Guess What? God Isn't to Blame for the Haitian Disaster!

We atheists do not revel in tragedy. We hate the fact that people suffer in this world as all people do. It's just that in times like these it's good to be an atheist. Earthquakes happen. That's all there is to it. What we revel in are attempts by Christians to justify God's actions. They are pathetic, all of them. And guess what? God isn't to blame for the Haitian Disaster! Nope. God is completely good and loving towards us all. His ways are perfect. Atheists like myself and Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins and Valerie Tarico have had a heyday with Christian responses so far. Now there is another one.

It's being claimed that the tragedy was due to something else. Greed. In 1804 Haiti fought for it's independence from France but as Peter Kirk tells us:
In July 1825, King Charles X of France sent a fleet of fourteen vessels and thousands of troops to reconquer [Haiti]. Under pressure, President Boyer [of Haiti] agreed to a treaty by which France formally recognized the independence of the nation in exchange for a payment of 150 million francs (the sum was reduced in 1838 to 90 million francs) – an indemnity for profits lost from the slave trade.
In other words, the Haitians were asked to pay twice as much for the freedom of their tiny mountainous republic than the USA was asked to pay for the Louisiana Purchase, of an area 77 times larger than Haiti. The people of Haiti did manage to pay the 90 million francs, estimated to be worth billions of dollars at today’s prices. But, according to this 2009 article from the Sunday Times (linked to by Avaaz.org), it took them over a century to do so:
In 1947, Haiti finally paid off the original reparations, plus interest. Doing so left it destitute, corrupt, disastrously lacking in investment and politically volatile. Haiti was trapped in a downward spiral, from which it is still impossible to escape. It remains hopelessly in debt to this day.
Then into this ongoing disaster zone came this month’s devastating earthquake. Was this a natural disaster? Well, yes and no. The magnitude 7.0 earthquake was of course a natural event. But that was not the main cause of the loss of life. I have lived through a magnitude 7.0 earthquake in a major city, in Baku in 2000. (Well, they said at the time it was magnitude 7.0, but the latest data gives a figure of 6.8.) In that earthquake “26 people died as a primary result, but only three people in collapsing buildings”. The latest (28th January) confirmed death toll in Haiti is 170,000.

Why the huge difference? Yes, there were probably geological factors which caused the ground acceleration in Haiti to be higher than in Baku. But surely there is far more here. It must be the poverty and overcrowding in Port-au-Prince, and the poor standard of building work in a known earthquake zone, which have greatly exacerbated the damage and casualty rate. In addition poverty and poor infrastructure have hampered relief efforts.

Link
So now, guess what? Based on the above, Christians like Glenn Peoples are claiming:
The reason for Haiti’s poverty is not their mythical pact with the devil but rather some unscrupulous lending by other nations.
I don't know what kind of mileage he's trying to get out of this fact, if this is all true. Keep in mind Peter Kirk also said what he wrote:
...is not an attempt to answer the question of why God allowed this natural disaster. But it is intended to put the disaster in perspective.
Yet, Christians still try to open any window to show their God is not to be blamed for anything. Do they think God could not have spoken to King Charles X not to charge the Haitians so much for their independence, like he supposedly did in the Bible? And do they think God could not have let the Haitians find gold, or oil, or diamonds on their land? Either one of these deeds would do the trick. Or, do they think God could not have inspired an industrial genius like Henry Ford or Thomas Edison to start a group of factories that would produce what the rest of the world needed? But no. God couldn't do any of this, could he? It would spoil the Haitians and they might be able to feed themselves and be well off like Americans have been, and that's worse than suffering through this earthquake, right? No, whatever I suggest God either could not do it or he knows what's best, right?

So then I throw my final trump card down and suggest the Perpetual Miracle Objection. Why didn't God just do a perpetual miracle by not allowing that earthquake to ever take place? If God wants to remain hidden then this kind of miracle would do the trick, for if the earthquake never took place we would never know God was involved precisely because it didn't happen. And if God can do perpetual miracles then the earth does not need fault lines which human beings have been attracted to from the dawn of our species before we knew they had dangerous devastating consequences.

Come on, at the very basic level of morality a God who revealed himself to human beings would at least point out where the fault lines are and warn us not to build cities on them, and in the process show us how to get what we need without living near them.

