Why won't God heal amputees?

[Tristan]

I'm posting a website that I stumbled across.

God Is Imaginary

 

There are many articles and videos attempting to disprove Christianity. (Yes I said attempting as I know people will respond with "Well he's wrong about this! I can prove it with Psalm 24!" or something.. It's just that I've watched some of his videos and read some of his articles and it just makes sense to me.)

 

I'm no expert, don't get me wrong. I'm just trying to spread my opinion.

 

Yes I'm an atheist. I believe Science is the only thing that will carry our species forward, instead of backwards.

 

Some of the videos/articles I highly recommend for interested people are:

Historical Gods

Prayer Illusion

10 Questions

 

The videos are relatively long (5-10 minutes), and I suggest devoting some time to watching and thinking.

 

I know this section is in Religious Debates. I know that asking for little to no flaming is useless.

 

If you click on the links to actual Youtube hosted videos, you will find many many many comments on how the owner if this site is an idiotic person that will rot in hell. This is not the way to defend your religion, and I know that Gamers Coalition members are intelligent and will reply with dignity and information concerning the topic at hand.

[shaftiel]

You really can't prove god, thats why there is faith. Any debate between those who believe, and those who do not, just ends up with each side talking in circles and ending up right back where they began. Shrug, its very unsatisfying to work so hard to prove a point only to find yourself back at the beginning. So I tend to avoid these kind of discusions nowdays.

 

 

 

 

Shaftiel

[Unclean]

I know this section is in Religious Debates. I know that asking for little to no flaming is useless.

The mods are watching. Flaming doesn't last long here.

 

you can cast doubt on if there is/isn't a god, but you can't prove either... and getting into a discussion about it on forums won't change anyone's beliefs.

You should look through the other threads in here and the Political Asylum. Quite a few people have changed their beliefs after reading arguments people have made (myself included). However, if people come in here with closed minds, then you're right -- discussions won't change their beliefs.

[MrDuke]

Read the book of Job. All people; good, bad, male, female, Christian, Muslim, black or white can suffer under the watchful eye of God. There is no rule that says if you live a clean life you will be free of suffering.

 

Why does the cameraman let the gazelle die from a croc attack? Because the croc must eat and we all understand the reasoning; we understand the plan.

We don't understand God's plan for that person who doesn't have an arm and because we don't understand (have enough information) we are not in a position to form a legitimate opinion.

 

You may know my story, you may not.

I often wondered if my daughter thought the same thoughts about me and my wife; if she wondered, "Why do mommy and daddy let these people hurt me time after time at the doctors office and why do they give me terrible tasting medicine that makes me throw up all the time?"

She did not understand the plan--we did.

 

I won't pass judgment on you on whether or not you have faith, but I encourage you to pose questions just as you are doing. I've been where you are...keep going.

[discom]

You should look through the other threads in here and the Political Asylum. Quite a few people have changed their beliefs after reading arguments people have made (myself included). However, if people come in here with closed minds, then you're right -- discussions won't change their beliefs.

sorry, i meant change your religious beliefs... not just any beliefs. I have yet to see it happen, that's all.

Edited May 29, 2007 by discom

[Unclean]

sorry, i meant change your religious beliefs... not just any beliefs. I have yet to see it happen, that's all.

Ah, gotcha. Stick around these parts, and watch what happens!

 

 

Yes I'm an atheist. I believe Science is the only thing that will carry our species forward, instead of backwards.

Interesting idea... it seems like you phrased this very carefully. Would you mind clarifying what you mean a little more?

[Tristan]

I just mean Scientific Studies produce new knowledge. New knowledge makes new technology. New technology establishes a new way of life for many people.

 

Granted, some will quote me here and say, "But Jester, every day there are new Christians that find a way of life far better than what they had previous!"

 

Sure there are spiritual ways of thinking, that teach our children how to live a healthy and meaningful life. And being respectful to each other is a huge step to strengthen ourselves as a species, and not separate races.

 

Religion can divide us, and in turn, can pit ourselves against one another. Whether it be racist comments and actions, or even war.

 

Read my signature, "Together We Stand, Divided We Fall." Those 6 words are vital.

