From you link: The precedent in case law is defined by Nugent v Smith (1876) which says that an act of God is caused by “elementary forces of nature unconnected with the agency of man or other cause.” It is understandable that such an archaic term would originate in 16th Century English law, but why has it survived in current law? A more descriptive term would be “act of nature,” or better yet, “natural event.”

It is called God before it was called nature. Changing the name does not change what it is. Hierarchy continuum understanding: god has a newer used name: nature.

God or nature either way it is called still exist, atheism illogical.

It’s all on us humans.