Faith Healing

[PostmodernProph]

No one has ever re-grown an arm, a leg, a toe or a finger, or even part of a toe or finger....
How can that be and you still believe in faith healing?

I think there is a really simple explanation... there is no such thing as faith healing.

But that explanation could be wrong. If you think so, why?

You claim to be rational, let me try to show you the error of your thinking, by demonstrating it to you. I assume you believe in medical science.

No doctor has ever re-grown a patient's limb. How can that be and you still believe in doctors? I think I know why, because medical science is phony.

Not entirely true in that a doctor cannot do it but the body has certainly done it.

Children have been known to regrow a finger and especially the tip of a finger. Too bad we can't figure out how to capture and channel that ability that we grow out of.

????......I doubt that.....

 

[Brucethethinker]

No one has ever re-grown an arm, a leg, a toe or a finger, or even part of a toe or finger....
How can that be and you still believe in faith healing?

I think there is a really simple explanation... there is no such thing as faith healing.

But that explanation could be wrong. If you think so, why?

You claim to be rational, let me try to show you the error of your thinking, by demonstrating it to you. I assume you believe in medical science.

No doctor has ever re-grown a patient's limb. How can that be and you still believe in doctors? I think I know why, because medical science is phony.

Your overly simple analogy does not follow. Doctors cure people of what they can cure people currently. There are MOUNTAINS of definitive evidence supporting this. There is no definitive evidence and little circumstantial evidence supporting faith healings. Apples to oranges.

I claim my "overly simple analogy" does follow.

You say look, faith healing doesn't work to re-grow limbs. You make this claim even though you are unable to show me a single time anyone has prayed for a limb to regrow and had it fail. Then you draw the conclusion that therefore, "there is no such thing as faith healing".

I use YOUR "logic", and say ok, no doctor has ever caused someone to regrow a limb. Therefore, there is no such thing as medical healing.

If a person with a missing limb were to go to a doctor and say "cause my missing limb to regrow", the doctor would likely say "sorry, medical science is unable to do that". Similarly, if that same person were to go to a faith healer and say "cause my missing limb to regrow", the faith healer might say "sorry, faith healing is unable to do that".

So what's the difference? Not apples / oranges. Take everything you say about "faith healing", and replace "faith healing" with "medical science". Your logic is incorrect, that's all I'm saying.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

No one has ever re-grown an arm, a leg, a toe or a finger, or even part of a toe or finger....
How can that be and you still believe in faith healing?

I think there is a really simple explanation... there is no such thing as faith healing.

But that explanation could be wrong. If you think so, why?

You claim to be rational, let me try to show you the error of your thinking, by demonstrating it to you. I assume you believe in medical science.

No doctor has ever re-grown a patient's limb. How can that be and you still believe in doctors? I think I know why, because medical science is phony.

Your overly simple analogy does not follow. Doctors cure people of what they can cure people currently. There are MOUNTAINS of definitive evidence supporting this. There is no definitive evidence and little circumstantial evidence supporting faith healings. Apples to oranges.

I claim my "overly simple analogy" does follow.

You say look, faith healing doesn't work to re-grow limbs. You make this claim even though you are unable to show me a single time anyone has prayed for a limb to regrow and had it fail. Then you draw the conclusion that therefore, "there is no such thing as faith healing".

I use YOUR "logic", and say ok, no doctor has ever caused someone to regrow a limb. Therefore, there is no such thing as medical healing.

If a person with a missing limb were to go to a doctor and say "cause my missing limb to regrow", the doctor would likely say "sorry, medical science is unable to do that". Similarly, if that same person were to go to a faith healer and say "cause my missing limb to regrow", the faith healer might say "sorry, faith healing is unable to do that".

So what's the difference? Not apples / oranges. Take everything you say about "faith healing", and replace "faith healing" with "medical science". Your logic is incorrect, that's all I'm saying.

Let me lay out why your analogy does not follow.

