Why Doesn't God Heal Amputees?

[Guest Doug5]

This is the 10 questions video from that site. It has some problems, but it is an interesting site when you have some time.

 

http://www.whydoesgodhateamputees.com/video10.htm

[Vixentrox]

Yes that is a very good site. It has been brought up a number of times here but always good to refresh the post for newer folks.

[LadyFeline]

You know, we had this discussion elsewhere just a couple days ago.

 

One of our resident Christians actually came in and said That God has healed amputees. His proof? The story where Jesus stopped the bleeding after Peter lopped some guy's ear off in Gethsemane.

 

That's right. Healing an ear is the exact same thing as regrowing a severed limb (because ears are limbs, donchaknow)

[Grandpa Harley]

You know, we had this discussion elsewhere just a couple days ago.

 

One of our resident Christians actually came in and said That God has healed amputees. His proof? The story where Jesus stopped the bleeding after Peter lopped some guy's ear off in Gethsemane.

 

That's right. Healing an ear is the exact same thing as regrowing a severed limb (because ears are limbs, donchaknow)

If you cut one off, it doesn't regrow... normally... rather like a limb but it seems for Jeebus' friends one swallow makes a summer.

 

My comment was that newts must be the most loved of God's vertebrates since if they lose a limb, they regrow it.

 

As a complete side bar, there were experiments in the 1940s about limb regeneration. It seems, if you prevent callus forming over the stump, there is every sign of at least partial regeneration. Unfortunately, it is agonising, and all died of blood poisoning... I don't need to elaborate WHO tried such a thing... but it seems that we can do it... just not in any way one would care to

[Former Follier]

Bravo! I just sent an email to my former (and my parents' current) pastor with a link to this video and the request that he respond. If he does, I'm sure it will be entertaining and will be sure to post it here. Stay tuned!

[Guest Doug5]

His proof? The story where Jesus stopped the bleeding after Peter lopped some guy's ear off in Gethsemane.

 

You cannot quote the movie Cinderella to prove that the stories of Cinderella are true. Of course the book says they are true, that is the source of the story.

 

Show me someone with medical records of a missing a limb, and then medical records of the limb restored. That would be a HUGE story, yet there are zero cases. If god existed and cared for humans, he could do a much clearer job expressing his existence and plan. How do we know which religious book is correct? Why is the evidence for god all ambiguous and could just as easily be random chance. Why does god not show up in your room to explain the options to you personally if you ask him to do so. Is he too busy? All christians know that if they pray for god to reveal himself in this manner to them, that it will not happen, yet they hold on to the fairy tell beliefs that it does.

[Ouroboros]

One of our resident Christians actually came in and said That God has healed amputees. His proof? The story where Jesus stopped the bleeding after Peter lopped some guy's ear off in Gethsemane.

And I think he/she (the Christian) misses the point of the word "amputees"... it's plural and not just one time in history (even if that story was true or not). There's 100's of millions of people in the world that needs to be healed, not some frigging soldier 2000 years ago. He's dead now, so why can't Mr. BigShotJesus turn on his healing-engine and put some miracle-juice in it and start making people whole again? Either because he doesn't want to (not so benevolent after all), or he can't (not so omnipotent either) or he's just not around (neither omnipresent nor existing or maybe he's just busy in a different dimension playing poker with the Devil).

[Lycorth]

His proof? The story where Jesus stopped the bleeding after Peter lopped some guy's ear off in Gethsemane.

 

You cannot quote the movie Cinderella to prove that the stories of Cinderella are true. Of course the book says they are true, that is the source of the story.

 

Gotta love that good-old Xian circular reasoning

[Purple]

Why Doesn't God Heal Amputees?

 

Because he's a dick.

[Garnet]

Because he's a dick.

 

Now, now. Don't be putting down dicks. At least they exist and some of them are quite pleasurea...er...useful.

[Purple]

Because he's a dick.

 

Now, now. Don't be putting down dicks. At least they exist and some of them are quite pleasurea...er...useful.

 

HEY, at least I managed to not be verbose.

[Grandpa Harley]

Pithy is the word I'd have used...

