Why won't God heal amputees

On March 19 2009 16:35 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
dont question, just accept jesus christ into your heart as your lord and savior

On March 19 2009 16:40 Rice wrote:


why?

On March 19 2009 16:40 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:

shut up and accept kid, you don't want to go to hell do you?!?!?

On March 19 2009 16:54 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
is eternal damnation a joke to you?

On March 19 2009 17:03 Marradron wrote:


Yes it actually is.

I don't believe in god and i consider anyone that does not intelligent enough to make their own opinion and choices.

I'm 100% atiest and i like it.

Gl living your life in fear of eternal damnation lol.

On March 19 2009 16:59 L wrote:
I think its funny how american bible thumpers are, it seems, the end all and be all to 'christians'.

On March 19 2009 17:03 Marradron wrote:


Yes it actually is.

I don't believe in god and i consider anyone that does not intelligent enough to make their own opinion and choices.

I'm 100% atiest and i like it.

Gl living your life in fear of eternal damnation lol.

On March 19 2009 17:03 Marradron wrote:


Yes it actually is.

I don't believe in god and i consider anyone that does not intelligent enough to make their own opinion and choices.

I'm 100% atiest and i like it.

Gl living your life in fear of eternal damnation lol.

On March 19 2009 17:04 Slithe wrote:
I honestly don't know what you're trying to accomplish by posting something like this on a Christian forum. The only conclusion I can come to is that you're trying to troll them.

On March 19 2009 17:14 Ludrik wrote:

Where did you get the idea that this was a christian forum? I thought it was a starcraft forum. Muslims, budhists, hindu's, and christians can all play starcraft.

On March 19 2009 17:17 Marradron wrote:


Well sorry but i dont see any point in arguing with these kind of people. I just stated my opinion on religion, i dont not want to persuade people i do simply not care about them any more. I've learned a long time ago that most of these fanatic believers ignore all your arguments and just bring up the lol its just the way god works argumemnt.

BTW sarcasm doesnt work on the internet.

no need to call me an asshole beacause you dont agree with my points. You started this.

On March 19 2009 17:32 2b-Rigtheous wrote:
I can't understand why people try to act like the argument of "We cannot understand God's ways" is a weak one. It's a very strong argument indeed. You were created, you didn't make the world, you only see it from your tiny, limited and biased perspective. We hardly know anything about this world we live in, I mean we know so, so little... Yet scientists are studying 24/7 and they still know almost nothing. Shows how limited our minds truly are. And somehow you think we can understand God, the creator of this Universe. That's laughable and arrogant to say the least.

Atheists these days love the argument of rationality. It makes them sound so intelligent... or so they think. How is it rational to believe the whole world came into being by luck, by mere chance.... The sun, the moon, sex, human beings, animals, the sky etc. all came from mere luck... Do some research on the probability of that… and then tell me who’s rational and who’s not….

On March 19 2009 17:32 2b-Rigtheous wrote:
I can't understand why people try to act like the argument of "We cannot understand God's ways" is a weak one. It's a very strong argument indeed. You were created, you didn't make the world, you only see it from your tiny, limited and biased perspective. We hardly know anything about this world we live in, I mean we know so, so little... Yet scientists are studying 24/7 and they still know almost nothing. Shows how limited our minds truly are. And somehow you think we can understand God, the creator of this Universe. That's laughable and arrogant to say the least.

Atheists these days love the argument of rationality. It makes them sound so intelligent... or so they think. How is it rational to believe the whole world came into being by luck, by mere chance.... The sun, the moon, sex, human beings, animals, the sky etc. all came from mere luck... Do some research on the probability of that… and then tell me who’s rational and who’s not….

On March 19 2009 17:32 2b-Rigtheous wrote:
I can't understand why people try to act like the argument of "We cannot understand God's ways" is a weak one. It's a very strong argument indeed. You were created, you didn't make the world, you only see it from your tiny, limited and biased perspective. We hardly know anything about this world we live in, I mean we know so, so little... Yet scientists are studying 24/7 and they still know almost nothing. Shows how limited our minds truly are. And somehow you think we can understand God, the creator of this Universe. That's laughable and arrogant to say the least.

Atheists these days love the argument of rationality. It makes them sound so intelligent... or so they think. How is it rational to believe the whole world came into being by luck, by mere chance.... The sun, the moon, sex, human beings, animals, the sky etc. all came from mere luck... Do some research on the probability of that… and then tell me who’s rational and who’s not….

On March 19 2009 17:50 benjammin wrote:


wouldn't a 1 in a million quadrillions probability that our cosmological models were correct be more rational than a creation myth?

On March 19 2009 17:55 benjammin wrote:
i don't see where you got that from my post, i was just saying that an explanation was any amount of probability is more rational to believe than one with none

On March 19 2009 18:10 IdrA wrote:
well its not really the problem of evil and the normal responses to the problem of evil cant address it because of the claims that miracles cure other diseases like cancer and stuff, either god hates amputees or the other medical 'miracles' arent really miracles.

On March 19 2009 18:16 Jibba wrote:
I find most undeveloped atheist/agnostic thought to be just as idiotic as any other undeveloped religious beliefs. This thread probably falls into that category.

On March 19 2009 18:16 Jibba wrote:
I find most undeveloped atheist/agnostic thought to be just as idiotic as any other undeveloped religious beliefs. This thread probably falls into that category.

On March 19 2009 18:19 AcrossFiveJulys wrote:
anyone who has any common sense should be able to point out that religious people are ridiculous for believing in their religion 100% without question. honestly it's just pointless to try to present arguments against religion because if someone is capable of thinking past what they've been told they don't need convincing anyway, as they'll have discovered it on their own.

