Jeff you seem to be asking the question that we have all asked Why do bad things happen to good people ? I dont think there is one single answer. I certainly do not think that bad things only happen to non believers. But to answer that question we have to have all the knowlege of God. Sometimes its to teach us, sometimes its man that causes these things to occur to other men, there are so many reasons, The question you seem to want an answer to is why doesnt a loving God just cure these things believe me I have personally struggled with this question in my own life. The answer is the same as the cause there are so many reasons,each must be answered individually and only God can do that. Just as we punish a child sometimes for doing wrong things to teach them for their own good. God lets us be punished for our good we may not realize its for our good only God knows our hearts so what you see as bad may not be bad. With others Im sure its because they reaped what they sowed , but again we could only answer these questions if we were all knowing and we are not. Only God is.Thats why it seems to me the only answer is to understand God loves us, he has his reasons and we may not understand them but he is always fair and always looking out for us even if we do not get it. Faith in its essence is to trust in things we can not see do not always understand.
Why Doesn't God Heal Amputees?
- Thread starter jeffhughes
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I ask God... I ask God to take away my pride, and God said,"No." He said it was not for Him to take away, But for me to give up. I asked God to make my handicapped child whole, And God said, "No." He said her spirit is whole, Her body is only temporary. I asked God to grant me patience, And God said, "NO." Jesus said that patience is a by-product of tribulation, It isn't granted it is earned. I asked God to give me happiness, And God sied, "No." He said He gives blessings, Happiness is up to me. I asked God to spare me pain,'And God said, "No." He said suffering draws you apart from wordly cares And brings you closer to me." I asked God to make my spirit grow, And God said, "No." He said I must grow on my own, But He will prune me and make me fruitful. I asked God if he loved me. And God said, "Yes." I asked God to help me love others As much as he loves me, And God said, "Ah, finally you have the idea!"Someone shared this poem with me and I wanted to pass it on, the author is unknown. I do not have an answer to the question asked, but I believe God is most interested in healing a person from within (spiritually). Not to say that he does't heal physically, mentally etc. I believe all things are possible with God! Just because I have not seen it does not mean it has not happen.
This thread puts me in mind of what my mother used to always say to me That is " out of everthing bad comes something good" when I was younger I thought that was a crock, but the older I grew the more I saw it was true. I have found this is often how God works. Even his death a bad thing brought Good our salvation.A person dies, a baby is born, A person falls down another picks them up ect ect It's all how you look at life if you dwell on the death, you fail to notice the miracle of the birth, if you dwell on your fall you fail to not notice the one lifting you up. Everything bad that has ever happened to me and others I have seen somewhere down the line turns out to be for a reason. It may be to make you stronger, or to be able to allow you to empathize with another you meet later in life, it maybe a lesson you pass on to your children or a friend, because you have experienced it. The reasons are many, and as varied as the many things we experience.the secret is do not get bogged down in the bad thing but rather lift up head and look for the good that God will bring from it. I have never seen it fail you just have to be open to seeing it.
(kriss;55928)
Jeff you seem to be asking the question that we have all asked Why do bad things happen to good people ?
That is specifically not what I was asking. I can accept that bad things happen to good people and that good things happen to bad people. But I understand how it is a potentially confusing that I've asked, so I have tried to lay it out in the form of a logical argument. Maybe this will clear it up:Assumptions:God exists.God heals people in this world today.God is able to heal anyone of anything (omnipotence).Argument:P1. There are reports of God healing people of internal illnesses and "non-visible" conditions, but no reports of God healing amputees by growing back their limbs.P1. God has reasons for healing people - He doesn't just heal people arbitrarily.P2. We can suggest that often God's reasons include displaying His power, bringing others toward salvation, furthering the ministry of the one healed, etc.P3. Healing people of internal illnesses and "non-visible" conditions would accomplish these ends.P4. Healing amputees by growing back their limbs would also accomplish these ends.P5. There is no discernible difference between internal illnesses and amputation, except in virtue of their visibility.P6. Visibility should not be an important factor in deciding whether to heal or not heal someone.P7. There is not likely to be any statistical difference between people in these two categories - whether in amounts of faith, percentage of Christians, or any other important factor.C1. If these premises are true, then there does not seem to be any reason for God to heal people in one category but not the other.C2. Therefore, one of the initial assumptions should be doubted or denied.So, in other words, if we don't see reports of amputees being healed, it is logical to assume that either a) God is not omnipotent,
God does not truly heal people in the world today, or c) God does not exist. But of course, I am open to hearing your criticisms of this argument - that's the reason I'm here in the first place.(kriss;55928)
Thats why it seems to me the only answer is to understand God loves us, he has his reasons and we may not understand them but he is always fair and always looking out for us even if we do not get it. Faith in its essence is to trust in things we can not see do not always understand.
I understand that. I'm just looking for the evidence of His love to see if it is genuine.(setfree;55929)
I asked God to make my handicapped child whole, And God said, "No." He said her spirit is whole, Her body is only temporary. ...Someone shared this poem with me and I wanted to pass it on, the author is unknown. I do not have an answer to the question asked, but I believe God is most interested in healing a person from within (spiritually). Not to say that he does't heal physically, mentally etc. I believe all things are possible with God! Just because I have not seen it does not mean it has not happen.
Certainly true. But I'm operating under the assumption that God does, indeed, heal people physically and mentally, no matter whether His primary interest is spiritual healing or not. But thank you for the poem, it was wonderful
(kriss;55932)
Everything bad that has ever happened to me and others I have seen somewhere down the line turns out to be for a reason. It may be to make you stronger, or to be able to allow you to empathize with another you meet later in life, it maybe a lesson you pass on to your children or a friend, because you have experienced it. The reasons are many, and as varied as the many things we experience.the secret is do not get bogged down in the bad thing but rather lift up head and look for the good that God will bring from it. I have never seen it fail you just have to be open to seeing it.
This is, again, not what I'm talking about, but I just wanted to point out that, while what you're saying is true, you could find the same thing in a self-help book about "overcoming failure" or whatever. The idea is that bad things happen, but you can't get down on yourself or the good things will pass you by. That good and bad things happen to everyone is a fact of life, and doesn't necessitate that they have reasons behind them. But at any rate, as I said, it's not what I'm talking about. So that's a side point.
Jeff you seem to be asking the question that we have all asked Why do bad things happen to good people ?
That is specifically not what I was asking. I can accept that bad things happen to good people and that good things happen to bad people. But I understand how it is a potentially confusing that I've asked, so I have tried to lay it out in the form of a logical argument. Maybe this will clear it up:Assumptions:God exists.God heals people in this world today.God is able to heal anyone of anything (omnipotence).Argument:P1. There are reports of God healing people of internal illnesses and "non-visible" conditions, but no reports of God healing amputees by growing back their limbs.P1. God has reasons for healing people - He doesn't just heal people arbitrarily.P2. We can suggest that often God's reasons include displaying His power, bringing others toward salvation, furthering the ministry of the one healed, etc.P3. Healing people of internal illnesses and "non-visible" conditions would accomplish these ends.P4. Healing amputees by growing back their limbs would also accomplish these ends.P5. There is no discernible difference between internal illnesses and amputation, except in virtue of their visibility.P6. Visibility should not be an important factor in deciding whether to heal or not heal someone.P7. There is not likely to be any statistical difference between people in these two categories - whether in amounts of faith, percentage of Christians, or any other important factor.C1. If these premises are true, then there does not seem to be any reason for God to heal people in one category but not the other.C2. Therefore, one of the initial assumptions should be doubted or denied.So, in other words, if we don't see reports of amputees being healed, it is logical to assume that either a) God is not omnipotent,
Thats why it seems to me the only answer is to understand God loves us, he has his reasons and we may not understand them but he is always fair and always looking out for us even if we do not get it. Faith in its essence is to trust in things we can not see do not always understand.
I understand that. I'm just looking for the evidence of His love to see if it is genuine.(setfree;55929)
I asked God to make my handicapped child whole, And God said, "No." He said her spirit is whole, Her body is only temporary. ...Someone shared this poem with me and I wanted to pass it on, the author is unknown. I do not have an answer to the question asked, but I believe God is most interested in healing a person from within (spiritually). Not to say that he does't heal physically, mentally etc. I believe all things are possible with God! Just because I have not seen it does not mean it has not happen.
Certainly true. But I'm operating under the assumption that God does, indeed, heal people physically and mentally, no matter whether His primary interest is spiritual healing or not. But thank you for the poem, it was wonderful
Everything bad that has ever happened to me and others I have seen somewhere down the line turns out to be for a reason. It may be to make you stronger, or to be able to allow you to empathize with another you meet later in life, it maybe a lesson you pass on to your children or a friend, because you have experienced it. The reasons are many, and as varied as the many things we experience.the secret is do not get bogged down in the bad thing but rather lift up head and look for the good that God will bring from it. I have never seen it fail you just have to be open to seeing it.
This is, again, not what I'm talking about, but I just wanted to point out that, while what you're saying is true, you could find the same thing in a self-help book about "overcoming failure" or whatever. The idea is that bad things happen, but you can't get down on yourself or the good things will pass you by. That good and bad things happen to everyone is a fact of life, and doesn't necessitate that they have reasons behind them. But at any rate, as I said, it's not what I'm talking about. So that's a side point.
(Jeff Wrote)Assumptions:God exists.God heals people in this world today.God is able to heal anyone of anything (omnipotence).Argument
1. There are reports of God healing people of internal illnesses and "non-visible" conditions, but no reports of God healing amputees by growing back their limbs.P1. God has reasons for healing people - He doesn't just heal people arbitrarily.P2. We can suggest that often God's reasons include displaying His power, bringing others toward salvation, furthering the ministry of the one healed, etc.P3. Healing people of internal illnesses and "non-visible" conditions would accomplish these ends.P4. Healing amputees by growing back their limbs would also accomplish these ends.P5. There is no discernible difference between internal illnesses and amputation, except in virtue of their visibility.P6. Visibility should not be an important factor in deciding whether to heal or not heal someone.P7. There is not likely to be any statistical difference between people in these two categories - whether in amounts of faith, percentage of Christians, or any other important factor.C1. If these premises are true, then there does not seem to be any reason for God to heal people in one category but not the other.C2. Therefore, one of the initial assumptions should be doubted or denied.Although you have presented a very good argument outline, the fact is this very subject could only be argued amongst those who do not believe in God.I don't care how convincingly or eloquently someone here may present to you their opinion on this - you are not going to be convinced until you see an arm sprout from a stump.Let's put the whole notion of a "healed" amputee in perspective... For today's society to actually believe God himself "healed" an amputee, He would have to call in the press and make sure every camera got a shot of him personally touching the amputee and watching the limb regrow. If an amputee simply re-grew their limb, society would contribute it to freak science / genetic modification, etc. etc. etc. How many people (yourself included) would actually give glory to God for this "miracle"?Again, Christianity is based on faith - and only a handful of Christians would believe it was God alone who performed that type of miracle today.I know you will never be satisfied with any answer given to you here on this topic, but I do hope those of faith will put it to rest.God Bless.
1. There are reports of God healing people of internal illnesses and "non-visible" conditions, but no reports of God healing amputees by growing back their limbs.P1. God has reasons for healing people - He doesn't just heal people arbitrarily.P2. We can suggest that often God's reasons include displaying His power, bringing others toward salvation, furthering the ministry of the one healed, etc.P3. Healing people of internal illnesses and "non-visible" conditions would accomplish these ends.P4. Healing amputees by growing back their limbs would also accomplish these ends.P5. There is no discernible difference between internal illnesses and amputation, except in virtue of their visibility.P6. Visibility should not be an important factor in deciding whether to heal or not heal someone.P7. There is not likely to be any statistical difference between people in these two categories - whether in amounts of faith, percentage of Christians, or any other important factor.C1. If these premises are true, then there does not seem to be any reason for God to heal people in one category but not the other.C2. Therefore, one of the initial assumptions should be doubted or denied.Although you have presented a very good argument outline, the fact is this very subject could only be argued amongst those who do not believe in God.I don't care how convincingly or eloquently someone here may present to you their opinion on this - you are not going to be convinced until you see an arm sprout from a stump.Let's put the whole notion of a "healed" amputee in perspective... For today's society to actually believe God himself "healed" an amputee, He would have to call in the press and make sure every camera got a shot of him personally touching the amputee and watching the limb regrow. If an amputee simply re-grew their limb, society would contribute it to freak science / genetic modification, etc. etc. etc. How many people (yourself included) would actually give glory to God for this "miracle"?Again, Christianity is based on faith - and only a handful of Christians would believe it was God alone who performed that type of miracle today.I know you will never be satisfied with any answer given to you here on this topic, but I do hope those of faith will put it to rest.God Bless.Well jeff you have made that pretty clear even to my hard headBecause of my absolute faith that God could heal an amputee or any other visible illness should he choose the only answer I have for you is Christs own Words Jhn 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed. This is faith Here Thomas is actually seeing Christ risen from the dead and he still doubts we only assume seeing would convince us ?Faith is not a matter of the physical eyes but the heartSeeing is not always believing as hilltop has said, Today we would just assume a some genetic anomaly occurred and it grew back on its own. If it were always easy to make the leap of faith in things unseen there would be no blessings for it.
Because of my absolute faith that God could heal an amputee or any other visible illness should he choose the only answer I have for you is Christs own Words Jhn 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed. This is faith Here Thomas is actually seeing Christ risen from the dead and he still doubts we only assume seeing would convince us ?Faith is not a matter of the physical eyes but the heartSeeing is not always believing as hilltop has said, Today we would just assume a some genetic anomaly occurred and it grew back on its own. If it were always easy to make the leap of faith in things unseen there would be no blessings for it.(HillTop;55951)
I don't care how convincingly or eloquently someone here may present to you their opinion on this - you are not going to be convinced until you see an arm sprout from a stump.
