Our God — Page 185
Refutation of Arguments Supporting Atheism 185 except in exceptional circumstances, the mention of which here is not necessary. Anyone who violates the law of nature is not spared the consequences on the grounds that he did not violate the law of the Shariah. He will certainly suffer the consequences of violating the law of nature, and compliance with the law of Shariah cannot save him from that. Consider, for example, if a roof collapsed on two people, one pious and the other a sinner: in accordance with the law of nature, both will die or both will survive, depending on the way the roof fell. It would not [simply] be the case that the pious one is saved and the evil one dies. Similarly, if a pious and God-fearing person, who does not know how to swim, jumps into deep water, he will not be saved from drowning merely because he is pious. His piety relates to the law of Shariah and water is under the law of nature. The law of nature normally is not influenced by the law of Shariah. In short, as a general rule, the law of Shariah only determines the recompense of a good or bad deed within Shariah and has no bearing on the recompense determined by the law of nature, and vice versa. It is absurd for the atheists to support their belief with this. As for instance, a pious and righteous person who had young children went for a bath in the river and drowned whereas an evil person bathing in the river at the same time returned home safe and sound; a very chaste and well behaved girl caught fire and died a day after her marriage while an unchaste and ill-mannered girl married the same day lived happily ever after; an innocent and good-natured boy was crushed to death by a falling roof whereas an evil and filthy boy playing there went out moments earlier and escaped harm etc. On the basis of such instances, the atheists argue that if there was a God such outrage and injustice would not have taken place.