On March 19 2009 18:22 IdrA wrote:

accepting the premise that god does other medical miracles the question of amputees and any similar miracle that would have incontrovertible proof is perfectly reasonable

On March 19 2009 17:03 Marradron wrote:


Yes it actually is.

I don't believe in god and i consider anyone that does not intelligent enough to make their own opinion and choices.

I'm 100% atiest and i like it.

Gl living your life in fear of eternal damnation lol.

On March 19 2009 19:24 hymn wrote:
Here's a thought of me about God: I do believe he doesn't exist. I think he was created by the early priests just to control the people.
Even if the christian god does exist you can still blaspheme and do whatever you like cause he's all forgiving. Remember how he forgave the jews for crucifying his son and never did them any harm for 2000 years? Yeah, you can argue they had some tough times with all the anti jewish purges and the third reich and such but think about it - is there a nation that hasn't suffered? No. So you argument is not really valid.
My point is that people can never go hell cause god's gonna forgive them.

on a more serious thought: fuck god and all deities and live your live and enjoy it cause you're gonna be here for like 70-80 even 90 years and it's worth the time to brag about god and his healing abilities.

I'm a christian (not a severely devout one, i don't go to church or pray regularly) because I'd like to think that when I die I won't cease to exist and believing in a higher power kind of comes with that belief.

On March 19 2009 19:52 Pioneer wrote:

The jews have suffered more than any group of people in recorded history. A lot more.

Jesus (in the story) was considered the embodiment of god so his decision and acceptance of crucifixion was the will of god.

I wish that people that are atheist would actually read religious texts before making semi uneducated statements concerning them.

On March 19 2009 19:52 IdrA wrote:
you believe in something solely because you want to believe it. i think that does denote intellectual inferiority. religious people in general may not necessarily be intellectully inferior, but anyone who takes pascal's wager certainly is.

I don't believe in God because I fear that I'll go to hell if I don't or because I fear some kind of reprimand or eternal damnation, for all I know I could be on my path to hell.

On March 19 2009 19:58 esla_sol wrote:


There are so many things wrong with that statement.

Fear is not a good reason to believe in something. Do you think God wants you in his heaven if you only believe in him to not go to hell?

I think you are smarter than that.

On March 19 2009 18:22 IdrA wrote:

accepting the premise that god does other medical miracles the question of amputees and any similar miracle that would have incontrovertible proof is perfectly reasonable

On March 19 2009 20:01 HamerD wrote:
Actually from a practical standpoint, God (if he existed and could intervene with the world, which I very much doubt) would not be wise to heal the legs of all amputees.

It would encourage people to just go around throwing themselves off buildings and in front of trains, knowing they would be restored by the all mighty. Think about it, if God cured all diseases, how could humanity's population be restrained? If he revived all casualties of war? If he prevented all childhood and childbirth deaths?

Essentially you would never want a god that just bends to the will of all of his followers, or he is just a help dispenser, a tool.

On March 19 2009 20:06 Jibba wrote:

What medical miracles are you talking about? No one is talking about ridiculous Pentacostal garbage.

On March 19 2009 20:09 Pioneer wrote:

Is there really any indisputable evidence that god/higher power doesn't exist? Also please don't say "oh why didn't god stop the tsunami or heal this or that person" and use it as your argument. Assuming that there is an omnipotent higher power there's no way to have complete understanding of that things reasoning or actions.

On March 19 2009 20:05 Pioneer wrote:
Did I say once in there that I was afraid of oblivion or going to hell? There's a good chance that my actions may lead me to hell and there is strong reasoning behind the belief that there is no god/afterlife. I'm not afraid of the atheist belief, I'd rather it not be that way but can anyone say that they'd prefer nothingness and ceasing to exist over the chance at eternal happiness?

(I said chance because assuming you believe in the christian religion there is a chance at eternal hellfire.)

On March 19 2009 20:01 HamerD wrote:
And by the way, all of this crap about using logic to prove or disprove God is the stuff of retarded college dropouts and dumb 1st year philosophy students.

On March 19 2009 20:01 HamerD wrote:
The most important arguments relating to religion are:

1) Will we go to hell if we don't worship God?

2) Can God do anything on this earth?

3) Does God exist?

In that order.

On March 19 2009 18:24 esla_sol wrote:

Why should you try and change their mind? Because they are wrong, dead wrong.

And it is these wrong people that turn up to the polls and vote. If religion was a non-issue, gays would not have been stripped of their basic human rights with the passing of prop 8.

And yet, even with millions of people praying, nothing will happen. (I mean, if you're gonna 'test' God, at least play by the rules. According to the scriptures quoted in the very article we're discussing, you actually have to have faith that it will surely happen. Bummer eh?)

No matter how many people pray. No matter how sincere those people are. No matter how much they believe. No matter how devout and deserving the recipient. Nothing will happen. The legs will not regenerate. (You mean just like not a single case of rabies was healed, EVER, without vaccine?) Prayer does not restore the severed limbs of amputees.(It doesn't heal rabies either, right?) You can electronically search through all the medical journals ever written -- there is no documented case of an amputated leg being restored spontaneously.(Same with rabies, right?) And we know that God ignores the prayers of amputees through our own observations of the world around us. If God were answering the prayers of amputees to regenerate their lost limbs, we would be seeing amputated legs growing back every day.

On March 19 2009 20:12 Lucktar wrote:
Why does taking Pascal's Wager make someone intellectually inferior, Idra? I mean, you can debate the sincerity of such a belief all you want, but it's hardly an irrational point of view. I don't think there's anything intellectually dishonest about believing in god just to avoid the possibility (no matter how small) of eternal hell. In fact, that sounds a whole lot more honest to me than most Christians.

On March 19 2009 20:08 IdrA wrote:

then why does he 'miraculously cure' cancer and rabies and whatnot?

On March 19 2009 20:08 IdrA wrote:

the verses from the bible quoted in the op do kind of script him as that. "ask and ye shall receive" and whatnot.

On March 19 2009 20:23 kefkalives wrote:
No matter what, a believer will be able to supercede any argument of an atheist with the "god dosent require logic blah blah blah". They make an argument they can't lose.

On March 19 2009 20:19 Jibba wrote:

It's spiritually dishonest and it makes several rash assumptions, such as being a good person (without being Christian) isn't enough to get you into Heaven. Assuming you're a Christian, that obviously wasn't the case for Jesus, and someone from another religion could just as easily put the same dilemma on you for their cause.

On March 19 2009 20:15 GoodWill wrote:


You just wrote off a huge portion of humanity to the college dropouts. The "real" philosophers don't approach this subject with logic. Wow man you are really gud.

On March 19 2009 20:15 GoodWill wrote:


And then you enlightened us by listing THE definitive three most important ... ... arguments?

How can I be as educated as you? How can I survive college now that I have tried to use logic to determine the existence of god?

On March 19 2009 18:16 Jibba wrote:
I find most undeveloped atheist/agnostic thought to be just as idiotic as any other undeveloped religious beliefs. This thread probably falls into that category.

On March 19 2009 20:31 Lucktar wrote:

Well, the point that it's spiritually dishonest is questionable, but I understand where you're coming from. At the foundations, though, the carrot and the stick are what motivates people in perhaps not all, but nearly all situations. You can couch your belief in all the correct language about loving god and accepting forgiveness and so on and so forth, but you're still just after 2 things: the carrot, or heaven, and safety from the stick, or hell.

As far as making rash assumptions, the whole point of Pascal's Wager is to assume the worst case scenario. God might exist, he might hate people who don't believe in him, and he might send people to hell for said lack of belief. So if just being a good person is enough to get me into heaven, great. If not, though, I'm fucked. Therefore, Pascal's Wager.

On March 19 2009 20:12 Lucktar wrote:
Why does taking Pascal's Wager make someone intellectually inferior, Idra? I mean, you can debate the sincerity of such a belief all you want, but it's hardly an irrational point of view. I don't think there's anything intellectually dishonest about believing in god just to avoid the possibility (no matter how small) of eternal hell. In fact, that sounds a whole lot more honest to me than most Christians.

On March 19 2009 20:16 Jibba wrote:
I bet this strategy works with all your girl friends.
Religion isn't a non-issue, but it's not the source of problems either. Either way, there's a difference between religion and faith. and the original post isn't questioning religious institutions. It's questioning faith in a benevolent God, who by all indications does some pretty terrible things. Like someone else said, it's a modified form of the problem of evil argument and it would be answered by religious people the exact same way.

On March 19 2009 20:10 IdrA wrote:

did you not read the op or something?
this is addressed to people who believe in the 'power of prayer' to literally heal sick people. if you dont believe that then yes you are free to ignore it. but there are plenty of people who do believe it.

On March 19 2009 20:26 HamerD wrote:


That doesn't contradict what I said. God might, for example, feel like showing his presence from time to time to his most devoted followers, through miracles or apparitions; or to huge circles of people who aren't necessarily *expecting* anything other than their lord to make a judgement.

There is a difference between healing once in awhile and being a medipack on tap.

The bible is a ridiculous source in my opinion. AFAIK it's been ripped apart, adulterated and amended to high hell. It was supposed to be something like 3 times the length, and it was a pretty shoddy translation through the centuries from the original texts, apparently. Picking individual arguments against a text which is full of confusion and mistranslation is as pointless as believing everything in the bible is the unadulterated word of God.

Extremism is present in both religion AND atheism.

On March 19 2009 20:34 HamerD wrote:


Cas en point. Look, guy, re-read what I put. Using logic to prove or disprove God is RETARDED.

LOGIC NEVER PROVES ANYTHING. Logic can give you reason to find proof for something, but it is the means to the end. The end is finding ACTUAL EVIDENCE. Theories do not prove facts, it's the OTHER FUCKING WAY AROUND.

I wish you could see how much my eyes are rolling at your insanely lame defense of lazy college dropout pseudo-intellectuals.

On March 19 2009 20:34 HamerD wrote:

Again, for those less intellectually endowed than a baboon, let me repeat. Logic is not the prover of arguments. Logic is necessary to create valid arguments and make theories, but it does not PROVE anything.

Logic is something that has to proven in ITSELF. Logic is our understanding of causal nature. It is nothing more than a translation of causality into an applicable theoretical concept. Proof comes before logic, because logic bends around proof to accommodate it. Encore cas en point, quantum physics.

On March 19 2009 20:01 HamerD wrote:
And by the way, all of this crap about using logic to prove or disprove God is the stuff of retarded college dropouts and dumb 1st year philosophy students.

On March 19 2009 20:48 Jibba wrote:

It's just picking on a form of extremism, which is easy to do for anything. They could go any number of routes in response to you, no different than any other evil argument. Plus, even if the person got better, you would just claim that it was a placebo effect of their healthy consciousness.

The main point is that you shouldn't castrate someone's religion for praying for other's good health. That's just wicked, and certainly not in line with humanism.

