Why Does God Permit Natural Disasters?

Like many Americans during the past three weeks, I've been bombarded by news about the destructive power of Hurricane Harvey in Texas and Hurricane Irma in Florida. The stories are of misery, death, and destruction.

The misery, death, and destruction are acutely difficult to accept because they have been visited upon innocents. I say that knowledgeable of the ancient argument that our personal and collective sinfulness has merited our pain. Yet that raises this question: Does anyone really deserve personal ruination because of personal sin, particularly from a God whose Son said He came to call sinners and not the just?

Stated differently, why does an all-knowing, all-loving, all-powerful God permit innocents to suffer in natural disasters?

This question has occupied philosophers for millennia. The natural order of things has revealed that we all have free will, and we know from our experiences that we can easily abuse that free will. The individual will is so free that we can use it to do magnificent things or horrific things.

But a natural disaster is not the handiwork of anyone's free will. Could it really be the handiwork of an angry God impatient with the manner in which we have abused free will? This argument is not a logical extension of Christian teaching unless God is terribly inconsistent with His impatience over human failures and errors and has somehow overlooked and not yet grown impatient with the world's worst monsters.

Why the natural disasters? We know from the exercise of our reason that the curvature of the Earth and its continuous movement through space set in motion a series of forces. These forces protect the Earth and its inhabitants from the harmful rays of the sun and permit the intrusion of the beneficial rays. All this comes at a price. The movement of the Earth actually produces friction, and that friction, in turn, ignites energy, and that energy often is drawn by the Earth's gravity and finds an outlet in destructive forces on the planet.

Though these forces -- the linchpin of which is the Earth's gravity -- can be avoided through the exercise of creative reason (we can build shelters from them), they are often, as with Harvey and Irma, beyond our ability to harness or control. All this is a thumbnail sketch of basic astrophysics, largely acquired through human reason and beyond serious dispute.

But the disputable philosophical questions remain. What force set all this in motion? What caused the big bang in the first place? What caused the Earth's gravity? What tipped over the first domino that billions of years later triggered the explosions of energy that eventually became Harvey and Irma?

We know from reason that every effect had a cause. You plant grass seed and water it, and the effect is blades of grass. The cause was the interaction of the seeds and earth and rain and sun brought together by the free will of the person who did the planting. There are infinite examples of this. Yet is there any cause that was uncaused? Yes. That is the all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving uncaused cause, whom most of us call God the Father.

Now back to the question posed earlier. If God the Father created us and loves us, why does He permit natural forces that He set in motion to harm and even to devour us? A similar question was actually addressed by our Lord Himself when He was approached by biblical scholars who asked about a young man who was blind from birth. The question they put to Jesus was: Whose sinning caused this man to be born blind? Was it the man himself or his parents?

The question may have been an attempted trap. Yet Jesus answered by saying essentially that no one's sins caused the blindness. Rather, he was born blind so that the works of God could be made manifest in him. In other words, he was born blind so that Jesus could cure his blindness publicly -- as He did -- and thereby enhance the faith and understanding of all who learned of this and believed it.

Of course, not all who learned of the cure of the blind man believed in Jesus' divinity. Some thought He was a charlatan performing tricks, and some thought the young man was never really blind. Their skepticism and doubts caused G. K. Chesterton to remark that "the Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried."

Chesterton recognized that we are free to believe or to reject belief. To those who believe in the all-loving God, we know that from time to time, He manifests Himself to give us a need to embrace Him, just as He did with the man born blind. That embrace is the test of faith. It was manifested in countless unseen acts of generosity and selflessness -- from believing stranger to believing stranger -- in Texas and in Florida.

I can hear the prayer of the faithful in pain. "O Lord, I prayed that the hurricane would not destroy my home, yet it did. I still love you, Lord, because my family was spared. I love you more now because I need you more now. I don't reject the truth. I embrace it, no matter the cost -- because the truth will keep my free will set upon you."