 

Everyone asks, "Why are we here?" There's no reason. Do birds ask why they have wings? Of course not, they are imbeciles. We, on the other hand, are competent and have grown as a species because we ask questions, which leads us back to Scientific Studies. Take the scientific method.

1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.

 

2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.

 

3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.

 

4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.

 

This is crucial for helping ourselves live better every day.

 

 

I am still very young, and am part of a generation that is going to be absolutely screwed.

Where will fuel be 30 years from now? How hot is the Earth actually getting as we speak? Are we on the verge of nuclear war in the next century?

 

I'm worried, and I feel Science will help.

 

I guess that is what I meant by "move forward," Unclean.

[Unclean]

Thanks for the clarification.

 

Have you ever found it odd that the science that comforts you is also the source of your worries?

 

I don't think religious folks have the same problem.

[Leveller]

I've purposely avoided posting in the religious section for a few reasons, as with the best will in the world people will often take questions personally and as an attack on a belief/faith, but that is by no means my intention.

(I get this every day at work, where being direct and to the point often can upset people who would prefer to skirt around issues).

 

I believe in a greater power, whether it is a being or something else I am not sure. I attended church nearly every day from the age of 7 until I was 18 and have read the bible more than 5 times, but I have a number of questions which perhaps some here can shed light upon.

 

Obviously different denominations have different beliefs/comprehensions of the scriptures, some who believe they must be taken literally, some who believe them to be a guide etc.

My personal opinion is that religion (rather than faith) as a whole, be it Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Taoism, Islam etc. are all man's aim to create order and direction in what they are doing day to day. In general these religions teach sound life lessons, draw lines between right and wrong and through belief create a sense of worth or greater good for the individual.

 

Man by our nature needs to have a belief in something, be it that money will bring happiness, our children will grow to be good people or that should anything happen to either ourselves or our loved ones there is something greater than a hole in the ground waiting for them (which is where the faith part comes in).

 

Different religions approach this in different ways, that long term need for something being most obviously demonstrated by Martyrdom within Islam.

 

I would deem myself a Christian based on my understanding of what is right and wrong, I believe that mostly is oriented around how I lead my life. I don't regularly attend church, I was always raised to believe that an individual should be judged by their actions rather than their words and believe that this holds not only personal day to day relationships, but also in any other relationships.

 

I use the term Christian widely, as I would be lying if I said I pray, it is more aligned with my life holding true to what are general Christian teachings (as best as possible).

I have seen too much hypocracy from people who go to church believing that will cleanse them of any wrong doings, rather than just not doing them in the first place to believe that Church attendance is true sign of personal strength. In fact I know several people who call themselves religious, but the reality is that they talk a great game, but lead a very different life.

 

The comment above about "faith" and lack of ability to prove or disprove god is where Christianity as a "religion" rather than code for a good life falls apart for me (this would be applicable if I placed myself into any other "general religion).

Don't get me wrong, I believe faith is a great thing in the main, it provides so much strength to so many, but at the same time "blind faith" rather than belief can lead directly to fundamentalism, extremism etc. these exist within Christianity as well as Islam etc. When I see news reports, and other US media reporting continually about "Islamic militants" it can create a sense of hatred akin to anti-semitism within the deep Christian heartland of not only the US but globally.

 

Once more one of my posts goes off at a mild tangent, but, I guess the question I have based on a couple of the posts I have seen above is.

 

Without belief, if globally people stopped believing in a god, whether that be Christians, Muslims whatever, and science is unable to prove the existence of a god would god continue to exist?

 

The above may need a lot of clarification, and I may be getting too granular between faith and belief, but to me they are very different things (one good the other a good thing with the potential to be very bad). I know I said I had a number of questions above but most are probably handled better in person rather than typed where they could be misunderstood.

[Tristan]

Great input, Lev

[auggybendoggy]

who says he doesn't heal amputees?

Admitted, I've never seen it but I've never met Abrham Lincoln either but I'll assume he did live.

 

I read the links and watched the videos and the atheist who made the video simply does not understand scripture.

