The Forum > Article Comments > Did science or God save Dr Kent Brantly from Ebola? > Comments
Did science or God save Dr Kent Brantly from Ebola? : Comments
By Monica Karal, published 19/9/2014The Sydney Morning Herald article asks why Brantly arrogantly assumed that God deemed him more worthy of saving than the 1400 people who have died of the disease.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Page 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
-
- All
What is the object for this sentence? Is it civilisation or culture...or perhaps both?"
The conversation on this topic seems to have significantly diverged from that originally intended.
Did science or god save Kent Brantly?
I provided a logical way of reasoning that science was the agency of the good doctor's recovery to good health. How would the religiously afflicted know that the recovery is full and complete without confirmation from science? Leave science out of the issue and presume he has recovered through a miracle. Without the confirmation, would it be safe to allow him to resume his duties? If you were among the medical staff, believer or unbeliever, would you see it as completely safe to serve beside him? How do you think the patients would react learning that their doctor's "recovery" was put down to a miracle and no medical tests were deemed necessary?