It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why won't God heal amputees?

page: 33
25
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
"Why won't God heal amputees?"

This is a silly question isn't it? We are human and therefore ruled by what it means to be human. Humans are not able to regrow limbs. If God wanted us to regrow limbs, he would have made us something other than human.

Why do we die, why do we grow old, get diseases, etc.......BECAUSE WE ARE HUMAN!




posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by The Motorcycle Boy
 





"Why won't God heal amputees?"


That is the question posed to those that their god heals.





This is a silly question isn't it?


Only if you think it is





We are human and therefore ruled by what it means to be human
,

We are ruled by whatever we allow to rule us,or is forced upon us.






Humans are not able to regrow limbs


Can you prove this ?




If God wanted us to regrow limbs, he would have made us something other than human.


Can you prove your god exists and then prove that what it may or may not want ?




Why do we die, why do we grow old, get diseases, etc.......BECAUSE WE ARE HUMAN!


We do not die because of what we are, we die because of a multitude of negative effects upon the cells that we are made of.

A kangaroo does not die BECAUSE IT IS A KANGAROO.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup

This thread will go on, like they all do, for pages and pages of people just spouting hatred.... where's that gonna get anyone?

Is any atheist or agnostic gonna suddenly change their mind because of this thread? NO.

Is any religious believer gonna suddenly say "wow you're so right, i'm awfully gullible" NO.

Just chill out and debate it a calm and polite manner.
You ain't gonna convert anyone.


Seriously. It's one thing to state your beliefs. It's another to just bicker for pages and pages.
People will defend what they believe to be true.
I don't take a side either way. It would be a great experiment, and would perhaps lay to rest these trivial debates.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by happy_spork
 





It would be a great experiment, and would perhaps lay to rest these trivial debates.

Indeed, I have offered many times here on ATS to take xtians up on their clams.

I offered to be healed and even offered to become an xtian for a trial period and the experiment could be conducted right here on ATS.
But when you get down to the detail they back out.

I'm still up for it though, something like become an xtian on Monday and keep a daily blog for all to see, just waiting for the xtians to give instructions.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


Thank you for the further proof that you don't pay all that much attention to what others say troll. He was talking about not taking sides while you respond with your continued babble FOR your side.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


I appreciate your attentiveness to my post!
But, I don't consider anyone a "troll".
Oh, and I'm a "she", not a "he", just for the sake of correcting your pronouns



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by happy_spork
 


I apologise for getting your sex incorrect ma'am. But my calling hima troll comes from exhaustive *ad nauseum* experience with his constant, repeated and blind assault on anyone who disagrees with him, particularly Christians.

[edit on 28-11-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 04:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman

Indeed, I have offered many times here on ATS to take xtians up on their clams.

I offered to be healed and even offered to become an xtian for a trial period and the experiment could be conducted right here on ATS.
But when you get down to the detail they back out.

I'm still up for it though, something like become an xtian on Monday and keep a daily blog for all to see, just waiting for the xtians to give instructions.


It's not that easy. You must really commit yourself. I am sure you'd have an alterior motive other than actually establishing a relationship with the Father. Otherwise, you'd have already found Him on your own and would not be offering this "experiment".



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 05:00 AM
link   
The Christian God is the god of the bible, the main characteristics of whom are that he is a personal being who is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. He also has, and has granted us, free will.

A personal being by the Christian definition is one who has free will. Omniscient means all-knowing. Omnipotent means having the ability to do anything at all. Omnipresent means existing everywhere at all times.

Free will means the ability to make a decision, to choose. The act of choosing simply means there must be an alternative present, one which could possibly be chosen. It also implies a deliberation, even if only a short one. And deliberation requires the passage of time.

First, let me concede that a god can be omnipresent, since omnipresence can be a characteristic of other entities, such as time itself.

But if God is omniscient he cannot also be omnipotent. An omniscient god knows everything – past, present, and future. If he knows everything, he already knows every decision he is ever going to make. If he already knows every decision, he cannot change his mind about them. If he cannot change his mind he is not omnipotent, because changing his mind is something God cannot do. If, on the other hand, he does change his mind, then he didn’t know everything from the beginning, so he is not omniscient. An omniscient being cannot also be omnipotent.

