I’m discussing John Loftus’s book The Christian Delusion here, and I’m looking at the Why Won’t God Heal Amputees and God is Imaginary websites here. All three seem to think that religion (Christianity in particular) is a complete delusion.

Now, is weighing in on the issue here. Comment #7 reads:

You know, when the most powerful being in the Universe, omnipotent creator-of-all actually acknowledges your existence with some little “miracle”, or imagined form of “feedback” (usually through feelings) it can be a tremendous boost to many people’s fragile ego.

What’s interesting, is the very people who claim they have received “petty” miracles from God are usually angry when asked how they feel about other people being ignored, left to die, suffer, or go without justice (who may have also prayed faithfully) yet God is granting you “petty” little wishes concerning health, finance, even a new car/truck.

WWGHA covers the same class of argument that Franko47 has brought up in chapter 10. Basically, the argument runs something like this:

One hundred people go off to war. All pray that they will come back home alive. Ninety-eight of them are killed in combat, while two survive. The two who survive come home and spread the word that their prayers saved them, and credit God with their survival.

When faced with this situation, atheists point out that Christians talk extensively about the two who survived, while completely ignoring the other 98 who were killed. The atheist reasons that the Christian is cold, callous, and uncaring. The Christian is looking so hard for evidence of God, that he is ignoring human suffering in order to find it.

Interesting though the thought experiment may be, it doesn’t prove anything about the nature of God. Although I concede that it is callous and uncaring to brush off the 98 who died and only focus on the two who survived simply because it conflicts with the idea of an all-good God who is in control of everything. This does prove something about what a long way we Christians have to go in order to line up with Christ’s teaching and God’s expectations for our lives.

But that’s hardly news. Anyone who knows Christian theology knows that we can’t claim to be perfect. Only one can make that claim.

What I’m more interested in here is that many atheists (Franko47 among them, apparently) consider this little thought experiment a compelling case against God. I don’t see why it would be. It proves nothing about the nature of God.

What is a miracle? Browsing definitions online, the common thread among all of them is that a miracle is a special or unique occurrence, surpassing all explanation. To be considered a miracle, the event must be unique by definition. So if 100 soldiers went to war, prayed to survive, and they all did, where’s the miracle? What is special or unique?

In order to be special or unique, an event must be against the odds, a rare occurrence. If an event happens, and it isn’t against all odds, and it’s not unique or special in any way, then it’s a commonplace occurrence and doesn’t count as a miracle.

About Cory Tucholski

I'm a born-again Christian, amateur apologist and philosopher, father of 3. Want to know more? Check the "About" page!

Posted on June 14, 2010, in God and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. 2 Comments.

  1. The argument is a compelling case for no-god because any honest observation of the world and what goes on every day shows that either their is no god or that God does not concern himself with his creation.

    Either God is quite poor at his job or he does not exist. When 112 our of 113 people die in a plane crash I don’t see God at all. (not in the 1 that is saved or the 112 that died) Planes crash. People die. This is life.

    Most atheists or agnostics do not believe in miracles at all.

    Life is what it is. I don’t need a God to explain life.

    It is up to the Christian to explain how God is all they say he is when there is so much suffering and death in the world. (spare us the original sin stories, we don’t believe it and it is irrelevant) Christians speaks of a loving, compassionate, healing God. Where is the evidence of such a God?

  2. It is up to the Christian to explain how God is all they say he is when there is so much suffering and death in the world. (spare us the original sin stories, we don’t believe it and it is irrelevant)

    Wrong. It is very relevant. Man introduced rebellion into God’s perfect order when he first disobeyed God’s command. As a result, death followed. It is, therefore, man’s fault and man’s responsibility to clean up.

    As a parent, painful as it might be to watch, I have to allow my daughter to suffer the consequences of her short-sightedness. It’s the only way she’s going to learn. That doesn’t make me an unloving parent.

    God is allowing us to suffer the consequences of our own actions. That doesn’t make him unloving anymore than the above example makes me unloving. On the other hand, it shows his justice and his impartiality.

    The presence of suffering in this life will only magnify the glory of the next life. If there were no suffering in this life, why look forward to the next? We would hardly need a Redeemer if no suffering existed. From what would we be redeemed?

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: