Like the Andrea Yates approach: kill kids before the age of accountability and you guarantee them entrance to Heaven.
I don't know who this Andrea Yates is, but the difference is that no human being has the right to take the lives of others. God does have the right to take human life. He has the right to permit its end. We are creatures, God is God and as such He can summon whomsoever He wills to judgement at any time.
I thought you said that the victims of natural disasters didn't deserve what happened to them. Have you changed their mind?
I said that individual death by tragedy is not
necessarily an indication of God's displeasure. The rain falls on the just and wicked alike. But God's allowing of natural disasters can indeed be in part a consequence God's just vengeance. Sin has consequences, one of which is a degree of withdrawal of His protection.
so any evil can be justified?
God can permit any evil insofar as He can bring about a greater good. It may not be His will that evil should exist, but were He to completely prevent it, it would defeat the purpose of this life's trial. No crown without the cross.
So you are talking about collective punishment.
God can and has punished collectively. Nevertheless, He judges each and every person individually. A civilization which spits in God's face will eventually suffer civilizational reprimand (be it natural disasters, famines, outbreaks, war, or even, eventually, collapse). But in so far as the individual is concerned, he is called to account for his sins alone.
But I think you're forgetting something yourself: if your God is all-powerful and all-knowing, then God can achieve any positive outcome without any particular negative side effect. This means that negative impacts of God's actions can't be excused by being packaged with some greater good. The negative is avoidable, so the decision to include is has to be justified on their own merits.
It is justified, because a world with evil and suffering is better
sub specie aeternitatis than a world wherein God completely prevents it.
It is better that human beings are given the freedom to decide their own eternity. It is a good thing that humans can suffer and be tried. It is good for human beings to experience the depths of suffering so that they learn of their utter poverty and helplessness, their utter dependence upon God for their every breath. The cross is a good thing because for those who pick it up and put their trust utterly in God will find themselves inheriting an eternal and unsurpassable happiness in heaven.
You can either trust that God knows what He is doing and submit to His will, or you can insist that you know better and forever reject His will for your own. You are here precisely to make that choice. You wouldn't be the first to say no to God, a third of the angelic host made that same decision.
The ends can't justify the means if the ends can be achieved without the means in question.
God has chosen the best possible means for His ends, which if we so choose is our eternal happiness with Him in heaven. No matter how bad this life gets, it's a mere speck in eternity. Seventy, eighty years (on average) isn't a long time. You'll be old and wondering where all the years suddenly went sooner than you think. I'm not saying that this life is easy, but with a strong faith in God I need not fear any hardship. It is temporary.
But we're talking, among other things, about collective punishment and inflicting punishment on the undeserving. Both of these things are contrary to justice.
Everyone gets what they deserve, at judgement. For the good, God will compensate everything.
So you do think that when suffering occurs, it's because God wills it?
In the
consequent, He has permitted it.