[Former Follier]

I decided to send the link to this video in an email to my former Senior, Youth and Music Pastors at the church I attended more than eight years ago. I prefaced the video by a lengthy note and I do mean lengthy.

 

To date, I have only received one response and that was from my former Youth Pastor, John Cummins, which I received just an hour ago to which I've already replied. I am enclosing the entire chain... the initial email, his response and my reply. If there are any more additions, I will post them here as well.

 

Please critique me and let me know if you feel there is a better way to handle the matter. I honestly wrote the three of them because I wanted the questions answered from a practicing "strong" Christian's perspective. So far... no dice.

 

MY INITIAL EMAIL:

 

Gentlemen,

 

I am a long-time member of FBC and am now an apostate for many reasons, most of which are intellectual. I have provided a link to a video that I feel sums my apostasy up fairly well. If there are legitimate answers to the questions posed in this video, it would be enough to bring me back into the fold. As it is, there are simply too many contradictions concerning the basic tenets of the Christian faith: God's attributes (omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence); His love versus His wrath (which cannot be reconciled by the circular logic of His justice); His Creator-ship and the belief that one of His created beings (Lucifer) fell from grace only to become the very force of evil that God allowed to come into existence by his creation.

 

I have given you the courtesies of addressing you all with respect and with respect to your shared beliefs; I ask that you return the favor and respond to this email respectfully in answer to my sincere questions.

 

I hope that you will give credence to this email as it is sincere, I simply choose to withhold my identity as I have relatives that continue to faithfully attend services and I wouldn't want them to suffer because of my lack of faith. I am also concealing my identity because I do not wish to be proselytized. At one time I considered myself a devout Christian and took my walk in faith very seriously. I know the Bible better than most so please do not insult my intelligence by stating that I was never a true believer. I feel that the one thing that can drive people to apostasy quicker than anything is the acute, objective reading of the Bible.

 

To sum this email up, please reply to this email with your various responses.

 

The book of Matthew (KJV) states in chapter five, verses 42-44, the following:

 

42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.

 

No other meaning can be derived from that passage other than the denotation that the words themselves portray: even if you consider me your "enemy" as an apostate or even a "mission", you are required by God to comply with my requests as a way of showing His love. I am not asking anything outrageous such as a monetary gift or the performance of an impossible feat, I am simply asking that you reply to this email in response to the ten questions posed in the video at the below posted link.

 

I know all of you quite well so please do not think that I am merely someone that you met in passing. I was a regular. I was someone who was involved in everything and made winning souls my ultimate goal. I tried to embody Christ's love and did so joyfully. The common "If you claim to be an 'un-believer' then you were never a true believer in the first place" argument won't work in my scenario. I had faith and it was only shaken by the one true unforgivable sin in the Baptist church and that is free thought.

 

If my identity is revealed through the course of our (hopefully) continued correspondence, I trust that I can assume that our correspondences will be kept confidential in order to protect the reputations and testimonies of my attending family members, as I mentioned before.

 

That being said, please view the video (it is not vulgar or tasteless but very poignant) at your leisure and reply. I look forward to a timely response. For the sake of communicating, you can refer to me as Former Follier.

 

Sincerely,

 

F.F.

 

http://www.whydoesgodhateamputees.com/video10.htm

 

YOUTH MINISTER'S RESPONSE:

 

Dear Former,

You are a foolish man to tempt the Lord God. It has been my experience that this attitude you express stems from a desire to justify a sinful life style. The Word of God is clear and true and your foolish questions do nothing to alter that fact. I will not attempt to answer specific questions on areas where your heart has been darkened. You will get your chance to ask God Himself when you one day stand before Him. In the mean time my prayer is that you will find God's peace and love that are available to all those who have put their trust in Him.

J. Cummins

 

MY REPLY:

 

John,

 

I can take your lack of a reasonable response to my email as nothing more than your own form of a justification for an irrational and unreasonable belief system that hinges on the believer's willingness to abandon reason (a God-given trait?) and rely solely on emotion.

 

I addressed you, your father and Pastor Van Raiden very politely and incredibly respectfully but am saddened by the degree of hostility that I received in return. I was in no way attacking you, the church, your shared beliefs or anything else you hold dear. However, you found it perfectly acceptable to not only denigrate my intelligence but my morality as well. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but morality is a social construct as well as an innate behavior not a divine mediation. The Christian emphasis on the Ten Commandments (presumably the first set and not the second set) is arcane to say the least. "Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy." How, then, do you justify those who provide humanitarian efforts on the Sabbath such as ER doctors, policemen, firefighters, soldiers, etc? Are these public servants really going to feel God's wrath for saving countless lives instead of parking themselves in a pew?

 

If you succeeded in doing one thing with your email it is this: reaffirming my notions that Christians do not live life out of love for Christ but out of fear of His wrath and with an overwhelming sense of moral hauteur. You wish to place yourself on a pedestal and, in doing so, judge me for my transgressions. I'm sorry to say that you do not exude Christ's love but are merely a reinforcement of my disbelief.

 

I could attack FBC and its inaction in many cases as fervently and heatedly as you did in your email but I believe that my attitude displays more care and compassion than your own. For the sake of not being called a liar, I will relay a few names which are devastating to the church... Mr. Wasson, Mr. Bartlett, Pastor Horner, Dr. Cornelius. What do all of these men have in common? They are/were all self-professing Christians that did far greater acts of wickedness than I could ever hope to.

 

A wise man once said, "It takes nothing for a good man to commit good deeds or for a bad man to commit bad deeds but for a good man to commit bad deeds, that takes religion."

 

I really have no more to say to you than I have already said. I feel no resentment to you for lashing out at me as you did; I was equally as distraught when the walls of my faith were crumbling around me due to the egregious act of honestly thinking about what I was learning and looking at my faith objectively. If you were honest with yourself, you would admit that you have never done so. You are still in the infantile state of belief.

 

For every rationalization that you have to make for your God, that is one tick against your conscience... one more puzzle piece that just doesn't fit. I know how it is to believe and I know how it is to "un-believe" and my apostasy far surpasses anything that any church or any god could ever have to offer and that is the comfort of knowing that this one life that I am currently living is all that I have and that it should be cherished.

 

In closing, my heart has not been darkened but my eyes have been opened. While you offer to pray for me I will, in return, think for you.

 

Sincerely,

 

F.F.

 

Any comments or suggestions? I'd appreciate the input.

[woodsmoke]

I didn't read the original message, but your reply is fairly solid as far as content. I didn't see any major errors, but it could use a few minor grammatical corrections. I hope you don't mind my taking the liberty of playing English teacher.

 

I can take your lack of a reasonable response to my email as nothing more than your own form of a justification...

 

I addressed you, your father and Pastor Van Raiden very politely and incredibly respectfully, but and I am saddened by the degree of hostility that I received in return. It was in no way my intention to attacking you, the church, your shared beliefs or anything else you hold dear, however (no need for a comma here) you found it perfectly acceptable to not only to denigrate my intelligence, but my morality as well. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but morality is as much a social construct as well as an innate behavior; not and is in no sense a divine mediation. The Christian emphasis on the Ten Commandments (presumably the first set and not rather than the second set) is arcane, to say the least...

 

If you succeeded in doing one thing with your email it is this: reaffirming my notions that Christians do not live life not out of love for Christ but out of fear of His wrath, and with an overwhelming sense of moral hauteur. You wish to place yourself on a pedestal and, in so doing, judge me for my transgressions. I'm sorry to say that you do not exude Christ's love but are merely a reinforcement of my disbelief.

 

I could attack FBC and its inaction in many cases as fervently and heatedly as you did me in your email response, but I believe that my attitude displays more care and compassion than your own. For the sake of not being called a liar credibility... Pastor Horner and Dr. Cornelius. What do all of these men have in common?...

 

"...commit bad deeds, but for a good man to commit bad deeds..."

 

I really have no more to say to you than that which I have already said. I feel no resentment toward you for lashing out at me as you did... If you were honest with yourself, you would admit that you have never done so...

