Does the Haiti earthquake prove that there is no god?

[Thorne]

Why does God have to stop a natural disaster from occuring? Why is it that if he allows one to happen that all of a sudden he's hateful and doesn't give a shit about anybody?

If I were walking down the street and saw someone attacking another person, and did nothing to stop it, or even stood by and watched, I would be as guilty of a crime as the perpetrator, wouldn't I?

Or if I saw a man walking onto a plane with a bomb strapped to his chest, wouldn't I be guilty of killing innocent people if I failed to notify the authorities?

I look upon the idea of God in this same way. He COULD prevent the disaster. He doesn't, which implicates him in the suffering of the victims. Even if we assume that there is a reason for the disaster itself, God COULD protect the people, preventing unnecessary death and injury and all the horrors that the victims must suffer.

The fact that God does not intervene in these disasters leads me to two possible conclusions:
1 - Like a scientist testing bacterial colonies for resistance to antibiotics, God simply observes the results of these disasters, seeing which people survive and which do not. The suffering of those who survive in a damaged condition is immaterial to him. The survivors must live with the consequences.

2 - There is no God. Natural disasters happen, and people die and are injured. The survivors must live with the consequences.

In both cases the results are the same. Naturally, my opinion is that the second case is true, but even if I'm wrong and the first case is closer to the truth, this is certainly not the God of Abraham and Mohammad, and is most definitely not a being worthy of any kind of worship or adoration.

Now, one can probably come up with many other possible explanations for the apparent absence of any intervention by God, but they all seem to end the same way: The survivors must live with the consequences.

[Saheli]

If I were walking down the street and saw someone attacking another person, and did nothing to stop it, or even stood by and watched, I would be as guilty of a crime as the perpetrator, wouldn't I?

I look upon the idea of God in this same way. He COULD prevent the disaster. He doesn't, which implicates him in the suffering of the victims. Even if we assume that there is a reason for the disaster itself, God COULD protect the people, preventing unnecessary death and injury and all the horrors that the victims must suffer.

The fact that God does not intervene in these disasters leads me to two possible conclusions:
1 - Like a scientist testing bacterial colonies for resistance to antibiotics, God simply observes the results of these disasters, seeing which people survive and which do not. The suffering of those who survive in a damaged condition is immaterial to him. The survivors must live with the consequences.

2 - There is no God. Natural disasters happen, and people die and are injured. The survivors must live with the consequences.

In both cases the results are the same. Naturally, my opinion is that the second case is true, but even if I'm wrong and the first case is closer to the truth, this is certainly not the God of Abraham and Mohammad, and is most definitely not a being worthy of any kind of worship or adoration.

Now, one can probably come up with many other possible explanations for the apparent absence of any intervention by God, but they all seem to end the same way: The survivors must live with the consequences.

I completely agree that God, having not prevented the earthquake when he could, implicates him in the suffering of the victims. And now the question should not only be what does this say about God, but also what does this say about suffering? As far as God is concerned, why are the only two options that he is uninvolved or hates people? As far as suffering is concerned, again who of us could really say for certainty that any answer is correct? But there are some things that we do know about suffering: suffering gets people's attention...when someone notices suffering they go help meet needs. When people suffer sometimes they learn things they otherwise might not learn. I am NOT saying that that these are the reasons why the earthquake happened. I am only saying that there are many things to consider. So if God, who could prevent himself from being implicated in the sufferings of these innocent people allow himself to be so implicated, the larger question is why? Is God an idiot? He just didn't consider what people would think if he didn't stop the earthquake? Does he want people to think of him as a hateful creator who doesn't care about the creatures he created? Is he just not there at all, and all these questions are a waste of time? I think all the questions we can come up with are worth considering.

You say in the end of your post that other options may exist but all end the same way, with the survivors bearing the pains of the event. Yes, of course that's right. And to that point we have no idea what those consequences will mean to each individual, although I think it's pretty safe to say that this will probably (hopefully!) be the most traumatic, painful (physically/mentally) event each will ever have to endure. We all have burdens, and I am NOT trying to minimize suffering; please don't misunderstand. I am saying that everyone in this world suffers a myriad of hurts throughout life for different reasons. Those who don't believe in any kind of God or supreme being is likely to believe that hurt is random and impersonal. Some people believe that all hardships are a result of sin, and there are probably dozens of theories inbetween the two extremes. The people will have to live with what happened forever; for some it might ruin their life: perhaps they will never get over what happened. For some it might renew their faith in people, finding that people are much more compassionate than once thought. For some it might be the beginning of a new life: I've heard on the news that Obama is thinking about passing laws that would allow more Haitians (hope I spelled that right) to live in America. The point is that we have no idea what the actual implications of the consequences suffered by the people mean. We can only guess. And while nobody here would argue that the tragedy was anything less of horrendous, we simply cannot say that nothing good can come from it. I am not using that statement to say, "See, so God was good to not prevent the earthquake...some Haitians can live in America now." That is not what I believe at all.

Like I said, I have no answer as to why God wouldn't interfere. I just don't believe that it means he doesn't care, that he isn't involved, or that he isn't there.