Perhaps I should have clarified that it isn't just that faith healing does not cure amputees (or other visibly obvious conditions), but that there is no proof of faith healing, no definitive evidence supporting faith healing, and very little circumstantial evidence supporting faith healing. Therefore, there is no reason to conclude that faith healing is effective or even exists. Apples.

Medical science has vast amounts of definitive evidence supporting that it is, in most cases, effective. The results of medical science surround us and are us. Although they have not YET cured an amputations in all cases, there are people who have had severed limbs re-attached. Prayer has never done that. The eradication of many diseases and the low infant mortality rates among many many other examples are the proof in the pudding, so to speak. There is enough evidence to conclude that medical science is working. Oranges.

Your response above attempts to frame my argument in a way that it isn't: that the healing of missing limbs is the only leg for the argument to stand on. That is just the most obvious exple that best illustrates my point: that there is no evidence to conclude that people are miraculously healed. Your analogy oversimplifies my position.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

No one has ever re-grown an arm, a leg, a toe or a finger, or even part of a toe or finger....
How can that be and you still believe in faith healing?

I think there is a really simple explanation... there is no such thing as faith healing.

But that explanation could be wrong. If you think so, why?

You claim to be rational, let me try to show you the error of your thinking, by demonstrating it to you. I assume you believe in medical science.

No doctor has ever re-grown a patient's limb. How can that be and you still believe in doctors? I think I know why, because medical science is phony.

Not entirely true in that a doctor cannot do it but the body has certainly done it.

Children have been known to regrow a finger and especially the tip of a finger. Too bad we can't figure out how to capture and channel that ability that we grow out of.

????......I doubt that.....

You're kidding.

Its really not at all uncommon.

Do you also doubt the links I posted?

If you should happen to find yourself near a computer with InterWeb access, you might consider asking google dot com for answers.

 

[Brucethethinker]

Your analogy oversimplifies my position.

This is most of your original post:

My question to them is: Why doesn't your God heal amputations? None. Zero. Never. No one has ever re-grown an arm, a leg, a toe or a finger, or even part of a toe or finger.... Why not?

How can that be and you still believe in faith healing?

I think there is a really simple explanation for why that has never happened. It easily explains why visibly obvious conditions or injuries have never been healed. Because there is no such thing as faith healing.

But that explanation could be wrong. If you think so, why?

Now, this is that same post, with "God" and "faith healing" replace with "medical science". Please read it:

My question to them is: Why doesn't your medical science heal amputations? None. Zero. Never. No one has ever re-grown an arm, a leg, a toe or a finger, or even part of a toe or finger.... Why not?

How can that be and you still believe in medical science?

I think there is a really simple explanation for why that has never happened. It easily explains why visibly obvious conditions or injuries have never been healed. Because there is no such thing as medical science.

But that explanation could be wrong. If you think so, why?

Now, personally I think faith healers are often charlatans, and most faith healing is bogus. But, your argument is not convincing, it is flawed. It's only because you claim to be rational that I bothered to point it out to you. To be totally rational you have to accept absurdities at times. Prayer in general doesn't work. If it did, churches would buy one lottery ticket and all pray that it hits. They don't do that because they've found out it doesn't work.

 

[Abishai100]

Mind Messenger

Modern science has come up with medical wonders such as artificial pacemakers. If you believe there is a paternal God who blesses the facets of man such as intelligence, then such a God has granted man access to intellectual achievement that facilitates physical health.

Scientists know of the psychological phenomenon of the placebo effect wherein the mind tells the body that it does not need too much stimulation to energize the body and hence 'believes' an otherwise ineffective stimulant (or drug) is effectively acting on the body's malady.

There's nothing technically wrong with 'believing' that an outside or unnamed force is healing you, as long as you keep such beliefs in check with relation to actual symptoms or concerns.

In Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" (1818), we read of a mad scientist who tampers unnaturally with the forces of nature and resurrects a dead human corpse only to realize that the spirit of the resurrected dead person does not want to be re-created by the follies of man.

Perhaps faith healing is related to harmless imagination which can be coordinated with Christianity (i.e., the Devil's Advocate).






Narcissus mythology - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia