Tsunami was Gods Retribution?

For discussion of philosophy, religion, spirituality, or any topic that posters wish to approach from a spiritual or religious perspective.
Post Reply
User avatar
SirDennis
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 2:31 am
Location: Canada

Post by SirDennis »

Voronwë the Faithful wrote:I do take you for your word, in large part because I have gotten to know you. And I hope -- since you have gotten to know me -- that you are able to take my post in the spirit it was intended.
Yes. I meant to say -- though not as an after thought -- that I agree with your statement about faith and knowing.

"Faith is the substance of things hoped for; the evidence of things not seen." Some things can be known without faith (ie there is a chair under me). Other things require faith in order to "know." The presence of faith -- true faith, not conditional or relying on physical proof -- is, perhaps unfathomably or not easily explained, proof of the presence of God.

To apply the idea a little further: therefore (I believe it was you who said something to the effect) the kind of knowing that is experienced between two people -- really a kind of faith toward each other -- may also be evidence of the presence of God between them. (An interesting aside might be a discussion of Sam, Frodo and Gollum's relationships.)

There is an idea expressed in the scriptures that faith comes through hearing and hearing through the word of God. The corollary is that God gives us faith. That statement is modified by this concept: God gives to each a measure of faith: to those who have been given much faith, more will be given. To those who have been given little, even that will be taken from them. (Doesn't seem fair, but there it is.) Regardless, the extent that I believe this to be true is an element of what I mean when I say "I know."

ETA: Thanks Lali. :love:

and, Jewel, while I disagree with you, I believe you are entitled to your opinion and have no interest in trying to change your mind. Not that I don't care about you personally, in fact I do; but it really is not my place to try to do so...
User avatar
JewelSong
Just Keep Singin'
Posts: 4660
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:35 am
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Post by JewelSong »

I think the key to the origin of the thread is the title...which is "Tsunami was God's retribution?" (as in...WTF!?!?!)

NOT "Was the Tsunami God's retribution?" (as in, let's discuss whether or not this could be the case.)

To me, the title of the thread implies disbelief and a kind of horror that anyone would seriously believe that God would destroy thousands of lives and create such horror as "retribution" for not believing in the right way.

I don't think Alatar was asking if anyone really believed the premise of that horrid video. I think he was shocked to find some people taking the idea seriously and posting verses from the Bible to "prove" that God sometimes uses the weather as a punishment.

The Old Testament (in particular) is full of horrible events and deeds attributed to and/or justified by God as well as many instructions that applied (at the time) to a somewhat barbaric people who lived in the desert.

It is up to us to decide what applies to us today and what is simply the history of the building of a community out of scattered nomads.

It is ludicrous (to me!) to start pinning natural disasters on God's "retribution" and pointing the finger to the sins or shortcomings of various communities or countries as the "reason" for the tornado/earthquake/flood...etc.

If God truly was/is that small minded, petty and vindictive, I could never worship such a Being, because that God would not be worthy of my praise/obedience/time of day. However, I believe that people tend to view God in their own image, and this is the God being described in the Old Testament and some of the New. I believe that is why Paul said we "see through a mirror dimly." We only get a very small glimpse of the Divine, through the lens of whomever wrote the story at the time.

Surely God is too big for us to fully grasp? Surely the Divine is much bigger than our small minds can comprehend? Surely God cannot be contained in one Book...or even many Books? Study the Bible till the cows come home...you will still only have a teeny tiny slice of what the Divine is. And that slice will be flavored by your own experiences and prejudices, no matter how hard to try to make it otherwise.

Let the mystery be.
"Live! Live! Live! Life is a banquet, and most poor suckers are starving to death!" - Auntie Mame

Image
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46102
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

This thread became a lot more interesting and productive when it morphed into challenging discussion about people's differing views than it was when it was just "OMG look at that those crazy wingnuts!!!!!111."

In my humble opinion, of course.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
SirDennis
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 2:31 am
Location: Canada

Post by SirDennis »

I think he was shocked to find some people taking the idea seriously and posting verses from the Bible to "prove" that God sometimes uses the weather as a punishment.
And I don't see where anyone was doing that. There was the verse about 3 years of famine in the days of King David, but that verse clearly said the famine was because of something Saul did. But the discussion veered towards the idea (at least as far as I can tell) that a specific historical event, especially one that seems at odds with the overall message of the Bible, should not be considered a doctrinal issue.

