Posted by: gebs | July 20, 2010

Response to Sarah Mckenzie

I wrote this in response to an article written in the SMH http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/not-miraculous-just-good-luck-20100716-10dwp.html

Just a few points in response to your article.

Firstly, God does take care of those who die despite the fact that he might not choose to stop the plane from falling out of the sky or the balcony falling down.  Humans are free to make their own decisions and must bare all the consequences, God is not a safety net in the sense that we can do what we want and expect God to stop tragedy.  Sometimes God chooses to make special intervention and perhaps miracles, and unlike your wrong judgement, the higher plan God has is something we are invited to inquire into and he gives us the tools to do this.

Secondly, although science cannot prove a miracle, it can however, state that its current empirical means of inquiry lead to the conclusion that an explanation is needed using language beyond scientific terms.  Science is not the only language we have at our disposal, and we are more than just material beings.

Thirdly, as for your statement about amputees, God does answer their prayers but not in the limited material sense which enslave your mindset.  See Nick Vujivic for example.

You conclude your article with the arrogant and proud stance which plagues the atheistic mindset.  Namely, that you are smarter the all religious people and history itself for that matter, and your so called logical powers are beyond the idea of God.  If the Blessed Mary McKillop’s two miracles are stingy, I wonder why no atheist has ever been attributed to one throughout the entire course of history?  I am sure the Blessed Mary will do many more throughout eternity, maybe even pleading for God’s mercy for people like you and I when we die.

As for luck, using this for the basis of your argument seems so obviously flawed especially for a person of your proud logic.  Why do you call it good luck, by doing this you attribute to it a moral content which you probably explain using utilitarian means, which is inherently relativistic.  I will help you with your logic.  Without God, things and events just happen, for no reason what so ever except for chaotic chance, there is neither good luck or bad luck, there just is.  If things conspire towards a good end, however, sometimes against all possibility and probability, there must be a cause for this.   This cause the theists call God, and there is ample proof for God if you know where to look and with the right mindset.  Sorry God does not fit into the categorical scientific proofs you choose to limit your world too.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: