Does God punish people through natural weather events?

[JimR-OCDS]

Give me your interpretation of the drought in Ahab's reign.

Kings is clearly framed as a historical text, with multiple references to the sources used to create it. Additionally, Elijah is recognized as a prophet by scripture and he relays this as a punishment against Ahab for his embrace of foreign gods.

Even if you brush away the whole of the old testament as "allegorical," Christ Himself recognizes Elijah as a prophet and the drought as a historical event:



So what's your interpretation of this drought?

Droughts happen naturally all the time, just like floods, hurricanes and tornados and they're not punishments from God to make people conform, but rather the consequence for the sins of mankind since day one.

Jim

 

[longhair75]

Simple answer: No

 

[LivingWordUnity]

That was the way of thinking in tribal theology. Whatever bad happened, it was God's wrath that brought them suffering. Whenever good happen, it was God who rewarded them for the good things they did.

The story of Noah and the Flood is mostly allegorical and shouldn't be taken as literal historical fact.

This line of thinking contradicts what we know of the good news in Jesus Christ.

God did not send Jesus, to change His mind about men, rather, Jesus came to change men's minds about God.

Jim

Jesus taught about the flood as a literal event.

"As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of man. They ate, they drank, they married, they were given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all." - Jesus (Lk 17:26-27)
.

 

[football5680]

God can use it to punish people but it is not always the case.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

When God punishes people it's to bring about a greater good.

 

[MoonlessNight]

Droughts happen naturally all the time, just like floods, hurricanes and tornados and they're not punishments from God to make people conform, but rather the consequence for the sins of mankind since day one.

Jim

I'm not asking you about droughts in general. It is extremely dishonest to say that I am, since I have repeatedly and explicitly stated that I do not believe that all natural disasters are used by God as punishment.

I am asking you about the specific drought that occurred in the reign of King Ahab and which was prophesied by Elijah as a punishment for Ahab's embrace of foreign gods.

Was that specific drought a punishment from God or not? And if your answer is that it wasn't, how do you reconcile this answer with what is said in the book of Kings?

 

[Open Heart]

There was a tornado headed for a midwestern town, and all the Christians of the town gathered in the local church to pray. It just happened that the tornado hit the church, killing all of the praying Christians.

No, I don't think that weather events are judgments.

11 The Lord said, “Go out and stand on the mountain in the presence of the Lord, for the Lord is about to pass by.” Then a great and powerful wind tore the mountains apart and shattered the rocks before the Lord, but the Lord was not in the wind. After the wind there was an earthquake, but the Lord was not in the earthquake. 12 After the earthquake came a fire, but the Lord was not in the fire. And after the fire came a gentle whisper. 13 When Elijah heard it, he pulled his cloak over his face and went out and stood at the mouth of the cave.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Jesus taught about the flood as a literal event.

"As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of man. They ate, they drank, they married, they were given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all." - Jesus (Lk 17:26-27)
.

Jesus referred to the flood story, because the Jews in his presence, knew the story.

The flood story as many parts of the Old Testament are meant for teaching purposes, and not for
historical fact.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I'm not asking you about droughts in general. It is extremely dishonest to say that I am, since I have repeatedly and explicitly stated that I do not believe that all natural disasters are used by God as punishment.

I am asking you about the specific drought that occurred in the reign of King Ahab and which was prophesied by Elijah as a punishment for Ahab's embrace of foreign gods.

Was that specific drought a punishment from God or not? And if your answer is that it wasn't, how do you reconcile this answer with what is said in the book of Kings?

Even the drought you're speaking about, it's in tribal theology mindset.

It's not necessary to believe that it was the wrath of God for humans not obeying.

Ask yourself, if God was so angry, why did he bother to send Jesus many centuries after he destroyed so many others out of his wrath ?

The fact is, God is love and is merciful. Sending Jesus yet while men were sinners, is a sign of his great love and mercy, not his anger and wrath.


Jim

 

[MoonlessNight]

Even the drought you're speaking about, it's in tribal theology mindset.

It's not necessary to believe that it was the wrath of God for humans not obeying.

Ask yourself, if God was so angry, why did he bother to send Jesus many centuries after he destroyed so many others out of his wrath ?

The fact is, God is love and is merciful. Sending Jesus yet while men were sinners, is a sign of his great love and mercy, not his anger and wrath.


Jim

Why would a prophet of God misrepresent the will of God?

It's not as though Elijah was misled in his interpretation of the will of God by "tribal theology." He was a prophet, his role was to act as God's representative on Earth and to relay the Word of God to the people.

And Elijah certainly wasn't a false prophet. He was the greatest prophet, so if he was not a prophet then there were no prophets (and then you'd have to throw out half the books of the Old Testament). Indeed, Elijah even appeared at the Lord's Transfiguration, along with Moses, the giver of the Law, which signifies Elijah's importance in the plan of Salvation.

So how do you interpret Elijah's prophecy?

All you've done is brush away the question on two occasions now, both saying it's just "tribal theology." Why won't you directly address the Old Testament scripture? You seem to not take it seriously at all.

Furthermore, how would you respond to someone who claimed that the Gospels are just "tribal theology" and thus can be ignored in the same way that you are ignoring the Old Testament and the Prophets?

 

[MoonlessNight]

11 The Lord said, “Go out and stand on the mountain in the presence of the Lord, for the Lord is about to pass by.” Then a great and powerful wind tore the mountains apart and shattered the rocks before the Lord, but the Lord was not in the wind. After the wind there was an earthquake, but the Lord was not in the earthquake. 12 After the earthquake came a fire, but the Lord was not in the fire. And after the fire came a gentle whisper. 13 When Elijah heard it, he pulled his cloak over his face and went out and stood at the mouth of the cave.