Please don't assume that you know my heart or my intentions. I have stated multiple times on here that I am seeking to understand. I am not "arguing" this argument - I am presenting it here in hopes of receiving a decent answer for it that doesn't in some way deny God, His love, or His power. I'm hoping that reasonable Christians can come to a reasonable answer, one better than simply "just have faith." Saying that to a doubting man is like dangling a steak in front of a starving man. The honest truth is that I want to believe in God, but these doubts will not allow me to until I put them to rest. And I don't want it to be an either-or scenario, where I am forced to give up logic to follow a deity. For me to do that, I think, should require even greater evidence of His existence.(HillTop;55951)
Let's put the whole notion of a "healed" amputee in perspective... For today's society to actually believe God himself "healed" an amputee, He would have to call in the press and make sure every camera got a shot of him personally touching the amputee and watching the limb regrow. If an amputee simply re-grew their limb, society would contribute it to freak science / genetic modification, etc. etc. etc. How many people (yourself included) would actually give glory to God for this "miracle"?
You're right that some people would not be convinced. There are some who would never be convinced, despite any evidence thrown at them. But I am not one of those people. If I heard a story about a regrown limb that could be at least decently verified, and that happened to a Christian (so that it was most certainly the Christian God that did it), then I would put this argument to rest. It may not silence some of my other doubts, but this one, certainly, would be thrown out the window quicker than you can blink. I would certainly attribute it to God. So please don't assume that I am a heart-hardened, cynical atheist who is seeking to push their vindictive vendetta against organized religion. I am a person who is seeking the truth, in whatever capacity it comes in. I will always seek the truth, and I am not afraid to question my beliefs, but of course, I would very much like for them to be confirmed - as it means less psychological agony for me.(HillTop;55951)
I know you will never be satisfied with any answer given to you here on this topic, but I do hope those of faith will put it to rest.
I have heard decent answers, but I am hoping that with more discussion we might illuminate the truth. And I don't believe that it requires blind faith.(kriss;55953)
This is faith Here Thomas is actually seeing Christ risen from the dead and he still doubts we only assume seeing would convince us ?Faith is not a matter of the physical eyes but the heartSeeing is not always believing as hilltop has said, Today we would just assume a some genetic anomaly occurred and it grew back on its own. If it were always easy to make the leap of faith in things unseen there would be no blessings for it.
You bring up a good point, and perhaps it is time to shift the discussion just slightly. You mention that we only assume that seeing would convince us, but that instead we should have faith without seeing. Thus, you are essentially saying that God hopes that we will believe in Him without evidence. But I have a few difficulties with that:1. If we are to believe in God without evidence, then why do we have reports of miracles occurring? Couldn't these be considered evidence, so wouldn't God refrain from healing people altogether?2. It may be true that evidence will not fully convince, but don't you think that evidence will at least help convince? I mean, the more evidence you see for something, the easier it is to believe it. I believe in gravity because I see evidence for it every day. It comes naturally to me to believe in it. So don't you think that God would be providing us with more than ample amounts of evidence in order to help us believe? In fact, don't you think He would give us concrete proof of His existence? If God starts rearranging the clouds into various animal shapes, or gives mass, world-wide visions to everyone telling us to believe in Him, then sure, it might not convert the most stubborn atheists. But don't you think it would help many, many more people believe in Him? Wouldn't a loving God want to give us enough - or more than enough - evidence to help us believe in Him, so that we have a hundred times more people going to heaven? These are just my thoughts....my doubts. My struggles.I just wish and hope and pray that God would reveal Himself to me like He apparently did to those in the Bible. I'm only asking for the same treatment as they got. And I'm sure that amputees would be jumping, dancing, and clapping their hands in agreement with me if He did so.
I don't care how convincingly or eloquently someone here may present to you their opinion on this - you are not going to be convinced until you see an arm sprout from a stump.
Please don't assume that you know my heart or my intentions. I have stated multiple times on here that I am seeking to understand. I am not "arguing" this argument - I am presenting it here in hopes of receiving a decent answer for it that doesn't in some way deny God, His love, or His power. I'm hoping that reasonable Christians can come to a reasonable answer, one better than simply "just have faith." Saying that to a doubting man is like dangling a steak in front of a starving man. The honest truth is that I want to believe in God, but these doubts will not allow me to until I put them to rest. And I don't want it to be an either-or scenario, where I am forced to give up logic to follow a deity. For me to do that, I think, should require even greater evidence of His existence.(HillTop;55951)
Let's put the whole notion of a "healed" amputee in perspective... For today's society to actually believe God himself "healed" an amputee, He would have to call in the press and make sure every camera got a shot of him personally touching the amputee and watching the limb regrow. If an amputee simply re-grew their limb, society would contribute it to freak science / genetic modification, etc. etc. etc. How many people (yourself included) would actually give glory to God for this "miracle"?
