Amputee Healings?

[saveski]

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
And what is the source of your pain? Did you believe in miracles once?[/quote]

No pain - just disbelief that the whole planet not only still believes in utter MYTHOLOGY but bases their lives around it! It’s just so much easier for all these people to just BELIEVE - rather than use the faculty of reason (which God gave them!).

And good job on your answer to my question although it begs the question.

I probably did believe in miracles when I was a believer - but then I woke up and saw the truth.

There are no miracles. A true miracle would be an amputee spontaneously regrowing a limb after invoking a prayer.

Until then GOD = UNICORN = HERCULES, et al.

[Brother_Chris]

So I understand your argument is your argument, ‘if there has never been a healing of an amputee, then G-d does not exist’?

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]saveski wrote:
Still no answer to my post - why has God never healed an amputee?

I see all kinds of other mumbo-jumbo but no ANSWERs.[/quote]

I’ll take a stab at it, but I need to know what argument you’re trying to put forth here.

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]saveski wrote:
Still no answer to my post - why has God never healed an amputee?

I see all kinds of other mumbo-jumbo but no ANSWERs.[/quote]

IF one accepted your (argument sake) premises that God performs explainable miracles like curing cancer and healing other diseases, but does not heal amputees, the obvious answer would be that he only performs miracles that could have another explanation. Or put another way he only performs miracles that don’t violate laws of physics, but that he only shifts or manipulates reality within the parameters of the probabalistic laws of physics.
[/quote]

I thought god was supposed to be omnipotent. What you’re saying, essentially, is that miracles don’t exist and everything follows the laws of nature. If that is true, a supernatural god is both impossible and unnecessary.[/quote]

G-d cannot go against logic, because He is logic. This has nothing to do with the actual example, but this goes more into the Simpsonfied argument of ‘can G-d microwave a burrito so hot that He can’t touch it?’

[Brother_Chris]

On the contrary.

I think someone needs to pick up a natural apologetics book. Let me know if you need a name of a good one.

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]saveski wrote:
Still no answer to my post - why has God never healed an amputee?

I see all kinds of other mumbo-jumbo but no ANSWERs.[/quote]

IF one accepted your (argument sake) premises that God performs explainable miracles like curing cancer and healing other diseases, but does not heal amputees, the obvious answer would be that he only performs miracles that could have another explanation. Or put another way he only performs miracles that don’t violate laws of physics, but that he only shifts or manipulates reality within the parameters of the probabalistic laws of physics.
[/quote]

I thought god was supposed to be omnipotent. What you’re saying, essentially, is that miracles don’t exist and everything follows the laws of nature. If that is true, a supernatural god is both impossible and unnecessary.[/quote]

Define Omnipotent. IF God is truely omnipotent to the extreme definition then he can violate the constricts of logical argument. You can’t logically limit a OMNIPOTENT being.

Others have argued that God is omnipotent to the degree that he sets the laws and does but not break his own laws.

If he is the creator of natural laws, and desires not to violate them, then when he heals an amputee, he would do so by going back in time and keeping it from happening in the first place and we’d never know.

Or he would erase any inconsistency from the history of the universe and we’d never know.

Or if he wanted to change something that would be unexplainable, he’d change the laws of physics and then we wouldn’t consider it to be unexplainable anymore.

Lastly, all that my statement requires is that a god would chose not to perform miracles by violating the lmits of physics, but only by manipulating reality within probabilistic constraints. If its a choice then it does not limit omnipotence.

But “some god” could still steer the universe within probability limits, and he actually does this through our unexplainable free will ability to affect the universe within the limits of probability. Some “god” whatever you call it, only need to be the last step beyond the edge of scientific explanation, and that science itself requires. Science can never completely describe reality because science is a creature of reality. It is part of it and a map can never contain the territory that it is mapping, unless the map is greater than the territory.

So as far as God being possible or necessary, that does not require that he perform unexplainable mysteries, except the one unexplainable mystery of non-determinism, which allows the ability for “probabalistic miracles”. Would it be explainable if you flipped a coin and it cam up heads 50 straight times? A god could avoid violating laws, and still basically dtermine the coin flip for every binary quantum event.

“Everytihing” does not follow the laws of physics anyway. The laws of physics are non-deterministic. They only set limits so that part is a misunderstanding too.

[/quote]

G-d didn’t create the rules of logic, G-d being truth encompasses logic and cannot go against logic, because illogical things are untrue. For example…A =/= A is illogical.

[mertdawg]

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]saveski wrote:
Still no answer to my post - why has God never healed an amputee?

I see all kinds of other mumbo-jumbo but no ANSWERs.[/quote]

IF one accepted your (argument sake) premises that God performs explainable miracles like curing cancer and healing other diseases, but does not heal amputees, the obvious answer would be that he only performs miracles that could have another explanation. Or put another way he only performs miracles that don’t violate laws of physics, but that he only shifts or manipulates reality within the parameters of the probabalistic laws of physics.
[/quote]

I thought god was supposed to be omnipotent. What you’re saying, essentially, is that miracles don’t exist and everything follows the laws of nature. If that is true, a supernatural god is both impossible and unnecessary.[/quote]

Define Omnipotent. IF God is truely omnipotent to the extreme definition then he can violate the constricts of logical argument. You can’t logically limit a OMNIPOTENT being.

