I was recently reading
an article, and it raised some interesting questions.
Basically, a bar had been constructing a new building, and a church was protesting it and organizing prayers against it. The building was struck by lightning the week it was supposed to open and burned down.
The owner is suing the church on the ground that their prayer is what caused lighting to strike the building. The church is denying the owner's claims -- thus admitting that prayer is powerless.
If I were a zany christian, I would definitely see this as an act of God. I mean, what are the chances that this particular building would just be struck by lightning randomly? Looking at it from this viewpoint, I would say the church is definitely responsible because you can't sue God.
As much as I don't want religion to mix with law, if Christians believe in the power of prayer and the bartender believes in the power of prayer, they should pay up. It's obviously their fault.
The judge was quoted in the article: “I don't know how I’m going to decide this, but as it appears from the paperwork, we have a bar owner who believes in the power of prayer, and an entire church congregation that does not.”
Pure comedy. As long as you are trying to recruit new members to your faith, prayer is the most powerful thing in the world but you won't take responsibility for using this "power".
Do you think the church is at fault for praying for and ultimately receiving the demise of this bar? Have you ever prayed for something and got it in a way that you weren't anticipating? Does the Christian church really undermine the power of prayer?
Recommend
Comments (38)
The lawsuit is ridiculous, and I believe 100% in the power of prayer. The point is, no one can prove it, so it's totally ridiculous to litigate it. It's out of the jurisdiction of the law, and that has nothing to do with faith.
You'd still have to sue God under the definition of negligence in personal injury law. This suit's groundless and the bar owner should be ashamed of their actions. This wastes public money and the court's time. This isn't even a "smart" philosophical challenge - it's an immature excuse to exact pointless revenge.
The church can't claim responsibility. God gets the responsibility. I wish them luck in bringing Him to trial.
"The church is denying the owner's claims -- thus admitting that prayer is powerless."
I don't think they are admitting this at all; that's quite a logical leap!
I'm with @MagisterTom@xanga on this one; if their prayer really was answered, then they are not responsible but rather the One who answered the prayer. They are not saying, as the judge mistakingly said, that they do not believe in the power of prayer; they are merely admitting that they are not the ones that answer the prayers they offer. That says more about their belief in prayer's power as opposed to their unbelief.
When Christ was in the Garden of Gethsemane he gave us the right way to pray. "Not my will but Thy will". The church prayed that the bar would not be built there and hopefully prayed "not my will but Thine". I am sure the trial if there is one will be another "Stokes" trial, with mud slinging from both sides. But the ultimate answer is that we don't command God and he answers prayers as he see's fit. I had a young new minister come to my house one time and tell me there was an emergency prayer meeting that night and could he expect us. Thinking someone might have been in an accident or gravely ill I asked him, "what were we going to be praying about?" He said "that someone kills Sadam Hussain." I quickly told him that I might pray that "God softens his heart" or that he is "somehow removed from power"...But I would not pray for his death. Same desired results but entirely different attitude. How did the church pray? Did they ask for a bolt of lightening...or did they only give supplication to God that the bar not open? God decided how to handle the situation. You can't sue City Hall and I wouldn't advise trying to sue God. Praise Him that the lightening only hit the building, not the publican. :?)
An amusing and interesting situation. In the UK there is a legal term known as an Act of God, which insurance companies ensure their policies do not cover if they can help it. Whatever the morality of such specific prayer, it is legal to pray what you wish. If God did answer the prayer, then it was an act of God. If he didn't, then it is a natural cause and effect, thus being an act of God. God is not covered by any legal system as far as I know, so although God can be criticised for the destruction of property, She cannot be brought to book. Of course, it may have been set alight deliberately by some fanatic, which is another case. Also, it has to be considered whether the church property is considered the property of God or not. If so, maybe the judge will fine God the cost of the property and the litigation and have the chuch handed over to the bar owner.
Now I have to go. A bolt of lightning has just struck my chicken coop and I have to prepare myself for a fortnight of eating nothing but fried chicken, when I was looking forward to a pork chop. No rest for the wicked.
its interesting how the judge was quoted saying : “I don't know how I’m going to decide this, but as it appears from the
paperwork, we have a bar owner who believes in the power of prayer, and
an entire church congregation that does not.”
first of all, the bar owner would have to have proof of the congregation specifically praying for the calamity to strike (like a video or something)--but then again for some reason i dont think that anyone could be charged for praying or having a certain intention. that would just be ludicrous,
second of all, if i were a member of that church, i wouldnt deny at all that its an act of god. i would rejoice at it openly, who else but god can cause lightning to strike a bar? i dont know why these people are denying anything, even if they admit to praying, its not like they could be charged for it-then that would go against the amendments.
if it were me & my church i'ed issue a statement that went something like this: "we do not deny that our congregation does not want a bar within its vicinity, and we may have been asking god for such a thing to be stopped from happening, therefore we do acknowledge that this is direct intervention from god."