 

HOWEVER, I'll agree with him that from a traditional point of view he is challenging. Most people read with FAR too much lliteral interpretation which makes his arguments valid.

 

But for those who do not hold to literal it's meaninless talk.

 

I don't believe the earth is 6000 year old nor do I find adam being made from 100% dust AT ALL IMPORTANT.

 

so the links did nothing to move me away from my belief.

 

Aug

[Tristan]

who says he doesn't heal amputees?

Admitted, I've never seen it but I've never met Abrham Lincoln either but I'll assume he did live.

 

I read the links and watched the videos and the atheist who made the video simply does not understand scripture.

 

HOWEVER, I'll agree with him that from a traditional point of view he is challenging. Most people read with FAR too much lliteral interpretation which makes his arguments valid.

 

But for those who do not hold to literal it's meaninless talk.

 

I don't believe the earth is 6000 year old nor do I find adam being made from 100% dust AT ALL IMPORTANT.

 

so the links did nothing to move me away from my belief.

 

Aug

 

And that's fine, too

[auggybendoggy]

I guess to bear on the subject a bit more constructively I would argue that someone

to say God does not heal amputees needs more proof.

 

I don't know that he doesn't, nor do I know that he has not.

 

I think the position of the atheist here, is that out of all these "supposedly" healings we see (like benny hinn) we don't see any of real visual (no questiosn asked) miracles. thus it looks bogus. I agree.

 

Benny hinn and the likes are full of smack in my opinion and don't do the gospel much justice.

 

Tristan,

if you want a great book, which touches on the porblem of evil try "The inescapable love of God" by Thomas Talbott.

Hes a christian philosopher who goes into a bit of that but he leaves the traditional thought and CLEARLY endorses the view that God does indeed love all men and WILL SAVE all men.

 

It's a PROVOCATIVE book and he's really the first in our time to have the guts to stand up in the theological world and shout out good news that Jesus died for the whole world. I'm sold on his view, it took a lot of debating and arguing but I finally cried uncle and since have found that the view of UR (universal reconciliation) is an incredible story that leaves me hungry for more.

 

Anyhow, he does go into the problem of evil as he was challeneged by his own atheism in his life and found it a dead end and embraced a view of God that is incredible (from my perspective).

 

anyhow, good topic. I love talking about God, even if the person says they don't believe.

 

Aug

[Allanon]

I also have refrained from posting in the religious section like Leveller, but for different reasons.

 

While I don't believe in a great power, I am a true believer in the rational and physical world, I think that having a spiritual life is a great thing for many people. However, as most of my cousins, uncles, and aunts on my mothers side all goes to church every sunday, ready the bible, and evangelize I always picture religion as something people to use to control others.

 

While I know that religion is a great thing, I really don't have a great interest or respect for organized faith, rather I think that individual religions such as Buddhism which is more introspective then Christianity IMO are more healing.

 

Yes I know I have a biased opinion against Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and other organized religions of the world but as I have a very fundamentalist Christian family and a mother who is very open to her spirituality as well as others I have come to see it as organized is bad, spirituality is good.

[auggybendoggy]

allanon,

agreed, religion is often used for evil (controlling others) rather than for doing good.

 

I myself am in a very similar boat but I feel throwing out the baby with the bathwater is not necessary. I do believe there is a very high being who loves us all. While people die and bad things happen, I believe it's all for the progression of good...

 

God has bound all men over to disobedience

 

for one purpose...

 

To have mercy on them all.

 

I love this fact, that though we all have different hardships and life is for many, terrible, Gods goal (which he will achieve) is to bring restoration to a fallen world which EVERY SINGLE person partakes in.

 

Aug

[appalachian_fox]

Tristan,

if you want a great book, which touches on the porblem of evil try "The inescapable love of God" by Thomas Talbott.

Hes a christian philosopher who goes into a bit of that but he leaves the traditional thought and CLEARLY endorses the view that God does indeed love all men and WILL SAVE all men.

 

It's a PROVOCATIVE book and he's really the first in our time to have the guts to stand up in the theological world and shout out good news that Jesus died for the whole world. I'm sold on his view, it took a lot of debating and arguing but I finally cried uncle and since have found that the view of UR (universal reconciliation) is an incredible story that leaves me hungry for more.

