I know I am getting myself into more trouble because of my last controversial post on Haiti, but I recently came across a blog post about the earthquake in Haiti and Christian theodicy by theologian J. Kameron Carter.
Natural disasters with their devastating impact on are always terrible when they take away human life. However, I do not like to refer to natural disasters as natural evil. God said that everything in creation was good in Genesis 1. It is problematic to call natural disasters evil because this terminology presupposes a mode of human agency (in my opinion) in which human beings, to some extent, are able to control the weather. Why use the word “evil” describe describe the natural if other than the fact that the weather is something that we as human beings cannot control. This has led me to be more suspicious of suffering God orthodoxy, to think that we have a firm grasp on who God is, claiming that God is essentially suffering in the world, feeling our pain and heartbreaks either passively or actively (Moltmann, process theism, etc., etc.). Yes, the cross can function as a form of revelation of the Triune Godhead’s nature to humanity; however, to say definitely that God in every situation in creation is suffering seems to me to be suspect. God responds the same way in all situations? I do not believe so. Yes, God is responsive but God responds to us in different ways. God is beyond our comprehension and grasp; we are unable to determine what God is doing all of the time, otherwise God would not be God. Perhaps it would be better to approach God’s activity in creation with awe and mystery as Victor Anderson argues in his Creative Exchange.
