Why does God Allow Natural disasters ? (The First PRINCIPLE)

Why does God Allow Natural disasters ? (The First PRINCIPLE)

Excerpts from : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8467755.stm

"As the philosopher David Hume (echoing Epicurus) put it in 1776: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?"

Faced with this question, Archbishop of York John Sentamu said he had "nothing to say to make sense of this horror", while another clergyman, Canon Giles Fraser, preferred to respond "not with clever argument but with prayer".

I have nothing to say that makes sense of this horror - all I know is that the message of the death and resurrection of Jesus is that he is with us

Archbishop of York, John Sentamu

Perhaps their stance is understandable. ....[End Quote]"

First of all i am surprised at the Bishops Sentamu falling victim to such a frightened, confused/defensive almost media friendly answer ...

Understanding "Why?" Is a question that will depend "First" on the understanding of

God (his Will, Attribute, Mercy... etc).... Without this First principle the latter question becomes almost redundant ?! Nay, even more so, i say "It all depends on this first princple" ... Like so many things the first is the start to the End !

Why?

Question of Philosophy? Some principles pf Wittgensten can be brought into play here ..

Even though Wittgenstein dismisses "prepositions that take the form of "A believes P"

we will not go into detail here but let us borrow some logic ...

If someone (call him X) believes God to be a subservient "fatherly" Figure with the creation as his children.

Then from this we can derive that this disaster by its mere occurrence is abhorrent ... hence, God is allowing his children to suffer.

But again, i think what is hidden and subtle in the "God-Disaster" Controversy is the

Reverse, What is the Reverse ?.... What people are actually trying to say is

"If God actually does exist he wouldnt allow this to happen, so because it has happened he does not Exist?"

That people derive the existence of Non-Existence of God via the events occurring, which is a damning almost arrogant assumption ....

But surely the logic is flawed here since we NEED TO UNDERSTAND GOD FIRST (OR THE EVEN THE EXISTENCE OF GOD) before embarking on the "Why such things occur?" The Logic that people follow is almost blind and condemning without remorse... as Wittgenstein-esc style ... We need to use philosophy to sharpen and gain clarity in our thoughts ...

if my Motorbike broke down i would say "How can i a great engineer build this bike if it has broken down for me"? Then i find out that i had to top up the oil ?! Suddenly my proposition "How can a great engineer build this bike?" Has fallen apart ...?

The first principle is fundemental here .... !