Man who sues God gets a response
by Jared Bridges
September 21, 2007
America’s courts keep getting curiouser and curiouser:
LINCOLN, Nebraska (AP) — A legislator who filed a lawsuit against God has gotten something he might not have expected: a response.
State Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha said he sued God last week to make a point about frivolous lawsuits.
One of two court filings from “God” came Wednesday under otherworldly circumstances, according to John Friend, clerk of the Douglas County District Court in Omaha.
“This one miraculously appeared on the counter. It just all of a sudden was here — poof!” Friend said.
Frankly, I don’t see how The Onion can compete with the “real” news these days…
Family Research Council is a 501c(3) non-profit organization. If this post has been helpful to you, please consider a gift to help us continue to advance Faith, Family, and Freedom.
Comments
The omniscient should have better legal knowledge: God is subject to the laws of the state in which He holds residence, of course. And, being omnipresent, its clear that God must be a resident of every state, both American and otherwise – thus He is subject to the laws of every jurisdiction. It is rediculous for God to claim he is not subject to the laws of the state in which He resides (ie, all states).
God could quite easily get off by fleeing the country, as noone has an extradition treaty with Heaven. This would require God withdraw His presence entirely from the US though.
Alternatively, God could just ignore the whole thing – the worst possible outcome for Him would be an arrest warrant. God would become a wanted criminal, but who could catch Him? Perfect stalemate.
God’s chosen second defence, free will, is terrible legal stratagy – its not even a defence. God is claiming that he did indeed commit the crimes, but that his previous good deeds outweigh this. Such a good deed has no bearing on his liability though.
I also notice that, in addition to this civil complaint, God appears to be guilty of a great many criminal offenses. The greatest of these may be withholding evidence vital to national security, or aiding terrorism. God, being omniscient by definition, must have had advance knowledge of every major terrorist attack – including 911, the Iraq violance, and all smaller incidnts. By refusing to supply this information to the authorities, He allowed the attacks to take place.
God claims to have created numerous biological weapons of mass destruction. Some of the more deadly of these – variations of the influenza virus, the bubonic plague – have killed millions. Some, less spectacular, may have casualties in the billions. The cumulative death toll is beyond imagining.
Based on these, I think God should be forced to either leave the US entirely, or to answer for His crimes according to the laws of the country in which He chooses to reside.
Its not all bad for God though – as he was in the Americas before the arrival of Europeans, He can probably be recognised as a native inhabitent and get a fee handouts.
Well, FRC, the idea that Kathy Griffin’s Emmy acceptance speech has even the slightest thing to do with hate crimes legislation strikes us as just about as nutty.
http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2007/09/tonys-red-haire.html
Try as you may you will never get God out of anywhere, anytime, anyhow you choose.
We dont need to get God out. God never *does* anything. I cant even get him to influence a coin-toss to prove his existance to me.
You’re asking him for the wrong things. It is “his will be done”. He is omniscient and gives you want you need not what you want. Gambling is probably not on his high list of priorities for your life.
It wasn’t gambling. Its just the standard test of God’s existance. I will demonstrate:
God! As you are omniscient, I know you can hear this. As you are omnipotent, I know you have the power to influence the flip of a coin. As you wish people to believe in you, as revealed by your influence in the bible, and as you love all humans yet are obliged by your own law to punish those who do not accept you, you are also obliged to take any minor actions which would result in my conversion and salvation. Thus I ask you to cause this coin to land heads thirty times consecutivly. The chances of this happening without your divine intervention are one in a billion, and this is sufficient to satisfy me that you do indeed exist.
Heads.
Heads.
Heads.
Heads.
Heads.
Heads.
Heads.
Heads.
Heads.
Heads.
Heads.
Tails.
Good run! Ive never had it land heads eleven times before – the chances of that are slim. But, its not thirty times, so God fails the test.
In view of that run of heads, im revising my test: In future, I shall ask God to *alternate* heads and tails. It makes the task no more difficult to God, but eliminates any chance of a biased coin causing a false positive.
God is not obliged to prove his existance under any test or circumstance. There’s no reason to debate, simply because it is no way to “save” someone, but I will put in a little of my knowledge cuase I’m bored. BTW I enjoyed reading your argument Raven. It’s a great argument, and could be a great way to prove the point (The ORIGINAL POINT), that we need to find a way to eliminate frivilous lawsuits. Anyways, God is never going to help anyone prove or disprove his existance. He gave us free will, so that we could BELIEVE. If he proved his existance, there would be no other choice, but to beleive, which is not free will. Also the bible says ( And yes I know this will hold no credit by your standards Raven) that we are not to test our God, as we have proof everywhere we look, I.E, the ocean, mountains, life, and death. “Some see, and so believe, but blessed are those who do not see, and Believe”. Faith is a big part of my life, that noone understands. Faith is not something you can measure in a lab. Sorry, my thoughts are in a few places but thats all for now. I have to finsih a paper. :D I look forward to your reply Raven.
By: Patricia | September 21, 2007 at 4:46 pm
Then Chambers admits that God exists. What was God’s answer?