Others have argued that God is omnipotent to the degree that he sets the laws and does but not break his own laws.

If he is the creator of natural laws, and desires not to violate them, then when he heals an amputee, he would do so by going back in time and keeping it from happening in the first place and we’d never know.

Or he would erase any inconsistency from the history of the universe and we’d never know.

Or if he wanted to change something that would be unexplainable, he’d change the laws of physics and then we wouldn’t consider it to be unexplainable anymore.

Lastly, all that my statement requires is that a god would chose not to perform miracles by violating the lmits of physics, but only by manipulating reality within probabilistic constraints. If its a choice then it does not limit omnipotence.

But “some god” could still steer the universe within probability limits, and he actually does this through our unexplainable free will ability to affect the universe within the limits of probability. Some “god” whatever you call it, only need to be the last step beyond the edge of scientific explanation, and that science itself requires. Science can never completely describe reality because science is a creature of reality. It is part of it and a map can never contain the territory that it is mapping, unless the map is greater than the territory.

So as far as God being possible or necessary, that does not require that he perform unexplainable mysteries, except the one unexplainable mystery of non-determinism, which allows the ability for “probabalistic miracles”. Would it be explainable if you flipped a coin and it cam up heads 50 straight times? A god could avoid violating laws, and still basically dtermine the coin flip for every binary quantum event.

“Everytihing” does not follow the laws of physics anyway. The laws of physics are non-deterministic. They only set limits so that part is a misunderstanding too.

[/quote]

G-d didn’t create the rules of logic, G-d being truth encompasses logic and cannot go against logic, because illogical things are untrue. For example…A =/= A is illogical. [/quote]

Could you clarify this? Did I write that he created the rules of logic (I just don’t remember or can’t find it). I may refer to the logic of the “question poser” not true logic but our attempt which as we know has paradoxes such as the burritio, or semantic ones such as of “absolute statements.” When I refer to logic here, I mean that for human logical constructs to try to limit God with the attribute “omnipotent” is an oxymoronic paradox due to limitations in the human ability to understand logic fully.

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Could you clarify this? Did I write that he created the rules of logic (I just don’t remember or can’t find it). I may refer to the logic of the “question poser” not true logic but our attempt which as we know has paradoxes such as the burritio, or semantic ones such as of “absolute statements.” When I refer to logic here, I mean that for human logical constructs to try to limit God with the attribute “omnipotent” is an oxymoronic paradox due to limitations in the human ability to understand logic fully. [/quote]

No, I was just going deeper and trying to simplify it. Jesus is the Word (gk. Logos) and if we know anything about Greek and Rhetoric logos is Greek for logic. It would follow…

[mertdawg]

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Could you clarify this? Did I write that he created the rules of logic (I just don’t remember or can’t find it). I may refer to the logic of the “question poser” not true logic but our attempt which as we know has paradoxes such as the burritio, or semantic ones such as of “absolute statements.” When I refer to logic here, I mean that for human logical constructs to try to limit God with the attribute “omnipotent” is an oxymoronic paradox due to limitations in the human ability to understand logic fully. [/quote]

No, I was just going deeper and trying to simplify it. Jesus is the Word (gk. Logos) and if we know anything about Greek and Rhetoric logos is Greek for logic. It would follow…[/quote]

Right. That’s what I thought you were doing. I was worried that I had used the word logic ambiguously to mean both true logic, and human logical constructs.

[Gkhan]

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Because in the supER logical, mind numbing plan and providence of God, man can be free, accountable, responsible and utterly predestined all at the same time.
[/quote]

Absolutely incorrect. There is no way this is possible, no way, no how. It isn’t because God isn’t capable, it’s simply because that is not how he designed it. There is no way that something can be known in advance, and also have had the chance or ability to do otherwise.

This does not speak to a inability of God at all. Actually it’s the opposite. See man often thinks, based on his own abilities or inabilities God functions the same way. What it speaks to in reality is that God is the master of his own faculties. I.E., he can also choose to not know and therefore not know. An omnipotent being can do this. Another scenario that is possible, is that choice is not temporal therefore all of it happens simultaneously, therefore there is no ‘pre’ anything as it happens all simultaneously.
The scenario that is absolutely impossible is that he knew what we would do before we do it and yet we still had the option to choose otherwise. Again. it isn’t because God can’t do it, it simply means that he did not do it that way.

The reason why this is hugely problematic, is that for predestination to be true, as a Christian, is slashes huge swaths of scripture as either wrong or utterly meaningless.

God requires us to gain wisdom as well as trust in him. He provides us the clues to understand, not everything, but enough. The clues he provides in scripture, in creation, in revelation does not support, one single stitch, of predestination. [/quote]

Or another way around this is there are an infinate possible outcomes for every person, every event, ect, and God, because he is omnipotent, can see ALL of these, while mankind can not because of freewill and can only react to what is happening as it happens.

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]mertdawg wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Could you clarify this? Did I write that he created the rules of logic (I just don’t remember or can’t find it). I may refer to the logic of the “question poser” not true logic but our attempt which as we know has paradoxes such as the burritio, or semantic ones such as of “absolute statements.” When I refer to logic here, I mean that for human logical constructs to try to limit God with the attribute “omnipotent” is an oxymoronic paradox due to limitations in the human ability to understand logic fully. [/quote]

No, I was just going deeper and trying to simplify it. Jesus is the Word (gk. Logos) and if we know anything about Greek and Rhetoric logos is Greek for logic. It would follow…[/quote]

Right. That’s what I thought you were doing. I was worried that I had used the word logic ambiguously to mean both true logic, and human logical constructs.[/quote]

Yeah.

[Tiribulus]

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< G-d didn’t create the rules of logic, G-d being truth encompasses logic and cannot go against logic, because illogical things are untrue. For example…A =/= A is illogical. [/quote]God isn’t the source and author of the rules of logic, but is Himself subject to said rules? Is that what you just said?

Edited to rephrase.

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< G-d didn’t create the rules of logic, G-d being truth encompasses logic and cannot go against logic, because illogical things are untrue. For example…A =/= A is illogical. [/quote]God isn’t the source and author of the rules of logic, but is Himself subject to said rules? Is that what you just said?

Edited to rephrase.
[/quote]

…No, G-d is not the author of logic. He is logic. Yes, he would not be able to go against logic, like the statement ‘I am not who I am’ is not possible because G-d cannot go against himself or contradict himself.

[Tiribulus]

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< G-d didn’t create the rules of logic, G-d being truth encompasses logic and cannot go against logic, because illogical things are untrue. For example…A =/= A is illogical. [/quote]God isn’t the source and author of the rules of logic, but is Himself subject to said rules? Is that what you just said?

Edited to rephrase.
[/quote]…No, G-d is not the author of logic. He is logic. Yes, he would not be able to go against logic, like the statement ‘I am not who I am’ is not possible because G-d cannot go against himself or contradict himself.[/quote]Very good Chris. That’s why I asked. I would accept the proposition that God is logic as long as it is qualified by saying “but not merely logic and logic is not God”. I assume you agree.

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< G-d didn’t create the rules of logic, G-d being truth encompasses logic and cannot go against logic, because illogical things are untrue. For example…A =/= A is illogical. [/quote]God isn’t the source and author of the rules of logic, but is Himself subject to said rules? Is that what you just said?

Edited to rephrase.
[/quote]…No, G-d is not the author of logic. He is logic. Yes, he would not be able to go against logic, like the statement ‘I am not who I am’ is not possible because G-d cannot go against himself or contradict himself.[/quote]Very good Chris. That’s why I asked. I would accept the proposition that God is logic as long as it is qualified by saying “but not merely logic and logic is not God”. I assume you agree.

[/quote]

I’m not sure what that second sentence means, but if your asking if making a logic sentence is the same as making G-d, then no.

[Tiribulus]

God is logic, but logic is not all He is nor is logic God.

[Brother_Chris]

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
God is logic, but logic is not all He is nor is logic God.[/quote]

G-d is pure spirit, one substance. That substance is love, love is truth, truth encompasses logic and logic is the way in which truth interacts with itself (a la not contradict itself), logic is the way in which everything works – imperfectly except G-d – in the world.

[pat]

[quote]saveski wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Because in the supER logical, mind numbing plan and providence of God, man can be free, accountable, responsible and utterly predestined all at the same time.
[/quote]

Absolutely incorrect. There is no way this is possible, no way, no how. It isn’t because God isn’t capable, it’s simply because that is not how he designed it. There is no way that something can be known in advance, and also have had the chance or ability to do otherwise.

This does not speak to a inability of God at all. Actually it’s the opposite. See man often thinks, based on his own abilities or inabilities God functions the same way. What it speaks to in reality is that God is the master of his own faculties. I.E., he can also choose to not know and therefore not know. An omnipotent being can do this. Another scenario that is possible, is that choice is not temporal therefore all of it happens simultaneously, therefore there is no ‘pre’ anything as it happens all simultaneously.
The scenario that is absolutely impossible is that he knew what we would do before we do it and yet we still had the option to choose otherwise. Again. it isn’t because God can’t do it, it simply means that he did not do it that way.

The reason why this is hugely problematic, is that for predestination to be true, as a Christian, is slashes huge swaths of scripture as either wrong or utterly meaningless.

God requires us to gain wisdom as well as trust in him. He provides us the clues to understand, not everything, but enough. The clues he provides in scripture, in creation, in revelation does not support, one single stitch, of predestination. [/quote]

Lots of good trip weed being smoked in this discussion.

You seem to have a direct line to the Lord himself. Can you please ask the Great One -

HOW COME THERE HAVEN’T BEEN ANY AMPUTEE HEALINGS?[/quote]

I have already answered your question. The answer is, you don’t know if it ever happened or not. Do you know the fate of every person who is an amputee that has ever lived and know that not one of them ever received healing? Just because you’ve never heard of it, doesn’t mean it has not happened.