God cannot be exonerated no matter which way his defenders turn.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

If you follow the link to what Peter Kirk wrote you'll see the point of it is to call upon creditors to forgive the Haitian $1 billion debt, and I agree that they should. It's one of the best humanitarian responses to help the survivors in Haiti that I've heard so far.

Matt K said...

the ONE campaign has also been organizing a petition asking the United States to forgive the debt it is owed by Haiti which is also worth checking out.

Breckmin said...

"God cannot be exonerated no matter which way his defenders turn."

By what standard would we appeal to - to somehow "judge" God? The Owner, Creator and Sustainer of the universe (and this temporary creation which is dealing with the real problem of evil and how it is a danger to beings who can "choose" and therefore LOVE)?

God needs no exoneration...neither does He need defense. The same causes you look at for the earthquakes are the same ones that Christians look to when they ask "what happened?"

There ARE answers to your questions, John.

Let me start with a statement I can defend...

"God ordained the Haitian Disaster!"

The question that is begged here is NOT just "why would God do this"
a better question is "what do you mean when you say "ordained?"

What is meant when we use English words like "caused" "allowed" "in control of" "controlled" "sustained"
"decreed" "infinitely determined" etc.

until you deal with the imperfection of languages and what we are using to communicate with to describe atemporal concepts - I do not believe you are going to see what is really going on here with the objections in your book.

Those who seek contradiction will find it when things are complicated. Those who seek resolution in the midst of complication pray to a Holy Creator for protection from deception.

Piratefish said...

John>
Yes forgiving their debt is one of the best thing anybody can think of, where I'm at, Canada, we're already moving this through the legislature.

Breckmin>
You're boring and hilarious, I don't know if you're worth responding at all.

Breckmin said...

"God is completely good and loving towards us all. His ways are perfect."

Yes, His ways are always perfect since He is both omniscient and the Owner and Sustainer of the universe and saying His ways are perfect is clearly saying that the uncaused cause of all things sets the standard for perfection in His Own universe..but your first statement is imperfect.

It does NOT address the concept of Grace and unfairness.

Until you address these concepts head on...you are missing contemporary apologetics that relate to both unfairness and infinite decree (through an understanding of natural theology).

If suffering is the cost of being able to contrast with pleasure..how much more is grace in contrast to logical judgement?

Clearly, God is not equally gracious to us all...or we would have to be all exactly the same (impossible in a universe with choices where these choices affect one another).

No such thing as true absolute fairness.

Jim said...

Breckmin,

I don't know about anyone else, but the standard I use to judge God's actions as repulsive and immoral is my own. I don't need to appeal to any other standard. I condemn him!

Of course, it's a pointless exercise to condemn that which does not exist . . .

The language we use to condemn the "idea" of His Almighty Assholiness is just fine. Your attempt to define God as something out of reach of our vocabulary by imparting He/She/It with properties like "atemporalness" is a constant Christian rhetorical trick that refutes itself.

We cannot say that God is "in control" of the world, but you can say God is "atemporal."

You get to use adjectives with impunity, but we don't? God is love? God is truth? God is timeless?

By what standard are YOU using any words to describe the action or nature of God?

Regards.

Breckmin said...

"...is not an attempt to answer the question of why God allowed this natural disaster. But it is intended to put the disaster in perspective."


JWL "Yet, Christians still try to open any window to show their God is not to be blamed for anything."

Does it really matter whether you die from being eaten by a shark or whether you die in an earthquake? If everything that has a cause is logical to exist then why would God be somehow afraid of accepting that He is interacting with ALL choices and all natural occurrences? Whether it is the choice of a bear to kill a teenager or it is the choice of serial killer to kill an old man..nothing is outside of His Power to stop it...but the question remains "Is it logical for God to stop these choices?"

This question exists whether I ask the question...or whether or not you "see" what I am getting at with respect to ALL choices and ALL potential byproducts of volition which are necessary in order to have true LOVE.

The Romans 8:28 verse applies
to those who love God.

Breckmin said...

"at the very basic level of morality a God who revealed himself to human beings would at least point out where the fault lines are and warn us not to build cities on them, and in the process show us how to get what we need without living near them."

The entire earth is filled with danger. Does it matter whether it is a storm 10 years from now that you don't know about? Or a snake that crawls into your bathroom? Why didn't God warn you about the snake?

