Australian Pastor Blames Prime Minister for Causing Disasterous Floods as God’s Vengence

It appears Pat Robertson is not alone speaking for God in the use of nature to punish the sins of man. A Christian pastor in Queensland, Daniel Nalliah of Catch the Fire Ministries, has announced that the devastating floods in Australia are actually divine judgment against Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd because he “spoke against Israel” in December 2010.


Nalliah is upset because, while in Israel, Rudd insisted that the government should allow international inspectors into its nuclear facilities — a position consistent with demands made against Arab countries. He also called for a halt on new Jewish settlements.

God, according to Nalliah, decided to flood the country in response. Call me skeptical, but wouldn’t it have been easier for God to smite down Rudd or guarantee that England beats Australia in tomorrow’s cricket match?

Nalliah previously successfully defended himself against of charge of inciting hatred against Islam under Victoria’s then-new religious vilification laws. As a critic of those blasphemy laws, I am glad to see such acquittals even for irresponsible or obnoxious speech.

He also previously declared that the “Black Saturday bushfires” were revealed to him as divine punishment in”prophetic dreams” for Victoria’s decriminalization of abortion in 2008.

Source: Reddit and NineMSN

74 thoughts on “Australian Pastor Blames Prime Minister for Causing Disasterous Floods as God’s Vengence”

  1. “Essentially, both of you and all your ilk take your vaunted mythology and shove it. A very large proportion of the world’s wars and genocidal acts were–and are, still– justified by your obtuse delineations.”

    GBK,
    That was a rather pugnacious and incorrect statement that you began with and I answered you in kind.

    “Your responses to Tootie in this thread prompted me to call you out from your self-serving positions for various reasons.”

    Self serving was also pugnacious in tone.

    “You claim to be a Deist, who “practices the rituals of Judaism . . .” I have no problem with either half of the preceding sentence, but I would hope that you recognize the inherent contradiction of the whole.”

    No contradiction at all. Since you claim knowledge later on perhaps you’ve never heard of Reconstuctionist Judaism as formulated by Rabbi Kaplan. Though I’m not a follower Rabbi Kaplan was for years a faculty member of the Jewish Theological Seminary in NYC, probably the leading center for Conservative Judaism in the US.

    To go further though, to me all of life is rife with contradictions, I just explain the beliefs that work for me, I’m not looking for adherents and I brought up my children to determine their own views, not mine.

    “In June of this year I submitted a 30,000 word thesis towards an MA in Cultural Anthropology. It is essentially an outline and the paper will grow in the next year as needed and suggested by faculty to meet the requirements of the title: Animism, Polytheism, Monotheism: Cultural Expression And Human Illness.”

    Impressive, but not so much to me. I already have a Masters in Social Work from Columbia University achieved via a full tuition scholarship and 5 years of Post Masters Training at a recognized Psychotherapy Institute. I was in practice as a Psychotherapist for 20 years, worked in Social Services for 37 years. Besides that I’ve done extensive reading in history and mythology, particularly the works of Joseph Campbell, E.M. Frazer and Robert Graves, whose names you might be familiar with given your studies.

    However, I added that just to let you know that you’re not dealing with someone talking off the top of his head. You started out addressing me in a combative vein and I responded in kind. By the way to me ignorance is not a reflection of intelligence, but of someone so impressed with their knowledge that they essentially have a closed mind. A truth too often applying to many in the social sciences.

    That is neither here nor there though. All of us humans must perforce discover our own sense of the meaning of life and learn to cope with our inevitable deaths. They are almost infinite ways of doing this and as long as one group doesn’t try to impose its beliefs on others, let them do so.

    “My position was quite simple though probably not explicit; so: monotheistic thought has hindered the potential of humanity.’

    To me this is a rather facile point of view and gives me pause to wonder if your thesis is over influenced by your pre-judgment.
    Yes one can demonstrate that those organized faiths, with monotheistic beliefs have a destructive history with respect to mankind. However, to do so would leave out the fact that the evils caused were more the work of various persons and entities who hijacked these beliefs as justification for their own will to power. If you are to be a cultural anthropologist than you should understand that human society is in the main constructed pyramidally, like that of the Great Apes. It is less about philosophy and religion and much more about struggles for power.
    One in your field forgets the psychology of the situation at the peril of misunderstanding the whole.

