Can you explain why God sent the Tsunami?
-
PART I
=====
On board the RSS Persistence, two soldiers from the SAF are taking some fresh air on the deck. They are part of the relief team that is traveling to the Meulaboh, which was devastated by the Tsunami that followed the earthquake off the coast of Sumatra on 26 Dec 2004.
LTA Mok: What did they do to deserve this?
1SG Tham: I never thought of that question. I meanÂ…I did not look at it that way.
LTA Mok: How then, are you looking at it?
1SG Tham: I asked myself this: that why we are spared from a fate like them?
LTA Mok: You mean why Singapore was spared from the Tsunami?
1SG Tham: Yeah, and more. I donÂ’t think we deserve to be spared any more than they deserve to suffer.
LTA Mok: Is that why you volunteered for this mission?
Tham nodded.
LTA Mok: I guess we are lucky.
1SG Mok: I put it down to grace and mercyÂ…from God. -
Where is God in all this? A Christian response to the Tsunami Tragedy
Date: 20 Jan 05
Time: 1800h - 1945h
Place: LT 9, National University of Singapore (Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences)
Speaker: Dr LT Jeyachandran,
Executive Director, Ravi Zacharias International Ministries, Asia-Pacific Ltd
Free. All are welcome.
* LT 9 shown with Red Star -
PART II
=====
LTA Mok: You are a Christian?
1SG Tham: Yes, I am.
LTA Mok: Then you believe in a God that is all-loving?
1SG Tham: Yes, I do.
LTA Mok: If He is all-loving, why does He kill all these innocent lives?
1SG Tham: But He didnÂ’t kill these people, the Tsunami did!
LTA Mok: Yah, but He is supposed to be all-powerful right?
1SG Tham: Yah, so?
LTA Mok: So, He could have prevented this disaster but He did not. It is like watching someone dying before you and you do nothing. IsnÂ’t that cruel?
There was a moment of pause with Tham looking down at his own feet, searching for an answer. Mok was looking at ThamÂ’s expression, as if waiting for a response, but in his heart, he thought that he has won the argument. He has proven that an all-loving and all-powerful God could not have existed.
Then Tham broke the silence.
1SG Tham: Maybe God could have prevented the human tragedies but He did not, I donÂ’t know why. But then, it is not the only thing I donÂ’t understand. I donÂ’t understand how and why God created this world, and I donÂ’t know why He gave humans intelligence that has no equal among animals. I donÂ’t comprehend why when humanity failed Him and rebel against Him, He chose to send His only begotten Son to die on the cross so that those that believe in Him would not parish. Above all, I donÂ’t know why a sinful man like me can escape His wrath and instead, become a recipient of His grace. -
I think you totally missed the point Icemoon was making. He wrote it as a "sarcastic" remark, not as a statementOriginally posted by stupidissmart:Then probably ghandi has perform an act tat is so incredible tat even god cannot follow. Perhaps singapore should wage a war against malaysia when talks fail. Maybe american should throw an atomic bomb at Iraq and afghanistan so tat it have everlasting peace. WIth your theory, Israel should start killing off all palestinians when he get tired of talks. Aren't u starting another crusade ? Are u any different from hitler and his halocaust ?
Hitler play halo 2? -
if they have X-Boxes in hell, then yeah y not?Originally posted by nukewatch:I think you totally missed the point Icemoon was making. He wrote it as a "sarcastic" remark, not as a statement
Hitler play halo 2?
-
Not sure, but peace using Middle-East talks are more ok I guess, with the American president as mediator .. lol Also peace through guerilla fighting like MPAJA and Force 136 are ok. Dropping an atomic bomb is the best man! Paiseh, the bomb is not called "bestman" .. one of them is called "Fat Boy" I remember ..
The example she had given r clearly illustration when talks appears to fail while violence worked. She is not sacastic about the remarks. -
A tragedy exploited by extremist Xtians to say how god punish people from other religions?
Cant believe this man..havent u all got regards for human lives? -
newwatch, i like your story very much. reminded me of Isaiah, For my thoughts are not your thoughts ...., we can never comprehend God's way of doing things but we can be sure that he has a plan and it is perfect
-
This piece appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald. I think it helps understand a little better the mystery:
Waves of destruction wash away belief in God's benevolence
December 30, 2004
Compassion is the best response when humanity faces the problem of evil, writes Edward Spence.