In short, I do not see where anyone in this thread (though mileage may vary) agreed with the "crazy people" Al was saying "WTF" to.

That dispute aside, this idea intrigues me:
I believe that is why Paul said we "see through a mirror dimly." We only get a very small glimpse of the Divine, through the lens of whomever wrote the story at the time.
It is not the only time in which Paul referred to -- some might say borrowed from, but that sometimes implies a preference for or deference to -- certain secular teachings of his day to make a point. In this case it is an idea from Plato's Cave.

Might this be a case where an illustration is treated with more significance than its use implies? In other words, do you think it is possible that its use might be akin to using any other illustration that could be grasped by his audience, even as were the very words he chose in the language he used to communicate?

ETA: btw I agree with the idea of the verse, that here and now is but a shadow of what we will know or understand of God compared to when we are in heaven. But I don't see how this implies that it is impossible to have faith in God or his word.
Last edited by SirDennis on Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
axordil
Pleasantly Twisted
Posts: 8999
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
Contact:

Post by axordil »

In answer to SD's question to me:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
Falsifiability or refutability of an assertion, hypothesis or theory is the logical possibility that it can be contradicted by an observation or the outcome of a physical experiment. That something is "falsifiable" does not mean it is false; rather, that if it is false, then some observation or experiment will produce a reproducible result that is in conflict with it.
For example, the assertion that "all swans are white" is falsifiable, because it is logically possible that a swan can be found which is not white. Not all statements that are falsifiable in principle are falsifiable in practice. For example, "it will be raining here in one million years" is theoretically falsifiable, but not practically so.
User avatar
SirDennis
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 2:31 am
Location: Canada

Post by SirDennis »

axordil wrote:In answer to SD's question to me:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
Falsifiability or refutability of an assertion, hypothesis or theory is the logical possibility that it can be contradicted by an observation or the outcome of a physical experiment. That something is "falsifiable" does not mean it is false; rather, that if it is false, then some observation or experiment will produce a reproducible result that is in conflict with it.
For example, the assertion that "all swans are white" is falsifiable, because it is logically possible that a swan can be found which is not white. Not all statements that are falsifiable in principle are falsifiable in practice. For example, "it will be raining here in one million years" is theoretically falsifiable, but not practically so.
Thanks Ax. Tricky term that. So a belief that is not falsifiable is unreasonable? Or is it that belief itself is not falsifiable or provable?
User avatar
axordil
Pleasantly Twisted
Posts: 8999
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
Contact:

Post by axordil »

It is literally (but not idiomatically) irrational, not unreasonable. But yes, as a rule, really by definition, faith is not falsifiable because it is not provable. If it's provable, it's no longer faith, as someone else observed.

I do not dispute the existence of revealed truth. I only dispute its universality. What may be true to you in a way that defines your existence may have no meaning to me whatsoever. That doesn't make it false--it makes it true for you and irrelevant for me.

But this discussion has happened more than once before. ;)

The problem comes when multiple people with multiple revealed truths cannot reconcile them. There is no way of testing the veracity of their claims, so we're left with second and third order effects as the only measure, and generally that's a pretty motley assortment, devoid of statistical significance.
nerdanel
This is Rome
Posts: 5963
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:48 pm
Location: Concrete Jungle by the Lagoon

Post by nerdanel »

The New York Times ran an obituary for William Hamilton, the academic of "Is God Dead?" fame who identified as Christian while downplaying the importance of faith in a deity.

"He considered himself a follower of Christ, but whether Jesus was the son of God or not, he said, did not matter so much as whether people followed his teachings." He advocated, "We needed to redefine Christianity as a possibility without the presence of God." The Times summarized his views:
He believed that the concept of God had run its course in human history. Civilization now operated according to secular principles. And churches should, too, by helping people learn to care for one another unconditionally, without illusions about heavenly rewards.
I would be deeply enthused by society as he envisioned it: one that downplays or eliminates the importance of faith in a divinity and one whose religions focus on how humans should behave towards each other here on earth. I too see god(s) as a human invention that may end up not existing throughout history, and the Bible as having captured one earlier iteration of that human invention.

