God Allows Murder of Children at Sandy Hook Elementary Schol

[Jagella]

Does anybody remember the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting? Twenty-six people including twenty kids were shot to death. If you were God, would you have stopped that shooting?

No--Then you, like God, would have done nothing to save those people from being gunned down.

Yes--Then how would you explain how you would act morally while God did not?

If I was God or was otherwise able to stop the murder of those kids and adults, then yes, of course I would have stopped the shooter. Assuming the God of Christianity exists, then I can say I'm more moral than he is. If any Christian here disagrees with my saying I'm more moral then God, then you must conclude that allowing kids to be shot to death was the right thing to do at the Sandy Hook Elementary School.

[By Grace]

[Replying to post 246 by rikuoamero]

My argument is that Grace (presumably in real life) and other Christians on this thread believe and promote their God as being a protector. A loving Father God. A warder against evil.

That is a presumption for which there is no evidence. If it were true that Christianity was some sort of talisman that warded off evil things such as cancer, then churches would be full, and the cancer hospitals closed.

The same can be said for calamity or forms of sudden death. I dare say that if that if your presumption were true, then it is likely that you would become a Christian, despite what your sig lines say.

But that is also a presumption on my part, K?

As I posted to another poster, I believe that Jesus is saying that there are no guarantees we have in this life. therefore, he says we need to be prepared for that eventuality; that includes repentance (getting right with God) before there is a time that we cannot do that.

Evil exists, and evil people will continue to do evil things, for which they shall receive their just dues. But the fact that evil exists, and evil things happen does not logically mean that God does not exist, nor does it mean that he is powerless against evil.

When 20-year-old Adam Lanza shot and killed all those teachers, students, then finally himself, he was acting as a free moral agent, and that is what many fail to understand. Therefore the point of the discussion needs to be on him, and not God's ability to prevent such an evil action.

The book of Job details another man who suffered severe loss, for which he did nothing to deserve. But the end of the book is filled with all the blessings that God gave to Job because in all his suffering, he did not sin. After all that was over, he was made richer, and had more property, livestock and children than he had previously.

[ttruscott]

The passage is:

Luke 13:2 And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way?
3 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.
4 Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem?
5 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.�

So Christ indicates that tragedy doesn't happen as a result of someone sinning.

I don't read it like that at all... The warning is to not assume that disaster only happens to the worst sinners as He is telling them that perishing will happen to every unrepentant sinner.

but I cannot see what's meant by "likewise perish", since likewise perishing is to die in a tragic accident.

I suggest that likewise modifies perishing, not the method of death. The reference to the unrepentant tells us this perishing is the eternal death of the outer darkness, not ordinary human death that comes to all sinners, repentant and unrepentant alike.

And repentance has nothing to do with this, as Christ has said. So likewise perish must be metaphoric, in which case it is not "likewise."

Right, it is not being used as you seem to think...

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 251 by By Grace]

That is a presumption for which there is no evidence.

https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/ ... ur-Defence

Ahem

If it were true that Christianity was some sort of talisman that warded off evil things such as cancer, then churches would be full, and the cancer hospitals closed.

Not Christianity but it's God...but anyway, yes. Doesn't it strike you as strange that cancer hospitals are not closed?

I dare say that if that if your presumption were true, then it is likely that you would become a Christian, despite what your sig lines say.

Perhaps. One of the things that started me on this path towards atheism was the lack of protection despite promises of it.
Would I become one now, if God turned up and started protecting? No, but if he had done so in my youth, it's likely I wouldn't have stopped being Christian.

As I posted to another poster, I believe that Jesus is saying that there are no guarantees we have in this life. therefore, he says we need to be prepared for that eventuality; that includes repentance (getting right with God) before there is a time that we cannot do that.

So can I get an official answer out of you, please? By Grace is a Christian who does not believe that her God will defend. By Grace does not believe that her God promises to defend.

Do you agree with those two statements?

Evil exists, and evil people will continue to do evil things, for which they shall receive their just dues.

Does not mean the children are un-shot. Just means the gun-man is potentially being punished in some other dimension or realm.

But the fact that evil exists, and evil things happen does not logically mean that God does not exist, nor does it mean that he is powerless against evil.

I've corrected you on this before, Grace, and I will repeat myself here.
This thread, the assumption has been made that God both exists and is powerful, potentially all powerful.

When 20-year-old Adam Lanza shot and killed all those teachers, students, then finally himself, he was acting as a free moral agent, and that is what many fail to understand.

I've already argued against that point, although right now I can't remember if I've done so with yourself. Either way, I will repeat myself.
This means that care is taken to preserve the free will of the gunman, but not the free will of the victims. They didn't want to be shot and killed.

Whose free will are you going to defend, Grace? It's a zero sum game: you can defend one or the other, but not both at the same time.

Therefore the point of the discussion needs to be on him, and not God's ability to prevent such an evil action.

Do you believe that God has intervened in other situations? Or has God been 'hands-off' this entire time?

The book of Job details another man who suffered severe loss, for which he did nothing to deserve.

Losses that God allowed to happen, with his full blessing, merely to win a bet with Ha'Satan.

But the end of the book is filled with all the blessings that God gave to Job because in all his suffering, he did not sin.

Such as having a new set of kids, to replace the first batch who got killed.
Sorry, but that strikes me as a bit cold. It's looking at humans like livestock.

After all that was over, he was made richer, and had more property, livestock and children than he had previously.

Okay...so what about the parents of the Sandy Hook children? Does this mean that they'll get new children to replace the ones that got shot? Is God promising them financial wealth as well?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 250 by By Grace]

To those whom I offended (sounds like a Willie nelson song) I am sorry. I was carrying the rules of engagement from one forum to here. I will endeavor to be better, and i give you permission to call me out (via PM, though) so that I can correct what I stated.

Apology accepted. I won't do anything via PM, since what happened here was all on the public forum.

it seemed to me as if they were utterly dismissing it out of hand.

But we didn't. As I detailed, the quote from Luke has been responded to five times now. So just out of curiosity (I'm not going to hold it against you, now that you've apologised), I'd like to know just what led you to think your Luke quote was being ignored or dismissed.

Not exactly what I would state because it may lead some to believe that "obedience to God makes one live forever".

I have in fact encountered that (if not those words, certainly to that effect) before. Usually though, the living forever happens in heaven, but still, the sentiment is the same. Christianity teaches that obey God, follow Jesus's teachings and you'll go to heaven, doesn't it?

[marco]

To those whom I offended (sounds like a Willie nelson song) I am sorry. I was carrying the rules of engagement from one forum to here. I will endeavor to be better, and i give you permission to call me out (via PM, though) so that I can correct what I stated.

We are all sinners, By Grace. The Slavs have a saying that one must suffer to attain sainthood. Welcome to the forum and warm wishes.

In the statement "unless you repent, you will likewise perish" the supposition is that repentance brings life,

Not exactly what I would state because it may lead some to believe that "obedience to God makes one live forever". Again, I picked up that tidbit from another poster.

Christ imposes a conditional: unless you repent, and associates the consequences with suffering the same fate. I see no way in which saying sorry can prolong one's natural life and so I guess Christ is speaking figuratively, about etrnal life. People pass away but are raised to life by contrition. Or so it seems. The problem is with the word: "likewise."

And that is what I believe that Jesus was teaching here: we all need to be prepared (especially in this era of terrorism) that there is no guarantee that if one sees sunrise, that s/he will see sunset.

And you think this is a lesson that requires some teaching? It is well known that life is brief and unpredictable. What is unknown is the connection between life and repentance. I can't see how being prepared and being repentant avoid life's tragedies. They may gain a blessing.

[marco]

I don't read it like that at all... The warning is to not assume that disaster only happens to the worst sinners as He is telling them that perishing will happen to every unrepentant sinner.

Well that's demonstrably untrue since tragedy happens to us all. "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths a statistic" as Stalin astutely observed. Repentance does not soften the dull, cold ear of Death.

I suggest that likewise modifies perishing, not the method of death. The reference to the unrepentant tells us this perishing is the eternal death of the outer darkness, not ordinary human death that comes to all sinners, repentant and unrepentant alike.

Well it certainly doesn't tell me that and I bet it didn't tell his listeners that either. I agree it makes no literal sense, but then you can have a feast on metaphor.

Right, it is not being used as you seem to think...

Then I am truly glad my lecturers did not speak with the obscurity of Christ.
"The same thing will happen to you if you don't repent," is a simple enough sentence. Principal clause followed by an adverbial clause of condition. Meaning:
You too will die, like them, if you don't say sorry.

Had I been in the audience I would have asked for clarification. That you have offered this doesn't really count, since one would want it from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

[ttruscott]

I don't read it like that at all... The warning is to not assume that disaster only happens to the worst sinners as He is telling them that perishing will happen to every unrepentant sinner.

Well that's demonstrably untrue since tragedy happens to us all. "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths a statistic" as Stalin astutely observed. Repentance does not soften the dull, cold ear of Death.

While I take Stalin as an expert on death, his theology is corrupt and useless. I have already said that both the repentant and the unrepentant die the ubiquitous human death. You have added nothing that I can see...

