Better theological response to "why doesn't God heal amputees?"

[Bohm_Bawerk]

Bohm, in another thread you said that you would now no longer believe in God, even if he appeared before you. Would this kind of evidence convince you, or are your new beliefs so ironclad that no evidence could change your mind?

After what I’ve been through, nothing could convince me of the existence of God. If an amputee claimed he was healed by God, I would consider it to be a mystery rather than a miracle. God doesn’t always have to be the “plug” to explain what can’t currently be explained.

In addition, I wouldn’t want the amputee to be healed for my benefit. The scenario I posed is that the amputee is asking God to be healed and is independent from myself or any other nonbeliever.

You also mention that no amputations have been cured in modern times. You may have read the other thread on this subject in which a well-documented incident of a cured amputation was described. The possible explanations offered on an atheist apologist site were pretty whacky. So, what constitutes “modern times” in your definition?

I would say 1900’s up until present - in other words, a point in history where technology reached, or at least was reaching, a point where evidence could be accurately and reliably stored.

Does the miraculous healing of a completely shattered ankle bone count? Charlene Vance’s ankle bones were completely crushed to a pulp in 1986, to the point where there was no firm bone left to attach a pin. After a pilgramage to Medjugorje, it was completely restored. The medical documentation for this is excellent.

No it would not count. As David Hume pointed out a few hundred years ago, one problem with miracles is that they seem to verify different religions. Different religions lay claim to different miracles - Muslims point to the Quran being inimitable; Christians point to the Resurrection; Hindus, I am sure, have their own version of miracles.

In the case you have presented here, many Catholics would argue that Medjugorje is not a legitimate pilgrimage site; some have even gone so far as to claim that it is Satan that is appearing, and not Mary. Given, how can a miracle occur there? Who is right? Who is wrong? Why would God, or a god, permit further confusion by providing an alleged miracle in a pilgrimage site as contentious as Medjugorje? Either God has no common sense (i.e. no omniscience) or he simply just does not exist. I prefer the latter option.

Rita Klaus, an former nun who lost her faith and became an atheist, suffered extreme physical deterioration from multiple sclerosis, to the point where her legs were starting to warp and had to wear steel braces attached to her wheelchair. After reading about Medjugorje and praying to the Virgin Mary in 1986, she regained full use of her legs overnight and the warping of the bones in her leg disappeared. She had about 30 years of detailed medical reports describing her condition. The doctors who examined her before and after ther miracle were completely unable to account for the overnight nature of the cure.

I’m happy for her. But for every prayer that is “answered”, there are another million that go unanswered. I am a part of that million.

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t want the amputee to be healed for my benefit. I want the amputee to be healed for his/her benefit.

Of course.

Still doesn’t change the nature of my question. If there were an amputee that was healed, would you then believe in God?

And what evidence would be required for your belief? Would reading about it be sufficient? Or would you have to meet this person? And would his testimony be sufficient, or would medical reports be required?

 

[Poof]

I forgot to mention this but Bohm, how do you explain the non-cancer miraclous healings at Lourdes such as paralysis, blindness, etc. Spontaneous remission is out of the question.

 

[Poof]

I forgot to mention this but Bohm, how do you explain the non-cancer miraclous healings of Lourdes. Spontaneous remission is out of the question

 

[Flyingg]

What else is new?

Fatima - Mass hallucination or an encounter with aliens.
Lourdes - Spontaneous remission.
Padre Pio - consistently poured carbolic acid into his hands for 50 years.
Joan of Arc - Schizophrenic.
Guadalupe Tilma - hoax, naturally painted. - this is my personal favorite.

The list goes on and on and on it’s hilarious.

Not only atheists disbelieve them

 

[danserr]

As David Hume pointed out a few hundred years ago, one problem with miracles is that they seem to verify different religions. Different religions lay claim to different miracles - Muslims point to the Quran being inimitable; Christians point to the Resurrection; Hindus, I am sure, have their own version of miracles.

Which is totally irrelevant since evidence for the Resurrection is tremendously better than evidence for anything else. Simple “claims” to miracles are not the issue, but the evidence for Christianity is far better than for any other religion’s miracle. Since evidence for the resurrection far outweighs evidence for any non Christian miracles, this is evidence for Christianity over those other religions.

 

[Poof]

Not only atheists disbelieve them

Oh for sure. Everyone has their doubts about everything, it’s totally normal. Some people have doubts that Shakespeare wrote his plays. People of other religions such as Islam and Protestanism, doubt Peters papacy. There are people who doubt the theory of natural selection due to its many inconsistencies and support intelligent design. Many people doubt the existence of aliens, and of course, there are those who doubt Gods. Sometimes, and this goes both ways, we fail to see the obvious truth despite the many evidences available. So yes I agree with you, not only atheists disbelieve our miracles.