You're right that some people would not be convinced. There are some who would never be convinced, despite any evidence thrown at them. But I am not one of those people. If I heard a story about a regrown limb that could be at least decently verified, and that happened to a Christian (so that it was most certainly the Christian God that did it), then I would put this argument to rest. It may not silence some of my other doubts, but this one, certainly, would be thrown out the window quicker than you can blink. I would certainly attribute it to God. So please don't assume that I am a heart-hardened, cynical atheist who is seeking to push their vindictive vendetta against organized religion. I am a person who is seeking the truth, in whatever capacity it comes in. I will always seek the truth, and I am not afraid to question my beliefs, but of course, I would very much like for them to be confirmed - as it means less psychological agony for me.(HillTop;55951)
I know you will never be satisfied with any answer given to you here on this topic, but I do hope those of faith will put it to rest.
I have heard decent answers, but I am hoping that with more discussion we might illuminate the truth. And I don't believe that it requires blind faith.(kriss;55953)
This is faith Here Thomas is actually seeing Christ risen from the dead and he still doubts we only assume seeing would convince us ?Faith is not a matter of the physical eyes but the heartSeeing is not always believing as hilltop has said, Today we would just assume a some genetic anomaly occurred and it grew back on its own. If it were always easy to make the leap of faith in things unseen there would be no blessings for it.
You bring up a good point, and perhaps it is time to shift the discussion just slightly. You mention that we only assume that seeing would convince us, but that instead we should have faith without seeing. Thus, you are essentially saying that God hopes that we will believe in Him without evidence. But I have a few difficulties with that:1. If we are to believe in God without evidence, then why do we have reports of miracles occurring? Couldn't these be considered evidence, so wouldn't God refrain from healing people altogether?2. It may be true that evidence will not fully convince, but don't you think that evidence will at least help convince? I mean, the more evidence you see for something, the easier it is to believe it. I believe in gravity because I see evidence for it every day. It comes naturally to me to believe in it. So don't you think that God would be providing us with more than ample amounts of evidence in order to help us believe? In fact, don't you think He would give us concrete proof of His existence? If God starts rearranging the clouds into various animal shapes, or gives mass, world-wide visions to everyone telling us to believe in Him, then sure, it might not convert the most stubborn atheists. But don't you think it would help many, many more people believe in Him? Wouldn't a loving God want to give us enough - or more than enough - evidence to help us believe in Him, so that we have a hundred times more people going to heaven? These are just my thoughts....my doubts. My struggles.I just wish and hope and pray that God would reveal Himself to me like He apparently did to those in the Bible. I'm only asking for the same treatment as they got. And I'm sure that amputees would be jumping, dancing, and clapping their hands in agreement with me if He did so.
I think someone has been watching too much youtube. LOL.Anyways, just because cancers are healed miraculously does not mean that they were because of some divine intervention. You have to understand that cancer is a disease that has a cure. Just because a doctor cannot heal you does not mean that it is incurable. Cancer can be healed and has been healed for many years. The main stream does not know this because if it ever got out billions of dollars would be lost. Lives would be saved but that does not matter. Illnesses are cured because something changes for the better. Amputees are not growing limbs because it is not possible for humans to do so we are not alligators. This is really a ridiculous and unfair question.
(Alpha and Omega;55961)
I think someone has been watching too much youtube. LOL.
Who, me? Nah, of course not :angel10Alpha and Omega;55961)
Anyways, just because cancers are healed miraculously does not mean that they were because of some divine intervention. You have to understand that cancer is a disease that has a cure. Just because a doctor cannot heal you does not mean that it is incurable. Cancer can be healed and has been healed for many years. The main stream does not know this because if it ever got out billions of dollars would be lost. Lives would be saved but that does not matter. Illnesses are cured because something changes for the better. Amputees are not growing limbs because it is not possible for humans to do so we are not alligators. This is really a ridiculous and unfair question.
You're right, and that's sort of where the question comes in. The question assumes that God does, indeed, heal people today - which at least, I would say, most Christians believe. As for the whole cure for cancer being hidden from the mainstream thing, I'm not so sure about that - unless you have some insider knowledge that the rest of us are not aware of - but at any rate, there are some people who overcome cancer without God's help...or at least without asking for His help.As for it being an unfair question, I don't think it is if you are operating under the assumption that God heals and does miracles in today's day and age. If not, then feel free not to join the discussion
However, my next question in that case would be: If a loving God is able to do miracles and heal people, then why doesn't He? Either way, I think that the question is one worthy of examination. But as the one I just posed opens up a whole new can of worms, perhaps we should set that aside...
I think someone has been watching too much youtube. LOL.
Who, me? Nah, of course not :angel10
Alpha and Omega;55961)Anyways, just because cancers are healed miraculously does not mean that they were because of some divine intervention. You have to understand that cancer is a disease that has a cure. Just because a doctor cannot heal you does not mean that it is incurable. Cancer can be healed and has been healed for many years. The main stream does not know this because if it ever got out billions of dollars would be lost. Lives would be saved but that does not matter. Illnesses are cured because something changes for the better. Amputees are not growing limbs because it is not possible for humans to do so we are not alligators. This is really a ridiculous and unfair question.
You're right, and that's sort of where the question comes in. The question assumes that God does, indeed, heal people today - which at least, I would say, most Christians believe. As for the whole cure for cancer being hidden from the mainstream thing, I'm not so sure about that - unless you have some insider knowledge that the rest of us are not aware of - but at any rate, there are some people who overcome cancer without God's help...or at least without asking for His help.As for it being an unfair question, I don't think it is if you are operating under the assumption that God heals and does miracles in today's day and age. If not, then feel free not to join the discussion
(jeffhughes;55957)
You bring up a good point, and perhaps it is time to shift the discussion just slightly. You mention that we only assume that seeing would convince us, but that instead we should have faith without seeing. Thus, you are essentially saying that God hopes that we will believe in Him without evidence. But I have a few difficulties with that:1. If we are to believe in God without evidence, then why do we have reports of miracles occurring? Couldn't these be considered evidence, so wouldn't God refrain from healing people altogether?2. It may be true that evidence will not fully convince, but don't you think that evidence will at least help convince? I mean, the more evidence you see for something, the easier it is to believe it. I believe in gravity because I see evidence for it every day. It comes naturally to me to believe in it. So don't you think that God would be providing us with more than ample amounts of evidence in order to help us believe? In fact, don't you think He would give us concrete proof of His existence? If God starts rearranging the clouds into various animal shapes, or gives mass, world-wide visions to everyone telling us to believe in Him, then sure, it might not convert the most stubborn atheists. But don't you think it would help many, many more people believe in Him? Wouldn't a loving God want to give us enough - or more than enough - evidence to help us believe in Him, so that we have a hundred times more people going to heaven? These are just my thoughts....my doubts. My struggles.I just wish and hope and pray that God would reveal Himself to me like He apparently did to those in the Bible. I'm only asking for the same treatment as they got. And I'm sure that amputees would be jumping, dancing, and clapping their hands in agreement with me if He did so.
I never said there was no evidence or we did not need any we have a book full of them Do you believe them?? Many people have given testimony to their experiences Do you believe them? When Christ called on the apostels to become fishers of men did they ask for proof ?The thing is the proof doesnt come to the eyes or the brain it comes to the heart.once you believe and repent and start to learn God opens more proof up to you.Its not the other way around. He showed certain people in the Bible things to start his church for all who choose to accept it. But they followed without question. You have a free will to chosebut your choice must come from your heart through faith.. not proof.. the proof comes to the believer... Now you can say in your human mind you want proof first .... that may seem rational to your human mind ...But I must ask what have you or those who dont believe done that you think is so great God should give you more than he has the rest of us who made the leap of faith without proof?? That is believed without seeing. Do you not see you are trying to make a deal on your terms. God says above all he wants our love if you love him you trust in him..thus have faith. He tells you he died for your sins confess them to him ..believe upon him and you become a New person.. The New person receieves the proof perhaps you can continue to argue that what if he did this or that as proof ..but that just plain isnt the way it works... Blessed are those who believe and do not see.Psa 84:12 O LORD of hosts, blessed [is] the man that trusteth in thee. Psa 119:2 Blessed [are] they that keep his testimonies, [and that] seek him with the whole heart. Luk 6:21 Blessed [are ye] that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed [are ye] that weep now: for ye shall laugh Perhaps you need to really ask yourself, Why it is you feel you need proof before you can accept these promises?
You bring up a good point, and perhaps it is time to shift the discussion just slightly. You mention that we only assume that seeing would convince us, but that instead we should have faith without seeing. Thus, you are essentially saying that God hopes that we will believe in Him without evidence. But I have a few difficulties with that:1. If we are to believe in God without evidence, then why do we have reports of miracles occurring? Couldn't these be considered evidence, so wouldn't God refrain from healing people altogether?2. It may be true that evidence will not fully convince, but don't you think that evidence will at least help convince? I mean, the more evidence you see for something, the easier it is to believe it. I believe in gravity because I see evidence for it every day. It comes naturally to me to believe in it. So don't you think that God would be providing us with more than ample amounts of evidence in order to help us believe? In fact, don't you think He would give us concrete proof of His existence? If God starts rearranging the clouds into various animal shapes, or gives mass, world-wide visions to everyone telling us to believe in Him, then sure, it might not convert the most stubborn atheists. But don't you think it would help many, many more people believe in Him? Wouldn't a loving God want to give us enough - or more than enough - evidence to help us believe in Him, so that we have a hundred times more people going to heaven? These are just my thoughts....my doubts. My struggles.I just wish and hope and pray that God would reveal Himself to me like He apparently did to those in the Bible. I'm only asking for the same treatment as they got. And I'm sure that amputees would be jumping, dancing, and clapping their hands in agreement with me if He did so.