    In any event I’m not into fighting with you since we probably agree far more than we disagree. How ever “to call me out” (your term)will elicit a response that is less than delicate on my part. Stop being so defensive.

  2. “You keep calling it a conversion. I think you are hung-up on that word. Using your term, it would have to be, then, that Abraham, David, and Moses did once convert because they believed in God’s Holy One who would come in the future.

    Abraham (who had none of the rites you now practice) had faith looking towards the Holy One of Israel and it was COUNTED for righteousness. He was, as the Christian scriptures teach, thus saved by faith. He was saved by faith before the Law of Moses came into being! He was saved in the same way I was: by beholding the Holy One Israel afar off in time.”

    Tootie,
    The key words in what you are saying is: “as the Christian scriptures teach.” The concept of a Messiah is a rather late one in Jewish thought and teachings and had nothing to do with Abraham, Moses and David. The Messiah teachings came about around the 2nd or 3rd centuries BCE in response to the capture and invasion of Israel by first the Greeks and then the Romans.

    You are correct Baptists were hunted and persecuted, but they then in turn did their own persecution. This is true of all humanity and definitely all faiths. I am glad you find comfort and joy in your beliefs, just as I find that in my beliefs.

    I’ll give you an example though of Christian smugness and why it offends me. About 50 years ago Billy Graham was asked if a native islander, who lived an exemplary life, yet because of isolation had never heard of or accepted Jesus, would go to heaven. Rev. Graham answered affirmatively “No, because he would never have been baptized or accepted the Savior.” If that’s the God you imagine, please count me out.

  3. Mike Spindell

    LOL. I’m happy to be of service to you though I wish you no discomfort.

    🙂

    You wrote:

    “what you fail to realize is that you have proven the point I was making in your statement above. ”

    I didn’t fail to realize it. I was trying to prove another point, but proving it badly. And I made it next to impossible for you to understand me.

    The point I’m trying to make is that the messiah Abraham, Moses, David, and all the early Hebrews were looking forward in the future to the same person I’m looking back to in time.

    And the Jews in Revelation (in the time yet to come) will be looking back to the same person the Jews in the Book of Genesis were looking forward to.

    Essentially, all three groups (in the past, present, and future) are looking at the same individual.

    You, like most Jews, deny this; and I understand that.

    I have no animosity about that either. Like I said, I’m tickled pink about God and I’m happy most people don’t go to heaven. They drive me nuts.

    Though, you don’t drive me nuts. So, I would feel sad if you missed out on a good thing.

    But that is what I was referring to.

    You keep calling it a conversion. I think you are hung-up on that word. Using your term, it would have to be, then, that Abraham, David, and Moses did once convert because they believed in God’s Holy One who would come in the future.

    Abraham (who had none of the rites you now practice) had faith looking towards the Holy One of Israel and it was COUNTED for righteousness. He was, as the Christian scriptures teach, thus saved by faith. He was saved by faith before the Law of Moses came into being! He was saved in the same way I was: by beholding the Holy One Israel afar off in time.

    Now you might think me smug, but how you do think I feel about you or any Jew that thinks a book outlining God’s relationship with the entire human race can only best be understood and interpreted by a Jew?

    This relationship with Messiah has nothing to do with conversion. That’s a heretical Catholic policy from the past that has little bearing on this discussion.

    Look, I’m a Baptist. They were hunted down persecuted, tortured, burned at the stake, brutalized, and murdered by Catholics just like the Jews were.

    And they were also offered the unhappy choice of pain and suffering or being forced to convert. But I’m not distracted by that past history nor the word convert such that it should trip me up learning about what God wants me to know.

    And I have no doubt that a good God could be explitcit about what I should know. Otherwise he is a stupid God and undeserving of adoration. But, my God isn’t stupid. He is very clever and wise, and can communicate intelligently with me so that I understand and have no doubts about what is expected of me.

    The Catholic church isn’t forcing me now and it is not forcing you.