Speaking of our miracles, what do you think of them?

 

[TimothyH]

The way I see it, the fact that God gave me a leg or an arm or a left testicle in the first place is miracle enough. And then we sit around wondering, no, demanding that he regenerate a leg or an arm as proof that he exists.

Jesus himself told us why things like this don’t happen…

*Then some of the scribes and Pharisees said to him, “Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you. He said to them in reply, “An evil and unfaithful generation seeks a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of Jonah the prophet. Just as Jonah was in the belly of the whale three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights. At the judgment, the men of Nineveh will arise with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and there is something greater than Jonah here. At the judgment the queen of the south will arise with this generation and condemn it, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and there is something greater than Solomon here.” (Matthew 12:38-42) *

A man walks out of his own grave yet the world lacks faith.

And the apostles said to the Lord, “Increase our faith.” The Lord replied, “If you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you would say to [this] mulberry tree, 'Be uprooted and planted in the sea,’ and it would obey you.” (Matthew 17:5)

I’m blind in one eye. And some day God will take away sight in my other eye. It has already started to happen. Then my sense of taste will go away, my ability to run, then to walk, then to breathe. Then God will raise me from the dead on the last day if it be his will.

My eye can go to hell for all I care.

-Tim-

 

[Simpleton]

After what I’ve been through, nothing could convince me of the existence of God. If an amputee claimed he was healed by God, I would consider it to be a mystery rather than a miracle. God doesn’t always have to be the “plug” to explain what can’t currently be explained.

In addition, I wouldn’t want the amputee to be healed for my benefit. The scenario I posed is that the amputee is asking God to be healed and is independent from myself or any other nonbeliever.

Why are you here asking for explanations you will never accept?

I would say 1900’s up until present - in other words, a point in history where technology reached, or at least was reaching, a point where evidence could be accurately and reliably stored.

Do you hold this standard to all evidence regardless of the subject? If not why not?If yes, then on what grounds to you accept facts which are based on evidence that was compiled or stored before the 1900’s?

No it would not count. As David Hume pointed out a few hundred years ago, one problem with miracles is that they seem to verify different religions. Different religions lay claim to different miracles - Muslims point to the Quran being inimitable; Christians point to the Resurrection; Hindus, I am sure, have their own version of miracles.

I don’t believe people were asking if you would believe in Catholicism but rather if you would believe in a God.

I’m happy for her. But for every prayer that is “answered”, there are another million that go unanswered. I am a part of that million.

Was it that your prayer didn’t get answered or rather you didn’t like that answer you were given? When you ask for something is recieving what you asked for the only acceptable evidence that your petitions were heard. If I gave you my address and asked you for $100 dollars right now but you decline to pay me the money I asked for should I conclude that you’re no longer active on this thread?

 

[Flyingg]

Oh for sure. Everyone has their doubts about everything, it’s totally normal. Some people have doubts that Shakespeare wrote his plays. People of other religions such as Islam and Protestanism, doubt Peters papacy. There are people who doubt the theory of natural selection due to its many inconsistencies and support intelligent design. Many people doubt the existence of aliens, and of course, there are those who doubt Gods. Sometimes, and this goes both ways, we fail to see the obvious truth despite the many evidences available. So yes I agree with you, not only atheists disbelieve our miracles.

Speaking of our miracles, what do you think of them?

What is the obvious truth? I fail to see that any religion have an obvious truth or enough proof to support its personal God.
About miracles, each case is different and has it’s own misteries and explanations, I never saw a miracle but if I did, I try to reason what happened, if I failed in obtaining a scientific explanation, my failure doesn’t necessarly mean that a God did it.

 

[Bohm_Bawerk]

I’m blind in one eye.

-Tim-

I’m very sorry to hear that . You are in my thoughts.

 

[Luke_K]

After what I’ve been through, nothing could convince me of the existence of God. If an amputee claimed he was healed by God, I would consider it to be a mystery rather than a miracle. God doesn’t always have to be the “plug” to explain what can’t currently be explained.

Then it sounds like your question is answered. God doesn’t heal amputees because, by your philosophy, he doesn’t exist in the first place to do it.

 

[Bohm_Bawerk]

Then it sounds like your question is answered. God doesn’t heal amputees because, by your philosophy, he doesn’t exist in the first place to do it.

You misunderstood me. I was responding to another poster’s question about what it would take for me to be convinced that God exists. It was a personal question.

The thread is essentially about why I’ve never heard of an amputee being healed in modernity by God. I’ve heard of only one incident in the Middle Ages, but the evidence is sketchy. This isn’t about me believing or disbelieving in God as it is me wanting to know what beliefs believers hold on to. It upsets me that almost every thread I start with a question, people proceed to ask personal questions about me.

 

[PRmerger]

It upsets me that almost every thread I start with a question, people proceed to ask personal questions about me.