You can apply your reasoning to any danger or event that leads to death...not just earthquakes.

Until you deal with "death" itself and the reality of unfairness you are looking at a temporary creation that is supposed to fully demonstrate to you that "we need a Savior" and misinterpreting it to believing that God has somehow done something wrong... (since you claim you don't believe in God anymore you are failing to address the closed set of agreed assumptions of Christianity in that there is NO logical objective standard by which to somehow "judge" the Creator Who judges people individually and interacts with all of creation so that EVERY death is infinitely determined.

Breckmin said...

"By what standard are YOU using any words to describe the action or nature of God?"

Logic in an imperfect language which is based on divine revelation from prophets and apostles which were convicted by the Spirit of God to write and communicate to us this Logos.


It is the same logic that John uses in his book to make objections that you actually find your answers when you go a little bit further and recognize the fact that Love can not exist without "choice."

The fact that God is Infinite and doesn't move from location to location or experience duration on a consecutive linear timeline is logical when you apply natural theology and mathematical principle.


IF, however, you remove the Logic of God's atemporal trascendent existence..THEN you will have contradiction just like you would have with Richard's paradox or the Berry paradox.

IF you remove the Perfect Sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross as the Logos for God creating humankind in His Image then you will not understand the greater good of the eternal glory of LOVE and how "love" trumps the allowance of sin and disobedience (because of the need for choice to exist so that love can exist).

Explaining theodicy is based on logic..just as questioning it is based on logic.

Breckmin said...

"We cannot say that God is "in control" of the world,"

The problem is that "in control of" doesn't go far enough..so of course you can say that God is in control of everything in the world.

God, however, creates beings who create themselves...and this is where it BEGINS to get complicated.
We make choices based on our knowledge and motives and what we have learned.

Certain knowledge needs to be learned. There is no reason to assume that God could have created us omniscient.

busterggi said...

Thank you Bexkmin for admitting that your god is ignorant ("There is no reason to assume that God could have created us omniscient."),
bigoted ("Clearly, God is not equally gracious to us all") and cheats his creations ("No such thing as true absolute fairness.").

Why you think this is perfect is beyond insane.

D.L. Folken said...

John said, "We hate the fact that people suffer in this world as all people do"

If that is true, then why have atheists killed so many people? Why do most atheists support abortion which kills kids? Why do most atheists support doctors ending the life of old people simply because of their quality of life?

Atheism can be a very lethal religion that results in a lot of death and suffering for many.

Atheism doesn't even have compassion for the Haitians. I mean a few atheists may feel bad about it and want to feel good about it by giving money; however, they can get a good feeling by taking a shower instead and get the same result.

I know that my church of 3,000 took up a special offering. The money is being sent to help with the disaster relief. They ran video showing the suffering and the need. We saw the dead people piled up outside the medical relief center. I see Christians everywhere across the spectrum pitching in.

In the midst of all this, you take a tragedy and make it a political football. I personally think this is very cruel on your part and shows your lack of compassion for those who are suffering.

God Bless...

Jonathan said...

ZDENNY said...

*If that is true, then why have atheists killed so many people?
*Why do most atheists support abortion which kills kids?
*Why do most atheists support doctors ending the life of old people simply because of their quality of life?


I can't imagine how far you had to reach in your ass to pull out such crap. I would think you are your own proctologist.

Breckmin said...

"for admitting that your god is ignorant ("There is no reason to assume that God could have created us omniscient."),"

God is omniscient. For a finite man to call an Omniscient God ignorant because of cosmological principles involving the necessity of learning is indeed irony. Your
knowledge approaches zero in comparison to God's Infinite Knowledge.

"bigoted ("Clearly, God is not equally gracious to us all")"

To treat your children differently than those outside of your family is logical and not bigoted. Perhaps you can carefully define "bigoted" within the context of such assertion.

"and cheats his creations ("No such thing as true absolute fairness.")."

This is evasive to any possibility of "fairness" in a universe where choices are being made that affect each other... The only way to have "fair" is to have robots/puppets perfectly still without random motion and without oxidation affecting them differently.

Unfairness is NOT cheating since that would make us all guilty of cheating since it is impossible to be truly fair to anyone since we ALWAYS treat people differently according to their situations at various points in time.

Either you don't understand the cosmological principle of the Law of Unfairness or you are just looking for a way to manipulate what I have said and make it mean something that it doesn't.