 

Anyhow, he does go into the problem of evil as he was challeneged by his own atheism in his life and found it a dead end and embraced a view of God that is incredible (from my perspective).

 

This sounds like a great book, but I want to also suggest "The Problem of Pain" by C.S. Lewis. It's a bit meaty, but it's really good.

[Allanon]

allanon,

agreed, religion is often used for evil (controlling others) rather than for doing good.

 

I myself am in a very similar boat but I feel throwing out the baby with the bathwater is not necessary. I do believe there is a very high being who loves us all. While people die and bad things happen, I believe it's all for the progression of good...

 

God has bound all men over to disobedience

 

for one purpose...

 

To have mercy on them all.

 

I love this fact, that though we all have different hardships and life is for many, terrible, Gods goal (which he will achieve) is to bring restoration to a fallen world which EVERY SINGLE person partakes in.

 

Aug

 

 

No but also Aug it's not just that people have done evil things in the name of religion. I believe that it's better to look in then to look out to another being. While I respect people who practice any religion with the exception of when it harms other people, I personally think that you should not need someone else to judge your own actions, instead having you judge your own actions and living a healthy, spiritual life.

[appalachian_fox]

No but also Aug it's not just that people have done evil things in the name of religion. I believe that it's better to look in then to look out to another being. While I respect people who practice any religion with the exception of when it harms other people, I personally think that you should not need someone else to judge your own actions, instead having you judge your own actions and living a healthy, spiritual life.

 

Out of curiosity, do you believe in a universal standard by which actions should be judged? Granted, you don't think there's a person out there judging everyone, but you don't need an agent to still have a standard. I'm really curious, because it raises a lot of questions about the concept of personal judgement in the larger context of society if everyone is allowed to pick their own standards. I guess I'm asking if you think there is a spiritual analog to "ethics", where people agree that there are certain "good" and "bad" things (whether or not they live by them).

 

For this question, I assume that actions are context-oriented, and that there is not necessarily such a thing as a "right" or "wrong" action, but rather that the general "feel" of an action is dictated by the circumstances surrounding the action. Rather, I'm not asking for the Ten Commandments of generic spirituality, though if actions are absolute that would raise another series of questions.

[dragonfly]

Well, the huge difference I see between "science" and "God" in all these debates is this: science is here to serve me, I'm here to serve God. Although I do have an open mind (I personally think that the more truth you know, the more open your mind is) I would find it very difficult to picture anyone convincing me that God doesnt exist seeing as I met Him personally.

 

And I agree with Mr.Duke - God's ways are not our ways as far as suffering is concerned. Infact, the central teaching of Christianity uses suffering to bring about an eternal good (Jesus' death for humanity's reconciliation to God). And although there's suffering, I still see that God is very active in the world.

Edited June 6, 2007 by DarkArchon

[auggybendoggy]

fox raises a valid question that I have not really wrestled with.

 

I've argued in favor of the athiest having morals but I am not sure about it myself. For example well known Sam Harris (atheist) if I understand his argument, finds that people can have morals without a belief in a external higher source. I think most atheists argue this.

 

I have heard it argued against the atheist that if there is no higher being then there can be no moral value for doing what is good.

 

I'm not sure about all the dynamics but I'd like to hear fox expand on it a bit.

 

Aug

[appalachian_fox]

Well, I'm not really sure myself, it's just something that came to mind. I'd be willing to bet that this issue has been addressed at some point, or at least there are some good responses. This debate has been going on by people more educated in the nuances of these issues than us formally for at least the past 1600 years, and likely it goes back much further.

 

My knee-jerk reaction to my own thoughts is to say, "Why does a set moral code need a God?" Rather, the existence of a "Universal Good Idea List" doesn't require a Creator being to exist. Like I said, I haven't really seen anything about this yet, but it's honestly from lack of looking into it and lack of discussion with people who might be more knowledgeable about the common thoughts about this.