I never said there was no evidence or we did not need any we have a book full of them Do you believe them?? Many people have given testimony to their experiences Do you believe them? When Christ called on the apostels to become fishers of men did they ask for proof ?The thing is the proof doesnt come to the eyes or the brain it comes to the heart.once you believe and repent and start to learn God opens more proof up to you.Its not the other way around. He showed certain people in the Bible things to start his church for all who choose to accept it. But they followed without question. You have a free will to chosebut your choice must come from your heart through faith.. not proof.. the proof comes to the believer... Now you can say in your human mind you want proof first .... that may seem rational to your human mind ...But I must ask what have you or those who dont believe done that you think is so great God should give you more than he has the rest of us who made the leap of faith without proof?? That is believed without seeing. Do you not see you are trying to make a deal on your terms. God says above all he wants our love if you love him you trust in him..thus have faith. He tells you he died for your sins confess them to him ..believe upon him and you become a New person.. The New person receieves the proof perhaps you can continue to argue that what if he did this or that as proof ..but that just plain isnt the way it works... Blessed are those who believe and do not see.Psa 84:12 O LORD of hosts, blessed [is] the man that trusteth in thee. Psa 119:2 Blessed [are] they that keep his testimonies, [and that] seek him with the whole heart. Luk 6:21 Blessed [are ye] that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed [are ye] that weep now: for ye shall laugh Perhaps you need to really ask yourself, Why it is you feel you need proof before you can accept these promises?
(jeffhughes;55925)
I understand that, and thank you Denver. I just have a hard time putting my foot down and planting my faith on something that may or may not be there. Faith is a tricky issue to deal with because in our every-day lives, faith is generally based on evidence and experience. When I go to sit on a chair, I trust that it will hold my weight based on my previous experiences with other chairs, seeing other people sitting on other chairs, etc. But having "experience" with God, to me, is a little more hazy of a concept, as I know that at least some of what I have felt as "God" in the past has simply been emotion or self-delusion. Not saying that all of it has been, but I know that at least some of it has been, so the rest becomes suspect. And without more concrete evidence at hand, how can I say, "Well this is God, but this isn't?"I see the amputee issue as one possible way to know God's existence, and a question that does not seem to have a good answer other than, "We must have faith that God knows what He's doing." Such an answer simply begs the question - we can't give evidence for the existence of God by assuming He already exists. I am not trying to "vehemently push this topic," but I'm looking for an answer that satisfies me better. If there is none, it's certainly not proof of God's NON-existence. But to me, it doesn't say much for his loving qualities.Again, this begs the question. You say that you have to know God before you can know if there is a God. That is identical to those people who push crazy theories like "psi energy" - they tell people that there must not be anyone skeptical in the room for it to work. Then if it doesn't work, they can blame it on a hidden skeptic. If it does work, then they've proved it - but only to the people who already believe in it. But the fact is that they see it because they want to see it. In other words, seeing no longer is believing - instead, believing is seeing. But I can't accept placing faith in God before knowing He exists any more than I can accept believing in psi energy without seeing proof of its existence first. I hope that makes sense. But thank you for the prayers - I understand that what I am doubting may or may not be true, but at the very least, I have to wrestle with it.You're right - learning the value of life is certainly better than having all one's limbs. I never claimed it wasn't. But don't you agree that learning the value of life AND having all one's limbs would be EVEN better still?Coming from a psychology background, I know what you're talking about. However, not every amputee feels this, and essentially it is due to the nerve endings still transmitting signals as if the limb is still present. It has nothing to do with their "spirit body," as it has had great success in being relieved through the use of a "mirror box." Basically, they put their hand and their amputated limb in two sides of a box with a mirror in the middle facing toward the good limb. The brain sees the good hand twice and it sort of "tricks" the brain into releasing the pain associated with the hand.Oh, you're absolutely right. I'm not questioning God's judgment in allowing some to lose their limbs. Yet, the same logic applies to disease, illness, mental conditions, etc. To some people, God allows them to get cancer (as an example). But in other people, we hear claims of miracles - the cancer is miraculously healed! If God exists, then we can certainly say that He had reasons for healing one and not another. But why do we not see the same pattern with amputations? Certainly there should be reasons for healing SOME amputees. But here we only see God afflicting and never healing.If God loves us and "is always willing to touch us with His healing power," then you are essentially claiming that all those who are not healed are not healed because they are faithless or disobedient. Am I understanding you correctly? But I have known many people who are godly, Christian people who have died from various illnesses, though they prayed and believed in healing. I'm not trying to say that it proves God doesn't exist - merely that your conditions are not nearly adequate. I am sure that there are many godly, Christian amputees out there who have faith in God's ability to heal them and are not being disobedient. Does that mean that they are all healed? Not in the slightest. So knowledge, faith, and obedience are sufficient conditions to being healed, although they may certainly be necessary ones. In other words, there is more at play here - namely, God's decision-making process.