On March 19 2009 20:47 IdrA wrote:

how exactly is religion not a source of problems?
you can say muslims would be angry with or without the qur'an to gode them on, but the fact remains that it is there and it does inspire them and we dont seem to see the same actions in other people who arent promised 72 virgins in return for martrydom

On March 19 2009 20:56 IdrA wrote:
removing people's delusions does not seem cruel to me at all.

On March 19 2009 20:57 Jibba wrote:
I have algebra homework. Good day.

On March 19 2009 20:59 Jibba wrote:

That's why you're an emotional stub.

I have much more pity for you than for most religious people.

On March 19 2009 17:02 Elite00fm wrote:
if you don't feel like reading there is a youtube video that is virtually that article word for word with pretty pictures also:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDHJ4ztnldQ&feature=related

On March 19 2009 20:52 IdrA wrote:

heals once in a while, but never ever eeeeeever in a way that would leave indisputable proof?
thats a neat trick.

then, by all means, lets throw out the bible. that would do us a world of good.

please enlighten me as to the evils of modern day extremist atheism?
i was unaware such a thing existed.

On March 19 2009 21:01 IdrA wrote:

"mommy when timmy prayed for his daddy's cancer to go away it worked but when i tried it didnt and now daddy's dead and its all my fault"

people can not wish away tumors. telling them they can is cruel in itself, it gives false hope and misplaces trust. how many people have died because they tried some homeopathic bullshit instead of going to a doctor?

On March 19 2009 21:29 PriitM wrote:
He won't heal amplutees because he doesn't exist.

On March 19 2009 21:33 o3.power91 wrote:

If you do not bother to try to help yourself, why will God bother to help you?

On March 19 2009 21:35 PriitM wrote:

it doesn't heal amplutetees because it doesn't exist.

On March 19 2009 21:33 o3.power91 wrote:

I disagree with you in that people who pray to God for good health are retarded.
I agree with you in that they are retarded in praying for health without seeking actual medical advice.

I am a Muslim, and my point of view on those people who only pray instead of taking the sick to a doctor: If you do not bother to try to help yourself, why will God bother to help you?

On March 19 2009 21:22 HamerD wrote:


That's just a straw man. I didn't say 'the evils of religious extremism and atheistic extremism are equal in weight'.

Actually, think about it, religion becomes dangerous when deeply flawed people become involved. It's not impossible that in the future we will have gigantic pogroms of people who have misinterpreted Dawkins running up and down the country burning people carrying crosses at the stake. You'd be surprised how staggeringly stupid a large portion of our countries is.

And in the case of throwing out the bible, it's not going to happen any time soon; but if everyone takes it less literally, it will help us all. Same goes for trying to read it in a belligerent light. Unfortunately, it's one of the basic facts of life that you need to relate things to people to get them to get on board with you. Like Hitler trying to relate his issues with the Jews to the German peoples' weak economic position.

If you want to get violent, aggressive, stupid people to join your sect, you will have to preach to them a very different gospel than the one you will have to preach to calm, friendly people. The bible basically covers all the bases, so it will be frightening to some, inspiring to others, violent for others etc. It's a big personality smear to get everyone it can to convert to its religion. The same goes for all the religions. It's really like teenage mutant ninja turtles. You have 4 different personalities so 4 times as many people can relate to it.

So basically, you need to stop people from using confirmation bias when they read the bible, atheist and religious...and looking for violent passages in the Koran etc.

On March 19 2009 21:25 HamerD wrote:
One more addition. Getting rid of religion in the world would do about as much as getting rid of the Jewish race. People look for problems. That's the sad fact.

If you think the Arab Israeli conflict is about religion, for example, you are sadly mistaken.

On March 19 2009 21:44 IdrA wrote:

well i hold that god wouldnt help you in the first place as he doesnt exist, and so asking him to help you only generates false hope.

obviously if you believe something can actually come of praying to god then you'd have a different perspective on it. do you believe that god can heal the sick?

On March 19 2009 16:35 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
dont question, just accept jesus christ into your heart as your lord and savior

On March 19 2009 21:54 IdrA wrote:

religion is undeniably a problem. the fact that other problems may take its place is not a reason to ignore the existing problem.

On March 19 2009 22:19 Salv wrote:


and into your wallet.

On March 19 2009 21:53 IdrA wrote:
any idea that can cause people to rally around it is inherently dangerous, however you cannot compare religion and atheism. "fight to the death for god" and "fight to the death for the fact that there is no god" dont carry the same weight. by their very natures there is a massive imbalance there in the potential for inspiring extremism.

On March 19 2009 21:53 IdrA wrote:
not really sure what you're talking about for the rest of your post. at first you say that i shouldnt be referencing the bible and then you talk about how theres no way we're letting go of the bible anytime soon? i agree that the bible is a poor reference at best, but as you say its not going anywhere and there are alot of people with alot vested in it, so i see no problem with me referencing quotes from it when we're talking about the behavior of those people.

On March 19 2009 17:03 Marradron wrote:


Yes it actually is.

I don't believe in god and i consider anyone that does not intelligent enough to make their own opinion and choices.

I'm 100% atiest and i like it.

Gl living your life in fear of eternal damnation lol.

On March 19 2009 19:37 KaasZerg wrote:
In a eternal quantum universe everything remotely possible happens due to fluctuations in the quantum vacuum. That is asuming the universe is unending.

On March 19 2009 21:01 IdrA wrote:

"mommy when timmy prayed for his daddy's cancer to go away it worked but when i tried it didnt and now daddy's dead and its all my fault"

people can not wish away tumors. telling them they can is cruel in itself, it gives false hope and misplaces trust. how many people have died because they tried some homeopathic bullshit instead of going to a doctor?