Very easy to do in imperfect languages, btw, because of multiple meanings and the isolation of connected premises which can not be isolated.

Gandolf said...

Breckmin said..." By what standard would we appeal to - to somehow "judge" God? The Owner, Creator and Sustainer of the universe (and this temporary creation which is dealing with the real problem of evil and how it is a danger to beings who can "choose" and therefore LOVE)?"

Breckmin to what standard do you think you appeal to when folks are writing or reading your faiths.You appeal to mere human standard dont you!,even if you might "dream" some sky daddy is holding your wee hand.

Why bother playing games here and try deceitfully to manipulate matters? keeping up the usual traditional theist form are we?.

Seems you dont mind who`s standard is being appealed to,when its about what suits your religion, yet try asserting and adding extra goal posts for anyone being sceptical of it.

What a blatant fraud !.What utter deceitful double standard !

Breckmin this is the year 2010!! .You need to remember we are no longer!! early ancient ignorant cave men,simply lacking in enough knowledge to quickly understand, you are merely using methods of magic, by simply quietly swapping goal posts.

This magical tactic of quick-switch, may have actually worked very well! back in days of old, when gods were faithfully even thought to actually be throwing lightning.

But we humans have learned lots since then.

Now days thinking is more evidence based !!.And "evidence" exposes !! you appeal to a standard that man can know ways of gods when its suits your debate,ie the bible written by men.

Yet when suits you,you try appealing to standards ,"By what standard would we appeal to - to somehow "judge" God? "

"Your argument" itself, eats your own faith up!! and swallows it whole for breakfast!!

Its shows up what a great load of crap swallowing faith often produces.

If you wish to appeal to standards,then atleast keep the double standard out of the debate!

Lenoxus said...

"God cannot be exonerated no matter which way his defenders turn."

Aah, my problem with theodicies is precisely the opposite — that they give any possible God reign to commit or allow any possible evil.

Have any Christians out there suggested that earthquakes beyond a certain magnitude (I don't know much about the subject, but say, 11) are physically and logically possible, but will never happen because they are just too evil for God?

Of course, Christianity and Islam themselves actually go so far as to describe this universe as almost maximally evil, what with nearly everyone even going to Hell after some brief moments of a mostly decent life.

So I guess my own question is answered — Christians, for the most part, cannot imagine a world too evil for a God to allow it (except for those who, to their credit, reject the horrible notion of Hell).

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

Go Breckmin and Zdenny! Love it!

Gandolf said...

ZDENNY said...

"1,If that is true, then why have atheists killed so many people?

2,Why do most atheists support abortion which kills kids?

3,Why do most atheists support doctors ending the life of old people simply because of their quality of life?"

---------------------


1,The athiests that killed people killed people because they were dranged lunatics and total tyrants,some of these lunatics were even faithful/christian type disturbed lunatics.Some of them even used bible quotes and thoughts in their crusades!.

Good to see you showing up! the traditional dishonest & manipulative attitude of the faithful is still largely widely at work.

But you have failed to provide any proof how the actions of lunatics, can be blamed on nonbelievers.

You yourself are prime proof!,that lunacy also effects the faithful,what reason do you have to then try blaming the lunacy of some atheist tyrant leaders on those with no faith?.

Your debate lacks in evidence.

We are able to supply (wording in your faith books) and beliefs which is EVIDENCE of obvious (suggestive material) that can be shown could be used as material to insite the nastiness and abuse and wars that has historically been experienced through the existence of faiths.

Until you supply the same type of evidence of suggestive material is existant amongst non existant faith books of non believers.You lack any decent evidence! that backs your injust deceitful claim.

Meaning your claim is simply knee jerk reaction of faith !,with no basis for scientific fact.

2,ZDENNY you proving yourself to be the lunatic that you are,i suggest is enough good reason!! as evidence to suggest...Abortion could also sometimes be seen as a very great blessing!....I can honestly say i would definitly MUCH rather be aborted,than ever face the hell and torment of being born to somebody as ignorant as you!.

That to me would be worse than a life jail term with no (right) of the death penalty! .

Being unfortunate to be born to somebody like you could be a matter great longterm suffering!,that could possible even be so bad it might even lead to a need for extremely sad choices of suicide.Just to escape the pain

ZDenny,you lack any good evidence to actually prove why (humanity) should always see abortion as (honestly) always being bad or the worst thing.

