|
Was Katrina sent by God to destroy what the scriptures call "abomination?" After all, in Leviticus 18:22 the Bible says: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination." And it Leviticus 20:13 it is even more explicit, with: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." It is a fact some "religious" folks believe the destruction of New Orleans was a direct result of the choices of a few individuals who were participating in and supporting this festival and related "evil" activities. Does this belief by these individuals make these statements an actual fact? Of course not!
The problem of evil, or the paradox22 of attempting to reconcile the existence of evil or suffering in a world with the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good God,3.125 has been discussed and debated at least since the days of Epicurus, a Greek philosopher who lived from 341 to 270 BC.3.126 There are numerous religious and philosophical responses to this paradox, and they deserve study and contemplation. In depth analysis is beyond the scope of this book. However, like most paradoxes, there is truth and insights to be found in studying the details at the intersection.
The questions being raised, relative to bringing up this specific example of God's impact on things which are acted upon, are: "Was God responsible for the destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina and then Hurricane Rita in 2005?" "Was the destruction in response to the choices of people who were ignoring warnings religious teachers have been giving the world for as long as there have been people?" "Was the destruction a natural disaster, with no outside influence, neither from God, from a god, nor from mankind?" "How can there be an all powerful, all wise, and loving God, when death and damage and destruction and suffering like happened along the Gulf Coast occurs?
Some scientists contend that if God started the ball rolling, and especially if he set up all of the laws defining how balls rolls, he is responsible for where the ball rolls. In some ways this approach is an extension of Newtonian Mechanics.3.127 Sure, a hurricane movement is more complex than a rolling ball, and yet the analogy still fits.
|
paradoxes