I am sad that you feel upset that people ask personal questions about you.

I will refrain from doing so, knowing that it upsets you, but it does make one wonder what’s so “upsetting” about being asked why you don’t believe in God, when you’re on a forum specifically designed to discuss these things. Quite peculiar. Especially when one comes to a forum such as this, uses the designation “atheist” yet gets offended when one questions how you arrived at such a decision.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

You misunderstood me. I was responding to another poster’s question about what it would take for me to be convinced that God exists. It was a personal question.

Boy, now I noticed what you said:

what it would take for me to be convinced that God exists.

Forget about it. You will never be convinced. If I give you 1000 answers you will find 1001 replies. It is easy: it is enough to say NO 1001 times. Even if I go round the world to search for the best answer and return 5 years later with the best one I found and finally I present to you, you, sitting in your sofa, drinking your whiskey and someking a cuban cigar, emphatically will answer me back: “Not enough. NO!”.

God wants you to raise up from your sofa and look for him. He is all around the place and your search will take fruits. But sitting in the sofa never did any good … worse even for the case of God for He is the Boss, he does not need to be proved. You need to be proved, for your existence is not certain. In 1000 years where are you? We may go around the globe, and where are you? So, your existence is less clear than God’s. He is The Creator of the Universe, the Boss, the King of Kings, the Power of Powers, The Intelligence, The Goodness, the Justice. One blink of His Eyes and you were gone disappearing from life. You are like an ant asking for the proof that the elephant exists.

I think I would prefer to change sides. Please, give me a proof that God does not exist! From all the Universe, it is clear as water that Gos exists.

Would you mind to serve me some arguments that prove the contrary of what is evident, that God exists.

 

[Flyingg]

I think I would prefer to change sides. Please, give me a proof that God does not exist!From all the Universe, it is clear as water that Gos exists.

How is it clear as water? If there is a clear God you won’t see atheists and agnostics, even you won’t see thousands of religions wondering and giving different opinions of what the character of God(s) is.

 

[Bohm_Bawerk]

I think I would prefer to change sides. Please, give me a proof that God does not exist! From all the Universe, it is clear as water that Gos exists.

Would you mind to serve me some arguments that prove the contrary of what is evident, that God exists.

Why are you so angry? This isn’t a thread about whether or not God exists. This is a thread about a good theological response to why doesn’t God heal amputees (as there are no modern historical examples of God healing an amputee). I’ve only seen a couple of good theological responses on this thread (I’ll acknowledge them shortly); the rest boil down to “God did it” or asking personal questions about me.

The fact that you seem to be incredibly angry just indicates to me that your faith isn’t as strong as you profess it to be. If your faith was strong, you wouldn’t be angry. If I told you that you did not exist, you wouldn’t be so worked up about it; chances are you would feel pity for me. So what explains the difference with God, unless of course he really did not exist?

 

[Bohm_Bawerk]

I am sad that you feel upset that people ask personal questions about you.

I will refrain from doing so, knowing that it upsets you, but it does make one wonder what’s so “upsetting” about being asked why you don’t believe in God, when you’re on a forum specifically designed to discuss these things. Quite peculiar. Especially when one comes to a forum such as this, uses the designation “atheist” yet gets offended when one questions how you arrived at such a decision.

Oh no, it’s not the fact that people ask personal questions about me as it is that it changes the course of the thread. There are some threads where it’s implicit that I’ll accept personal questions (e.g. my thread on atheism and Catholic morality), but this thread has nothing to do with myself. It’s a question, and I expect it to be answered.

If you want to ask questions about me, please don’t do it on this thread in such a way that the thread can get derailed. Thanks.

 

[Poof]

What is the obvious truth? I fail to see that any religion have an obvious truth or enough proof to support its personal God.

Then you obviously don’t know Catholicism.

About miracles, each case is different and has it’s own misteries and explanations, I never saw a miracle but if I did, I try to reason what happened, if I failed in obtaining a scientific explanation, my failure doesn’t necessarly mean that a God did it.

Well at least you’re honest enough to accept the fact that you can’t find satisfactory scientific explanations to our miracles.

 

[PRmerger]

Oh no, it’s not the fact that people ask personal questions about me as it is that it changes the course of the thread. There are some threads where it’s implicit that I’ll accept personal questions (e.g. my thread on atheism and Catholic morality), but this thread has nothing to do with myself. It’s a question, and I expect it to be answered.

If you want to ask questions about me, please don’t do it on this thread in such a way that the thread can get derailed. Thanks.

Fair enough.

Except my personal question was specifically related to your OP.

Would you then believe in God if there were an actual amputee that were healed?

And to what degree of proof would you require? Would reading about this healed amputee be sufficient? Would you have to see this person in the flesh? Would you need evidence that he actually had an amputation?