I have been doing a little more research on the response of Religious Right groups to the recent catastrophe. Thankfully, in Australia we haven’t seen much evidence yet of support for the “Rapture craze” that has swept America (the “Left Behind” books etc.) so there is little discussion yet about whether the tsunami might have “end times” implications. The Rapture Index, a wacky “temperature” measurement predicting the nearness of “end times”, has gone up a bit, but hasn’t been updated since Dec 27. I do hope the author hasn’t been vanished ;-)

Nearer to home, Carl Wieland, chief honcho of Answers in Genesis in Australia, has had a stab at explaining the disaster from a creationist perspective:
Answers In Genesis - Waves of sadness, by Carl Wieland
The temblor-triggered tsunami terror raises the same age-old questions.”

Don’t expect much by way of a satisfying answer to these “age-old questions”. Basically, yes, God is in charge, but people die at random, whether from old-age or terrifying walls of water. But Wieland does make this interesting claim:

“A World Vision representative once told me confidentially that it is conservative, Bible-believing churches and Christians who are far and away the most generous givers to that organisation’s efforts to help people in poor countries.”

and he has a further unsubstantiated dig at the generosity of those Christians who reject his creationist worldview:

“Liberal Christians (i.e., those who take alarming liberties with biblical truths) talk a lot about social justice and helping poor countries - all noble concepts, of course. But in practice, although keen to see laws passed to take money from others, they are as a group less enthusiastic about dipping into their own pockets.”

Now World Vision makes no bones about the fact that it is a conservative Christian group, so it is hardly surprising that it attracts more donors from that section of the community. But since when does the religious belief of donors to disaster relief charities become a matter of record, public or otherwise? Please explain, Dr. Wieland.

And yet another article today explores the question of divine omnipotence:

The Age - When God goes missing
“… There it is - biblical literalism is dead; science is king. Or is it? Not every brand of religion has so readily offloaded the idea of omnipotence to get around the thorny intellectual questions of divine malevolence. What of the creationists, who believe that the Bible is not merely metaphor, but the true account of divine miracles? Where was their god this week? How can they explain his role in this? Was it vengeance - even against babies not old enough to talk?”

Filed in: Atheism, Creationism