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.
