Author Topic: Amputation [#1388]  (Read 295 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DL

Amputation [#1388]
« on: May 16, 2009, 04:31:14 PM »
Although very thought provoking, all the arguments you've raised involve numerous
logical fallacies and as such can all reduce what you have to say in this one
sentence: "You haven't won the debate."

1) Amputation is the outcome of a form of healing. Ask all the learned, educated,
doctors who perform them. In order to prevent disease and infection from spreading
to the whole body a doctor removes the untreatable infected section. Now, if you are
asking why won't an all-loving God heal an amputee in the sense of having the
removed section grow back, then the answer is two fold:

1) The existence of God and Heaven is not disproved simply by the asking of the
question, and your answer presumes there is no rational, logical reason God doesn't
restore the removed limb. So, you've preloaded the question with the assumption that
if God did exist then He would automatically answer all prayers in our lifetime,
here on this earth. In other words, you limited the miracle you are looking for to
occur within a fixed period of time, and that limitation doesn't satisfy or prove
God doesn't answer prayers. For if God does exist, and the afterlife is true, then
the limb will be restored along with the entire body of that person. Hence, God does
heal amputees if you do not limit His doing so to fall within the limited, fixed
time frame you want that persons limb to be restored. Hence, it is your limitation
of time thrown onto God that pre-loads your question so as to appear God doesn't
answer prayers, and ultimately you do not prove God doesn't
 answer prayers.

2) The question also presumes that the concept of "sin" is false at the outset. You
do not believe that mankind is inherently flawed, and therefore do not accept the
consequences (results) of sin (i.e., sickness, disease, death, starvation, crime,
etc. etc.) being the result of sin. Hence, your question is logically flawed in that
it starts with a false presumption that all men are born physically, emotionally,
and morally flawless (perfect). Yet, we know that there are some who are not born
physically flawless. And through time we also see the development of the emotional
and moral flaws of everyone, so that everyone eventually says, "well, no one's
perfect." So, where, why, and how does this imperfection eventually finally sneak
into your perfect man presupposition? Why does imperfection become the result if we
are all born perfect. Obviously, we are not all born perfect, which is what the
Bible claims to be true. That we are all born in "sin", that we
 are all born with a flawed nature. And we see the result of this truth not only in
ourselves but in everyone else as well.


I could go on, but I am tired and need to go to work in the morning.

Good luck in your ongoing endeavor to try and prove the non-existence of
non-existence. What else that does not exist that you are actively trying to prove
does not exist? Just curious. For you talk about Christians wasting their time in
believing in God, yet I think your talking about the non-existence of that which you
claim does not exist to be an even greater waste of time, indeed, quite delusional.
For who in their right mind would spend their time and effort trying to prove the
non-existence of that which does not exist? Your arguments against God are only
rational if God actually exists. You may be mad at Him and want to challenge His
decisions and so forth, but to argue He doesn't exist because you are mad at Him is
foolish. But, to argue for His non-existence seems to only make sense if He actually
exists.

Offline Dkit

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2113
  • Darwins +3/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Nemesis Ridiculii
Re: Amputation [#1388]
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2009, 10:21:43 AM »
There is zero evidence outside the bible to support the idea of God, heaven or sin.

Quote
Your arguments against God are only rational if God actually exists.
Not really.  God is not a real entity, but he does exist in the minds of his followers which has an impact in this life. 

Quote
You may be mad at Him and want to challenge His decisions and so forth, but to argue He doesn't exist because you are mad at Him is
foolish.

No one said they were mad at God.  You are projecting.

Quote
What else that does not exist that you are actively trying to prove does not exist?

We can't prove the non-existence of something, you obviously know that.  What the videos do is try to get believers to think about what they believe and why they believe it.  If leprechans had the ability to impact our governement, schools, environment, foreign and public policies as God does, we might make an effort to get leprechanists to evaluate their beliefs as well.

Quote
But, to argue for His non-existence seems to only make sense if He actually exists.

As noted earlier, God exists in the minds of his followers.  Believers in the bible and koran make decisions based on those beliefs.  For instance, Prop 8 in California has a real impact on gay people who want to marry.  Fred Phelps shows his belief in the bible being the word of God via his bigotry.  The 9/11 highjackers believed they would go to heaven and be rewarded for their sacrifice while taking thousands with them.  G. W. Bush had an enormous impact on the way our government was run through his public, foreign and environmental policies.  So, even though God doesn't exist in the real sense, he does have an effect on our planet.
"The Bible is a Banquet table not a snack tray!" - Anonymous Facebook User

Offline Malik

Re: Amputation [#1388]
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2009, 10:24:46 AM »
Quote
That we are all born in "sin"
I really dislike this idea.
Secret messages in Hitch-hikers guide:

'The sum of alphabetical order of letters in SHAHADA is 42'

Offline Former Believer

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: Amputation [#1388]
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2009, 10:38:49 AM »
Personally, I don't think the fact that God does not heal amputees disproves the existence of God.  I do think that it causes a problem for Christians who believe that God heals people and answers prayer like the Bible says he does.  If God can and does heal pneumonia or leukemia, he should be able and should heal missing limbs, Down's Syndrome, cleft palates, and badly disfigured burn victims.
Faith unsubstaniated by the facts equal foolishness

Offline Kevlar83

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Amputation [#1388]
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2009, 10:50:51 AM »
1) Amputation is the outcome of a form of healing. Ask all the learned, educated,
doctors who perform them. In order to prevent disease and infection from spreading
to the whole body a doctor removes the untreatable infected section. Now, if you are
asking why won't an all-loving God heal an amputee in the sense of having the
removed section grow back, then the answer is two fold:

So when my friend lost his leg in Iraq due to an IED, they were trying to heal him? I'll let him know...

1) The existence of God and Heaven is not disproved simply by the asking of the
question, and your answer presumes there is no rational, logical reason God doesn't
restore the removed limb. So, you've preloaded the question with the assumption that
if God did exist then He would automatically answer all prayers in our lifetime,
here on this earth. In other words, you limited the miracle you are looking for to
occur within a fixed period of time, and that limitation doesn't satisfy or prove
God doesn't answer prayers. For if God does exist, and the afterlife is true, then
the limb will be restored along with the entire body of that person. Hence, God does
heal amputees if you do not limit His doing so to fall within the limited, fixed
time frame you want that persons limb to be restored. Hence, it is your limitation
of time thrown onto God that pre-loads your question so as to appear God doesn't
answer prayers, and ultimately you do not prove God doesn't
 answer prayers.

I think the question "Why won't god heal amputees?" is more of a plea of dropping the ambiguity of "god's miracles". I don't care how long it takes as long as it can't be explained to coincidence (See Religulous and his talk with the Jew for Jesus guy who's miracle was that it rained). I think a miracle should be actualy miraculous, and not something that be explained by mutation, coincidence or ambiguity...

2) The question also presumes that the concept of "sin" is false at the outset.

Yeah, pretty much, since the idea of sin is flawed. (at least in my opinion)

I pose this question to the OP, why is it a sin to kill, except when I'm doing the killing in "God's" name? If I join in on a genocide will I get my pickings of the virgins for myself? Will "God" get angry, like Moses did, if I keep a few alive for slaves instead of making an example of them and killing everyone outright (minus the virgins of course)? The bible does set the ground rules for slavery after all...
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    -Edmund Burke

Somewhat cliche, but appropriate...