On March 19 2009 20:00 Pioneer wrote:

There are a lot of fallacy's in the bible and beliefs of people and considering that the bible's text has been re translated so many times that integral parts of it could be missing or misinterpreted. I also believe that the church exerted some of their own separate beliefs on the writing of the bible over time that many of the ideas in it may not have been the actual ideas of God.

On March 19 2009 21:42 HamerD wrote:


now if THAT were what you had first said, you would have won the thread.

On March 19 2009 22:06 o3.power91 wrote:

I am a Muslim but not an Islamic scholar or high priest or anything like that so I cannot say 100% for sure.

But from what I was taught: God can heal the sick. He just chooses whether or not he does. And who do you think God, if he exists, would rather help: a person who prays for their health while being taken care by a doctor, a person who prays without consulting a doctor, or a person who goes to the doctor but does not pray to God?

Of course there are cases when the 3rd type of person i mentioned gets healed. The only explanation for that I have is that God works in mysterious ways. I'll admit I don't know everything about God so I can't explain everything unfortunately

On March 19 2009 21:56 R3condite wrote:
im sorry but i have to say the author of that site is full of logical fallacy and if anything proves God exists more than not...

first off the cae w/ Jeanna Giese was an actual example u can't counter prove that by stating something hypothetical... what if God HAS healed an amputee? there are many manyy miracles of God that happen (i've seen some with my own eyes) but they nvr get pressed or go to the media most of the time... nobody bothers i guess

and i guess that is partially our fault for not spreading the good news but seriously if u r intelligent, even if you don't believe in God, u cannot possibly believe his logical reason to be bulletproof.

even if he gave an actually life example for the amputee counterpoint it would still be on shaky grounds because anyone could still say oh the amputee and the people who prayed for him did not even have faith the size of a mustard seed...

im not trying to prove to you God exists because that would possibly be the dumbest thing ever

if i could prove God exists then there would be no need for faith and there certain will be no need to be bickering like this
all im trying to say is this guy is full of holes and full of himself...

On March 19 2009 22:48 Chromyne wrote:
I disagree. To make the claim that a god does not exist, you would need to know everything there is to know in the universe (and I guess beyond for the sake of this argument). That would make you omniscent, a quality of a supernatural, making you a god yourself. Thus you would be god, and therefore a god exists.

On March 19 2009 22:23 HamerD wrote:


Religion is very low on the list of reasons why there is conflict in the world. The two biggest contributing factors to a lot of global conflict are a) ignorance and b) selfishness.

They are much bigger problems the people in society need to deal with. It is definitely the case that people like the Westborough Baptist church nuts are an obvious problem that the United States needs to deal with, but the simple fact is that you will never be able to take the religion away from that close-knit group of people. You need to remove their ignorance, not their bible.

It's very dangerous when people see the world as simply a group of problems that need to be solved, and then we'll all be ok. Inevitably you simply grow more and more problems. People find difference whenever they feel like it.

All that needs to be done about religion in developed society is for people to make it more personal, and leave it to themselves. What needs to be done about it in developing societies is mass education and alleviation from the state of ignorance.

On March 19 2009 22:52 IdrA wrote:
oh im not disagreeing with your logic, if you believe in god then of course youd pray to him.
if god has the power to heal the sick how come cases, like amputees, where a cure would be undeniably a miracle, are always ignored? would be a pretty huge coincidence if every amputee ever just happened to be undeserving of gods mercy.

On March 19 2009 22:55 HamerD wrote:


Actually it was a joke about the crap spelling. Supernature is not necessarily the attribute of something omniscient. If something were omniscient, and it were a natural thing, it would be natural and not supernatural. And, like I already said, using logic to prove anything is retarded and what 1st year college philosophy students do.

On March 19 2009 23:11 o3.power91 wrote:

That is a good question. In fact, that was one thing I have always wondered about God. From what I have been taught, people with disabilities, deserving of it or not, serve as examples to healthy people to show them how lucky they are for not being in the same situation or as a warning of what God may do to punish you for your sins.

I believe that amputees who are also sinners are given their sickness as punishments for their sins of course. Those who do not deserve the pain however, I believe God will reward for their suffering on the Day of Judgment. I believe that all suffering encountered during our lifetime that is undeserved will be added to our rewards in the next life. Some people also may be believers but have minor sins. If these people get sick, I believe it is a way for God to punish them for these sins so they would be cleaned of these minor sins on the Day of Judgment.

This is just my belief. You can choose to believe it or not.

On March 20 2009 00:06 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Chromyne, Pioneer didn't claim that the Bible has been retranslated successively (although it probably has been by some people here and there). The Bible actually does not have an agreed-upon official translation for each language.

On March 20 2009 00:21 Chromyne wrote:


But we do have the official original works/manuscripts, and those are in Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). This is why you don't rely on, say, an English translation. You go back to the original Greek or Hebrew. Your point is fairly moot.

On March 19 2009 22:54 IdrA wrote:

what if the ghost who never lies told me that god doesnt exist?
what then?

no. you claim that miracles happen. the burden of proof is on you. you show a person whos leg grew back. until then his theory is not the one full of holes.

On March 08 2009 17:34 SpiritoftheTunA wrote:
The Pope and God walk into a bar.

The Pope goes up to the bartender, and says, "I will have your most holiest of wines."

God turns to the Pope

+ Show Spoiler +

For this experiment, we need to find a deserving person who has had both of his legs amputated. For example, find a sincere, devout veteran of the Iraqi war,

On March 20 2009 01:43 HamerD wrote:
What needs to be done about it in developing societies is mass education and alleviation from the state of ignorance.