But what if God is omniscient? That means he already knows everything that is going to happen. It also means God is outside of time. Only a being who is outside of time can look at the fabric of time in its entirety. But if God is outside of time, it means he cannot deliberate, since the act of deliberation requires time. Therefore, God cannot make choices; he is stuck with the choices that he made when he created everything. Therefore, God cannot have free will. He is a robot.

If God is omniscient, it also means we have no free will. If God knows that tomorrow I will go to the store and purchase a gallon of milk, then I don’t have a choice to do otherwise. I might think I’m deciding to go to the store rather than stay at home, but if God already knows what I’m going to do, then how can I change my mind? If I cannot change my mind, then I don’t have free will.

What if I do change my mind? What if I had decided to stay home but then changed my mind and went to the store instead. If God is omniscient, he already knew I was going to change my mind, so it makes no difference. I still didn’t really have a choice. It was an illusion.

If I don’t have free will then prayer makes no sense. God already knows that I’m going to pray or not pray, so I have not made the choice myself. Also, if God is omniscient, he already knows everything that he is going to do in the future, so praying cannot alter God’s predetermined plans. Remember, God cannot change his mind if he is omniscient, and if he cannot change his mind, praying for something different to happen is futile.

God also cannot change his will. If God is omniscient, then his will is predetermined and unchangeable. Praying that something is God’s will is pointless. If it is God’s will, it will happen and not even God can change it, regardless of what you pray for. Prayer is a completely useless act.

In summary, I have logically shown that God cannot be both omniscient and have free will. He cannot be omniscient and also grant us free will. He cannot be omniscient if he is omnipotent. If God is not omniscient, if he does not have free will, and if he cannot grant us free will, then he is not the god of the bible. In fact, the god of the bible cannot exist.

Perhaps some lesser god does exist, one who is neither omniscient nor omnipotent but who is vastly superior in both knowledge and abilities to any human. In our view, he would still be worthy of the title of “god,” just not the god of the bible. The god of the bible cannot exist because the characteristics assigned him by Christian beliefs are mutually exclusive.

Cont.........



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 05:03 AM
link   
Prayer and free will only make sense if we assume that God is neither omniscient nor omnipotent. But if we make those assumptions, we are assuming that the Christian god is a fallacy.

I’ve heard all the counter-arguments. God is so far above us that he can do things we cannot possibly understand. That’s a cop-out. Even God cannot defy logical thought. If A is less than B and B is less than C then C has to be greater than A.

And then there is the observational God model. God knows what we are going to do in advance, but we are the ones who choose to do it. That’s fine if we assume that God didn’t create the universe and all the laws of nature that govern it. If it is his creation, then everything we do is caused by him.

Let’s use a metaphor. God’s creation is a gigantic quilt. Every thread in that quilt represents a timeline. We, being on the quilt, cannot see where the thread meanders ahead. We can choose to turn left or right onto thread after thread, but we can’t see where the threads end or where new ones begin. But God, being on the outside, can see the entire quilt. He constructed it. He knows where every thread goes because he put it there. In other words, he created our destiny; our choice of threads has already been made for us. We only think we get to choose.

If you can come up with a logical way out, then you are free to comment. But if your logic is based on nothing but faith, then it isn’t logic at all. I don’t see a way around the logic outlined above. If you do, please let me know.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Anubis3.14
 


Very well said. What you explain also explains the Book of life. It is already written.

But i do have a question for you.

God did say he had to cut the time short or no man would survive. Doesn't that mean God really changed he's mind?

It sort of tells us that god does have options. It sort of tells us that God is also observing.




[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by reasonable
 



Originally posted by reasonable
why wont god heal amputees?


God helps those who help themselves.



But to answer your question, Why would god heal amputees?

Us with all our limbs are the idiots who can't see amputees for the great whole they truly are.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by happy_spork
 


I apologise for getting your sex incorrect ma'am. But my calling hima troll comes from exhaustive *ad nauseum* experience with his constant, repeated and blind assault on anyone who disagrees with him, particularly Christians.

