Answer: Why won't God heal amputees? [#2772]

[naemhni]

Hi

I recently read you main page on why won't God heal amputees. I felt like I could give a valid answer to this question, so I have written a post at http://wordaboveyourname.com/healing/healing-wont-god-heal-amputees/

I would love to hear what you think of this

Kind regards

[name removed]

[RubyLeo]

If I am reading his article correctly, it seems that he is saying it's not on god to heal an amputee, the burden is on the believer.  In other words, if just one believer (he said it didn't need to be millions praying, just one), had enough belief/faith - it would happen.

So my question is: why can't HE make it happen?  If that is what he truly believes, and he claims to "lay hands" on people and many times heal them - what's up with the failure rate? Does he just not have enough faith for the ones he can't heal?  Not enough faith to heal an amputee?

He says the question shouldn't be, "Why won't God heal amputees" - but "why won't the CHURCH heal amputees."

Indeed.  Why not? And he didn't mention taking up the challenge.  Again, why not?

[Jag]

I'm going to give the same reply that I gave to the last person who did this.

Dear letter writer,

Here's how you've post reads to me: You came to this website, talked about answering the question posed by the website, and how that inspired you to write something in response to it.

Then, rather than share your thoughts here, where you are taking the time to drop us a note telling us that you have an answer - you direct us to come to your website instead.

Don't you think that's kind of rude and presumptuous? It looks like you are just trying to increase traffic to YOUR website, rather than engaging with the members here.

If you've got something to say, by all means, feel free to say it here - you obviously know the web address. Increase your hit count on your own time.

Thanks bunches,
Jag

[Jag]

If I am reading his article correctly,

You're a kinder person than I - I never give these hit-and-run emailers the benefit of the doubt/click. Thanks for taking one for the team RubyLeo!

He says the question shouldn't be, "Why won't God heal amputees" - but "why won't the CHURCH heal amputees."

Yep, that's why I don't bother  I suppose I'll grant that it's a good question but it's neither an answer to the one being asked here nor much of an answer to anything from what you said. Silly theist emailers, it's like they can't quite read sometimes.

Indeed.  Why not? And he didn't mention taking up the challenge.  Again, why not?

Somehow, that always ends up being the case. They all have something to say, but it never ends up answering the question or stepping up in a way that provides any benefit to anyone. It's like clockwork.    

[RubyLeo]

Hi Jag - thanks for taking the time to comment on my response.  Being new here, I was not aware of the trend that you addressed in your reply. Although it should have been obvious, it didn't even occur to me! Well done, by the way.

Yes, he did get a "click" on his site from at least one person (fool? lol) - me - however, it only served to add to my conviction that this not a question that can ever be adequately addressed by a theist.  Which is why the question is so brilliant. 

Thanks for the heads' up. 

[Jag]

I'm pretty serious in post #2 about how obnoxious I think this kind of email is. Seriously if you can take the time to talk about having an opinion, then share it.

Would the letter writer show up at a party and invite all the guests to come to his party instead? It's just rude. 

And they always want to tell us how superior their moral code is. Pfft.

[shnozzola]

Guest,

In your response, you say:

No amount of begging God to heal someone will change the fact that God gave Christians the power, authority and responsibility to heal the sick. This includes amputees.

I disagree.  In 2000 years of Christianity, no Christians, no god, have healed amputees.
 
Actually, doctors (theists and non-theist) have healed the sick, or possibly sick people were healed just by all the possible coincidences (that is why the healing of amputees is asked for, to remove all doubt).

But, science WILL heal amputees.  Research, and hour upon hours of experimentation and progress, built upon all that medicine has learned, will allow humanity to build bones, skin, tissue - all necessary to heal an amputee.

People will praise a nonexistent god - while science, humanity, hard work, etc., will attempt to solve the next problem.

[Jag]

Smirking, I admit it.

Maybe I've been looking at this all wrong. Maybe I should follow the links, and then find a place to drop the person/organization/whatever an email myself, with a link back to the mailbag page, and tell them directly what I just said here.....

Hmmmm, I can see that being a nice little temper vent on a particularly crappy day. I'll have to remember this for the next one of those days, probably around finals.....

[Nick]

Typical...put the blame for not doing so on everyone and everything but God.