Sir D:

To be clear, I did not feel slighted by your earlier post. I understand that you and I have such different worldviews, and approach religious discussions using such different principles and assumptions, that it will be very difficult for us to achieve any meeting of the minds. But I don't think that should (or does) cause either of us any grief. :)
I won't just survive
Oh, you will see me thrive
Can't write my story
I'm beyond the archetype
I won't just conform
No matter how you shake my core
'Cause my roots, they run deep, oh

When, when the fire's at my feet again
And the vultures all start circling
They're whispering, "You're out of time,"
But still I rise
This is no mistake, no accident
When you think the final nail is in, think again
Don't be surprised, I will still rise
User avatar
SirDennis
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 2:31 am
Location: Canada

Post by SirDennis »

nerdanel wrote:The New York Times ran an obituary for William Hamilton, the academic of "Is God Dead?" fame who identified as Christian while downplaying the importance of faith in a deity.

"He considered himself a follower of Christ, but whether Jesus was the son of God or not, he said, did not matter so much as whether people followed his teachings." He advocated, "We needed to redefine Christianity as a possibility without the presence of God." The Times summarized his views:
He believed that the concept of God had run its course in human history. Civilization now operated according to secular principles. And churches should, too, by helping people learn to care for one another unconditionally, without illusions about heavenly rewards.
I would be deeply enthused by society as he envisioned it: one that downplays or eliminates the importance of faith in a divinity and one whose religions focus on how humans should behave towards each other here on earth. I too see god(s) as a human invention that may end up not existing throughout history, and the Bible as having captured one earlier iteration of that human invention.

Sir D:

To be clear, I did not feel slighted by your earlier post. I understand that you and I have such different worldviews, and approach religious discussions using such different principles and assumptions, that it will be very difficult for us to achieve any meeting of the minds. But I don't think that should (or does) cause either of us any grief. :)
Well, for the record, I spend very little time thinking about going to heaven and/or suggesting the desire to do so should be anyone's motivation for trusting God. In fact I can't think of one time that I told someone that they should want to go to heaven.

Right action does not lead God to love a person. Right action is its own reward. For the Christian, right action is an expression of our love for God, something we do as a child does out of love for a parent. Loving and caring for others is the only way I know how to express the love God has for me and that I have for Him. But it is not what makes him love me, he just does. I do hope that others will accept his love, but that is only because knowing God loves me is something I could not live without.

Unlike yourself, I came to this as an adult with my eyes wide open. Now, everything, all the time before I came into relationship with God, I count as loss. However at times I wonder if I was fortunate not to be raised as a Christian (except maybe very loosely nominally) because I missed the youthful urge to reject Christianity along with everything else my parents and past generations stood for. Truth be told, even as an adult, getting to the point where I can now say I am born again was long and painful, with me kicking and screaming through most of it.

But enough of that.

Recently (as in over the past few months) I've become active in a local church, the Salvation Army (even learned how to play the tuba of all things). What attracted me was their stance on social justice issues. In fact it was what they are doing about human trafficking that got me in the door.

Here is their statement of mission and values (again for the record):
The Salvation Army is an international Christian church. Its message is based on the Bible; its ministry is motivated by love for God and the needs of humanity.

Mission Statement

The Salvation Army exists to share the love of Jesus Christ, meet human needs and be a transforming influence in the communities of our world.

Core Values

There are three core values of our faith – Salvation, Holiness and Intimacy with God.

Rooted in these three values are the seven core operational values which guide all aspects of The Salvation Army in Canada & Bermuda.

Compassion: We reach out to others and care for them.

Respect: We promote the dignity of all persons

Excellence: We strive to be the best at what we do and a model for others to emulate.

Integrity: We are honest, trustworthy, and accountable.

Relevance: We are committed to the pursuit of innovation and effectiveness.