    You and I are free to choose. If we listen carefully and open our hearts we can choose wisely.

    He stands at the door and knocks. And he provides more than a new heart. He provides a new life that goes on living forever.

  4. @ Mike Spindell

    I apologize for my delay in responding, and also apologize for lumping you in with Tootie. This last action was obviously a mistake on my part as I have considered your posts to be some of the most eloquent.

    “You perhaps have not been around long enough to read my statements of my personal religious beliefs.”

    I have “been around long enough” and have read many of your posts over the years. Your responses to Tootie in this thread prompted me to call you out from your self-serving positions for various reasons.

    You claim to be a Deist, who “practices the rituals of Judaism . . .” I have no problem with either half of the preceding sentence, but I would hope that you recognize the inherent contradiction of the whole.

    Your argument with Tootie appeared to center around how the Torah was usurped by Christians and Muslims for the purpose of providing legitimacy to their thought. I don’t dispute this historical fact which is why I stated, albeit simplistically, “[t]hey both adhere to the bloodline of Abraham, revere Moses and the ‘old’ prophets–as does Islam.”

    According to you, this statement, “expose[d] [my] ignorance in this matter by [my] lack of knowledge of context, which I mistakenly believed was obvious based on the rest of my post.”

    What is obvious to you, “based on the rest of your post,” is not so obvious to others who might read your posts and yet not grasp the “context” that you think is so obvious but fail to provide. Such is the slicing of hairs and the fragile assumptions of authorship.

    Your presumption and declaration of my ignorance exposes a bias in your position, no matter the gentle cloakings you expend in approaching your stance. My position was quite simple though probably not explicit; so: monotheistic thought has hindered the potential of humanity.

    In June of this year I submitted a 30,000 word thesis towards an MA in Cultural Anthropology. It is essentially an outline and the paper will grow in the next year as needed and suggested by faculty to meet the requirements of the title: Animism, Polytheism, Monotheism: Cultural Expression And Human Illness.

    After living in Turkey for five years, Spain for two years, and Morocco for two years–with many travels in this time, I hope my ignorance survives.

    Sincerely,

    gbk

  5. “Mike Spindell (if you are still talking to me since I let you have it on another thread):

    Jews who don’t believe in Christ (now or in the future) will like gentiles who do not believe in Christ (now or in the future) be condemned to hell.”

    Tootie,
    I bear you no ill will, even though at times you can be a smug pain in the ass and in fact I’ve even agreed with you sometimes, though rarely. what you fail to realize is that you have proven the point I was making in your statement above. In the “End Times” as detailed in Revelations, Jews will only be saved if they believe in Jesus as God. To me therefore as a Jew who can’t accept Jesus as God the “End times” by Christian belief will be a disaster for me. Therefore I am unmoved by Christians “who love Jews and Israel” because their love is only on their terms of Jewish conversion. Love like that I don’t need and in fact is not love at all but merely a smug self assurance that you all know what God has in store.

    However, as Buddha injected afterwards both Revelations and the Council of Nicea took the Gospels and teachings of Jesus and turned them all around in order to justify the barbarity
    of the Roman Empire.

  6. “Essentially, both of you and all your ilk take your vaunted mythology and shove it. A very large proportion of the world’s wars and genocidal acts were–and are, still– justified by your obtuse delineations.”

    GBK,
    You perhaps have not been around long enough to read my statements of my personal religious beliefs. I am a Deist, who practices the rituals of Judaism which i personally find moving. I have no idea as to the nature of what a purported creative force my wish of its creation and believe humanity incapable of ever attaining understanding. I also believe that given the vastness of the Universe humanity is highly insignificant.

    I stated in my post quite clearly that I don’t believe that the Torah or the Gospels represented history but in original intent were an attempt to halt the murderous violence of humanity through the use of allegory and the setting up of rules for living in a society. I wish you had read the post more closely than you seem to have read it. That you lump me in with fundamentalist, fanatics and Tootie, does exhibit a lack of knowledge of what I’ve written here and my positions, which if you had that knowledge might enlighten you to understand that our positions are not far apart.

