Will Bill O’Reilly or anyone else who saw the hand of God in the safe landing of US Airways Flight 1549 this January please explain why God chose not to save Continental Connection Flight 3407, which plunged into a house outside of Buffalo last night, killing all 49 people on board and a resident on the ground?
Among the explanations which will not be accepted: “humans cannot possibly fathom God’s mysterious ways.” Oh yes they can, apparently—when something good happens. Having found proof of God’s love in the safe conclusion of US Airways Flight 1549, believers cannot now turn around and claim that God’s ways are veiled just because something disastrous happens. If it’s legitimate to infer beneficence from a happy outcome, it is equally plausible to infer malice or at least indifference from a negative outcome. You can’t pick and choose the actions in which you find God’s will transparent.
Perhaps they were celebrating Darwin Day on the plane and this angered God.
O ye of little faith. Passengers on Flight 3407 weren’t religious enough. Or maybe God is angry at Obama’s stimulus plan. What a racist.
no doubt it’s because of the gays
Or as Derb has written ( I think ), “If god exists, he may as well not.”
In other words, all prayers get answered with the exact statistical frequency as they would in a godless universe. If the remission rate of a particular cancer is 1 in 100, then if 2000 people with that cancer pray for intervention, about 20 will likely end up testifying to God’s love. Meanwhile, and curiously, amputee prayers have still not gotten through to the big guy, even once.
There’s a satirist on YouTube who gos by the handle Edward Current. He had a piece that touches on just this topic right after the “Miracle on the Hudson”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-vhyqx_Duc
I don’t think you get it.
If something good happens, that’s God taking care of us.
If something bad happens- well.. who knows.
But, let’s focus on the goodness- k?
I’ve figured it out. The pilot on Flight 3047 realized there was a problem with the plane, and unlike Cpt. Sullenberger, he stopped to pray for God’s assistance. Unfortunately, God was waiting for his burrito to finish cooking in the microwave and wasn’t able to respond to the prayers in time.
*His burrito. Must show proper pronoun respect to the Almighty.
Unfortunately it’s usually the mean spirited Calvinist who comes up with the most consistent explanation: There are no good people. The folks on BOTH flights deserved to die for their sins (or for Adam’s original sin). It was God’s grace and mercy that spared the lives of US Airways Flight 1549.
It’s too bad one flight landed safely because of the–get this–GOOD PILOT? What the hell does god have anything to do with it. You take two pilots, one experienced, one who isn’t, and the experienced one will be able to land in an emergency situation, the other will not. It’s really simple people. Stop bringing religion into everything.
I’ve lived in Buffalo, and it’s cold there in February. Everybody who can afford to leave town goes to Florida. God was probably there trying to stay warm.
Because god doesn’t exist.
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”
Epicurus – Greek philosopher, BC 341-270
God must have had a good reason to smite those fifty sinners.
Or so says the image on this here tortilla.
Explanation: Bill O’Reilly is an idiot savant.
With this post, you inch closer to joining him in the short end of the pool.
Cheers! You took the words right out of my mouth.
Simple: the guy on the ground was a blasphemer. 🙂
It is easy God does not exist.
“God has plans to prosper you, give you hope and a future, not to harm you.” Bad things come from the god of this world, which is not God. “Every good gift comes from God.” It’s a miracle that only one house out of all those in the neighborhood was harmed. The debris field was incredibly contained. Those houses in that neighborhood are 20 feet apart. Also, two people in the house somehow got out before their house exploded. There are miracles to be seen and God is sovereign, no matter what.
Attempting to explain the mechanics of divine omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, divine sovereignty and its decree(s) that also encompasses the reality of human decisions, human conditions and a universe subject to the present physical realities is frankly impossible since it requires an infinite and eternal mind.
What we do know is this. God is NOT chargeable for sin, failure or a violation of his own divine and perfect integrity. Hence, if a man assigns to God the success of a flight and the failure of another, a man or woman has done that. Has God shown up at your door to declare he did either? You are assuming such assignments have come from God.
It is a matter of certainty that a person’s death does come as God decrees but God’s decree(s) does not negate the reality of both the laws of physics or human volition. He may incorporate such realities in his decree(s) in eternity past, it appears quite weighty he does.
Calvinists are, by the way, theological rationalists and poor examples of more thorough theological considerations.