On March 20 2009 01:43 gokai wrote:
Welp. Being a buddhist and talking about it to my friends, I've learned not to talk to them about religion. Relgion can't help a person if they don't find it useful. And arguing over religion is like hella counter productive.

The way I see it. If you read the buddhist scripture and find no inspiration from them. Nothing I can say can convince you they're helpful.

I kind of sympathize with people who are devoted to their faith. People think they're dumb when they're just doing something that helps in life. I use to not believe in any religion and also thought religous people were stupid. But now it just seems so arrogant.

On March 20 2009 00:34 Liquid`NonY wrote:


How can my point be moot? My point was that you claimed Pioneer claimed something that he didn't claim. He wasn't talking about successive translations. It's a relevant fact.

About translations:
Going back to the original Greek or Hebrew won't solve anything. Nobody's first language is the Greek or Hebrew from that time period. Everyone learns the language(s) of the Bible through translation now. Even those who are raised speaking Greek or Hebrew still need to study Ancient Greek or Classical Hebrew. There are people who can read the originals while thinking completely in the language of the originals but that ability was created from learning the language through translation from whatever language they previously knew.

On March 20 2009 01:11 IdrA wrote:
thats not analogous at all. we can infer the conditions of the big bang from stuff we can observe today. simple, understandable logical conclusions drawn from evidence that anyone can see.

however there is no evidence that an amputee has ever regrown a limb, nor is there any reason to believe it has happened.

you do not have to see something happen to believe it happened. however if you believe something happened with absolutely no evidence or support, you are an idiot. there is evidence and support for the big bang. there is none for an amputee regrowing a limb.

its also not analogous to undiscovered species. we are aware that we have not searched every habitable place on earth yet, and so we know there are probably species living in the places we havent yet looked, and so it is likely there are undiscovered species. given what we know about human anatomy there is no reason to believe that a limb could regrow, and given that there is no reliable evidence of a legit miracle _EVER HAPPENING_, also no legit evidence of any supernatural being ever having any noticeable effect on the real world, there is no reason for us to believe that a limb could be regrown. if it happens, or there is trustworthy evidence that it has happened before then ill look pretty dumb. i am however, quite confident that that will not happen and until it does you dont have a leg to stand on. unless god grows one for you.

when you present arguments like 'well it could happen so you cant say it hasnt' theres not much left to do but belittle you.

On March 20 2009 01:49 koreasilver wrote:
You're all going to hell.

On March 19 2009 17:04 Slithe wrote:
I honestly don't know what you're trying to accomplish by posting something like this on a Christian forum. The only conclusion I can come to is that you're trying to troll them.

On March 19 2009 16:57 Rice wrote:
I think its funny how christians think " accepting jesus as your savior" is the difference between heaven and hell

On March 19 2009 21:01 IdrA wrote:

"mommy when timmy prayed for his daddy's cancer to go away it worked but when i tried it didnt and now daddy's dead and its all my fault"

people can not wish away tumors. telling them they can is cruel in itself, it gives false hope and misplaces trust. how many people have died because they tried some homeopathic bullshit instead of going to a doctor?

On March 19 2009 22:19 Salv wrote:


and into your wallet.

On March 20 2009 01:50 Chromyne wrote:


I was referring to your point on translations. And I still don't agree, You must have very litte trust in the ability of historians and other persons involved in studying ancient languages and text. I think it's safe to say that people have been trying to challenge the history validity of the Bible for a long time. The original Hebrew and Greek exist on actual manuscripts, and I trust historians to be able to understand them just like I trusted them to understand any other historical documents that gives the world the vast documented history we have today.

On March 20 2009 03:23 ilj.psa wrote:
i find it also funny that Idra pops up in every religion thread.


only an idiot would pray without getting professional help. Don't generalize buddy

On March 20 2009 00:21 Chromyne wrote:
But we do have the official original works/manuscripts, and those are in Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament).

On March 20 2009 06:31 Hypnosis wrote:
Im a complete athiest and i have gotten to the point where it is useless to discuss religion with religious people because it is an absolute belief. Imagine you are taught all your life that 2+2 is 5, every one of your friends believes it completely. some smart guy comes along and says 2+2 is 4. what do you do? argue forever.

perfect analogy.

On March 20 2009 01:43 gokai wrote:
Welp. Being a buddhist and talking about it to my friends, I've learned not to talk to them about religion. Relgion can't help a person if they don't find it useful. And arguing over religion is like hella counter productive.

The way I see it. If you read the buddhist scripture and find no inspiration from them. Nothing I can say can convince you they're helpful.

I kind of sympathize with people who are devoted to their faith. People think they're dumb when they're just doing something that helps in life. I use to not believe in any religion and also thought religous people were stupid. But now it just seems so arrogant.

On March 19 2009 19:52 Pioneer wrote:
The jews have suffered more than any group of people in recorded history.

On March 20 2009 03:23 ilj.psa wrote:
i find it also funny that Idra pops up in every religion thread.


only an idiot would pray without getting professional help. Don't generalize buddy

On March 20 2009 12:01 TheAntZ wrote:
In answer to the original post: I myself am an atheist, and I haven't really researched much about religion. However, I think that if God does exist, there's three ways of looking at it. In the first, you can assume that God is omnipotent and omniscient, thus if people ever became amputees, it was all part of God's plan, thus it wouldn't make sense for Him to heal them. Alternatively, you can assume that God's influence on the universe and everything that happens to it is not as strong as most people believe. In this case, God may or may not know of the suffering of amputees but cannot in either case affect it in any way. Or, perhaps the case is that God does know all and see all, and is able to manipulate anything in existence to His liking, but does not wish to intervene in earthly events in a visible way, choosing instead to cause things to happen in the manner He wishes by using subtlety and a 'Light touch'.
But then again, I really don't know enough about religion to form any concrete ideas about it.