[Jag]

<snip> ... the trend ...<snip>

If you want a good giggle that will also make you kind of sad, pay attention to the themes that will start to emerge among our theist visitors. There's maybe a double-handful of "types" that show up early on in the exchanges (once you see them often enough you notice certain markers, like YEC hints and such), but by the end, it narrows down (usually) to maybe three or four common "types".

The predictability is kind of funny, but it's also what makes it sad. There's only so many spaces left for god to fit, but they often seem determined to stuff as much of him as possible into the little gaps that remain.

There are anomalies, of course, and some of them actually stick around for a while.

[wright]

Hi

I recently read you main page on why won't God heal amputees. I felt like I could give a valid answer to this question, so I have written a post at http://wordaboveyourname.com/healing/healing-wont-god-heal-amputees/

I would love to hear what you think of this

Kind regards

[name removed]

Like Jag, I see no reason to follow your link. If you had the wherewithal to find this site and post here, you can damn well make your argument here.

[RubyLeo]

<snip> ... the trend ...<snip>

If you want a good giggle that will also make you kind of sad, pay attention to the themes that will start to emerge among our theist visitors. There's maybe a double-handful of "types" that show up early on in the exchanges (once you see them often enough you notice certain markers, like YEC hints and such), but by the end, it narrows down (usually) to maybe three or four common "types".

The predictability is kind of funny, but it's also what makes it sad. There's only so many spaces left for god to fit, but they often seem determined to stuff as much of him as possible into the little gaps that remain.

There are anomalies, of course, and some of them actually stick around for a while.

I'll start to pay attention to that.  Ought to be interesting.

I lurked here off and on for a very long time before joining - and the answers that the agnostics/atheists (etc.) had for the theists blew my mind. The theists didn't stand a chance, and it was at times painful to "watch." This is not a criticism, it's a compliment, by the way.  It went a long way in contributing to my journey into atheism (along with reading lots and lots of books on the topic as well).

I wonder how many other people have been mentally or emotionally "nudged" to question their beliefs based on the collective information on this site? I'll bet you there are many!

[WordAboveYourName]

Hi everyone

I just wrote a reply to a number of things on here and got a message "Resource Limit Is Reached" when I previewed.

It's too late to write it again so I'll try again tomorrow. However, just to clear something up, I had no idea my email was going to be posted here. If I expected any response, I thought I might receive an email telling me why I must be wrong. I certainly wasn't trying to drive traffic to my site (which I make no money from as it is only a couple of months old, and has no adverts), or come across as being obnoxious.

I'll rewrite my reply tomorrow, especially to RubyLeo, thanks for taking the time to respond

[Nam]

We, usually do not click on links because we prefer to read your own words here. In saying that, I clicked your link, which I never do. The one thing that grabbed, if anything, was:

I need to point out that I have not seen any amputees healed yet

And you never will. History has shown no evidence (unbiased evidence, that is) that a literal healing has ever happened.

I think, and I believe many here think, as you may think/believe that the Bible stating what it does is figurative, and most likely in reference to one's soul rather than an actual physical attribute since our bodies are material possessions.

We, mainly, come at this from the viewpoint of the Bible being a literal translation since a huge amount of Christians take it from that point-of-view. When I was a Christian, and the Christians I personally know (family, friends, etc.,) mainly all believe everything in the Bible is literal, no metaphors, analogies, similes, alliterations--literal 100%.

There's a different argument for those who do not take it literally.

-Nam

[Jag]

Hi everyone

I just wrote a reply to a number of things on here and got a message "Resource Limit Is Reached" when I previewed.

It's too late to write it again so I'll try again tomorrow. However, just to clear something up, I had no idea my email was going to be posted here. If I expected any response, I thought I might receive an email telling me why I must be wrong. I certainly wasn't trying to drive traffic to my site (which I make no money from as it is only a couple of months old, and has no adverts), or come across as being obnoxious.

I'll rewrite my reply tomorrow, especially to RubyLeo, thanks for taking the time to respond

You could cut-and-paste the blog post you linked to as well. That was the point of your original email after all.

[Nam]

Hi everyone

I just wrote a reply to a number of things on here and got a message "Resource Limit Is Reached" when I previewed.