Uh, why does it matter? If you seriously don’t believe in God, why do you get into the argument of getting people to try to explain how God works? If you’re only interest is to argue, why not debate a point which is more beneficial to you? Why does it inspire you so, that you have to write a post about it?
Heather,
I’ll explain it — Just as soon as you explain how life began on Earth and how the universe was created (and don’t say “The Big Bang” — you also have to explain what existed before that).
What exactly is the argument? Planes crash, thus there’s no loving God? If that is the argument, then this is as lightweight as they come and any reputable theologian would have a field day with you.
Pingback: God and Natural Disaster
Oh please. Why does every good or bad outcome have to be tied to God. I’m a believer and believe that God does not create evil. There are tragedies that occur that are out of our control. God does not make them happen. When we as humans chose to remove ourselves from the safety of the Garden of Evil, we exposed ourselves to the harsh realities of nature, men and mortality. Geese hitting an aircraft engine are a reality of nature. Icing on a wing is a reality of nature. Some realities can be maneuvered and dealt with, like Flt. 1549. Other realities, no matter what your experience, cannot be dealt with, Flt. 3407. Realities of nature, men and mortality are a consequence of man (Adam & Eve) making the choice to originally disobey God.
Great post, I couldn’t agree more. Interesting how there are people like you out there who make the conservative ideals a little easier to stomach when they’re not shoving God down your throat too.
I am a Conservative. I am not a Christian. I do not worship the Judeo-Christian God and deny Christ’s divinity. Am I still a Conservative?
From my perspective, God is not a Superhero. He is not Superman or Batman.
This is the being that laid down the laws of the Universe that govern it. He created a universe that is theoretically infinite but in any case the Universe is indefinably large. And on the order of around 12-18 billion years old. There are things we do not know about His creation. Physics break down at the Big Bang.
You expect us to know why He does something? Give me a break.
And you also expect Him to be concerned with the lives of every living person? Again, gimme a break.
This is God we are talking about, not Superman.
It’s Bush’s fault?
Or the Messiah was busy passing his bankrupting America bill???
Maybe God thinks women should not pilot planes….and maybe he knows why…
Some things are true whether we believe in them or not.
It always amazes me how atheists consider an event in which a lot of people die just a dirty trick played by God. They were always going to die. WE are all going to die. It’s just a question of when and how. And if they had died at a later time, or in a different way, their survivors would grieve just as much. Death is the end of one state of being and the beginning of another. The fact of inevitable death does not make God evil, or less likely to exist.
I can’t speak for many believers other than myself, but some of us avoid using good outcomes like the water landing as “proof of God’s love.” Having concluded God is there on other grounds, the occasional miracle supports what we already believe, and the occasional disaster falls under the inscrutability-of-God category.
Are people really saying, “USA 1549 ditched safely, AND THAT PROVES we have a loving God?” Maybe people are saying that, but not me. Both purposeful evil and random evil exist, and bad things can still happen to any one of us, even in a universe run by a loving God. In fact the ultimate Bad Thing, death, will happen to each of us. If our theology accounts for death, it has already taken a big step toward accounting for other related evils.
Um, you folks know that there’s an old philosophical challenge to theism known as “the problem of evil,” right? And that both theistic and atheistic philosophers have spent centuries debating the implications of evil for belief in God, right? If not, you might want to visit your local library sometime soon. (Personally, I recommend N.T. Wright’s *Evil and the Justice of God*. But if you want a more even-handed approach, check out *The Evidential Argument from Evil*, ed. Daniel Howard-Snyder).
More seriously, you need to make a distinction between two kinds of theistic approaches to these events. If the theist thinks that the safe landing counts as evidence in favor of God’s existence, but the crash landing does not count as evidence against God’s existence, then there’s clearly an inconsistency here that the theist needs to explain. But for someone who already embraces theism (whether rationally or irrationally), there’s nothing odd or inappropriate about thanking God for preserving the lives of those on one plane even though God didn’t preserve the lives on the second plane. And this is the situation most theists are in– we don’t approach tragedies as apologists, seeking evidential support for our theism; we approach them as religious believers, thanking God for the blessing we enjoy and trusting him even when he allows tragedies to occur.
In a nutshell: The problem with this post is that it assumes that the only legitimate way for a theist to interpret these events is to consider them as wholly isolated, discrete happenings. A safe landing implies the goodness of God; a crash implies the indifference of God. But what’s the objection to a Christian (or other theist) interpreting these events from *within* the perspective of a Christian worldview?
so, just like it’s ok to kill humans with abortion, but not horses with slaughter.
liberals, never questioning their inconsistency.
liberals, always HATING choice for groups other than themselves.