"Why did you do this to us, God? What did we do to upset you?" asked a woman in India this week, a heart-wrenching question asked in common these past few days by Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and Christians. Nothing could have prepared us for what happened when the tsunami unleashed its terror. So we seek answers where answers are hard to come by, in either secular or sacred realms.
Traditionally, the Judeo-Christian God, considered the most supreme and perfect being in the universe, has been ascribed the following necessary attributes: omniscience (all-knowing), omnipresence (present everywhere at all times and at once), omnipotence (almighty and powerful) and benevolence (all good and caring).
How, then, did a God as powerful and benevolent as this allow such a thing to happen? If he is benevolent then he cannot also be omnipotent, for a God who has both these attributes would have wanted to, cared to and been able to prevent such a catastrophe.
Perhaps, though omnipotent, He is not benevolent. That might explain why, although it was within His power to stop the tsunami, He simply chose not to: God has His own reasons and we are not to ask why. However, this answer will not suffice since by definition God is perfect. Being perfect, He must of necessity not merely be omnipotent but benevolent as well.
A possible solution to this problem, traditionally known as the problem of evil, was offered by the heretical Manicheans, who believed not in one supreme being but two: one good God responsible for all the good things in life and another bad God, Satan, responsible for all the evil in the world.
St Augustine, a follower in his early 20s, became an ardent critic of this doctrine, thinking a weak God powerless to defeat Satan was not worth worshipping.
Philosophically, if God is perfect, then there can be only one perfect God, not two. In any case, evil is an imperfection and thus not a characteristic that can be attributed to God.
If the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune are at play and the deaths caused by the tsunami are a cosmic payback in the form of karma, does that offer a solution, albeit a philosophical one, to the problem of evil? I think not. For how can children, some as young as a few months, who had not yet lived their lives, deserve to be punished so cruelly for their past sins - especially when they have not been offered the promised divine opportunity to atone for those sins through another life?
Even if solutions are forthcoming to these philosophical conundrums, humanely speaking they make little sense. Perhaps that is why some people remain sceptical about the presence of any divine providence ruling over us.
A compromise solution, between secular scepticism and a psychological need for the sacred, was offered by the Greek philosopher Epicurus. Although believing in gods, he claimed these divine beings would not want to diminish their heavenly happiness by mingling in the sordid affairs of mortals. For Epicurus, the gods were not crazy but simply indifferent to both human joys and sorrows. When it comes to social or natural evils, we are all alone.
But if natural disasters are merely random events caused by the uncaring and blind forces of nature, does this offer us any comfort or meaning in the face of the apocalyptic events on Boxing Day?
Even if our heads offer us such solutions, our hearts refuse to follow. For the problem of evil is an existential problem that confronts our own individual mortality and vulnerability to unknown and unexpected disasters.
Ultimately, heartfelt tears shed in earnest and with compassion, with offerings of charity for those who have suffered, are more meaningful than any theological and philosophical treatise on the problem of evil. Especially at Christmas when, according to the gospels, love is the single core message.
Perhaps this is the essence, if the legend is true, of what God learnt from us when He walked and suffered as a man among us. Ultimately, the problem of evil confronts us not as a puzzle to be solved but as a mystery to be experienced. And as Jesus and Plato before him indicated, the meaning of the mystery of life can be found only by experiencing another great mystery - the mystery of love.
Dr Edward Spence is a philosopher at the Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, Charles Sturt University.
http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=26475&hl= -
Why does god allow or create nature disasters ?
So the answer I gathered so far is...
I don't know why... but I already made the assumption tat he is benevolent (even though he never show any benevelent acts in the bible... which is his own words... he only claim he was benevelent) so when he killed off the ten of thousands of people, it must be for something good. How is it good ? I don't know and I don't care. Tis is a lousy answer but I have to accept it. Doesn't tis example and other cruel nature disasters already show tat the assumptions he is benevelent is wrong ? No, the assumption can never be wrong though I don't know why. I can't give any examples of his kind acts either. I just memorised tat he is benevelent. Tat is it. -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:Why does god allow or create nature disasters ?
So the answer I gathered so far is...