It's too late to write it again so I'll try again tomorrow. However, just to clear something up, I had no idea my email was going to be posted here. If I expected any response, I thought I might receive an email telling me why I must be wrong. I certainly wasn't trying to drive traffic to my site (which I make no money from as it is only a couple of months old, and has no adverts), or come across as being obnoxious.

I'll rewrite my reply tomorrow, especially to RubyLeo, thanks for taking the time to respond

You could cut-and-paste the blog post you linked to as well. That was the point of your original email after all.

Except for being a more honest opinion, we've read/heard it all before.

-Nam

[neopagan]

Guess I will sit back and wait to be schooled by the theist du jour on one of (like Jag said) the common arguments we will hear. I will help with some silly questions:
  1. Who is this Jesus guy?
  2. I wish someone would up and die for me already
  3. How much for eternal bliss? Can I buy it?

Ho hum

[Ivellios]

I like the first and most important lesson of Christianity:

You deserve torture and burning in a lake of fire for all eternity for comitting the most heinous crime/sin of all, being born. Even though Jesus himself said that God does not punish you for the sins of your ancestors, that is counter to Christian Theology. All of Creation must pay because Adam had the hots for Eve.

Therefore....
 
God could heal amputees if he wanted to... but Adam and Eve ruined that for everyone. He'll still heal that common cold, if you pray 5 times a day for seven days or somesuch, but amputees bodies are too corrupt from 'original sin' that the All-Powerful god cannot overcome. Therefore he needs humans to develop the technology to accomplish this, then he can get the credit for giving us the intelligence and resources to engage in such endevors. Despite this, Christians fight over tooth-and-nail to stop all research in this direction.

God cannot create a sinless being inside someone that has sinned, because of that, Mary was also born from a sinless virgin. (Catholic Doctrine: [Immaculate Conception]) But, how did Mary's mother come to be?

That's two "cannots" for an "All-Powerful God" isn't it? 

Didn't follow the link, and since nothing else was mentioned about it, so the Catholic snippet was just added from my background, ie. what I was taught to believe. Still, no medical proof of someone being an amputee, then after any god healed them, medical proof that they are no longer an amputee.

Question: Who's faith does it depend on? The 'healer,' the one that's asked for the healing, or both?
How much faith does it require to be before a crowd and ask for healing?
How much faith does it require to go thru 'laying on hands' before a crowd, knowing that if you fail, you'll be ridiculed?
How much faith does it require to try to stand after being asked to?
Is this still not enough?
Clearly not.
So, how much then?

[Aaron123]

A few days ago I came across a website/article titled “Why won’t God heal amputees?”. Knowing the answer to this, I decided to read the article and see if it made any sense. From a logical point of view, it made some valid points, however from a biblical viewpoint, it was way off.

Apparently, logic and the bible are two different things.

Accidental honestly here...

[magicmiles]

It's quite possible to come up with incorrect conclusions using very sound logic. Truth and logic don't have to go together, although logic will certainly result in truth more times than not.

[WordAboveYourName]

Hi again

A lot to respond to, I'll try to start from the top.

RubyLeo

it seems that he is saying it's not on god to heal an amputee, the burden is on the believer

I guess at one level that's what I'm saying the situation is now. I said at the end of the article, that there is more to say about the basis for healing. I'll try and sum it up as briefly as possible:
Basically, Jesus Christ, on the earth, healed ALL who came to him. Through his death, resurrection and ascension, the Holy Spirit was able to come and live in Christians, giving them the power, ability and responsibility to the preach and heal.
The closest the New Testament comes to commanding Christians to "pray" for the sick, is in James 5. The rest of the time it commands us to "heal" the sick. Even in James 5, if we read carefully, it says the "prayer of faith" shall save/heal the sick. Not, pray enough and then God will do it.
When Jesus died he said "it is finished". Now it's in our hands. I delibrately haven't quoted any bible verses stating that healing is provided for in the atonement of Jesus, but can do if needed.

why can't HE make it happen? ... what's up with the failure rate?

I am bothered by the failure rate. When we're talking about life and death, either physical or spiritual, numbers matter! Every number is a person. However, if I focus more on the failures, then I'm going to fear failure every time I lay hands on someone. If I focus more on the success I'm going to grow in faith and expectation. So I'm not healing amputees, but I know they can be healed, because Jesus didn't say "it is partially finished". I fully expect to get to that point. To be honest I find it astounding and disgraceful, that a website like this should be able to thrive. We should have people in the church healing amputees and us Christians are helping to give God a bad name.