 

For Every rationalization that you have to make for your God, that is one more tick against your conscience; one more puzzle piece that just doesn't fit. I know how it is to believe and I know how it is to "un-believe," and my apostasy far surpasses anything that any church or any god could ever have to offer: and that is the comfort of knowing that this one life that I am currently living is all that I have, and that it should be cherished...

 

Strikethroughs denote words that don't fit or are unnecessary, added words are italicized and changed/added punctuation is bolded (which isn't incredibly easy to see in a casual reading, but if you keep that in mind you shouldn't have any difficulty spotting them).

 

Like I said, nothing major. You used "that" in a fair number of places where it's really not necessary (which, I've discovered lately, is a grammatical error virtually everyone seems to be constantly guilty of without realizing it), had a few run-on sentences and needed a bit more (appropriate) punctuation in some places, but other than that it was a fairly solid read.

[Former Follier]

I didn't read the original message, but your reply is fairly solid as far as content. I didn't see any major errors, but it could use a few minor grammatical corrections. I hope you don't mind my taking the liberty of playing English teacher.

 

Strikethroughs denote words that don't fit or are unnecessary, added words are italicized and changed/added punctuation is bolded (which isn't incredibly easy to see in a casual reading, but if you keep that in mind you shouldn't have any difficulty spotting them).

 

Like I said, nothing major. You used "that" in a fair number of places where it's really not necessary (which, I've discovered lately, is a grammatical error virtually everyone seems to be constantly guilty of without realizing it), had a few run-on sentences and needed a bit more (appropriate) punctuation in some places, but other than that it was a fairly solid read.

 

I can't help but laugh. I knew my grammatical errors would be aired (not that I mind) but I do hope you realize that I wrote my reply in less than fifteen minutes. I am just glad I didn't have more spelling errors than I did. I've always lacked in the proof-reading department. Perhaps I could forward future correspondence to you, my editor. haha

[woodsmoke]

Heh, no worries. How do you think I got to the point of being able to critique others' grammar so well?

[R. S. Martin]

Please critique me and let me know if you feel there is a better way to handle the matter. I honestly wrote the three of them because I wanted the questions answered from a practicing "strong" Christian's perspective. So far... no dice.

 

I read through the whole thing. First of all I am glad you did this. That scripture passage was good. I do think you contradict yourself when you claim that the entire thing is kept in strictest confidentiality, and then you post a man's name and the initials of his church on a public forum. Here is part of what you say about confidentiality:

 

I trust that I can assume that our correspondences will be kept confidential in order to protect the reputations and testimonies of my attending family members, as I mentioned before.

 

I think that is pretty strong and should be honoured by all parties, including yourself. I don't understand why you don't. Are you absolutely sure that he does not--and never will--read this forum? Do you know for a fact that nobody on this forum--members and/or visitors--knows him or will know him in the future? Those are questions I would consider of utmost importance if I professed this level of confidentiality. In other words, it seems you are claiming that leaking confidentiality would have major consequences to your loved ones. Do I understand you correctly on this? I am asking myself how honest this really is. Are you not more afraid that you will get into trouble with your family than that your family will come into disrepute? Just asking.

 

Secondly, I find that if I want a response on such controversial issues I have to be as succinct and to-the-point as is humanly possible. Since your purpose is to have them watch the video and respond to it, one brief paragraph, plus an opening and closing sentence, would probably be ideal. I will rewrite it, using your words as far as possible:

 

Gentlemen,

 

I am a long-time member of FBC and am now an apostate for many reasons, most of which are intellectual. I have provided a link to a video that I feel sums up the reasons for my apostasy fairly well. If there are legitimate answers to the questions posed in this video, I would like to know them; it would be enough to bring me back into the fold. I am simply asking that you reply to this email in response to the ten questions presented in the video at the link posted below.

 

According to Matthew 5:42-44 (KJV) you are obligated to respond:

 

42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.

 

Thus, even if you consider me your "enemy" as an apostate or even a "mission", you are required by God to comply with my requests as a way of showing His love.

 

[P]lease view the video (it is not vulgar or tasteless but very poignant) at your leisure and reply. I look forward to a timely response. For the sake of communicating, you can refer to me as Former Follier. I wish to remain anonymous to protect the reputations and testimonies of my Christian family members who attend your church.