A question for Jim: do you think that this is just "tribal theology" and it can be ignored? If so, what do you accept, if anything, from the prophets? If not, why are you ignoring the words of Elijah to King Ahab?

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Jesus referred to the flood story, because the Jews in his presence, knew the story.

The flood story as many parts of the Old Testament are meant for teaching purposes, and not for
historical fact.

Jim

Jesus never said that about it.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

A question for Jim: do you think that this is just "tribal theology" and it can be ignored? If so, what do you accept, if anything, from the prophets? If not, why are you ignoring the words of Elijah to King Ahab?

As a Discalced Carmelite, OCDS, Elijah is considered the Father of Carmelites.

The Scripture you referred to is often used in Carmelite teaching on the subject of "contemplation."

God is not heard in the violence of life, but in the quiet stillness, just as Father Elijah expresses.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Jesus never said that about it.

Jesus didn't give Bible classes.

Jim

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Jesus didn't give Bible classes.

Jim

Jesus taught his disciples the meaning of things in the Old Testament.

 

[MoonlessNight]

That makes a third time that you've dodged a direct question about your interpretation of scripture Jim.

One might almost think that you don't have an interpretation, because you simply ignore the parts of scripture that you don't like.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

"Let us move on to Jesus’ second temptation…The devil proves to be a Bible expert who can quote the Psalm exactly. The whole conversation of the second temptation takes the form of a dispute between two Bible scholars. Remarking on this passage, Joachim Gnilka says that the devil presents himself here as a theologian. The Russian writer Vladimir Soloviev took up this motif in his short story “The Antichrist.” The Antichrist receives an honorary doctorate in theology from the University of Tübingen and is a great Scripture scholar. Soloviev’s portrayal of the Antichrist forcefully expresses his skepticism regarding a certain type of scholarly exegesis current at the time. This is not a rejection of scholarly biblical interpretation as such, but an eminently salutary and necessary warning against its possible aberrations. The fact is that scriptural exegesis can become a tool of the Antichrist. Soloviev is not the first person to tell us that; it is the deeper point of the temptation story itself. The alleged findings of scholarly exegesis have been used to put together the most dreadful books that destroy the figure of Jesus and dismantle the faith.

"The common practice today is to measure the Bible against the so-called modern worldview, whose fundamental dogma is that God cannot act in history—that everything to do with God is to be relegated to the domain of subjectivity. And so the Bible no longer speaks of God, the living God; no, now we alone speak and decide what God can do and what we will and should do. And the Antichrist, with an air of scholarly excellence, tells us that any exegesis that reads the Bible from the perspective of faith in the living God, in order to listen to what God has to say, is fundamentalism; he wants to convince us that only his kind of exegesis, the supposedly purely scientific kind, in which God says nothing and has nothing to say, is able to keep abreast of the times."

– Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI)
Jesus of Nazareth, p.34-36, 2007

 

[JimR-OCDS]

That makes a third time that you've dodged a direct question about your interpretation of scripture Jim.

One might almost think that you don't have an interpretation, because you simply ignore the parts of scripture that you don't like.

I answered you three times, but obviously your fundamentalists mindset prevents you from listening to anything other than your own interpretation.

Try listening to Catholic Theologians who have the authority and knowledged to teach Scripture from a Catholic perspective.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Jesus taught his disciples the meaning of things in the Old Testament.

Well the Bible didn't exists, but the Torah did and the Pharisees followed the rigid tenets of the law.

So much so, they accused Jesus of not following the law.

Jesus taught the deeper meaning of the Scriptures, and revealed God as Our Father, something never used by Jews of His time.

Remember, when the Pharisees brought the woman caught in adultery, they were following the law as prescribed in the Torah, by Moses. According to the law, the woman was to be stoned to death. This was also the law for homosexuals as well.

What was Jesus response ? Mercy and forgiveness.

This is how God is revealed to us by Jesus.

Not the god who keeps a list of our failures and should we die before making it to confession, he'll send us to eternal torment.

God is not dualistic. He loves the sinner as much as the righteous.

As Michei posted, God sends rain on the good and the bad.

The differences is how we people of faith react to suffering. We accept accept our cross and link our suffering to Christ's passion.

Jim

 

[MoonlessNight]

I answered you three times, but obviously your fundamentalists mindset prevents you from listening to anything other than your own interpretation.

Try listening to Catholic Theologians who have the authority and knowledged to teach Scripture from a Catholic perspective.

Jim

I've asked you about a specific historical drought which was the subject of a specific prophecy by Elijah.

I've looked through your posts again, and you never refer to this event or this prophecy.

You only say two things:

1. That natural disasters happen all the time and it would be wrong to call them all punishments. But, as I've already explicitly said, I'm not talking about disasters in general I'm talking about one specific one. Despite that, you've never addressed this specific event.
2. That attributing any disasters to God is a mistake of "tribal theology." But, as I've already noted, the Book of Kings certainly does seem to attribute this drought to God. Therefore to say that doing so is a false conclusion of "tribal theology" is to say that the Book of Kings is just a bunch of mistakes. Furthermore, you can find similar statements throughout the prophets like Jeremiah, Ezekiel or Amos. So if you are going to throw out the Book of Kings on this ground, it looks like you'd also have to throw out the books of Prophecy as well. If you do that what are you left with? Now it could be that you don't believe that these books are just full of mistakes of "tribal theology," but if so it is impossible to know about it because you have repeatedly refused to give your interpretation of these books.

Instead of directly addressing my questions you content yourself with insulting me, saying that I am a fundamentalist who is incapable of understanding anything. But you know what? Even though that is false, I'd rather be that than someone who throws out whole books of scripture.