Indeed.  Why not? And he didn't mention taking up the challenge.  Again, why not?

Seriously, I give it my best shot any time I come across an amputee (assuming they want to be healed, I do know of some who don't). One day I want to come back here and let you know it's been done, just not sure how long that's going to take!

I know most people here will not be convinced until they actually personally see an amputee healed, that's your choice (for others, I'm not sure even that would be enough). For me, I've seen too much healing to believe that God doesn't exist and that he doesn't heal, that's my choice.

I'm passionate about healing. Mark 16 tells us that signs will confirm the word. If we're preaching without signs, why should people listen to us? Luke 10:8-9 tells us to heal the sick FIRST, then preach.

I'll respond to others later, I've got to work now.

Thanks for some genuine responses

[WordAboveYourName]

Nick

Typical...put the blame for not doing so on everyone and everything but God

What I'm doing is trying to stay as close to the bible as possible. I don't care how comfortable or uncomfortable it is. Everyone seems to want to blame God, (Christians included, it's the basis of all their excuses for failure), when what the bible says is that he came to destroy the works of the devil. God did his bit already! Now Christians are meant to be doing the same works and greater (John 14:12)

Wright

Like Jag, I see no reason to follow your link. If you had the wherewithal to find this site and post here, you can damn well make your argument here.

Fair point, like I said I never realised it was going to be posted here. After I've responded to the comments so far, I will post the main points here

Nam

mainly all believe everything in the Bible is literal, no metaphors, analogies, similes, alliterations--literal 100%

I think it's naive to say that either every last word is literal or figurative. For example, when Jesus said "I am the good shepherd", I don't know anyone who believes Jesus was literally saying he was actually a shepherd. Having said this, I believe that physical healing is biblical, and literal, 100%. Hope that clarifies my viewpoint

[Fiji]

The article in the OP is a combination of No True Scotsman and "I have proof except I can't show you".
And here we have the author claiming to know which parts of the bible are to be taken literally and which are metaphore.
Ie. WordAboveYourName is the only person ever to know how to read the bible correctly. His decoder ring must be worth a fortune!

[Iamrational]

I think it's naive to say that either every last word is literal or figurative.

All I want for Christmas is a magic encoder ring, a magic encoder ring.

Doesn't have the same ring to it. Makes a lot more sense than 2 front teeth. Those won't get you to heaven.

[WordAboveYourName]

neopagan

Not sure how your comment really has anything to do with this conversation.

Ivellios
As you state, you obviously didn't read the article. I don't think there's any value in responding to your statements about Catholic doctrine, a lot of it's off-topic, and the rest is answered in the article (I'll post the main points later so you don't need to click the link)

However, I would like to respond to your on-topic questions:

Question: Who's faith does it depend on? The 'healer,' the one that's asked for the healing, or both?

This is a question the church regularly gets wrong. It can depend on either, or both. When the woman with the issue of blood touched Jesus cloak, she was healed based on her faith (Jesus said so, Matthew 9:22)

The trouble is when we start putting the responsibility for faith onto the sick person. It is the "healer's" responsibility to heal. They should never be allowed to say "you didn't get healed because you didn't have enough faith". In Matthew 17 when the disciples couldn't heal the boy and Jesus did it, he didn't berate the boy or his father for their unbelief, but his own disciples. He clearly expected them to be able to get the job done!

How much faith does it require to be before a crowd and ask for healing?
How much faith does it require to go thru 'laying on hands' before a crowd, knowing that if you fail, you'll be ridiculed?

Being ridiculed rarely crosses my mind when I'm praying for someone, especially in the street. It's more about giving the person what Jesus paid for. Christians have got to start caring less about themselves and more about others.

How much faith does it require to try to stand after being asked to?
Is this still not enough?
Clearly not.
So, how much then?

You sound like you're talking from a personal perspective. Have you been through this or know someone who has?

Basically, questions about quantity of faith are missing the point. The disciples asked Jesus to increase their faith in Luke 17:5. Jesus responded by saying "If you had faith". Faith isn't about quantity. If you have faith, it works. If it doesn't work, you don't need "more faith", you just need faith full stop.

