Religious Beliefs, Insurance, and “Acts of God”

Yesterday in my class on religion and science, we discussed the notion of “acts of God” and divine action. I started us off with the phrase “acts of God” as used in the realm of insurance policies, which led nicely into a discussion of whether people take that language literally, and if so, what it applies to.

It quickly dawned on me that, since some religious believers view everything as an “act of God,” if they sign an insurance policy that says they are not covered in the case of “acts of God,” then they are effectively paying a lot of money for a policy that doesn’t ever cover them for anything.

Or is it only the religious views of the insurance company that matter when it comes to coverage? If so, hadn’t we all better start asking what they are before we sign on the dotted line?

"It is a continual source of puzzlement to me that fundamentalist Christians and anti-theist activists ..."

Not Loving the Bible
"This is sort of an ongoing discussion I've had off and on with Realist - ..."

Not Loving the Bible
"Saying, in essence, “I know you are but what am I” is never a meaningful ..."

Not Loving the Bible
"When it comes to the biblical data on "issues," I agree with you. Progressives as ..."

Not Loving the Bible

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Phil Smith

    I’m pretty sure “acts of God” has a specific meaning in case law, if not legislation. The religious beliefs of the insured play no part in that. 😉

  • markhh

    When I signed the insurance papers on the new house 3 years back, God was no where to be found. It was “natural disasters, acts of war ..” and few other categories.
    Even 20 years ago it was “acts of Providence”.