I don't know why... but I already made the assumption tat he is benevolent (even though he never show any benevelent acts in the bible... which is his own words... he only claim he was benevelent) so when he killed off the ten of thousands of people, it must be for something good. How is it good ? I don't know and I don't care. Tis is a lousy answer but I have to accept it. Doesn't tis example and other cruel nature disasters already show tat the assumptions he is benevelent is wrong ? No, the assumption can never be wrong though I don't know why. I can't give any examples of his kind acts either. I just memorised tat he is benevelent. Tat is it.
-
When ur time come,If u have to go,u must go..
-
Personally, I don't think God sent the tsunamis to punish non-believers. I always believe that I have no guarantee that non-believers will be punished this side of eternity. Its the other side that matters...
-
god sent tsunami so as to create awareness for the poor countries n help them to get food for their otherwise starving populations...debts are also frozen or written off for those said countries...otherwise...they will have no hope of clearing their foreign debts ever...besides...they will have new infrastructure in place...so do not blame god...whichever god u all r talking abt...religion promotes peace...extremist dumb f**kers mess up this world...blame those retards instead
-
Just a thought, no basis for it, but it is an "attractive" possibility?
Let's say God has a direct hand in the tsunami. Maybe the tsunami used to promote peace or whatever, some good thing.
... And the victims all go straight to heaven or paradise. Sounds evil, but considering this is a ticket to heaven and by default people don't get it. -
for the price of sin is something something....Originally posted by red_ryder:http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1380248,00.html
Martin Kettle
Tuesday December 28, 2004
The Guardian
The modern era flatters itself that human beings can now know and shape almost everything about the world. But an event like the Indonesian earthquake exposes much of this for the hubris that it is.
Perhaps we have talked so much about our civilisation's potential to destroy the planet that we have forgotten that the planet also has an untamed ability to destroy civilisation too. Whatever else it has achieved, the Indian Ocean tsunami has at least reminded mankind of its enduring vulnerability in the face of nature. The scale of suffering that it has wreaked - 20,000 deaths and counting - shows that we share such dangers with our ancestors more fully than most of us realised.
An entirely understandable reaction to such an event is to set one's face against any large questions that it may raise. But this week provides an unsought opportunity to consider the largest of all human implications of any major earthquake: its challenge to religion.
A few days after the 9/11 attacks on New York, I had dinner with the Guardian's late columnist Hugo Young. We were still so close to the event itself that only one topic of conversation was possible. At one stage I asked Hugo how his Catholicism allowed him to explain such a terrible act. I'm afraid that's an easy one, he replied.
We are all fallen beings, Hugo declared, and our life in this world is a vale of tears. So some human beings will always kill one another. The attack on New York should therefore be seen not as an act of God, but as an act of fallen humanity. Then he paused, and added: "But I admit I have much more difficulty with earthquakes.";
Earthquakes and the belief in the judgment of God are, indeed, very hard to reconcile. However, no religion that offers an explanation of the world can avoid making some kind of an attempt to fit the two together. And an immense earthquake like the one that took place off Sumatra on Sunday inevitably poses that challenge afresh in dramatic terms.
There is, after all, only one big question to ask about an event of such destructive power as the one that has taken place this week: why did it happen?
As with previous earthquakes, any explanation of this latest one poses us a sharp intellectual choice. Either there is an entirely natural explanation for it, or there is some other kind. Even the natural one is by no means easy to imagine, but it is at least wholly coherent.
The tsunami took place, say the seismologists, because a massive tectonic rupture on the sea bed generated tremors through the ocean. These unimaginable forces sent their energy coursing across thousands of miles of water, resulting in death and destruction in a vast arc from Somalia to Indonesia.
But what do world views that do not allow scientists undisputed authority have to say about such phenomena? Where do the creationists stand, for example? Such world views are more widespread, even now, than a secularised society such as ours sometimes prefers to think.
For most of human history people have tried to explain earthquakes as acts of divine intervention and displeasure. Even as the churches collapsed around them in 1755, Lisbon's priests insisted on salvaging crucifixes and religious icons with which to ward off the catastrophe that would kill more than 50,000 of their fellow citizens.
Others, though, began to draw different conclusions. Voltaire asked what kind of God could permit such a thing to occur. Did Lisbon really have so many more vices than London or Paris, he asked, that it should be punished in such a appalling and indiscriminate manner? Immanuel Kant was so amazed by what happened to Lisbon that he wrote three separate treatises on the problem of earthquakes.