We cant! rely on your faith book for honest answers,for starters your faith books not!! even always completely honest is it.

3,ZDenny your suggestion reeks of the blind thoughtless attitude the very foundations of faith often wallow in.

If somebody is suffering extremely bad because of their health or quality of life.Do you suggest it more humane to (make) them continue! to suffer on,and refuse them any choice to dignity and right to choose not to need to suffer on endlessly?

Many non believers support doctors who support the humane act of allowing certain people the right to dignity and right to end long term suffering.

ZDenny why? the need to use deceit! and try manipulating matters!, to try to suggest some evil motive?

Was your plan? simply to show the general public!, just how faithful folks love to use manipulation and deceit?

Anonymous said...

--If that is true, then why have atheists killed so many people?

Why have Christians killed so many people? No, really.

--Why do most atheists support abortion which kills kids?

Do you define a child as a couple of cells?

What about the mothers that would die from complications if the fetus, sorry, baby, is not aborted?

What about all the natural abortions that happen to most pregnancies anyway?

Selective much?

--Why do most atheists support doctors ending the life of old people simply because of their quality of life?

Citation please, or are you pulling that out of your ass to build up your straw man.

--Atheism can be a very lethal religion that results in a lot of death and suffering for many.

Christianity can be a very lethal religion that results in a lot of death and suffering for many.

Hello Crusades. Hello Inquisition. Hello Salem witch trials. Hello modern-day witch hunts. Hello faith healing. Hello anti-gay Ugandan legislation. Hello anti-condom crusade. Hello anti-stem cell research vetoes.

--Atheism doesn't even have compassion for the Haitians.

Atheism is a term, a philosophical stance on belief. Of course it doesn't have compassion for anything. It's a fucking word.

How stupid are you? People have compassion for other people.

--I mean a few atheists may feel bad about it and want to feel good about it by giving money; however, they can get a good feeling by taking a shower instead and get the same result.

And so can you!

By the way, have you finished building up that straw man yet?

--I know that my church of 3,000 took up a special offering.

Your church itself? The building?

Or the people that worship in the church? You see my conundrum.

--The money is being sent to help with the disaster relief.

That's nice. The mean nasty atheists are doing the same thing.

--They ran video showing the suffering and the need. We saw the dead people piled up outside the medical relief center. I see Christians everywhere across the spectrum pitching in.

While you see Christians, I see people. Human beings that want to help other human beings.

Divisive much?

--In the midst of all this, you take a tragedy and make it a political football.

Pat Robertson said the people of Haiti made a pact with the Devil.

For living on an island near a fault line.

Yeah, we'll call stupid when we see it.

--I personally think this is very cruel on your part and shows your lack of compassion for those who are suffering.

I personally think it's even crueler for some Christians to say that Haiti had it coming. Or that it was God's plan all along.

Geology proves you wrong, unless of course you think the tectonic plates were set up that way by God, in which case he's still an immoral prick for not stopping this disaster.

--God Bless...

Gesundheit.

Peter Kirk said...

Thanks for the link to my post at Gentle Wisdom. But I can't help thinking that I would be damned for anything I wrote about Haiti (and you happened to read), just because I am a Christian. After all, I didn't mention God in this post except to say "That is not an attempt to answer the question of why God allowed this natural disaster." Is there actually anything in this post that you disagree with?

But in answer to some of your questions, yes, God could have for example spoken to King Charles X (or for that matter to today's bankers) and asked him to forgive Haiti's debts. Very likely he did speak to him. But the king, as a selfish and sinful man (like all of us), didn't do what God asked him, or would have asked him. God could have forced him to do it, but only by turning people into robots.

And he did show the Haitians that their country was an earthquake zone, through devastating earthquakes in the 18th century. But they went ahead and built unstable buildings there anyway.

How about this argument: Suppose you have a teenage child who goes out, with your permission, and commits some minor offence. Are you to blame? Well, you could have locked the young person up at home 24 hours a day, so yes, by the standards you apply to God, that anything you could have stopped is your fault, you are to blame. But is that responsible parenting? No, it is child abuse. Similarly God could lock us up 24 hours a day so we are unable to sin, but that would be to abuse us, not to be a responsible and loving Father.