some god.

Just think of how many occur that don't affect anyone.

Red herring. We are talking about those who DO harm people. No-one needs a god to prevent a natural disaster from harming people in uninhabited areas or when those people present wouldn't be harmed anyway. Or are you saying that god has less than a 100% success rate in using his powers? So much for omnipotence.

Also, the things that cause these natural disasters are the same things that allow life to exsist on this planet.

Ironic, isn't it?

Red herring. Unless god cannot redirect storms so as not to harm innocents. Some omnipotent being.

[Darth Wong]

I would see this as a rather simple question to answer. Yes, we have free will, but if God tells you to "completely destroy the Amalakites" and you don't, you'll receive the punishment from God himself. For instance, let's take a look at those tribes that "failed to assemble before the Lord at Mizpah." Because they didn't (free will?) they were all killed.

Two points:

1) At no point in the Bible did he threaten the Jews with death if they didn't clamour for the crucifixion of Jesus.

2) Even if he had, that would still defeat the "free will" argument, since it is being used as an excuse for God's apathy. If God was willing to use threats of death and suffering to make people do what he wanted, then he could certainly tell John Wayne Gacy or Ted Bundy not to stick that knife in.

[Magnetic]

I would see this as a rather simple question to answer. Yes, we have free will, but if God tells you to "completely destroy the Amalakites" and you don't, you'll receive the punishment from God himself. For instance, let's take a look at those tribes that "failed to assemble before the Lord at Mizpah." Because they didn't (free will?) they were all killed.

Two points:

1) At no point in the Bible did he threaten the Jews with death if they didn't clamour for the crucifixion of Jesus.

No, but (and I have no proof of what I'm going to say) I bet that God "hardened their hearts", like he did Pharaoh, in order for them to call for a known murderer (Barrabus) rather than someone who did all kinds of good things in various cities. God gives people over to a reprobate mind on a number of occations in the Bible.

2) Even if he had, that would still defeat the "free will" argument, since it is being used as an excuse for God's apathy. If God was willing to use threats of death and suffering to make people do what he wanted, then he could certainly tell John Wayne Gacy or Ted Bundy not to stick that knife in.

I'm not sure why there seemed to be so much 'interveining' of God in the OT but not much in the NT, and especially not through much of recorded history. But it seems clear that if you went against what God ordained, you risked either plague or death, thus your 'free will' rested upon your obedience.

It's an intersting topic though.