The man who sued God?

[Dr B]

There is a film on later in the week called something like "The man who sued God" - i apologise in advance is its a bad film.

I have not seen it but I did see a clip. In the clip a man has a boat struck by lightning and the insurance claims its an act of God. The man then takes the church to court claiming that as they are God's representative on earth, and it was an act of God, they should pay as by default, they are responsible.

So the logic is, the representatives of God (i.e., the church) are financially responsible for 'acts of God' because they represent him / her in earthly form.

Any thoughts on the logic of this argument? Just as a piece of logical or indeed illiogical fun?

[Dr B]

Its on at 9:00pm wednesday Channel 5 (UK).

God has representatives, like a company (the church) - and they are liable....or so the claim goes....

[tkingdoll]

I haven't seen the film but I believe it's based on a real story in which the man lost.

I love the argument though - the Church claims it is God's representative on earth, so why not sue for acts of God?

Unless I am going barking mad, I think the original case was the reason insurance companies changed the wording of policies to no longer contain 'acts of God' but something less...stupid.

[Nettles]

Which church would one sue?

[Dr B]

I have not seen the film - but my hunch would be the catholic church. Does it make a difference to the abstract logic of the claims?

[Jocky]

Surely holding a post which makes you something's 'representative' in a certain context doesn't make you legally responsible for all the actions of that entity?

On that argument, diplomats would have criminal responsibility for the actions of the governments they represent, and MPs would be liable for the actions of their constituents :D

[median]

Mind you, if you died whilst sea-fishing, would that be an Act of Cod? :D

Surely holding a post which makes you something's 'representative' in a certain context doesn't make you legally responsible for all the actions of that entity?

On that argument, diplomats would have criminal responsibility for the actions of the governments they represent, and MPs would be liable for the actions of their constituents

I agree on this one. And then, of course, is the problem of getting God to accept responsibility.

Plus the idea of predestination and omniscience, where would that come in?

[Jocky]

Mind you, if you died whilst sea-fishing, would that be an Act of Cod? :D

Depends - if you were using a hook, line and sinker, it could be an Act of Rod

(Oh no, it's going to be one of those threads, innit?)

Plus the idea of predestination and omniscience, where would that come in?

Oooh, maybe you could sue God for stuff that hasn't happened yet!

[median]

Oooh, maybe you could sue God for stuff that hasn't happened yet!

I had a revalation that I knew you were going to say that