Don’t remember who said it but even an atheist like myself can find humor in this sad situation:
“To God, prayers are just so much junk mail.”
Now it’s time for the compassionate Arminian to balance the mean spirited Calvinist.
Actually, Jon Rowe, I agree with you that we all deserve to die for our sinful nature. However, we don’t know that God intervened in Flight 1549, but He certainly can intervene as he deems appropirate in His own wisdom and we can never expect it. That is why we must be ready to be judged by Him every day that we live.
Jon, do you ever read the works of Dr. John MacArthur, probably the most articulate Calvinist and a brilliant Bible scholar? We are blessed to live about an hour’s drive away and try to get to his Grace Community Church at least once a month.
As my mom used to say, “God don’t make junk.” He cares deeply about everyone, even if they turn their back on Him.
“it is equally plausible to infer malice or at least indifference…”
Maybe if you need help in inferring God’s will, you could try reading the Bible. It might answer a lot of your questions, if you could approach it with an open mind.
Well, one difference between these flights is, one pilot was a older white male, the other was a female.
Maybe God doesn’t want female pilots? Or maybe the first flight was saved in order to inspire others. Kipling put it thusly, in “The Answer” http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Answer_(Kipling):
“While he who questioned why the flower fell
Caught hold of God and saved his soul from Hell.”
(check the link for the full poem, or google “Kipling the answer”)
Straight answer to a snarky question: The world is not a reflection of God’s will, therefore disaster, chaos and devestation are to be expected. It’s salvation from these terrible norms that is always a surprise.
When something goes horribly wrong, there’s no need to invoke God to explain it. When something goes catastrophically right for a change — like a safe water landing where everyone gets out alive — that’s when you begin to suspect divine intervention.
That does it! Finally, we’re done with the mystery of theodicy! In just a few short sentences, Ms. Mac Donald has slain an age-old theological dragon. About time, I say. If only the rest of those unthinking theists could see this post (that is, if they could read), then we’d be able to get rid of those dim, superstitious crutch-wielders altogether. Thanks, Ms. Mac Donald, for your brilliantly original contribution to a timeless debate.
Of course, if you happened to encounter one of the rarest of all humans, a thoughtful believer, he or she might point out that celebrating God’s love in the event of a happy outcome is not the same as finding proof of God’s love in the event a happy outcome. Indeed, a thougtful believer might point out that Ms. Mac Donald has constructed a strawman.
destroy the dialectic.
1+5+4+9=19
1+9=10
1+0=1
3+4+0+7=11
1+1=2
There is only one God, and that is why flight 1549 was saved and not 3407. God works in wonderful ways.
It is a mistake to look for Gods reason for anything. All you will find are pathetic human interpretations of the moment. Don’t let human ignorance set the standard or image for God in your life.
“Mean spirited Calvinist?”
Are you “mean-spirited” when you choose to contribute to one charity but not another? Why is God obligated to save or condemn everyone on a complete “consistent” basis?
** the theidiocy of xian theodicy **
So . . . gotta problem with evil? Unmerited pain and suffering? Where was God when people fell out of the sky to a fiery end? It’s remarkably easy to show that the fictional character God cannot exist.
Epicurus destroyed the omni-god 300 years BCE — that is, long before the world became burdened with the suicidal cult of xianity:
Is god willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then where does evil come from?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him ‘god’?
Too bad Paul of Tarsus didn’t get a decent training in philosophy. He should have listened rather than preached in Athens.
Xianity has spent so much time trying to shore up its failed pantocrator that there’s even a name for this branch of theological special pleading, theodicy.
anti-supernaturalist © 2009
Where are the souls of the christians that were aboard 3407, if there is a God? Maybe the assumptions about the “evils” of death need to be changed.
Even before flight 3407, you already had a theistic contradiction when using the “hand of god” argument. If it was god who saved that plane, was it god who also had the birds fly in to the jet engines that caused the crash in the first place?
They didn’t have time to pray and I agree that the Obama Porkulus bill was also at fault.
If all I did was save you puny humans, you’d start taking my beneficence for granted, wouldn’t you? If I let a plane fall every now and then, the prayers keep wafting up to Heaven as I require. It’s bad enough that you only pay attention to Me when you want something!