    “Are they? They both adhere to the bloodline of Abraham, revere Moses and the “old” prophets–as does Islam. It is time for the monotheistic adherents (Judaic, Christian, and Islamic) to quit terrorizing the world with the split hairs of their evolving beliefs for political gain.”

    You expose your ignorance in this matter by your lack of knowledge of context, which I mistakenly believed was obvious based on the rest of my post. That Christianity and Islam have expropriated the Torah, for their own attempts to legitimize their faiths would be indeed unimportant were it not for the almost two millenia of persecution of Jews in order to justify the usurpation. There is no Judeo-Christian context since the religious beliefs are antithetical in all major points. i.e. Jews do not believe in heaven or hell and probably not even an afterlife.

    However, those of Tooties’ ilk, lacking or ignoring these differences blithely continue to confuse the two as per their religious traditions. This is fine with me as long as they don’t harm me, or my co-religionists in the process. Therefore in responding to Tooties unfortunate post I needed to draw the distinction.

  7. “Look, if the only options I have in life are to choose between two people I know that lived on this earth–You and Jesus– you lose.”

    Only if Jesus didn’t see you coming first, Tootles.

  8. Tootie:

    “Hey, I don’t make the rules.”

    ***************

    You just spout them as if you do and that there is no other directly contrary interpretation by your very own sect.

  9. mespo:

    Hey, I don’t make the rules. When you create a universe, plants, animals, and so forth you can make your own rules too. 🙂

    Look, if the only options I have in life are to choose between two people I know that lived on this earth–You and Jesus– you lose.

    You lose because you offer me nothing–zip, nada, zilch, ZERO. In fact, you offer me less than nothing as you are somewhat ANTI-Tootie.

    Something caused what we see before our eyes. And I don’t see how it is logical (scientifically) that what I see is an accident.

    The mathematical number of the time required to produce the simplest protein is so large that it is incomprehenisble to the human mind and would take longer than that for organisms to form.

    Thus, science cannot account for the effect that you and I exist. And to believe science can account for it one day in the future is no less an act of FAITH than what I exercise.

    If I’m to accept the premise that an intelligent lifeform created what I see, then it is not illogical to conclude that such a powerful force would have any trouble whatsoever making itself (Him Self) known to me–an object of His creation.

    If mankind can publish billions of books to communicate vital or important information fit for the human mind, clearly, the creator of such an unsearchable universe can manage to get a good instruction book printed and put into my hands.

    It’s only logical.

    Look, I’m not one of these ranting Christian types standing on a street corner with a sandwich board saying the world is coming to an end. I figure I’ve grabbed the golden ring. I’ve hit the lottery. And I’m tickled pink about it. You don’t want it? Eh, It’s no skin off my back. And some people are so bad, I’m glad I’m not going to have to deal with them in the afterlife.

    Billions of people have come and gone on this earth and if there is no God at all to hold someone accountable for all those who starved others to death, beat them to death, or tormented them (and having gotten away with it): I HAVE NO REASON TO LIVE. What’s point if it is just a free for all?

    I cannot accept that.

    You and no one else (except Christ) has a better answer to my dilemma. Hitler for example. Does anyone believe he really paid a price commensurate with his evil deeds?

    How are YOU going to hold him accountable? You cannot. And I can’t. But Christ can. That means everything to me.

    So, you might think at this point, but I (Mespo) am not a murderer, or a thief, a kidnapper, or a molester. So, no account before a God of my life on earth is necessary and if by chance there is a heaven, surely I (Mespo) qualify.

    This is the hard part for those who consider themselves good, or even fairly good, or attempting to be good. This is the hardest part because they assume they know the extent of goodness and evil. People have the right to think that. In fact, according to my faith, God gives them that right. He gives them free will to decide these matters.

    Of course, you may gamble wrong on that Mespo. And that’s the rub and the risk.

    I believe even the best person on earth is corrupt. Sorry. But I just think we cannot easily see our own evil. I think it is a hazard of being human. I’m sure that you intend to do good and feel you shouldn’t be held accountable for doing evil because you didn’t intend to do it (mens rhea).

    That is logical.

