God and the weather

durangodawood · Sep 13, 2017

If God controls the weather, people should be very upset with Him.

AV1611VET · Sep 13, 2017

Strathos said:
I would say that the vast majority of weather events are not direct acts of God intended to send a message or carry out a judgment.

And the remainder?

Strathos · Sep 13, 2017

AV1611VET said:
And the remainder?

It's a binary proposition...

Another Lazarus · Sep 14, 2017

doubtingmerle said:
News Flash: Animals were attacking long before "mankind fell".

4 Weird Fossils That Show Earth’s History, From Sex To Dinosaur Fights

They attack each other after the glory of man disappeared because of sins.

doubtingmerle · Sep 14, 2017

Another Lazarus said:
They attack each other after the glory of man disappeared because of sins.

If animals did not attack each other until the glory of man disappeared because of sins, why was I able to show you fossils of animals that attacked each other before the glory of man disappeared?

Loudmouth · Sep 14, 2017

Occams Barber said:
I second Bungles comments.

How do you tell the difference between weather caused by God and weather not caused by God?
OB

The same way you tell the difference between a rainbow caused by light diffraction and a rainbow caused by an invisible pink unicorn.

Ygrene Imref · Sep 14, 2017

Strathos said:
My view is that, aside from certain rare incidents (some of which are documented in the Bible) God does not directly interfere with the weather, instead allowing it to operate in accordance with the natural forces that He created. This is how I interpret Matthew 5:45. So God is responsible for the weather, but is not directly controlling it (most of the time).

The forces which govern the weather can be studied, understood, and predicted by scientists. That's how we have weather forecasts. So 99% of the time, when someone claims a storm or other meteorological phenomenon is a direct judgment of message from God, I don't find them to have any real support or basis for that claim.

I know that some people here feel differently about this, though. What are your thoughts on the matter?

(Also for all you atheists who are going to say something like 'God doesn't influence the weather because he doesn't exist', you can just save it. We already know what your opinion is.)

There are principalities, archons, powers, archangels, and angels that operate in union with God's will - and are given power over elements and dynamics. Some of these entities rebel, and take on their own will of manipulation, most don't.

Human weather machines are at technological odds with those powers/entities that were [formerly or currently] given power over those things. And, we are not the most technologically advanced world to exist in history - the East alone was near space age during the dark ages.

Similarly as in physics, we need to look at the net will of God - which is always His. Any perturbations we think we (created entities) cause have already been accounted for by Him, and therefore already exist a solution to regain/maintain "equilibrium"/union - His will. The foolish literally get purged just like perturbations do in math - through coupling constant (Christ.) And, everything else is written in terms of the "acceptable" parameters (holiness.)

quatona · Sep 14, 2017

Strathos said:
My view is that, aside from certain rare incidents (some of which are documented in the Bible) God does not directly interfere with the weather, instead allowing it to operate in accordance with the natural forces that He created. This is how I interpret Matthew 5:45. So God is responsible for the weather, but is not directly controlling it (most of the time).

The forces which govern the weather can be studied, understood, and predicted by scientists. That's how we have weather forecasts. So 99% of the time, when someone claims a storm or other meteorological phenomenon is a direct judgment of message from God, I don't find them to have any real support or basis for that claim.

And what are those cases in which you do find them to have a real basis for that claim?

(Also for all you atheists who are going to say something like 'God doesn't influence the weather because he doesn't exist', you can just save it. We already know what your opinion is.)

I am convinced that whenever God directly interferes with the weather, it´s because of homosexuality.

Strathos · Sep 14, 2017

quatona said:
And what are those cases in which you do find them to have a real basis for that claim?

There are several. Of course I won't be able to prove it to you.

quatona · Sep 15, 2017

Strathos said:
There are several. Of course I won't be able to prove it to you.

Why be defensive? Of course you can´t prove them, and I don´t expect to you (and, on top and as you said yourself, I don´t even buy into your premise of a God existing, and you can´t prove it, either).

But when you say "many are, some not" I am genuinely interested how you get to distinguish one from the other. Look, you were the one who said that in most cases "there is no real basis or support". The operational term, per your OP, isn´t "proof", but "real basis or support". All I am asking is: What constitutes a "real basis or support" for the claim that God directly interfered with the weather, in your epistemology?

Strathos · Sep 15, 2017

quatona said:
Why be defensive? Of course you can´t prove them, and I don´t expect to you (and, on top and as you said yourself, I don´t even buy into your premise of a God existing, and you can´t prove it, either).