On March 19 2009 18:10 IdrA wrote:
well its not really the problem of evil and the normal responses to the problem of evil cant address it because of the claims that miracles cure other diseases like cancer and stuff, either god hates amputees or the other medical 'miracles' arent really miracles.

On March 21 2009 01:33 IdrA wrote:
excellent argument there
better not to talk down to americans when you post nothing but mindless drivel yourself.

On March 21 2009 02:21 TheAntZ wrote:
It really does tickle me pink seeing people act superior and tough on the internet.
"I AM THE BOSS OF THE INTERNET, ALL OF YOUR INTERNET DEBATE SEEMS CHILDISH BEFORE MY ABSOLUTELY IRREVOCABLE 13 YO LOGIC AND/OR FAITH >:["

On March 21 2009 02:39 ilj.psa wrote:
i see nothing good about this religion debates , no one changes its original stance anyways.

Religion thread -> atheists called religion stupid /profanity involved -> quotes of Dawkin's books -> Idra and Mindcrime make their obligatory religious thread posts to increase their post count -> profanity from atheists -> 20 more pages of irrelevant discussions -> thread closed.

Religion thread -> atheists called religion stupid /profanity involved -> quotes of Dawkin's books -> Idra and Mindcrime make their obligatory religious thread posts to increase their post count -> profanity from atheists -> 20 more pages of irrelevant discussions -> thread closed.

On March 21 2009 09:28 IdrA wrote:
whats the point in attacking the discussion itself?
if, as you say, no one is going to question their beliefs as a result of it then nothing is really going to come of it... which means its not hurting anything, and some of us simply enjoy arguing about it. whats wrong with that?
and if you're wrong, or contradicting yourself, and it can have an effect on people's beliefs, well then obviously the discussion isnt futile.

the vast majority of my posts are in reply to people who disagreed with me or who i disagreed with. how exactly is that a circle jerk? i find it hilarious you say im being condescending and then try to psychoanalyze me.

On March 21 2009 12:32 ilj.psa wrote:

It IS futile because when you use profanity, condescending comments and deliberately trying to ridiculize people's beliefs is going to bring a reaction out of people, this can be applied to any topic in the world, and thats what this kinds ends up usually. Did I say its wrong to question someone elses or themselves beliefs? No

In this case, debating wether God is real or not is irrelevant , since this is not the question or purpose of discussion of the thread itself is not to discuss God's existance, that would be in fact "off-topic".

what? its a circle jerk because it involves what stated above and usually thats how it ends, go use the search function

dunno why i keep bumping this -_- , k im out

On March 21 2009 15:45 Savio wrote:
That article was ridiculously long so a ridiculously long response is best but I'm not gonna give it to you. But I will share just a few things I thought about as I read it.

1. One of the first things I thought was that Jesus did restore an amputated ear in the Bible (didn't read all 9 pages of responses so I don't know if this was already brought up but I thought it was at least funny since he was always like "duuuude, no amputee has EVER gotten their body part back', like every 2 sentences).

2. Everybody who has ever lost a limb HAS or at least will get it back (I don't know all the timelines perfectly, but "not a hair of the head shall be lost" when we are all eventually resurrected).

3. Most of the internet emails you get and that rabies case probably weren't direct interventions from God (maybe some were, I can't really know, but I THINK that most aren't). I think that for the most part, God sends us to an imperfect world where bad things happen by chance or choice and he intervenes in some cases for a bunch of different reasons but its definitely not with the intent of creating a great mass email. When he doesn't intervene its not because he doesn't love us, but because leaving him to come here is like leaving home and going to college. It wouldn't make sense for a loving parent to do all your studying and take all your tests for you so you can get a diploma. That is not actually helping you. Letting you mess up and get hurt and experience pain (all of which we couldn't do if we still lived with him) DOES help us become more capable and knowledgeable.

4. We lived with God before being born (you are getting my beliefs now), and we have existed in one sense or another forever and we will exist after this for forever. What happens during a short little 70 years (in terms of physical pain suffered by us) is less important from an eternal perpective than the fact that I had an itch on my arm on May 15, 1992 for half a second. God does not think from our "little ant" perspective. Life now is not fair, but that doesn't matter cause its over as soon as it starts. And eternity is not fair, it is WAY too generous to ALL of us (even amputees).

5. God judges us based on our knowledge. I (unlike many Christian faiths) do not believe that those who never really learn the Gospel are damned. They have as good a chance at salvation as I do because I am judged according to my knowledge and they on theirs (if they are decent people even without knowledge of the gospel, they are in good shape).

Now suppose someone is living not exactly a saintly life, but on the other hand, God has never PROVEN to them that he exists. They are in decent shape. But what if their friend lost a limb, they prayed that it would grow back and it did....then what? What if they are not capable/willing to change their life? They are now judged at the same level of knowledge as a prophet but are not living a "prophet-like" life? God does not want to damn his children. That is why he gives more proof to those who are living the life of a prophet, and that is why it says you must have faith FIRST (most people WAY overestimate how much faith they have. Saying you believe does not cut it).
I think that when God made all the statements of prayers of faith being answered and able to move mountains, he was talking about an end-outcome, not an initial step in building faith.

7. If you do a prayer "experiment" meaning "lets see if God answers this prayer", that is by definition a prayer without faith. If there is any experiment to it the prayer is without faith. If someone (very few people ever attain this in this life) honestly KNOWS exactly what will happen and does not have a shadow of doubt in his mind, that is what God wants and he shows great miracles to these people. We call them prophets.

