Leonardo said:
RicOlie_2 said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
Using that logic, it's pretty easy to realise that since Angels are impossible, there are hundreds of possible explanations.
Except that there is absolutely no way to determine whether Angels are impossible.
Yeah, same for mermaids, leprechauns, and unicorns. People claim to have seen them.
Oh, but they're not real!
There's a difference between saying something is not real and saying it is impossible.
RicOlie_2 said:
What I meant was "how can this be explained if there is no God."
Simple: this is the story of a dumbass mechanic who almost got crushed to death by a truck. Luckily for him, medical personnel worked their asses off to make him live.
There. Imagine reading this same story on the news, but without his testimony, without hearing his angle on it. Imagine no journalists ever gave him a microphone. All of a sudden it sounds like a pretty mundane story, one you hear hundreds of times.
I've heard miracle stories hundreds of times.
Perhaps he may be disrespectful from an atheist standpoint, but from a Christian point of view, this is not the case. That being said, the doctors did play a major part. Without them, the man would have died, and I think he should have credited them (maybe he did in his book).
What are you talking about? In that last part you do make sense, but the first sentence is pure madness! "Disrespectful from an atheist standpoint"??? Dude, what about common sense, we're talking about basic human respect, you do acknowledge that surgeons saved his life but you say he wasn't disrespectful?
He didn't say "Those doctors and surgeons were useless--they didn't think I would survive, but thank goodness God was there to heal me, otherwise I wouldn't have made it," but rather omitted recognition of the doctors' work.
So, you're totally ok with a man of faith basically saying to his doctor:
- "hey, fuck you, you did nothing for me, the Lord saved me with a miracle!"
- "but we healed you, we put you back together, we gave you iv drips.."
- "magical man came and gave me a shock in the forehead, and my intestines grew back. and no thanks to you!!"
If I was the doctor in question I would fight really hard against my instincts to punch him in the kisser!
I am absolutely not OK with someone saying that. That man didn't say anything like that. He didn't deny the doctors' role, but instead just didn't mention it. Let's use an analogy of the opposite scenario (someone being killed in ancient times). King Example orders the death of Joe. Executioner Bob kills Joel. Would you say King Example or Executioner Bob was responsible for Joe's death? One of Joe's friends later talks about how wrong King Example was to kill Joe. Would you say Joe's friend isn't giving Executioner Bob enough credit for Joe's death?
Bad analogy, I know, but hopefully it is good enough that you can grasp the gist of what I'm trying to say.