Then I am truly glad my lecturers did not speak with the obscurity of Christ.
"The same thing will happen to you if you don't repent," is a simple enough sentence.

No one has ever accused the Bible of plain speaking and add that to the fact that the most true statement in all of reality can be and will be perverted to the use of evil leaving the most plain speech at the mercy of evil were it not for the indwelling Holy Spirit to tell us what is meant.

Had I been in the audience I would have asked for clarification. That you have offered this doesn't really count, since one would want it from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

Yes, or you might have thought what He said was perfectly clear and went on you way...that is, hearing a person speak is not the same as reading a book about that speech.

[By Grace]

rikuoamero Quote:
My argument is that Grace (presumably in real life) and other Christians on this thread believe and promote their God as being a protector. A loving Father God. A warder against evil.

By Grace posted
That is a presumption for which there is no evidence. If it were true that Christianity was some sort of talisman that warded off evil things such as cancer, then churches would be full, and the cancer hospitals closed.

The same can be said for calamity or forms of sudden death. I dare say that if that if your presumption were true, then it is likely that you would become a Christian, despite what your sig lines say. :Shocked:

[Replying to post 253 by rikuoamero]

Not Christianity but it's God...but anyway, yes. Doesn't it strike you as strange that cancer hospitals are not closed?

No, and I do not believe that you completely understood what I was attempting to say.

Quote: By Grace
I dare say that if that if your presumption were true, then it is likely that you would become a Christian, despite what your sig lines say.

That was an attempt at humor, not snark.

Perhaps. One of the things that started me on this path towards atheism was the lack of protection despite promises of it.

Would I become one now, if God turned up and started protecting? No, but if he had done so in my youth, it's likely I wouldn't have stopped being Christian

Sorry that you experienced such trauma in your youth. But that trauma does not make or break the case for the existence of God That is because your experience as a youth is subjective, by definition.

In another post, you self-describe yourself, an atheist.

rikuoamero
So can I get an official answer out of you, please? By Grace is a Christian who does not believe that her God will defend. By Grace does not believe that her God promises to defend.

Do you agree with those two statements?

rikuoamero
https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/ ... ur-Defence

AHEM

I observe that this is not the first time that you give me some false either/or choices to make. (e.g.post 192) but I will not dwell on that except to note that on the previous places it seemed that you were attempting to box me into a false choice dilemma, which by definition is an error of reasoning.

"Have you stopped beating your wife?" is the same sort of question that you asked of me.

Then you point out 11 verses from knowingjesus website that mentioned "defense and refuge " and then attempted to trap me into giving only one answer that you gave me.

I really resent that.

But the greatest error you are making here is that of application. Seemingly you wish that those guarantees were universal, but they are specific.

The verses are applied to the Children of God, and from what you posted, and what is in your signature lines, I believe it is safe to assume that you are not a Child of God. Therefore you may not have the relationship with Him that the writers of those Psalms and other Scriptures have.

Again, not snark nor nastiness. There are Bible verses that say that sort of thing, but I do not want to give fodder for another derail.

Another error you make is that of context. By taking verses from Scripture and ripping them from their context, there is an automatic distortion. For instance it is possible to "justify suicide" by taking verses out of their context, and stringing them together. I choose not demonstrate that.

On this thread, I feel as if I am a piñata. My purpose for posting here was to demonstrate from Scripture that the premise of the OP. through my being aggrieved, and my unfortunate retaliatory posting, I may have contributed to that feeling of being a piñata.

If I come back............ never mind

[marco]

I have already said that both the repentant and the unrepentant die the ubiquitous human death. You have added nothing that I can see...

I would have amazed myself had I found the words to add to that, Ted.

No one has ever accused the Bible of plain speaking

Well far be it from me to be the first.

Yes, or you might have thought what He said was perfectly clear and went on you way...that is, hearing a person speak is not the same as reading a book about that speech.

Yes, like the others I'd have taken the obvious meaning: if you repent, you won't die. I may have been a bit scepical, though. However, given your lavish interretation I am back at square one. I bet Christ would have been good at selling used cars, had they been around. Come to think of it, he could have impressed by conjuring one up and travelling into Jerusalem in style instead of on a donkey (or two.)

As to his meaning, I am no wiser.

[ttruscott]

I bet Christ would have been good at selling used cars, had they been around. Come to think of it, he could have impressed by conjuring one up and travelling into Jerusalem in style instead of on a donkey (or two.)

As to his meaning, I am no wiser.

Equating Christ with the modern epitome of the weasley cheat is excessive since there is no indication of used car salesman in HIS character in the least and He is scorned for not being able to sell His message except to the foolish.

Wiser? You want proof of knowledge, not wisdom, and there will be no proof until there is.