The question of "Why doesn't God heal amputees?" is not a new question. It's just a new variation of a very old philosophical concept called "The Problem of Evil". The reasoning behind this concept is weak at best and complete whining at worst. In a nutshell, it says that since there is suffering in the world, God either doesn't know about it, doesn't care, or can't stop it.
This is wrong Lola. The WWGA question is deeper than that. It has nothing to do with the problem of evil. You're thinking too superficially. I'll give you a clue to get you moving in the right direction: Christians believe that God cures cancer and all sort of ailments (that can and do heal on their own) all the time. What is the fundamental, observable
difference between healing cancer and an amputee? Think it through.
My response (in a nutshell) is: pain happens - deal with it.
That is not an answer as to why God doesn't heal amputees. That's a dodge of the question. It's a brush off.
It isn't God's job to eliminate suffering.
Do you really feel good about worshiping a God that looks down on a pediatric oncology ward, throws up his hands and says, "Hey, not my fuckin' problem".
Plus the fact that if you are going to say religious healings DO happen (which you did say in another post), then why doesn't He heal everybody? Is God deserving of worship if he has the ability to heal everyone, but picks and chooses who to heal based on (pardon the phrase) God knows what? I've used this analogy before... if a doctor had a pill that cured every form of cancer in the world, and then only gave it to the people he wanted to, what would you think of him?
Honestly, you Christians don't think these things through at all.
God created our universe and our reality. God set the parameters of that universe so that life is possible. God expects intelligent beings to choose good over evil, but that doesn't mean that every single one of us will do so.
No. God did none of those things because God is not real. As humans, we choose good over bad mainly because it feels better to do good than bad.
As for natural disasters, they are acts of nature, not acts of God.
If you are going to say acts of nature are independent of God (and this is something we agree on), then it opens the door to the very real possibility that every single thing that happens, everywhere in the universe, is an act of nature, not an act of God. Prove me wrong. Show me evidence that something could not possibly have happened without an act of God driving it, and I will believe you. But please understand, that evidence would have to be solid enough to convince me beyond any reasonable doubt. On par with enough evidence to prove that the Tooth Fairy was real. Otherwise, everything is natural.
For natural disasters to not happen, the laws of physics would need to be completely different, and if they were, we wouldn't be here talking about it since life would not exist.
So... wait a minute here. You think religious healings are not violations of the laws of nature? Is God capable of manipulating the laws of nature or not? You're confusing me here. Is God not capable of stopping an earthquake by simply lowering the pacific plate down slowly instead of having it slide? Is God not capable of turning a hurricane out to sea instead of straight at New Orleans?
The more I hear from Christians like you, the more convinced I become that you all think God is just some super powerful human who sweeps in to save the day when he feels like it. This is not what omnipotence means! It's so weird. It's like you're trying to take bits and pieces from what you've learned in church, and coupled it with this vision of like... the nicest human being you can think of and meshed them together to make some sort of God-thing. Do you understand that when this is what you're doing... you're making it up?