Co-operation: We encourage and foster teamwork and partnerships

Celebration: We give thanks by marking milestones and successes.

http://www.salvationarmy.ca/missionandvalues/
What I can affirm so far is, these people take helping others very seriously. And it is not easy work. In my short time there I know of a female mission volunteer who was attacked (punched in the face) by a client, and another who had their wallet stolen while serving free meals to the needy. (The wallet was returned and the person who stole it was remorseful, but not before he bought drugs with some of the money. The victim did not press charges.) As well I have been asked to volunteer for a program that helps reduce recidivism among sex offenders after they are released from jail. Then there is the prison ministry and homeless shelter/halfway house I am interviewing to volunteer at next week.

I don't know what Christian life was all about back when you were one nel. The above is just a smattering of what it is like for me so far. And all of this is done while I am myself unemployed and technically still homeless.

None of this is meant to elevate myself above others, or to seek praise from you or anyone. It is God in me who deserves and is worthy of praise... my only desire is to be used of Him.
Last edited by SirDennis on Sun Mar 11, 2012 6:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
axordil
Pleasantly Twisted
Posts: 8999
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
Contact:

Post by axordil »

SirD:

The "Army" does some great things. My sister used to run a woman's shelter for them. As with her, I have no doubt either in the sincerity of your faith or the positive fruits thereof (those would be the second and third order events I spoke of earlier).

There are other organizations that do other worthwhile things of the same ilk. Some are Christian. Some are based on other faiths. Some are totally secular. My observations have been that the people who are fully engaged in them are all equally sincere in their faiths, or their secular visions, and all equally driven to do the right thing not for any reward, but because within their worldview it is simply right.

And of course we can all point at those who, while professing faith, or NOT professing faith, do things one cannot easily reconcile with the notion of Right Action as it is generally understood.

For someone whom faith has never touched, even while I was growing up in an environment supposedly designed for its inculcation, I do not believe it is possible to come to the conclusion that any religious faith in particular or religious faith in general is necessary for Right Action, or that Right Action flows naturally from any or all religious faiths. What does seem obvious is that some people are disposed to do right, and others are not, and that there's not much if any connection between that and their professed creed (or lack thereof). The purportedly devout and the allegedly atheist are hard to pick out of a methodological lineup, as it were, going strictly by their actions.

That's the view from the outside looking in: it boils down to "well, I'm glad it works for you." And I am. But as Blake observed, "one law for the lion and the lamb is oppression."
User avatar
yovargas
I miss Prim ...
Posts: 15011
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:13 am
Location: Florida

Post by yovargas »

axordil wrote:What does seem obvious is that some people are disposed to do right, and others are not, and that there's not much if any connection between that and their professed creed (or lack thereof). The purportedly devout and the allegedly atheist are hard to pick out of a methodological lineup, as it were, going strictly by their actions.
Which reminds me - as an anecdotal side note - that my very traditionally Christian mom, while talking to me, her openly gay, strongly atheist son, recently told me that I was more virtuous and moral than many Christians she knew. Said in the context of how she hopes I can find a nice gay man as virtuous and moral as I to settle down with (did I mention she's very traditionally Christian??), I must say I was quite shocked and deeply flattered! :D
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists


Image
User avatar
axordil
Pleasantly Twisted
Posts: 8999
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
Contact:

Post by axordil »

yovargas wrote:
axordil wrote:What does seem obvious is that some people are disposed to do right, and others are not, and that there's not much if any connection between that and their professed creed (or lack thereof). The purportedly devout and the allegedly atheist are hard to pick out of a methodological lineup, as it were, going strictly by their actions.
Which reminds me - as an anecdotal side note - that my very traditionally Christian mom, while talking to me, her openly gay, strongly atheist son, recently told me that I was more virtuous and moral than many Christians she knew. Said in the context of how she hopes I can find a nice gay man as virtuous and moral as I to settle down with (did I mention she's very traditionally Christian??), I must say I was quite shocked and deeply flattered! :D
Parents surprise in good ways sometimes. :)
User avatar
SirDennis
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 2:31 am
Location: Canada

Post by SirDennis »

axordil wrote:SirD:

The "Army" does some great things. My sister used to run a woman's shelter for them. As with her, I have no doubt either in the sincerity of your faith or the positive fruits thereof (those would be the second and third order events I spoke of earlier).

