If the boy's belief in a God is based on the fact that he survived the robbers attack I asume the so called omnipresent and omnipotent God was quite happy to allow the frightening experience to take place although he could have done something to prevent it. Instead he chose to allow this innocent child to suffer fear and anxiety. If this is confirmation of a God then he/she must be a cruel and sadistic creature.

When you think of all the natural distasters that befall humans and others, killing millions over millenia, this God, if he/she is as good as they say, cannot be omnipotent or omnipresent because he/she has failed, by definition, everytime such disasters occur.

Yes I know God works in mysterious ways, after all I'm only human and not capable of reconciling these inconsistencies. Strangely the church and other religions have no difficulties with these inconsistencies. Are they not human?

Ross Logie, Jakarta, Indonesia

ATHEISTS, GOD ALSO HAS A RIGHT

For Christopher Hitchens and other who do not believe in God, the testimony of a nine-year old child, who survived an attack by armed robbers with his family in their house in South Africa, can maybe changes their view point: “Now I believe there is a God in heaven,” the boy said.

The Bibles clearly advises us on how to believe: “But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.” (Luk. 18:16, King James Version)

God also has the right to state His side: “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. (Joh. 12:48, King James Version)


ROELOF COERTZE
VANDERBIJLPARK
SOUTH AFRICA

2007-12-23

Roelof Coertze, vanderbijlpark, South Africa