    But what if there is a form of evil that God says has to be included the rap sheet of the human race? And what if that evil is rejecting God? We are talking about it right now and I’m telling you about it, so you are now not unaware of it. But I’m sure you already knew it.

    He says you must believe or else.

    I know, Mespo, that looks like a Hobson’s choice. And,frankly, it is. But what’s a God to do?

    I do know that God tried has several times reset the human race. There was the flood. These people who died were full of violence and murder. He culled the human race (apparently) getting the healthiest branch left (the genetic bottleneck science has discovered).

    After that there was the attempted culling with the Caananites. These were probably the most wicked people at that crucial time in history.

    They were worse than Hitler. So much so that they didn’t put others into ovens, them put their own offspring in them. Well, it wasn’t technically an oven, but a fire pit under a brazen altar statue of Molech.

    These were a people who had sexual practices in which fathers had sex with daughters. Brothers had sex with aunts. The whole civilzation was sex crazed as part of their MARRIAGE customs and because of all this activity, many children were born. That went hand in hand with burning, searing, and roasting alive til dead, their own infants, on the altar of Molech.

    These people were destroying their own children, not God. Had this spread to the whole population of the earth, it is likely the human race would have been extinguished.

    None of this early culling would eliminate the evil nature of mankind. It continued up to Hitler. And even to our day. Even last Saturday.

    How can God trust that you will not turn against Him if you don’t believe Him now? Well, you say, I might believe Him when I see more evidence. The problem is, hundreds of millions have already believed based on the evidence thus far. That seems to indicate there is already enough evidence. And God says he gave you evidence in nature.

    I’m sure it is no small comfort for you that the very wicked and the “good” unbeliever will not recieve the same punishment in hell.

    It appears that there was no other way for the human race or God would have provided it. And he made it simple enough: Just believe. That’s all.

    Christ pays (in God’s court of law) for any evil you (or I) might have done (even unknowingly) and all you need to do is wait out in the lobby during the trial (judgment day). He sits in the defendents chair on your behalf. And since he is innocent, so are you. He served your sentence anyway already (on the cross). So He has you covered every way to Sunday.

    Or is it Monday?

    It seems that if you cannot cut God such a minisucle amount of slack (by simply believing in Him), He knows that you will never agree to submit to his authority in the afterlife. And a man like you believes in some kind of authority? Do you not?

    Gosh, I wonder if Mespo is a dude?

    Anyway, in the end, it’s His gig Mespo.

  10. Actually, I have it on good authority that God caused the flood as a punishment against Daniel Nalliah for eating chocolate during Lent in 1996.

  11. gbk,

    “My only and sole point is that with a world population soon to exceed seven billion it is best to leave failed paradigms behind us and move forward with as much grace, dignity, and humanity that can be mustered.”

    I can’t argue with that, although I would like to add “rationality” to that list of mustering qualities.

  12. @ Buddha

    Polytheism is indeed more historically accepting of differing thoughts, but has also closed ranks when needed (e.g. Socrates), and by causation being abstracted to deities serves no further purpose.

    My only and sole point is that with a world population soon to exceed seven billion it is best to leave failed paradigms behind us and move forward with as much grace, dignity, and humanity that can be mustered.

  13. James M:

    On the Roman view of religion:

    “If anything, the Romans had a practical attitude to religion, as to most things, which perhaps explains why they themselves had difficulty in taking to the idea of a single, all-seeing, all-powerful god.
    In so far as the Romans had a religion of their own, it was not based on any central belief, but on a mixture of fragmented rituals, taboos, superstitions, and traditions which they collected over the years from a number of sources.
    To the Romans, religion was less a spiritual experience than a contractual relationship between mankind and the forces which were believed to control people’s existence and well-being.
    The result of such religious attitudes were two things: a state cult, the significant influence on political and military events of which outlasted the republic, and a private concern, in which the head of the family oversaw the domestic rituals and prayers in the same way as the representatives of the people performed the public ceremonials.”

    http://www.roman-empire.net/religion/religion.html

  14. BIL,

    That’s a small part of the reason that the roman empire was so successful — they’d come into a village, and rather than try to convert everyone, they’d just co-opt the local gods into the roman pantheon.

Comments are closed.