Jeffhughes, God does love us and has sent His Son Jesus not only to die for our sins, but for our sicknesses as well. 1 Peter 2: 24 says, "By who's stripes [wounds] we were,[Past tense] healed". The price has already been paid for healing.You are going by the experience of a godly person instead of what the word of God says.Just because a person is godly doesn't mean they have the faith to receive their healing.[A] You could be, godly believe in God, but not know that He wants you heald.You could be living right, know what the bible says about healing, but not have the faith to receieve healing.[C]You could have the knowledge, and could have faith to receive healing, but at some point be disobedient, and that could be an hindrence.I hope that you aren't putting the blame on a loveing God, for mans own faults.
I understand that, and thank you Denver. I just have a hard time putting my foot down and planting my faith on something that may or may not be there. Faith is a tricky issue to deal with because in our every-day lives, faith is generally based on evidence and experience. When I go to sit on a chair, I trust that it will hold my weight based on my previous experiences with other chairs, seeing other people sitting on other chairs, etc. But having "experience" with God, to me, is a little more hazy of a concept, as I know that at least some of what I have felt as "God" in the past has simply been emotion or self-delusion. Not saying that all of it has been, but I know that at least some of it has been, so the rest becomes suspect. And without more concrete evidence at hand, how can I say, "Well this is God, but this isn't?"I see the amputee issue as one possible way to know God's existence, and a question that does not seem to have a good answer other than, "We must have faith that God knows what He's doing." Such an answer simply begs the question - we can't give evidence for the existence of God by assuming He already exists. I am not trying to "vehemently push this topic," but I'm looking for an answer that satisfies me better. If there is none, it's certainly not proof of God's NON-existence. But to me, it doesn't say much for his loving qualities.Again, this begs the question. You say that you have to know God before you can know if there is a God. That is identical to those people who push crazy theories like "psi energy" - they tell people that there must not be anyone skeptical in the room for it to work. Then if it doesn't work, they can blame it on a hidden skeptic. If it does work, then they've proved it - but only to the people who already believe in it. But the fact is that they see it because they want to see it. In other words, seeing no longer is believing - instead, believing is seeing. But I can't accept placing faith in God before knowing He exists any more than I can accept believing in psi energy without seeing proof of its existence first. I hope that makes sense. But thank you for the prayers - I understand that what I am doubting may or may not be true, but at the very least, I have to wrestle with it.You're right - learning the value of life is certainly better than having all one's limbs. I never claimed it wasn't. But don't you agree that learning the value of life AND having all one's limbs would be EVEN better still?Coming from a psychology background, I know what you're talking about. However, not every amputee feels this, and essentially it is due to the nerve endings still transmitting signals as if the limb is still present. It has nothing to do with their "spirit body," as it has had great success in being relieved through the use of a "mirror box." Basically, they put their hand and their amputated limb in two sides of a box with a mirror in the middle facing toward the good limb. The brain sees the good hand twice and it sort of "tricks" the brain into releasing the pain associated with the hand.Oh, you're absolutely right. I'm not questioning God's judgment in allowing some to lose their limbs. Yet, the same logic applies to disease, illness, mental conditions, etc. To some people, God allows them to get cancer (as an example). But in other people, we hear claims of miracles - the cancer is miraculously healed! If God exists, then we can certainly say that He had reasons for healing one and not another. But why do we not see the same pattern with amputations? Certainly there should be reasons for healing SOME amputees. But here we only see God afflicting and never healing.If God loves us and "is always willing to touch us with His healing power," then you are essentially claiming that all those who are not healed are not healed because they are faithless or disobedient. Am I understanding you correctly? But I have known many people who are godly, Christian people who have died from various illnesses, though they prayed and believed in healing. I'm not trying to say that it proves God doesn't exist - merely that your conditions are not nearly adequate. I am sure that there are many godly, Christian amputees out there who have faith in God's ability to heal them and are not being disobedient. Does that mean that they are all healed? Not in the slightest. So knowledge, faith, and obedience are sufficient conditions to being healed, although they may certainly be necessary ones. In other words, there is more at play here - namely, God's decision-making process.
Jeffhughes, God does love us and has sent His Son Jesus not only to die for our sins, but for our sicknesses as well. 1 Peter 2: 24 says, "By who's stripes [wounds] we were,[Past tense] healed". The price has already been paid for healing.You are going by the experience of a godly person instead of what the word of God says.Just because a person is godly doesn't mean they have the faith to receive their healing.[A] You could be, godly believe in God, but not know that He wants you heald.You could be living right, know what the bible says about healing, but not have the faith to receieve healing.[C]You could have the knowledge, and could have faith to receive healing, but at some point be disobedient, and that could be an hindrence.I hope that you aren't putting the blame on a loveing God, for mans own faults.
Similar threads