But when you say "many are, some not" I am genuinely interested how you get to distinguish one from the other. Look, you were the one who said that in most cases "there is no real basis or support". The operational term, per your OP, isn´t "proof", but "real basis or support". All I am asking is: What constitutes a "real basis or support" for the claim that God directly interfered with the weather, in your epistemology?

I don't have an absolute method to determine it, except for events documented in scripture.

quatona · Sep 15, 2017

Strathos said:
I don't have an absolute method to determine it, except for events documented in scripture.

I didn´t ask for an absolute method. I asked for your method and criteria, by which you arrived at the notion that 1% are direct interference and 99% are not.
Isn´t that the very purpose of this thread: To find out how people arrive at their interpretation of such events?

Strathos · Sep 15, 2017

quatona said:
I didn´t ask for an absolute method. I asked for your method and criteria, by which you arrived at the notion that 1% are direct interference and 99% are not.
Isn´t that the very purpose of this thread: To find out how people arrive at their interpretation of such events?

Aside from scriptural documentation, the best method is probably a combination of the unlikeliness of a specific weather pattern forming according to known natural factors and the influence caused by it (i.e. the weather that stymied the Duc d'Anville expedition is a strong candidate, in my view).

Loudmouth · Sep 15, 2017

Strathos said:
Aside from scriptural documentation, the best method is probably a combination of the unlikeliness of a specific weather pattern forming according to known natural factors and the influence caused by it (i.e. the weather that stymied the Duc d'Anville expedition is a strong candidate, in my view).

Every time someone wins the lottery it is a highly unlikely event, around 1 in 175 million. And yet, people win the lottery all of the time.

Humans have an association bias where they tend to put more emphasis on hits as compared to misses. We will ignore billions and billions of times where weather does the expected thing, but focus on instances where something unusual but still possible happens. This gives us the false impression that something "supernatural" has occurred when it is just an unlikely event happening rarely, as it should.

Strathos · Sep 15, 2017

Loudmouth said:
Every time someone wins the lottery it is a highly unlikely event, around 1 in 175 million. And yet, people win the lottery all of the time.

Humans have an association bias where they tend to put more emphasis on hits as compared to misses. We will ignore billions and billions of times where weather does the expected thing, but focus on instances where something unusual but still possible happens. This gives us the false impression that something "supernatural" has occurred when it is just an unlikely event happening rarely, as it should.

I know you won't like it, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to invoke 1 Corinthians 2:14 here.

JDD_III · Sep 17, 2017

Some people's view of God are quite 1-dimensional.

God is outside if time and our material universe. God rarely "interferes" in the miraculous sense but if and when he does, that is pretty easy and unimpressive relative to the norm in how He achieves His will.

God created the universe's rules. He sustains l things and upholds all things. The most amazing reality is not interfering at one point in time, but the fact he has put in place many different rules and factors to achieve his will through the natural order he put into place and upholds.

Bungle_Bear · Sep 17, 2017

Strathos said:
Aside from scriptural documentation, the best method is probably a combination of the unlikeliness of a specific weather pattern forming according to known natural factors and the influence caused by it (i.e. the weather that stymied the Duc d'Anville expedition is a strong candidate, in my view).

Why not D-Day? Yet another case of God siding with the British who got the forecast right

The Americans thought the weather would be OK on June 5 (they were wrong, but thankfully listened to the British meteorologists) and the Germans thought the bad weather would continue through to late June leading them to be largely absent when the Normandy invasion happened.

Strathos · Sep 17, 2017

Bungle_Bear said:
Why not D-Day? Yet another case of God siding with the British who got the forecast right The Americans thought the weather would be OK on June 5 (they were wrong, but thankfully listened to the British meteorologists) and the Germans thought the bad weather would continue through to late June leading them to be largely absent when the Normandy invasion happened.

It's a possibility.

Loudmouth · Sep 18, 2017

Strathos said:
I know you won't like it, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to invoke 1 Corinthians 2:14 here.

Invoke all you want. The bias is still there.

bhsmte · Sep 18, 2017

Strathos said:
The main objection I have is when people blame God for certain weather events, they cherry-pick the ones that support their personal agendas and ignore the ones that don't.

This isnt juat with the weather. You see people on this site crediting gods will when good things happen them. When bad things happen, they claim; who could possibly know gods will?

God and the weather

Dis Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

No one important

Old Newbie

I'll think about it.

Contributor

Well-Known Member

"God"? What do you mean??

No one important

"God"? What do you mean??

No one important

"God"? What do you mean??

No one important

Contributor

No one important

Active Member

Whoot!

No one important

Contributor

Newbie

Similar threads