God and Disasters

In view of the horrific effects of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan I ask myself how Christians can continue to reconcile their unwavering belief in an imaginary being  with such cruel reality on this earth. A C Grayling’s “God and Disasters” asks the same question:

God and Disaster

alt text

One thinks with sorrow of the hundreds of thousands whose lives have been horrendously lost or affected by the great Japanese earthquake and tsunami, which will put a black mark against this year 2011 in the annals, coming so soon after the earthquake that hit Christchurch in New Zealand. The events are almost certainly linked tectonically, reminding us of the vast forces of nature that are normal for the planet itself but inimical to human life, especially when lived dangerously close to the jigsaw cracks of the earth’s surface.

Someone told me that there were to be special prayers in their local church for the people of Japan. This well-intentioned and fundamentally kindly proceeding nevertheless shows how absurd, in the literal sense of this term, are religious belief and practice. When I saw the television footage of people going to church in Christchurch after the tragic quake there, the following thoughts pressed.

It would be very unkind to think that the churchgoers were going to give thanks that they personally escaped; one would not wish to impute selfishness and personal relief in the midst of a disaster in which many people arbitrarily and suddenly lost their lives through ‘an act of God’. If they were going to pray for their god to look after the souls of those who had died, why would they think he would do so since he had just caused, or allowed, their bodies to be suddenly and violently crushed or drowned?

Indeed, were they praising and supplicating a deity who designed a world that causes such arbitrary and sudden mass killings? An omniscient being would know all the implications of what it does, so it would know it was arranging matters with these awful outcomes. Were they praising the planner of their sufferings for their sufferings, and also begging his help to escape what he had planned?

Perhaps they think that their god was not responsible for the earthquake. If they believe that their god designed a world in which such things happen but left the world alone thereafter and does not intervene when it turns lethal on his creatures, then they implicitly question his moral character. If he is not powerful enough to do something about the world’s periodic murderous indifference to human beings, then in what sense is he a god? Instead he seems to be a big helpless ghost, useless to pray to and unworthy of praise.

For if he is not competent to stop an earthquake or save its victims, he is definitely not competent to create a world. And if he is powerful enough to do both, but created a dangerous world that inflicts violent and agonizing sufferings arbitrarily on sentient creatures, then he is vile. Either way, what are people thinking who believe in such a being, and who go to church to praise and worship it? How, in the face of events which human kindness and concern registers as tragic and in need of help – help which human beings proceed to give to their fellows: no angels appear from the sky to do it – can they believe such an incoherent fiction as the idea of a deity? This is a perennial puzzle.

Romisen MXDL RC-G2 Cree Flashlight

I bought myself a few gadgets for Christmas including:

  • a torch (or flashlight as the Americans say), a Romisen MXDL RC-G2 from DealExtreme
  • digital vernier callipers,
  • a digital thermometer for the reptile house I built for the Blue Tongues,
  • a good quality battery charger (Ansmann Energy 8) because cheap charger plus cheap rechargeables means short battery life

The torch is amazingly bright for its size and I’m very happy with it. I’ve always liked torches but balked at paying large amounts of money for a quality brand like Maglite. So I tended to buy cheap, plastic torches that would last for a few months. In recent years I also bought torches containing LEDs instead of a bulb. These LED torches were relatively efficient producers of light, so batteries lasted well, but each LED was weak so the torch needed lots of them. Assembling lots of bits into a torch-head increases the cost so cheap LED torches were very crappily put together. But about a year ago there was a revolution in torch design. A US company called Cree Inc. produced a very efficient and bright emitter. Cree make their own torches but they also sell their emitters to other manufacturers (mostly Chinese) who have produced a large range of small, powerful torches.

sku_3607_1You can see the Cree emitter at the base of the reflector. It looks like a small pale yellow patch. This Romisen torch:

– uses a single AA battery
– has a large on/off push switch on the end, not on the barrel
– has a glass lens and aluminium reflector
– has a very bright central beam (ie a long throw) while the flood is not nearly as briight but still usable
– has good build quality.

This little torch is so bright it could be used for possum spot-lighting. We have a large water tower about 100 metres from our backyard. I can illuminate the top of the tank with it. So it is great for shining around outside. On the other hand it isn’t perfect for hunting for lost socks early in the morning – it’s blinding at close range.

At the moment I am using a standard AA 1.2V rechargeable battery in it which seems to last for about 60 minutes. Some Cree LEDs stop working if the battery voltage drops below a certain level. This is fine for situations where a strong output is critical but not so good for a household torch where a slow reduction in output over time is much better. This torch is like that. Even when the battery is approaching the end of its charge the torch is still quite usable around the house.

Postscript

I took this torch with us on our 2012 ten-week trip to Europe. For a few days we stayed in a friend’s alpine hut in Vorarlberg. He liked this torch so much I left if behind in the hut as a gift.