 

There's also the concept of the framework of "Right" and "Wrong" (absolutes) vs. right and wrong (gray areas) vs. everything is value-neutral. If every action is value-neutral, the entire concept of good vs. bad pretty much gets thrown out the window and you evade that sticky wicket. Of course, then, there's no need to judge yourself internally, either, and when reduced to the absurd anarchy rules. Of course, that isn't the necessary endpoint -- We look to society to allow for the improvement of the whole despite our individual failings. Again, to call back to business ethics, or some aspects of accounting, generally agreeable guidelines of right and wrong are established and in gray areas, intent is a factor. It also is reminiscent of background checks for security clearances: There's a bunch of Yes and No rules that seem hard and fast, but then there's a whole list (as long, sometimes longer) of "mitigating circumstances" that provides a chance to counteract a discrepancy (but there's no guarantee...).

 

Anyway, that's why I asked...I figured someone in this community would be either (1) more familiar with current/historical apologetics on this topic or (2) has done far more thinking about it than I have.

[dragonfly]

If it were true that morality did not need to be defined outside of humanity, then morality really is only a sort of "democracy" issue: something is moral or immoral if most people think it's that way. I personally see this train of thought as a spawn from living in a democractic country (somewhat). The rest of the world thinks very differently than us, and most of it definitely believes there is a higher being of sorts - it's a question of who it/s/he is rather than if there is one. So if you say that morality does not need to be defined by God, then the universal good list would be written by the majority, for the majority.

 

But, unfortunately, the majority can often be very wrong. And even having said that, it is (if morality is defined by us) my own morality would sometimes judge the majority to be considerred "wrong". But that can't be right, if morality is indeed defined by us.

 

My one more thought: If morality was truly universal, and morality was truly decided by the majority (because it's universal) then we should really be asking China what our morals should be.

 

The democratic slant on morality also makes me think of other things that are found in our society, such as my amusement at saying the words "private citizen". But that's a whole other topic...

Edited June 7, 2007 by DarkArchon

[appalachian_fox]

Okay, now I'm curious on your take on it. If you don't mind sharing, of course.

Edited June 7, 2007 by appalachian_fox

[dragonfly]

I'm going to guess you mean my take on where universal morality comes from, and if you need a higher being to have that morality list.

 

Well, yes I definitely think that you need God to have a universal morality. In some ways (to me) it seems like the only alternative to popular opinion deciding morality. If it's not just whatever is popular, then it has to be defined outside of us, and the majority is wrong (or may be wrong on some issues).

 

Now on the other hand, the only way that I can see to reconcile any sort of morality when there is no God is to declare morality to NOT be universal. So if there is no God, and morality isnt universal, then each of us gets to decide on our own what is moral or immoral. And I honestly think that this is what our society does right now anyway. For example, people ignore copyrights and download music illegally (I know that not all downloading of music is illegal), then rationalize it by saying that record companies have too much money anyway. And anywhere that our morals cross paths (like murder) it's no longer universal, but rather a coincidence that most people agree that murder is wrong, since we all define right and wrong individually.

 

It's very easy to see the problem that this presents, because if right and wrong is decided solely on an individual basis, then laws really are taking away humanity's freedom to individual morality. But again, if morality is decided by the individual, you cant really say if creating laws and taking away individual morality is right or wrong, since nothing is truly universal.

 

I want to keep this short, so I'll stop there. But basically, with the thinking I've done on the subject, I can only see 3 options: God, majority, or individual's deciding morality. Aside from the fact that I already know God and 100% believe that He's there, it still only seems like the viable option to me. The other two dont really deal with "morals" but rather opinions. Just my 2 cents. I hope it's somewhat clear...

 

I think I should add one little thing: I'm really only thinking in general terms here, and not about the grey areas you mention, like is it ok to lie to stop a greater evil. And I was really fascinated by your reference to security clearance. I'd never thought about it along those lines before!

Edited June 7, 2007 by DarkArchon

[appalachian_fox]

Fair enough. I'm not sure I'm convinced there needs to be a creator to being to set a Universal truth, but I also think it would be a hard sell to convince me it is a solid rationale. As far as relative morality vs. democratic morality (where I was going with morality is similar to ethics) I pretty much agree with everything you've said.