I have some comments on this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
Many theists invoke two different reasons why God doesn't intervene in cases where it would appear that it would be helpful if he did. One is that he doesn't want to usurp a human being's free will. The other is that he does not want to influence events that would defy the laws of physics. Because if he did it would be such strong evidence of a higher power that it would eliminate the need for someone to have "faith" given the almost insurmountable evidence inherent in the physics lawbreaking.
To me that sounds farfetched but not completely implausible. But now I want to know why this extends to horrible weather events, especially tornados that almost always strike unpopulated areas. Clearly the free will argument is not applicable. Tornados don't have free will. Less obvious is the fact that where a tornado strikes cannot be accurately predicted by human beings! Not even with a supercomputer yet to be built. Its the famous butterfly effect. (And of course there is also the quantum uncertainty which makes the point even stronger).
Without arguing over the science I would simply suggest that almost nudging a tornado out of the way of children's schools could be done without ever worrying that a scientist will see that and start believing in God for the wrong reasons.
I think this last paragraph is wrong. You of all people should realize that. If tornadoes consistently threaded their way through populated regions while somehow always just missing schools, movie theaters, etc. where there was a concentration of children, there is no doubt that scientists would notice. Not by the path or any unexplained deviation of the funnel, but by the amazing consistency of what was not hit.
Quote:
Since schools have been hit and children have died is it because:
Pending a response to my first point I think that concealment is still on the table.
Quote:
1. God doesn't have the power to nudge them?
This does not seem consistent with the concept of God so it really is a subset of 4.
Quote:
2. God doesn't care where they go?
Possibly.
Quote:
3. God has some reason to cause that destruction?
Excepting concealment, there is the test of human faith required. Remember that the children killed are actually not harmed under the assumption that there is a God. They are with God and therefore presumably better off. The test is for us to recognize that and not turn our hearts against God in our understandable pain and despair at our loss.
I wonder a bit if you are ever concerned that in attempting (I presume) to use this tragedy to turn people away from their faith, if you are committing a serious sin?
I concede this as an option, but not that it is shown to be the option.