As pope, St. John Paul II called this rational belief. It is the essence of understanding. It is faith tempered by human reason and human reason informed by faith. Faith without reason and reason without faith lead to fanaticism. Only their informed juxtaposition will guide our free wills to do the right things and to have understanding when bad things happen.

http://christianthinktank.com/natevl.html

Every so often I get a question like this, about 'natural evil' (as opposed to 'moral evil', in which there are intelligent agents/perpetrators involved)...

I have a couple questions for you. I have not found them covered in your material, but I haven't read through everything you have, so it's possible I missed it. Anyway, I was wondering how you would explain the problem of natural evil. I have heard the argument that evil is a result of sin. A tragedy such as a murder happens because someone commits a sin. A child is killed by a drunk driver. There is sin here as well. But what of the tornado that destroys homes and kills several people? Or an earthquake? Or any other tragedy that is a result of natural disaster and has nothing to do with what people have or have not done. I cannot explain to a non Christian why God would allow such things to happen. Any thoughts?

and, one focusing more on pain...

Have to complement you on a very reasonable Christian WWW page.

However (there's always one :-) I have a question concerning your thought on the problem of natural evils :

Even after concluding that such pain hurts God more, the basic question _why_ does He allow it remains unchanged and unanswered. In fact, I'd have thought such a problem would be _more_ unsatisfactory : not only does present a God who causes unnecessary suffering, it shows that God ends up causing himself unnecessary pain too.

Your dialogue seemed mainly confined to mental pain, and the benefits of empathy. For an example of a seemingly unnecessary natural evil, read the section on Hot Viruses at

http://freethought.tamu.edu/debates/craig-washington/washington2.html

Such things are even harder to console with a God that only allows as much pain into the world as is necessary.

Let me know what you think.

These are good, good questions, and no doubt questions that most of us have wrestled with, agonized over, pondered deeply, and even experienced ourselves. Before I get into 'dissecting' the questions in the various pieces embedded in them, let me make some preliminary remarks.

First, I must remind you that we are taking a SPECIFICALLY THEORETICAL approach here. Any answers/guidelines we develop here are NOT going to be any help to those experiencing grief associated with these types of situations. Grief is to be experienced and to be expressed--not necessarily answered. The problem of pain and suffering CAN be approached in a semi-detached, philosophical, analytical manner, but it MUST BE UNDERSTOOD from the outset of this discussion that I am in NO WAY 'insensitive' to these issues. (Some of you out there will be familiar with the experiences of me/my family with unexpected child death, long-term terminal illnesses, personal trauma. I can say with some depth that I am no stranger to this arena.)

Second, we must focus on clarity of terms. 'Natural evil' is, strictly speaking, a misnomer. What is actually under discussion is the problem of 'agent-less pain' or 'agent-less untimely death' or the such like.

This distinction is important. "Evil" implies some kind of moral agent--local or remote. But in the two cases we will examine here--children being killed in a natural disaster earthquake, or the excessive pain felt in certain types of terminal illnesses (such as the 'hot virus' referred to)--there is no 'agent' to do the 'evil-ing' as it were. The issue is NOT 'evil' per se, but something else. We will need to isolate those 'something elses' for analysis.

It should also be noted that in the bible there WERE natural disasters that occurred that were NOT 'agent-less.' In situations involving the nation of Israel, God sometimes used natural disasters such as disease and earthquakes to accomplish judgments or victories (e.g. Ex 8-13; Num 11; Num 14; I Sam 6; Num 16; 2 Kings 19; Acts 12). These, however, fall into the category of special miracles (due to their agent-character) and do NOT fall into the general scope of our investigation.

We generally do NOT have that kind of information about today's events being of this type--we cannot therefore assume that any specific event (e.g. earthquake, volcano, plague) is a judgment from God. It would somehow fall into some 'global' will of God--in some indirect/permissive kinda sense--but this would not have enough 'predictive power' to dismiss the event easily.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.