[edit on 28-11-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]


Oh get a grip dude calling me names only belittles any point you may feel you have.
I don't assault anyone that disagrees with me , I challenge those I disagree with.

I think the topic is "why doesn't god heal amputees" you happen to agree or disagree .

If you disagree care point us in the direction of proof of a god healing amputees.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 





It's not that easy. You must really commit yourself.


Who told you this ? When children are given copies of the bibles at school they don't come with a disclaimer " This is hard, so you should think twice before accepting the contents of this book"

Not one xtian that has ever knocked my door or come into my home has made any mention of difficulty,

Perhaps it would be prudent in being up front about it all eg a list of benefits of being an xtian and a list of things to do in order to gain those benefits.





I am sure you'd have an alterior motive other than actually establishing a relationship with the Father.
[/quote

I've no ulterior motive dude, I'm just responding to many of the claims made by xtians in relation as to why an indvidual would benefit by becoming an xtian.
]





Otherwise, you'd have already found Him on your own and would not be offering this "experiment".


This seems to be one of the misconceptions of xtians they seem to believe that people are missing out on something by not thinking like them.

I'm a perfectly happy individual enjoying my life which is currently gods and beliefs free.

Now if you choose to claim that somehow I can have a better life by acting or thinking like you, then clearly you must believe you are having a better life than me.

If this is the case then you can inform me of the benefits of living like you and if I feel that it would improve my life to do so then common sense would dictate that I give it a go.

That being said you would be hard pushed to offer me a better way of life than I already have but hey there's always room for improvement or new experiences.

If you are however implying that living and thinking like an xtian brings no greater benefit than living as a Muslim or atheist etc then hey kick on each to their own.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Anubis3.14
 





The Christian God is the god of the bible, the main characteristics of whom are that he is a personal being who is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.



You seem to have forgot -

Misogynistic

Genocidal

Homicidal

Neurotic

Schizophrenic

Jealous

Angry

Homophobic

uneducated

masochistic

sadistic

innumerate

Did I miss anything ?



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


moo, thx for the U2U...

OT doesn't know why God doesn't physically heal amputees, that's a toug one...I guess this will have to do for now....


Your question seems to merely be a very specific re-articulation of the general argument against God due to the existence of evil. Formally restating your argument:

1.An omnipotent God would heal amputees.
2.Amputees are not healed.
3.Therefore, an omnipotent God does not exist.
You could just as easily replace the major premise with anything else unpleasant: why do people lose limbs in the first place? The ultimate question you’re really asking is Why Does God’s Creation Include Death & Suffering? If you already believe that flaws in the world disprove God, then naming any flaw that God doesn’t fix—or any good deed God doesn’t do—will just reaffirm your perspective. But once you understand that the problems in this world are a result of sin—tracing back to the Fall in Genesis 3—we can reconcile the existence of a perfectly good and loving God with the existence of death and suffering. The Curse is actually the punishment for sin necessitated by God’s role as perfect Judge. Knowing that, it is nonsensical to blame God for the consequences of our own sin.

Answering your question completely requires a few tangential comments:

■Miracles aren’t a grab-bag of goodies for us to enjoy; rather, God uses miracles in particular points of time for very specific purposes. God doesn't need to prove Himself to us (we’re on trial, not Him), nor does He “need” to bless us. When He does bless us, it is entirely out of mercy.
■God has done greater works than restoring limbs. If He created the entire universe out of nothing, spoke all plants and animals into existence, sculpted and breathed life into the first two humans, and raised His Son from death, it is clear that He has the power to heal amputees if and when it is His will.
■If there is no God, why should we care if people have lost limbs? To borrow from C. S. Lewis, in a truly godless world, amputations wouldn’t be “good” or “bad”; they would simply be, a fact of life no different from a tree shedding leaves. Attacking theism on a moral basis undermines the argument.
■You qualify your own question with “[e]xcept the ear that Jesus put it back.” You may as well ask, “If God is all-powerful, why did He never part the Red Sea—except for that one time in Exodus?”1 And not only is your argument qualified; it is also, essentially, an argument from silence. Even if the Bible doesn’t record the healing of an amputee, that doesn’t mean God never has.
■So far we have conceded your point that, other than the scene in Luke 22, “never, ever in all Bible was a case of an amputation healed.” But is this so? First, it may be that there was no biblical Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic word for “amputee”2; it is possible that some passages referring to individuals as “lame” or “crippled” (Matthew 15:30, 21:14; John 5:2–9a) are actually referring to those who had lost limbs. Besides, how is healing a totally useless limb any less miraculous than restoring an amputated limb? Second, because of the nature of leprosy, the healings of lepers in the Bible actually does imply the restoration of some body parts, such as fingers.
Why didn’t all mighty god make a limb grow up? Don’t tell me they weren’t- after all the sword was the main weapon of that time and there has been a lots of wars. And no, even in that time a man didnt just die if he had an arm cut off..
Even if there were amputees in Bible times, there may not have been as many. Many amputees nowadays lose a limb because of diabetes, dysvascular diseases, or cancer3; doctors in Bible times would not likely have known to amputate for such reasons.4 Also, machinery—more powerful and more widely used than in Bible days—is the leading cause of accidental amputations.5 Finally, while some amputees surely survived their wounds in Bible times, modern medicine and emergency services no doubt increase the percentage of people who are able to survive the loss of a limb.6

(As you suggest, violence was probably the main cause of limb loss in Bible times. But swords don’t sever limbs as readily as shown in Hollywood films; also, many swords are designed to wound more by thrusting than by slashing, and blows are intended for the torso, not for limbs.)

Disputing the accuracy of your question doesn’t ultimately matter, though; even if we agreed that amputations were extremely common during Bible times and that the Bible doesn’t record any, that in no logical way disputes God’s existence or omnipotence. Besides, if you accept the argument against God on the basis of the evil around us, then miracles aren’t going to change your mind, anyway (Matthew 12:39). But when you accept God and His Word, you can understand how Genesis explains the death and suffering as a result of the failure of humanity, not God. Amputations are one element of the consequences of death, degradation, and suffering that humanity and all creation bear because of our rebellion and sin (Romans 8:22). But even amid and through that suffering, God works His perfect will (Romans 8:28), and one day there will be no more pain for His people (Revelation 21:4).


source: www.answersingenesis.org...

thoughts?



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 






OT doesn't know why God doesn't physically heal amputees, that's a toug one...I guess this will have to do for now....


Dude, only you would admit to not knowing and I take off my heathen hat to you fro doing so.

That has to be a first for a christian on ATS so I'm giving you a star.








Your question seems to merely be a very specific re-articulation of the general argument against God due to the existence of evil. Formally restating your argument: 1.An omnipotent God would heal amputees. 2.Amputees are not healed. 3.Therefore, an omnipotent God does not exist.


This isn't an argument against god it is a question of why if this god real does it not heal amputees when it is claimed to heal.

Throughout the thread the answers that have been given have been -

1)He does

2)He doesn't

3)He does but doesn't regenerate the actual amputated limb but somehow heals the soul of the limb

Needless to say there's no proof been presented for number1

Number 2 is easily verified by number 1

Number 3 requires a Vulcan mind meld, and as Vulcans are no more or less real than jesus, would require us to start all over again.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by spiritualzombie
Faith is believing in something with the entirety of your being without ever having any proof. It means never questioning. In any other field this is considered closed-mindedness.


I wold go one step further and say that faith is telling yourself you believe something that underneath you know is not true, lol.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taskism
Because he designed reality to follow certain rules. A spontaneously generated leg would defeat those rules.


So, he designed a reality in which everything makes sense except him actually existing? He designed a world full of people who generally require minimal evidence of a claim before supporting it, but made an exception for belief in himself?

You don't have a problem with an invisible wizard creating everything but a regenerating leg is outside the rules of the universe? I have no idea how you get anything done all day. Your brain appears to be severely damaged.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Izarith
 


If a person is helping his/herself why would they need God to help?



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join