On March 21 2009 15:11 Savio wrote:
I've always wondered about non-believers. If I may pose them a question:

If God does not exist, why would it be wrong for me to murder someone or rape? Would anything be "wrong"?

Animals kill eachother, even of the same species (I'm not talking about for food). Animals rape eachother (does anyone here own chickens? I did growing up so I know). We don't consider it wrong for them. Why would it be wrong for a man to go to his neighbors house and kill the family and rape the women?

If it makes him happy and there is no God, is it wrong to do what makes him happy?


(if you say this is a stupid question but think the article quoted is smart, then I don't even want to debate you because you are an idiot. This is at least as valid a question as he brought up).


EDIT: I did read the whole article so no whining on that point.

On March 21 2009 15:11 Savio wrote:

If God does not exist, why would it be wrong for me to murder someone or rape? Would anything be "wrong"?

On March 21 2009 15:11 Savio wrote:
If God does not exist, why would it be wrong for me to murder someone or rape? Would anything be "wrong"?
EDIT: I did read the whole article so no whining on that point.

On March 21 2009 15:45 Savio wrote:
5. God judges us based on our knowledge. I (unlike many Christian faiths) do not believe that those who never really learn the Gospel are damned. They have as good a chance at salvation as I do because I am judged according to my knowledge and they on theirs (if they are decent people even without knowledge of the gospel, they are in good shape).

it cant be applied to any other topic because any other topic could respond to ridicule by defending itself. religion cant because it has no reasonable basis to argue from.

yes the existence of god is entirely unrelated to his actions in our world. the whole argument presented in the op is intended to disprove the existence of the christian god.
no one said it was entirely unrelated, its just not

or you could read what i said
almost all of my posts have been replies to people who disagree with me or who i disagree with. if it was 1 person going god sucks and a 2nd person going i agree god sucks and a 3rd going me too fuck god, then yes. as is no. sure some people are just posting funny images, that doesnt invalidate everyone else's posts.

On March 22 2009 03:16 TheAntZ wrote:



The only kind of religious person that I could never respect in any way or form is someone who would seriously ask that question.

On March 22 2009 05:11 ilj.psa wrote:
Like it or not he has a good point, im curious what do atheists think of how morality emerge or how it was formed in our society?

On March 22 2009 05:11 ilj.psa wrote:

Like it or not he has a good point, im curious what do atheists think of how morality emerge or how it was formed in our society?

On March 22 2009 06:11 TheAntZ wrote:


I cant speak for all atheists, but basically, when im thinking about something, I dont think in terms of right or wrong, or what will happen to me if I do it. I just think, if I do this, will it cause someone else harm or trouble? Will it be the best thing I could do in that situation to make sure everyone walks away from it happy? Morality in my opinion isnt doing whats 'right' or 'wrong'. Its doing something that you hope someone else in your position would do for you. Again, this is just my opinion.

On March 22 2009 06:18 Jibba wrote:

Are human beings inherently born with religious knowledge? Obviously not. Then how do you think human societies evolved to the point where religion could be created, without destroying themselves first? There are no religious pretexts contained within Hammurabi's code, and even most animals are seen to exhibit most of the 10 Commandments.

It would seem to me that basing your scale of morality off a God's whim is a pretty irresponsible practice.

On March 22 2009 06:57 Cloud wrote:
What?, animals 'murder', commit adultery (lol), steal, lie, and the offspring do not protect their parents, its the way around.

On March 21 2009 22:35 Jibba wrote:

The question applies just as much to those who believe in God. Is your concept of morality defined by God's choosing it to be moral? Or does your God support what is moral because it is inherently moral? If morality is contingent upon God, then couldn't it just as easily be conceived that rape is moral for another possible God?

On March 22 2009 07:15 Jibba wrote:
How many animals kill eachother in competition for mating? Very few. Sharing isn't part of the 10 Commandments, and extraordinary circumstances aside, they don't eat their own children because any species that did that would die out very quickly.

The point is you don't need reason to arrive at most of the Commandments. Animals exhibit most of them and early peoples did so without pondering the basis for their morality.

early peoples did so without pondering the basis for their morality

On March 22 2009 14:07 BackHo wrote:
To answer your question - oh yes, without God we atheists might as well go commit suicide because we would have no morals. -________________-

On March 22 2009 16:19 0xDEADBEEF wrote:
The only good thing about being religious is the confidence boost you gain... because life feels a bit easier with a powerful imaginary friend at your side at all times while you just have to follow its "rules" (written by humans of course), and most of those rules are in fact common sense (i.e. every good person will follow a large subset of them automatically because that's how you have to live in a society, most of it is also regulated by law).

Fortunate events are associated with God's doing, especially if you prayed for it before. But it's just coincidence of course, or the result of your own doing. In terms of curing power (e.g. miraculous recovery from a tumor or something) it has the same power as a placebo - it might help if you believe in it, but it actually did nothing. And it doesn't always help of course.

Good thing then that unfortunate events can be conveniently ignored via the excuse "God's ways are inexplicable" (or similar excuses, e.g. "God wants to test my faith", "God wants to punish me").

So in essence every religious person has a life of good events (God's favors) and bad events (where God's motive is not clear or you did something wrong and are "punished" for it).
And this is exactly not different from the life of any other person at all - we all experience fortunate and unfortunate events. We just don't like to constantly lie to ourselves and lean on invisible friends for help. We manage life on our own. We also can deal with the fact that we may well be totally insignificant within the universe, and that there is no afterlife. In short: we're grown up.