There are other organizations that do other worthwhile things of the same ilk. Some are Christian. Some are based on other faiths. Some are totally secular. My observations have been that the people who are fully engaged in them are all equally sincere in their faiths, or their secular visions, and all equally driven to do the right thing not for any reward, but because within their worldview it is simply right.

And of course we can all point at those who, while professing faith, or NOT professing faith, do things one cannot easily reconcile with the notion of Right Action as it is generally understood.

For someone whom faith has never touched, even while I was growing up in an environment supposedly designed for its inculcation, I do not believe it is possible to come to the conclusion that any religious faith in particular or religious faith in general is necessary for Right Action, or that Right Action flows naturally from any or all religious faiths. What does seem obvious is that some people are disposed to do right, and others are not, and that there's not much if any connection between that and their professed creed (or lack thereof). The purportedly devout and the allegedly atheist are hard to pick out of a methodological lineup, as it were, going strictly by their actions.

That's the view from the outside looking in: it boils down to "well, I'm glad it works for you." And I am. But as Blake observed, "one law for the lion and the lamb is oppression."
Thank you for your gentle reply Ax. I was almost dreading coming back to see what kind of responses were waiting for me. I don't usually go all in like that in public.

You are right that people can do good things or not, or do bad things or nothing whether they are in relationship with God or not. I get that. Years ago I was a social justice activist straight up. But even successes on that front left me feeling hollow.

It seems everyone, at some point or other -- those who do good, those who do bad, those who do everything for personal gain or nothing motivated by personal gain, the wealthy (this is a common meme) and the poor alike, -- is destined to come to the place where they realize there is something missing. My sense now, especially among people who strive for a better world, is that without God in the picture, it is all for nought.

When preachers espouse a kind of social consciousness but deny or downplay God's sovereignty, having done it that way for years myself (at great personal cost and sometimes peril) I can tell you that they are missing the point. I would say, "but that's just me" but I no longer believe that to be true.

Yov you are blessed with a wise mother.
nerdanel
This is Rome
Posts: 5963
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:48 pm
Location: Concrete Jungle by the Lagoon

Post by nerdanel »

yov, that's awesome. I'm so glad to hear that.

Thank you for your thoughtful response to me, Sir D. I will offer a mishmash of only-approximately-ordered responses:

I first want to clarify that my rejection of Christianity is not, as best as I can tell, closely tied to any anti-parental/authority rebellion. First, I shared every step of what I was experiencing with my parents, who supported me in my questioning and took all necessary steps to facilitate it, from arranging meetings with priests for me to ask my questions, checking out books on other religions from the library, and taking me to other types of religious services, including to synagogue on a weekly basis once that became my chosen direction. And second, I was looking for a religion to replace Christianity rather than a transition to atheism: while I found Christianity to be incredible, I never questioned the existence of God at that point. I found a different religious authority and embraced it so wholeheartedly that I routinely tangled with my college religion professors for being insufficiently respectful of Orthodox Judaism (when, you know, the Orthodox teachings were completely contradicted by physical realities discovered via archaeology research.) Nor have my parents provided any strong reaction to my proclamation of atheism. When I was at home in fall 2009, after the Jewish High Holy Days that year, I realized that it had been causing me increasing stress to keep going to religious holidays and celebrations while gradually accepting that I did not actually believe literally in anything that was being said. When I finally blurted this out to my mother, she said that she had been aware that I probably felt that way for quite a while and that she was relieved that I was able to be honest with myself about it.