Jesus refers to great faith and little faith. Not lots of faith, great faith. Great faith doesn't give up, little faith does.

Jesus never said you need lots of faith to move a mountain, he specifically said faith the size of a mustard seed. We need to stop thinking about faith in terms of size or quantity.

[WordAboveYourName]

Fiji

WordAboveYourName is the only person ever to know how to read the bible correctly

Not at all. Christians need to start reading what is written, not what we've been taught, or would like to believe. I'm still not great in this respect, most weeks I still "see" something I didn't realise before, in the bible. I've got a long way to go.

Now, the reason I was so keen to respond to the original page http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.htm is because it used so much scripture. My aim was to show how the scripture is being used incorrectly, and when it was posted here I thought it would be a good opportuntiy to see if there was an argument against (what I consider to be) the correct use of scripture. So far most of what I have seen is just people's opinions and biases.
Does anyone want to have a discussion about the bible, in a similar way to "Chapter 5"?

[Ivellios]

Thanks for answering my questions.

Since you don't come from a Catholic background, I acknolwedge that my statement was Off-Topic.

This is a question the church regularly gets wrong. It can depend on either, or both. When the woman with the issue of blood touched Jesus cloak, she was healed based on her faith (Jesus said so, Matthew 9:22)

The trouble is when we start putting the responsibility for faith onto the sick person. It is the "healer's" responsibility to heal. They should never be allowed to say "you didn't get healed because you didn't have enough faith". In Matthew 17 when the disciples couldn't heal the boy and Jesus did it, he didn't berate the boy or his father for their unbelief, but his own disciples. He clearly expected them to be able to get the job done!

Was going to respond to what you posted earlier, but you typed out another reply, so I'm rolling it in with this. It's refreshing to see a Christian actually believe this part of the Bible, instead of choking it up as "metaphore" or "God doesn't work like that anymore!" After all, the Desciples once asked Jesus how to tell the difference between a true believer and a false one because they didn't want an unbelieving spy in thier misdt and get them all executed. Of course, a false Christian would definately respond that it was one of those two standard responses, being unable to heal. Not saying everyone that doesn't heal is a false one, only that none of the false ones can heal. Since a True Christian could believe the rhetoric of the false one.

Have to go to work now, will respond to more when I get back.

[WordAboveYourName]

Also, as promised, here is a quick copy and paste of most of the key parts of the article, for those who don't want to click the link

The author makes the following statement: “God is all-powerful. Therefore, God can do anything, and regenerating a leg is trivial”

As a statement, that is sound. However, the question shouldn’t be about what God can do, rather what he will do according to his Word. As Psalm 138:2 states, God has “hast magnified thy word above all thy name”. Therefore he will act according to his Word, rather than his ability

God actually told Christians to “heal the sick” (Matthew 10:8, Luke 10:9). No amount of begging God to heal someone will change the fact that God gave Christians the power, authority and responsibility to heal the sick. This includes amputees. The closest He comes to telling us to pray for the sick is in James 5, when he specifically refers to the elders of the church praying for a sick person.

Another key point, particularly regarding amputees is that, according to Mark 11:23, doubt is the opposite of believing, and will most likely prevent us from seeing what we are believing for. Obviously when dealing with an amputee, we are also going to have to overcome our doubt, which will be constantly facing us in the very visible form of a missing limb.

This is not an excuse, but a challenge. God created mankind from dust, so to re-grow a missing limb is not going to be difficult for him. We need to magnify God, rather than the missing limb. If we’re more focused on our God, than on the problem, the problem can ultimately be overcome.

God never looks for deserving people, because to put it bluntly, there aren’t any. None of us deserve God’s mercy or grace. None of us deserved God’s salvation or healing. But God gives it anyway, and it’s never based on the sick person’s performance.

Jesus never turned anyone away because they didn’t deserve it, or were being punished by God, or because it wasn’t “God’s timing” or any of the other excuses we have used!

[Tero]

WordAboveYourName, your god may be real to you, but he does not operate in the physical universe. There is no evidence for it.  Besides that, he is not even worthy of our notice, he thinks we are shit. He does not apply grace, according to you, because we are shit. Tell him to try living in the physical world. He would do no better.