Our own society seems to be more squeamish about such things. The need for mutual respect between peoples and traditions of which the Queen spoke in her Christmas broadcast seems to require that we must all respect religions in equal measure, too. The government, indeed, is legislating to prevent expressions of religious hatred in ways that could put a cordon around the critical discussion of religion itself.
Yet it is hard to think of any event in modern times that requires a more serious explanation from the forces of religion than this week's earthquake. Voltaire's 18th-century question to Christians - why Lisbon? - ought to generate a whole series of 21st-century equivalents for all the religions of the world.
Certainly the giant waves generated by the quake made no attempt to differentiate between the religions of those whom it made its victims. Hindus were swept away in India, Muslims were carried off in Indonesia, Buddhists in Thailand. Visiting Christians and Jews received no special treatment either. This poses no problem for the scientific belief system. Here, it says, was a mindless natural event, which destroyed Muslim and Hindu alike.
A non-scientific belief system, especially one that is based on any kind of notion of a divine order, has some explaining to do, however. What God sanctions an earthquake? What God protects against it? Why does the quake strike these places and these peoples and not others? What kind of order is it that decrees that a person who went to sleep by the edge of the ocean on Christmas night should wake up the next morning engulfed by the waves, struggling for life?
From at least the time of Aristotle, intelligent people have struggled to make some sense of earthquakes. Earthquakes do not merely kill and destroy. They challenge human beings to explain the world order in which such apparently indiscriminate acts can occur. Europe in the 18th century had the intellectual curiosity and independence to ask and answer such questions. But can we say the same of 21st-century Europe? Or are we too cowed now to even ask if the God can exist that can do such things?
[email protected]
I'm an atheist myself, and I would like to hear your explanations as to why an all-powerful, all-loving God would choose to kill so many innocent people (including babies and children) and cause so much suffering.
-somewhere in the bible, some number. -
god sent tsunami so as to create awareness for the poor countries n help them to get food for their otherwise starving populations...debts are also frozen or written off for those said countries...otherwise...they will have no hope of clearing their foreign debts ever...besides...they will have new infrastructure in place...so do not blame god...whichever god u all r talking abt...religion promotes peace...extremist dumb f**kers mess up this world...blame those retards instead
If u talk about poor, starving people, there r many living in north korea, other part of africa, some parts of china and south america. According to straits times, 1000 congolese were killed a day because they were starving or lack of health care. These people r probably much poorer than the people in maldives, sri lanka (coastal tourim area) and phuket which actually become rich due to tourism. They r in fact richer than their counterparts living in other province in their country. After the money and attention is given to these countries, these poorer (north korea, south america, africa) countries will have less of these funding. And now, after the waves, their livelihood is affected since people will start to think twice before going to beach resort again. In the end, it still make the world a worse place. If u talk about giving awareness and help, then u r dreadfully wrong since they r not really poor and there r poorer people around the globe. By killing these people, it appears to had used the worst possible method as well.Let's say God has a direct hand in the tsunami. Maybe the tsunami used to promote peace or whatever, some good thing.
Promote peace ? If the natural disaster occured in iraq, then the effect will be seen better. Victims go straight to heaven... Then it just meant tat heaven is like any place on earth since the people there r very much like the people here. The only thing different is the decorations. Anyway according to the bible, the only way to heaven is still through christ, not through natural disaster. Unless u r going to say the bible lies or something...
... And the victims all go straight to heaven or paradise. Sounds evil, but considering this is a ticket to heaven and by default people don't get it. -
I don't know why...but I already made the assumption tat he is cruel (even though he died for me on the cross...) so when He offer me eternal life, it must be a trick. How is it a trick? I don't know and I don't care. Tis is an egoistic answer but I have already made up my mind tat tis is the only answer I am going to accept. Doesn't His sacrifice for me on the cross already show tat the assumptions He is cruel is wrong? No, the assumption can never be wrong though I don't know why. I can't give any examples of His kind act either, cos I will reject every suggestion tat He is love. Tat is it.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I don't know why... but I already made the assumption tat he is benevolent (even though he never show any benevelent acts in the bible... which is his own words... he only claim he was benevelent) so when he killed off the ten of thousands of people, it must be for something good. How is it good ? I don't know and I don't care. Tis is a lousy answer but I have to accept it. Doesn't tis example and other cruel nature disasters already show tat the assumptions he is benevelent is wrong ? No, the assumption can never be wrong though I don't know why. I can't give any examples of his kind acts either. I just memorised tat he is benevelent. Tat is it. -
thank you for the encouragementOriginally posted by ventin:newwatch, i like your story very much. reminded me of Isaiah, For my thoughts are not your thoughts ...., we can never comprehend God's way of doing things but we can be sure that he has a plan and it is perfect -
I don't know why...but I already made the assumption tat he is cruel (even though he died for me on the cross...)