The second point is as to God's love. I confess that talk of this concept usually causes me to feel extreme anger, not at the speaker, but at what feels very keenly to me to be a comforting (and at times, discomforting) lie. My anger is linked to the "why bad things happen to good people" phenomenon and to the massive, almost mind-breaking suffering in the world that continues without divine intervention. It is impossible for me to accept that a god can possibly be paying attention to this world, engaging with it, let alone loving the beings that exist within it, and permit without intervention people to be born into suffering, torture, illness, and death. It is impossible for me to view the good things in my life as divine blessings or manifestations of divine love, when that view necessarily means that others (who are as or more deserving) have not been visited with such blessings and love. While I have lived a first-world life suffused with a reasonable amount of middle-class privilege, my forays into the study and especially practice of human rights law have already exposed me to too much suffering and pain for me ever to forgive any god that exists for failing to intervene in concrete, tangible, modern terms. (Even assuming for the sake of argument that Jesus was a form of divine intervention, it was manifestly insufficient to deal with current physical suffering; nor do I find "god intervenes in the world through us" arguments to be persuasive.) It is not coincidence that my movement from agnosticism to a much more strident atheism has coincided with increased exposure to other people's suffering. For me, the death or nonexistence of god is the much kinder reality; if god exists and indifferently refuses to intervene in this world tangibly to help his/her/its "creations" whom we are to believe that it "loves," I have a lot to say to that god in a conversation, and most of it would be edited if posted on this board.

So for me, divine love is very much incompatible with the painful realities of this world. We are the only beings who are available to change those realities - to show help, caring, and love to other people. It is this atheist view that leads me to want to help people - the belief that there is no one else but me (and other similarly-situated human beings) to care.

As for working with prisoners ... yes. I have more than a passing familiarity with the work you describe, including the physical risks that one takes in working with inmates - among the circle of people I know, the harm has included an attempted sexual assault, several people who have been hit, and one who was choked. It is not easy work but it is important work. I agree with what Ax said: "My observations have been that the people who are fully engaged in them are all equally sincere in their faiths, or their secular visions, and all equally driven to do the right thing not for any reward, but because within their worldview it is simply right." I suspect that we are each exposed to people doing this work who are more likely to share our worldview and orientation: I confess that most people I know who are working with prisoners are liberal atheists and agnostics, with a smattering of very liberal Christians and Jews mixed in. Anyway, I hope that your volunteer experiences prove very rewarding for you.

As for the Salvation Army, I am sorry to say that their American branch's hateful treatment of gay people who are in need and gay employees has left me with very little regard for them. I will be quite relieved if you tell me their practices in Canada are less bigoted.

Finally, I actually agree with you that life would seem fuller if a "loving parent" god existed who cared for us, watched over us, and did anything concrete to help us. Unfortunately, I think that construct is a comforting lie, and while I think life would be better if I believed it, I can't figure out how to present it to myself in a way that seems like something other than a lie.

ETA "college religion professors," not "college religious professors" :) - gah, you can proofread a post twice and still this stuff slips by.
Last edited by nerdanel on Sun Mar 11, 2012 10:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I won't just survive
Oh, you will see me thrive
Can't write my story
I'm beyond the archetype
I won't just conform
No matter how you shake my core
'Cause my roots, they run deep, oh

When, when the fire's at my feet again
And the vultures all start circling
They're whispering, "You're out of time,"
But still I rise
This is no mistake, no accident
When you think the final nail is in, think again
Don't be surprised, I will still rise
User avatar
River
bioalchemist
Posts: 13431
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:08 am
Location: the dry land

Post by River »

nerdanel wrote:It is impossible for me to accept that a god can possibly be paying attention to this world, engaging with it, let alone loving the beings that exist within it, and permit without intervention people to be born into suffering, torture, illness, and death. It is impossible for me to view the good things in my life as divine blessings or manifestations of divine love, when that view necessarily means that others (who are as or more deserving) have not been visited with such blessings and love.
I have this problem (if you can call it that) too. In fact, my entire immediate family does. After my sister's third round with adrenal cancer even my parents quit religion. It just seems so, well, pointless to spend time on a being who'd allow that to happen to someone three times. Yeah, she survived, but there's no way to frame something like that in a way that's the least bit palatable. Test of faith? That's not a test. That's abuse. Makes everyone involved better and stronger? Pretty sure she was better and stronger *before* the Whipple procedure (look it up, I don't even want to try and describe it). God showed His love by letting her live? We'd all appreciate it more if He showed his love by not letting it happen in the first place (because, if God is omnipotent, omniscient, and involved, this was either allowed or it was a mistake). All part of a divine plan? We're coming back to abuse. Far more comforting to look at the whole ordeal, and everything else that happens, as a cosmic-scale game of dice. You don't deserve it when you roll a snake eyes. You don't deserve it when you roll a seven either.
When you can do nothing what can you do?
User avatar
axordil
Pleasantly Twisted
Posts: 8999
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
Location: Black Creek Bottoms
Contact:

Post by axordil »

It seems everyone, at some point or other -- those who do good, those who do bad, those who do everything for personal gain or nothing motivated by personal gain, the wealthy (this is a common meme) and the poor alike, -- is destined to come to the place where they realize there is something missing.
Perhaps for some the goal is not to find something to fulfill a yearning, but to acknowledge rather its ineffability.
User avatar
vison
Best friends forever
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:33 pm
Location: Over there.

Post by vison »

I have a version of this, sung by Dolly Parton, Linda Ronstadt, and Emmy Lou Harris. I love the sounds their voices make, the music is beautiful.

However, if I pay attention to the words? I won't say more, as I have no desire to take any further part in this discussion:

Farther Along

Tempted and tried, we’re oft made to wonder
Why it should be thus all the day long;
While there are others living about us,
Never molested, though in the wrong.
Refrain:
Farther along we’ll know more about it,
Farther along we’ll understand why;
Cheer up, my brother, live in the sunshine,
We’ll understand it all by and by.

Sometimes I wonder why I must suffer,
Go in the rain, the cold, and the snow,
When there are many living in comfort,
Giving no heed to all I can do.

Tempted and tried, how often we question
Why we must suffer year after year,
Being accused by those of our loved ones,
E’en though we’ve walked in God’s holy fear.

Often when death has taken our loved ones,
Leaving our home so lone and so drear,
Then do we wonder why others prosper,
Living so wicked year after year.

“Faithful till death,” saith our loving Master;
Short is our time to labor and wait;
Then will our toiling seem to be nothing,
When we shall pass the heavenly gate.

Soon we will see our dear, loving Savior,
Hear the last trumpet sound through the sky;
Then we will meet those gone on before us,
Then we shall know and understand why.
Dig deeper.
User avatar
JewelSong
Just Keep Singin'
Posts: 4660
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:35 am
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Post by JewelSong »

My father once said that as he was coming out of dental anesthesia, he suddenly realized he had the answer to everything...the whole mystery of our being and the universe right in front of him. He said he was sure it wasn't imaginary - he KNEW he had the answer.

Then he woke up and it was all gone. ;)

vison, I love that version of the song, too - it's a great old Gospel hymn and such fun to sing and harmonize with. In some ways, it may be comforting to believe that "everything happens for a reason" and/or that we'll understand it all, by and by. It's scarier to think that things just happen...but that is what I do think. Sh*t happens. To everyone. And we must muddle through it, because this is all we have right now.

Is there "something more?" You know, I don't know. I think the best I can do is be here in the NOW...do the best I can to love my neighbors and be kind. My New Year's resolution (and my Christmas poem, for those of you who got a card) focused on not being such a judgmental b*itch. To be kinder, fairer and more helpful to my fellow humans.

Anyway, here's another song. Words and music by Iris Dement. She's got one of those twangy voices that is not to everyone's taste - but I think it's perfect for the song. And I love what the song says, too. (vison, I thought of you the first time I heard this!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlaoR5m4L80

Everybody's wonderin' what and where they all came from.
Everybody's worryin' 'bout where they're gonna go when the whole thing's done.
But no one knows for certain and so it's all the same to me.
I think I'll just let the mystery be.

Some say once you're gone you're gone forever, and some say you're gonna come back.
Some say you rest in the arms of the Saviour if in sinful ways you lack.
Some say that they're comin' back in a garden, bunch of carrots and little sweet peas.
I think I'll just let the mystery be.

Everybody's wonderin' what and where they all came from.
Everybody's worryin' 'bout where they're gonna go when the whole thing's done.
But no one knows for certain and so it's all the same to me.
I think I'll just let the mystery be.

Instrumental break.

Some say they're goin' to a place called Glory and I ain't saying it ain't a fact.
But I've heard that I'm on the road to purgatory and I don't like the sound of that.
Well, I believe in love and I live my life accordingly.
But I choose to let the mystery be.

