[Just mythoughts]

"Actually I meant that New Orleans didn't have enough righteous people in the city to do the right thing, and so the city couldn't be saved.

Same may be in the pipeline for SF."


Well see, I would not measure New Orleans about the number of righteous individuals with the place already below sea level and sinking, and only kept dry with levees designed for no more than a category 3 hurricane. We were given gray matter for the purpose of determining where we live to be survivable in the event of catastrophic events.

Interesting, as many of those that survived that wall of water, a good number of them came out praising the LORD for the miracle of their surviving.

[patriciaruth]

Righteous people to me doesn't just mean those who are right with God. A righteous person is also one who see what needs to be done for the wellbeing and survival of others and then does it.

Part of the old "works versus grace" debate. But how can you know of God's grace and not do works of loving kindness out of love and gratitude to God?

How many people were aware of New Orleans' peril and did nothing? This is a truth within a truth. Part of why only 10 righteous men are enough to save a city from destruction is that they do things to improve and protect their city in addition to giving honor to God.

Now, this is all just verbal gymnastics. I do not know if New Orleans was flooded and half abandoned because of a fall from grace. But we both agree that there weren't enough people in New Orleans who did the right thing to protect their city physically from the disaster which befell them.

San Francisco is treading the same ground. It is on a major fault line, and is not a poster child for godliness. Eventually it will suffer another earthquake. Some will ascribe the event to their hubris.

But you are right. I should not be making games out of disasters. mea culpa.