U know wat is the story of dying on the cross ? First he died not because he fight against enemies or something... he died because his father want him to ! His father wanted him to die ! He sacrifice his son to himself ! He could have just simply forgive but instead he kill and torture his son for watever reasons I do not know. Jesus couldn't really stop him and so he die. Then suddenly people say he is god and not the son of god ! So he actually commit suicide, acted as though he sacrifice himself, so as for him to forgive other people while role playing as 2 different people. U know wat, tis is a crazy story. The story makes more sense when he is powerless to stop the roman from killing him so he come out with some crazy story to make the best use of it.so when He offer me eternal life, it must be a trick.
Because if there is eternal life, why hide it at all ? Surely he want people to know about it by telling in tales then in a moment of craziness hide all its evidence so people can not have grounds to believe ? Isn't it more believable tat it never exists ?I can't give any examples of His kind act either, cos I will reject every suggestion tat He is love. Tat is it.
U still haven't show me any example of his kind act. Killing his own son to sooth his own ego isn't a kind act. -
Just like to share some of my thoughts. In light of the recent tragidies, many people might ask, where is God in all these? To me the Tsunami, no doubt claimed many many lifes, but it has brought about a common untiy among Man. People from all walks of life came forward to offer help. Even all the internal fighting within certain countries have stopped all they are all busy with the rescue operations.Where is God in all these?
In the people who came out of their comfort zone to help,
There You find God.
In those people who put their lives at risk to save others
There You find God
In those people who provided the emotional support for those of the grieving families,
There you find God
The list can go on and on and on.
This brings out the good, compassionate side of mankind which otherwise might not have seen. Also we should continually pray for the souls of those who perished and the victims' familes, that God would provide them with strength to survive through this.
-
Yo people. if u all really tink bout it, this argument bout God blah blah is crap man! Earthquakes and tsunamis existed way before the human race even started to populate the earth; tink bout the dinos why they suddenly disappear? Even till today we never fully understand the forces of nature not to say control it so why attribute it to God? Btw, for those who mentioned why Singapore was spared from the Tsunami i remenbered from one of my geography lessons way back in sch tat the earth's platonic movements r never stable; they occur ANYWHERE( again another forces of nature tat we do not understand) so it is perfectly possible tat Singapore can kena hit by earthquakes too juz tat till tis day it never HAPPENED yet. Also i dont see the relationship between God n this catrastrophe and whatever races involved; remenber tat b4 the westerners infiltrated China and other Asian countries many of the Asians DONT even noe who is Jesus, all i can say is stop linking Muslims or watever race to Christianity n watever bout Satan and God
-
Just like to share some of my thoughts. In light of the recent tragidies, many people might ask, where is God in all these? To me the Tsunami, no doubt claimed many many lifes, but it has brought about a common untiy among Man. People from all walks of life came forward to offer help. Even all the internal fighting within certain countries have stopped all they are all busy with the rescue operations.Where is God in all these?
i think u mixed up... when u see the death and suffering, u should see god because he is the one tat sent the waves. When u see people helping out, u should see just the human because it is really just them tat do the favour.
In the people who came out of their comfort zone to help,
There You find God. -
The reason why God sends the waves is only known to him alone. No use contemplating about it. But there's something special when you see others helping others. perhaps it just compassion, but i feel is what God working through us to help others.Originally posted by stupidissmart:i think u mixed up... when u see the death and suffering, u should see god because he is the one tat sent the waves. When u see people helping out, u should see just the human because it is really just them tat do the favour. -
The reason why God sends the waves is only known to him alone. No use contemplating about it. But there's something special when you see others helping others. perhaps it just compassion, but i feel is what God working through us to help others
If u ask me, the reason why people r helping others r because of compassion, and nothing to do with god. To think tat all good things r link with gods and all bad things r forgotten is biase.