 

Sincerely,

 

F.F.

 

http://www.whydoesgodhateamputees.com/video10.htm

 

You will note that I rearranged a few sentences, and added or deleted a few words here and there. All of this was done for impact and clarity. If we use few words, those words have to count. That is the philosophy behind it. You will also note that I cut out all but the bare essensials regarding confidentiality. I think the less fuss the better. These pastors are, after all, human beings and they will play guessing games as to who you really are. I don't think they like being kept in the dark.

 

I also looked at your response to John. It seems you do not expect continued correspondence. Because if you do, you will have to take out all the parts that express a defensive attitude and that accuse him of being less than respectful. We should not have to go to this length for something from Christians if they are what they profess to be. However, the fact of life is that the Christians consider it beneath their dignity to speak to an apostate as an equal. It's not within their radar or ability. If we want anything from them, we have to take this into account and arrange our interactions accordingly.

 

I keep rereading the quote at the top of this post. I really think it should be included in your email to them. Here is a totally new way that you could have presented your request:

 

Dear Gentlemen,

 

I am a long-time member of FBC and am now an apostate for many reasons, most of which are intellectual.

 

I have provided a link to a video that I feel sums up the reasons for my apostasy fairly well. It presents ten questions to Christians. I would like to see answers from a practicing "strong" Christian's perspective. If there are legitimate answers to the questions posed in this video, it would be enough to bring me back into the fold.

 

I look forward to a timely response. For the sake of communicating, you can refer to me as Former Follier. I wish to remain anonymous to protect the reputations and testimonies of my Christian family members who attend your church.

 

Sincerely,

 

F.F.

 

That is a fairly extensive critique and may be more than you asked for. Take what is of value and leave the rest.

 

If you want to re-address the issue with the men who did not respond, you can always give them a "way of escape" or allow them to "save face" by suggesting perhaps they did not get your earlier message. Then repeat your questions or requests as you see fit.

 

As I said at the beginning, I am glad you are doing this. I think it's good if Christians become aware of the problems of their religion. However, the abject disrespect they are showing you is not indicative that anyone is becoming aware of anything. They did not even acknowledge receipt of your emails, which equals failure to acknowledge your questions and even your person as legitimate. All the same, we have to start somewhere.

[R. S. Martin]

One more point. Are you committed to return to christianity if they can give good answers to those questions? I ask because it seems you are making the promise that you will. You say:

 

If there are legitimate answers to the questions posed in this video, it would be enough to bring me back into the fold.

 

Here's another way you could say the same thing without committing yourself to some unknown condition:

 

If there are legitimate answers to the questions posed in this video, I would like to know them; I might rethink my position.

 

The word "might" in there indicates that it is a possibility but it is not a definite promise.

 

That's the way I see things. Not everybody sees things the way I do.

[R. S. Martin]

I mentioned about my concern about breaking confidentiality. I am not suggesting in any way that it was wrong of you to share this issue. These things are too big for one person to carry alone. Maybe you did not use real names. If you didn't, then there should be no problem. I would probably stay away from using real names in this kind of situation.

[Former Follier]

Wow, and I thought Woodsmoke was brutal! I'm only joking. I'm relatively thick-skinned.

 

As I pointed out earlier, these emails were composed at work which means that I was minimizing and maximizing the entire time. My emails are generally more "stream of consciousness" than anything so the most I can hope to do is stay on topic and present some sort of cogent thought for the recipient.

 

I'll try to answer your questions. Please let me know if I leave anything out.

 

CONFIDENTIALITY:

 

I was in no way trying to reveal any more information about him than he could possibly reveal about me. My intent was to keep both of our identities confidential to anyone who might review our correspondences. I originally posted the chain here because this is the actual place where I found the video and I love feedback from my fellow "heathens." When I posted our emails, it didn't even cross my mind to remove his name or to insert an alias. Perhaps I should've and I apologize to all for the oversight.

