Question: Where was God when the earthquake hit Haiti [on January 12th, 2010]?* [It was a catastrophic 7.0 magnitude earthquake that killed tens of thousands of people and left more than a million homeless.] How could a good God allow such destruction and death?
Answer:
Such a question has no easy answers. Whenever a disaster hits such as Katrina or the earthquake in Haiti or even an act from men such as 9/11, people tend to begin to ask the question: Where was God? I have found that there is no great answer to the problem of why these things take place, but I do find comfort in God, knowing that He is in control of all things, and though I don’t understand His ways, I trust Him. That is faith (Hebrews 11:1).
Yet when we approach the question of how could a good God allow pain and suffering in our world, we can come up with several different answers. I will only list five approaches.
Approach #1 – There is no God
This is the atheistic approach. When the earthquakes hit Haiti, there was nothing anyone could have done since humans don’t know nor can we stop the earthquakes, and there is no Creator who could intervene in them. The problem with such a view is that 1) it defies logic that there is no Creator when the act of an earthquake boggles the mind unto itself. 2) This view offers no comfort whatsoever after disasters to those who are alive or who have suffered the loss of someone because of disasters. 3) It ignores that the vast amount of charity shown to the Haitian people have not been by atheists but by theists. Our faith in God as Christians demands that we care for the poor and the hurting (Galatians 2:10). No such morality exist among atheists, and if it does, it doesn’t find its basis on its philosophy.
Approach #2 – There is a God but He is too distant to care for our hurts
This would be the view of Muslims and a few other theists. This deistic view of God holds that God created all things but that is the extent of His interaction with our world. Within Islam, this means that we simply submit to His authority (the word Muslim means “one who submits”). While some Muslims have no doubt joined in with helping the Haitian people, their theology teaches that God willed the earthquake to be (determinism) and they do not question His actions.
The problem with such a view is that, like the atheist view, there is no room for comfort from God. For example, within Islam Allah has no concern for our human plights. Allah, if anything, delights in watching us suffer and die since he is too holy to concern himself with our misery. There is no comfort for our sins. No hope that we too need to repent to find true life (Luke 13:1-5). The Muslim answer to the Haitians is simply: Allah willed this to be and you need to submit to his laws.
Approach #3 God Willed This To Be Yet He Comforts Us With His Grace and Mercy
This would be the Calvinist response to Haiti. God doesn’t just control earthquakes and floods and disasters or even the sinful acts of people, but He also wills them to be (divine determinism). The sovereignty of God, teaches the Calvinist theologians, demands that we teach that God didn’t just allow the earthquakes to take place but that for His purposes alone He determined them to be. We don’t understand this mystery but we must (as with the Muslims above) simply submit to His goodness and believe that His purposes are for His own glory despite what we may or may not see (Romans 8:28 NKJV).
I have a respect for such a view as I believe that the Calvinist and the Muslims are quite different in their view of divine determinism despite some similarities. For instance, Calvinism might teach determinism but it likewise emphasizes that God is gracious and loving toward all His creation (Matthew 5:45; Acts 14:17). At least within Calvinism one does find comfort and hope for those who suffer. The Calvinist answer never really answers the question of why God allows pain and suffering but it does offer the hope that God will turn this for His glory (Genesis 50:20) as He did the crucifixion of His Son (1 Peter 3:18).
Approach #4 God Is In Control Of All Things Though He Does not Directly Cause All Things
This is the standard Arminian answer to pain and suffering. God has created the world and all that we see in it, and while He does exercise control of all things, He does not directly cause all things to come to pass. For example, He controlled the death of His Son (Acts 2:23) yet He did not cause the Romans nor the Jews to kill His Son directly. He simply allowed it to be. God could, if He so chose to, step into our world and control things for His own purposes and He has done so in the past, but His normal process of working in our world is to allow people a limited amount of freedom to make decisions that determine their destinies.
However, when it comes to earthquakes and hurricanes and other natural acts, God allows these things to be, and though He controls the weather simply by His word if He so desired, He allows them to follow their own courses. In this case, the earthquake that hit Haiti was allowed by God, and though He foreknew it, He simply allowed it to take place though we don’t know fully His reasons. Perhaps this destruction is opening Haiti to the gospel now more than ever before. Perhaps He is using this destruction much like He used Israel’s plights in the Old Testament to turn the nation to Him. We simply don’t know why this takes place but we trust Him and His ways to glorify His name.
Approach #5 God Didn’t Know This Would Happen
This is the Open Theist view held by many Open Theists, such as Greg Boyd. When the bridge fell in Minneapolis, Boyd and Calvinist John Piper faced off through a series of articles from their websites and from their churches. Piper argued that the bridges that collapsed in Minnesota happened because God willed it so. Piper argued that we only find comfort when we know that God is working all things for His own purposes and for His own glory. Boyd countered that God, like us, didn’t know this would happen. Since the future is partly open, God grieved with His creatures at the loss of human life and the chaos of the bridges that fell. Boyd said such a view prevents atheists and others from accusing God of wrong. God, wrote Boyd, didn’t plan the bridges to fall. The bridges fell because of human errors and not by God’s hand.
In the case of Haiti, Boyd would argue similarly that God didn’t know that the earthquake would hit. He was as shocked as we were to see the misery and suffering. Yet now we can comfort the people of Haiti with God’s love and compassion by reaching out to them with not just help but with the gospel. When earthquakes hit or tornado’s come, God doesn’t know anymore than we do what is about to happen since the future is open and God responds to the free choices of people. The people of Haiti will either turn to God or reject Him, but that is part of God’s love and grace, to allow for people to make free choices.
Conclusion
I don’t think there are ever easy answers to pain. Apologist Douglas Jacoby writes, “Try to imagine a world without pain and suffering and what do you get? You find a world that lacks any heroes. Where would valor be without the risk of pain and suffering? Where would compassion be without pain? Where would mercy be without pain? To imagine a world without pain and suffering robs us of our human triumphs and heroes.”
Whenever I consider the issue of pain and suffering, I ask people who say things such as “How can a good God allow me to suffer?”, who are you? Look at Jesus. He was perfect and yet He suffered. Are we better than Him? If He, the only perfect person ever to live, suffered, should we expect less? Jesus, in fact, left us an example of how to suffer in 1 Peter 2:21-25. Jesus showed us how to treat others in the midst of pain (Luke 23:34). Jesus showed us also that pain and suffering are momentary (Psalm 30:5; Isaiah 53:11) and that there must be a cross before there can be a resurrection (Isaiah 53:12; Romans 8:1-4).
[On a more general level, see also Brian Abasciano, “Answering the Problem of Evil from an Arminian Perspective.”]
__________________________________
* Editor’s notes are in brackets.
[Link to original post and comments on Roy Ingle’s website.]