Everybody's wonderin' what and where they all came from.
Everybody's worryin' 'bout where they're gonna go when the whole thing's done.
But no one knows for certain and so it's all the same to me.
I think I'll just let the mystery be.
I think I'll just let the mystery be.
"Live! Live! Live! Life is a banquet, and most poor suckers are starving to death!" - Auntie Mame

Image
User avatar
SirDennis
Posts: 842
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 2:31 am
Location: Canada

Post by SirDennis »

There's not much I can say in response to Nel and River's recent posts, other than I know where you are coming from, hence the kicking and screaming part of my journey to acceptance of God's sovereignty.

I might say look at how God himself was treated when he came in the flesh but, as most of us have said they don't believe in such a thing, I can understand it is cold comfort.

I have seen and endured my share of horror in this world, starting with finding a shot gun suicide in my basement at age 5. He was a friend my dad made in prison, who upon his release stayed with us for only a couple days... my dad was still in prison.

What I now believe is Jesus came to save the world, one person at a time if necessary, from the very things you describe. Why doesn't he just wave a magic wand and end suffering? What would have been the point of giving us choice if that was how he operates? And who knows, perhaps when he is good and ready he will, but not before he's held out his hand to as many people as he desires to.

In the meantime suffering in the world is often the direct result of human action. Yes even a child born to poverty and starvation happens because a significant part of the world's population, who have more than they need, do not feel compelled to share, or confront the economic system that allows for (if not is built on) such suffering.

Tell me which one of the things cannot be attributed to the kinds of choices humans as a whole, even the moral ones, have made, individually or corporately? And are we to believe that because there are victims in the world that God doesn't care? How is random nothingness any more kind a paradigm or more worth striving for change inside of?

His believers are his hands and feet caring for people. If someone says they are a believer and do not feel compelled to try to ease suffering in the world, one way or another, chances are they are deluding themselves.

Now specifically to Nel. Yes I have heard of that claim from the States and the attendant campaign to turn people away from donating to SA's Community and Social Services Fund. (For something that may have happened 20 years ago, attacking a fund that helps families in need today seems more than appropriate.)

Hearing about the campaign was one of the things holding me back from joining the local church at first. I asked around and no one had heard anything about it. I even went so far as to ask a friend of mine, who happens to be gay, who works for the Salvation Army though does not attend or belong to a church. Not only did he say he hadn't heard about it, but that he believed it was likely complete rubbish since it totally contradicted his own experience with the SA. What I do know is that the fellow who punched the volunteer (mentioned in another post) is not welcome at the mission any more. But as far as I know he still receives support in other ways.

Now I'm not saying we should rule out the possibility that the claimant has a case. But if so, it is something that again can be chocked up to the actions of an individual or group of individuals (such as happened recently at a US Baptist church that voted to not allow interracial marriage because the pastor's white daughter wanted to marry a black man he didn't like).

As for the employment discrimination case, it seems that it relates to "ordaining ministers" more so than a general prohibition against hiring gays. Outside of the minister trade, a special category usually reserved for husband and wife teams (though this rule is being relaxed lately I'm told) I doubt -- and the friend I mentioned above said as much -- that sexual orientation ever comes into play in hiring for general positions. As a former human rights activist who knows how campaigns sometimes play out, I'll reserve further judgement.

Either way, please tell me all about any organization -- church, state, secular, whatever -- engaged in human services that has not been accused of bias and/or sued at some point. Again, we are talking about people here. What I have observed is the potential for abuse is directly proportionate to the size of the organization.
User avatar
vison
Best friends forever
Posts: 11961
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:33 pm
Location: Over there.

Post by vison »

SirDennis wrote:What would have been the point of giving us choice if that was how he operates?
Since the god being knew, knows, and always will know what "choice" any given created being is going to make, the whole thing is just . . . .

You fill in the blank.

Yeah, I know I said I was staying out of this, but there are times when words scream to be answered and that was one of those times.

This god being wants it both ways. It wants to eat its cake and have it, too. :D
Dig deeper.
Post Reply