 

It is very possible that this pastor could be a regular to this board but somehow I doubt it. If you notice the way in which he dealt with me, you can surmise that he has little to no respect for anyone that doesn't follow his prescribed teachings so I very much doubt he's too concerned with or even interested in the inner workings of our iniquitous organization. It is possible, though. As I stated, in my initial email, if my identity were to be made known to him, I would expect him to lend me the same courtesies that I intended on lending him. Which brings me to my next response.

 

FAMILY:

 

My honest fear is that my attending family members (parents) would be ostercized if this pastor and his father, the senior pastor, were to leak my state of apostasy. I fear no retribution from family at all. They all know of my lack of religious conviction and even my dismissal of their core beliefs. They have known for years. The way my parents treat me has changed drastically through the course of time: there was a disbelief stage, an anger and resentment stage and, after quite awhile, an acceptance stage. My two older brothers (one of which is a member of this site) have never shunned me or treated me any differently and they are both professing Christians although one is moderately religious and the other is devout. I have no fear of my parents as I am adult, albeit a young one, and have lived my own life for nearly a decade.

 

RETURNING:

 

... would never happen. Yes, my vocabulary says in plain English that if given proof of God's miraculous work in the day-to-day lives of humans that I would return to the church and to God. I'm torn at this point. Perhaps I included this bit in my email for the people that I was sending it to. I didn't want them to think that I was just sending unnecessary jabs their way but had actual, honest questions. That is the case; I am genuinely curious about the responses that a "strong" practicing Christian would give to the questions, as I mentioned earlier.

 

This is the point where I am torn though: Who wouldn't turn to God if there was irrefutable proof of his existence and his works? I'm not talking feelings or emotions and especially not his "Word". I'm talking about the actual physical presence of a God, whatever form that might take. I do not believe in any Gods but if I were to it would take much more than a pastor telling me, "This is the way it is... this is what God wants... this is what you should do... this is the outcome." That doesn't fly with me.

 

LENGTH:

 

I write too much... I know that. I don't always use proper grammar or punctuation... I know that as well. The reason why I was so verbose in my opening email to them is because I wanted them to know that I was a real person that they dealt with on a daily basis and had a high level of interaction with, not just some schmuck that was cruising their website and decided to land a blow and then ske-daddle like all the apologists on here (with exception to a select few). I was hoping to actually break down the pretentious barriers and allow them to defend their point with an open and honest dialogue. You're right, it didn't work. Will an atheist or an agnostic ever be able to really talk to a person of faith on matters concerning their religion on the same plane? Who knows? I sure didn't get through to them, did I?

 

You have to understand that I KNOW these people. I went on a missions trip to Mexico with the pastor that I quoted earlier in this thread. I went door-to-door with him every Saturday morning when I was a teenager. I was his "go to" guy in the youth group. I was the volunteer. I was the ringleader. With all of that you'd think he would put some stock into what I have to say. The only problem is that I was not able to convey to him my actual identity for fear of what might befall my parents who are completely unrelated to this and who I do love but pity for their gullibility and ignorance. I would love to come out and say to him, "Pastor John, this is Nathan" but, sadly, after all that we've been through together as "brothers" he would turn hs back on me and betray me to the current youth group and would then make continued membership for my parents that much more difficult. My mother has been a member of the church for nearly 45 years and my father for more than 35, and to feel as if they're being forced out would devastate them. The church would rationalize it because, naturally it's the parents' fault when a child rejects their teachings, right? Fundamental Baptist mentality at its best.

 

 

 

He actually responded to my reply but I don't think I will be posting it.

[Grandpa Harley]

If it was deathless as the other one, you should (the moron). Hell it should be sent ot the news services

[Former Follier]

Deathless?

[Guest Florida]

Why doesn't God heal amputees or do anything else? Because He already finished everything.

 

It's up to you now. Take it or leave it.

[Former Follier]

He already finished everything? At what point did he kick back in his celestial recliner, sip his lemonade and say, "Good thing I kicked that shit off my boots! I'm finished."?

[R. S. Martin]

FF, thanks for the additional information. It is of no concern to me how you go about your personal business. You asked for critique so I gave it. Rather merciless, I'll admit. Sorry.