i see this as a test for all. the bartender, for one, admits that his bar was burned down because the church prayed for it to happen, therefore, he is indirectly admitting that there is a god, and he doesn't like beer & drunk people, and bars in general. --so, shouldn't he like, reform?
the church. on the other hand. probably realizes this as an "act of god" but has less faith in god and fears the law suit more.
blame god, mother nature, or whatever, but the bartender still cant sue the church-i think both Christians and atheists can agree on this.
now, the title and the author of this post is what got me trolling on revlife...
first of all, as a muslim i dont think the title is accurate, now i dont know what the bible says about prayer; but from what i know, god isnt the tooth fairy or an geenie. he knows whats good for you, hence even if you're praying for something and it doesnt come true, then its safe to say it wasnt meant for you.
on the author, its amusing to see someone who hates religion so much so dedicated to a site like revlife, all the while giving those who believe in god a chance to expand in their faith with such inspiring entries! thanks!
@MagisterTom@xanga - @Ancient_Scribe@xanga - Trying to imagine God getting subpoenaed. How would God take the oath? "So help me me"
@squeakysoul@xanga - I love that movie! I actually watched it in a class I took on the Philosophy of God!
Actually there is a place in the Old Testament when God says, "I swear by Myself..." It does make sense, though; who else would He swear by?
You have a great taste in films, by the way; you'd be a blast to veg out with!
@Ancient_Scribe@xanga - lol thanks. I do have a talent for vegging. I love that movie too, as improbable as I believe it is.
lol. this is silly.
prayer can be very strong.
& works in mysterious ways.
air jordan shoes
air max shoes
nike air shox shoes
cheap prada shoes
cheap nike dunk shoes
cheap gucci backpack schoolbags
Karen Millen
cheap bags & handbags
Louis Vuitton shoes
Fashion tiffany
Gucci sneakers
Hair Straightener
Dolce & Gabbana sneakers
Vlado shoes
Cheap Monster Headphones
air yeezy shoes
Coach Outlet Store
NBA shoes
puma shoes
gucci watch
Jimmy Choo Shoes
tiffany
Vibram FiveFingers
God has such an great sense of humor..
I believe in the power of prayer but the judge was right
this website is very good, you can go and see it
http://www.shoes4world.com/
I like how everyone here is saying "It's not the Church's fault, if ANYONE needs to be tried, it's God and that's impossible."
If you ask someone, a person named Jeff for example, to kill someone else and he does it, he is ultimately at fault for doing what you told him. But you're silly if you think you're not going to get in trouble too.
I think the bartender is in the right. Yeah, he's spending tax dollars on a religious case. So? How many politicians spend tax dollars preventing abortions and preventing gay marriage in the name of God?
I'd like to clarify, though. In terms of law, the bartender has no case. I was just saying in general, I think he was in the right.
I feel bad for the bar owner honestly but he doesn't have a case. Still, it's funny in a sad way.
@MagisterTom@xanga -I like (and second) what you said :P! Though, I'm gonna be a smartass and say that technically Jesus was already brought to trial when he was crucified, right?
Interesting....
@Ancient_Scribe@xanga - If I hired a hitman to kill you and tomorrow you were dead, would you not say that I was responsible while you look down on me from heaven?
For the record, I believe that every member of the church does truly believe in the power of prayer. I'm accusing them of denying responsibility for wielding that power. If someone is walking around with a concealed weapon and they have a negligent discharge which injures someone they have to man up and accept responsibility for the accident. When you choose to wield this kind of power you have to be responsible. In Matthew 21:21 Jesus says this:
"I tell you the truth, if you have
faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig
tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into
the sea,' and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever
you ask for in prayer."
The power to throw a mountain into the sea is definitely greater than the power of any man made weapon.
@XxrockxXxgirlxX@xanga - That He was.
@AtheistInfidel@xanga - No one hires God. Also since, in a court of law, it must be proven beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the crime, I think it would be hard to demonstrate an irrefutable connection between lightening striking a building and the fact that people were praying for God to do something, whether it was lightening, fire, or what have you. Was the building protected against lightening strikes (lightening rods)?
@Ancient_Scribe@xanga - Ignore the court of law for a minute. I haven't been to law school I'm not going to look up cases to try to show precedent here. I'm making a simple point.
Let's ignore the fact that a building was destroyed as well because I think it is blinding you. Let's instead say that a dear friend has cancer and you are praying for them to get better.
1. Do you believe that prayer has power?
Obviously you do.
2. If you pray for something are you exercising this power?
If your answer to number 1 is yes then 2 must be yes as well.
3. If your prayer is followed by the desired outcome (cancer goes away) is it because you prayed?
If you answer yes to number 1 and yes to number 2 then surely you answer yes to 3.
At this point you would probably be thanking god and bowing down to him as his blessings pour down on you. The only difference is that this time you prayed to keep a building from opening up and lighting struck it.
The congregation should either be celebrating or they should be apologizing because the lightning bolt wasn't their intent and prayer was just too powerful for them to wield responsibly.