Jump to content
Heather Mills - Amputee Forum
drewkowsky

WhywontGodhealamputees.com

Recommended Posts

If that site had used "WhywontGodhealtheblind.com", we wouldn't be here.

There's quite a bit more room for speculation of divine healing in blindness which is, I assume, the reason the site's authors didn't use it to illustrate their position.

My personal philosophy is more on the order of "God (Supreme Being, whatever) is testing me".

Why would he test you and what kind of results does he get from testing you with amputations that he couldn't get otherwise?

I mean, an omniscient god wouldn't need to test you at all. He's supposed to know exactly how it's going to turn out even if he doesn't, so what's the point?

How do I respond?

First, by surviving.

Second, by using what I know and can do to make life a bit easier/better for those around me.

Third, by being the best one-legged man that I know how to be (just as I did when I had two legs).

Of course. Most of us do. Even those of us with no belief in the supernatural. My motivation to survive and thrive is having a better life, making myself, my daughter, my family and everyone else I can happy. I don't need to believe any god is testing me to achieve that.

At the scene of the accident, a form was seen to appear at my door (by others). There was no way that a mortal person could have gotten there. That may have been my "guardian angel". Am I sure? No. I only know what I've been told and what I believe.

As I said above, you're perfectly entitled to your belief.

I believe that someone/something had a further use for me.

In my case that would be me, my daughter, my family, my friends and whomever else I can make even a little happier. To state the obvious, I'm much happier alive than I would be dead. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Rabbi once told me that "In religion, you pick your mythology. The purpose of religion is to quantify and simplify a human's contact with the unexplained greater forces in the grand scheme of things."

As a Rabbi he, of course, assumes the existence of a god. Even more, he assumes the existence of his god and no others.

...and of course, quantifying the unexplained is science's territory, not religion's.

This lead to a distinction between religion and faith.

Faith is required by religion. In fact, it wouldn't be faith or religion if the existence of a god were adequately demonstrated. It would be knowledge.

I asked him about the rational school of thought, that does not accept that which cannot be proven. Is there such a thing as atheism in human beings?

He agreed that there were those who could or would not accept the notion of a higher power.

Again, the Rabbi's starting position is that, despite the lack of evidence supporting it, his god must exist. The default starting position of a rationalist is "let's follow the evidence where it takes us". If there were a shred of valid evidence supporting the existence of a god, I'd be the first to revert my position.

Consider that this is one of the most important steps in 12-step recovery.

I don't understand what you meant to express here.

The Rabbi's reply was that, in his opinion, healthy human beings all share some sort of appreciation for being a part of the universe, in some form or another. For those who need rational approaches, allowing for the very existence of rationality meets the criterion.

Not everyone needs a god to feel part of the universe. The fact is we're all part of it, belief or lack of it.

"One true religion," "The only way to the truth," and all the other claptrap is not what faith is. Nor does it glorify or demean the deity it is supposed to celebrate. Those are ego strokers, nothing more and nothing less.

Was the Rabbi open to the notion that he was worshipping the wrong god? What if he turns out going to Thor's hell because he believed in Yahweh all his life?

Lizzie said it best: "The existence of amputees neither proves or disproves the existence of God." It only proves the existence of amputees.

Of course, but the website isn't debating the existence of amputees. It's debating the existence of Yahweh because of his lack of response to legitimate prayers asking for limb regrowth.

There was some graffitti on one of the stairwells at the university I attended. The sequence was:

"God is dead" -- Nietzche

under which some had scrawled:

"Nietzche is dead" -- God

Yep. Pretty witty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lizzie said it best: "The existence of amputees neither proves or disproves the existence of God." It only proves the existence of amputees.

Of course, but the website isn't debating the existence of amputees. It's debating the existence of Yahweh because of his lack of response to legitimate prayers asking for limb regrowth.

No, that's true. But the author is trying to use the existence of amputees as a way to disprove the existence of God. As we have both said to you, we think that the existence of amputees neither proves or disproves the existence of God. All the authors are doing is using personal opinion and sensationalism to attract people's attention.

I think the Rabbi, psychologists and psychiatrists quoted in this thread all have a similar opinion: That a healthy minded person acknowledges that they are only a small part of an enormous universe. The key is acknowledgement. To be part of a universe and to not acknowledge the fact demonstrates either a significant learning difficulty or a problematic ego IMHO. Someone, who acknowledges that they are a small part of the universe, may or may not also believe in a 'higher being', however, the two are often closely associated. The faith (or belief) in a higher being (and I don't mean religion, I mean faith - the two are very different) is a very personal thing. You either believe or you don't. I take it that you don't believe? If I'm correct, then why don't you believe? If it's because you can prove God's existence scientifically, then why do so many scientists believe in the existence of a 'higher being'?

Anyway, in a few years/decades time, we may have developed the knowledge to regrow an amputated limb. Not everyone could be helped with that technology though. But at the moment, we humans have to be satisfied with just regrowing skin, hair and liver cells and remodeling our skeletons. The fact that we can regrow a large section of our liver - isn't that amazing enough?

Btw, I enjoy a good debate, however, I don't think you are reading the responses thoroughly, objectively or sensitively (at least one very personal experience has been recounted) enough. Therefore, I will no longer be taking part in this thread.

Lizzie :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the scene of the accident, a form was seen to appear at my door (by others). There was no way that a mortal person could have gotten there. That may have been my "guardian angel". Am I sure? No. I only know what I've been told and what I believe.

I believe that someone/something had a further use for me.

I'll get off my soap-box, again.

Gil, have you posted of this incident before on this forum? I'm quite interested in hearing more about your experience, because I've had at least one encounter. Not exactly like yours, of course, but interesting enough!

Lizzie! God love you! You are a guardian angel in 3-D. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, that's true. But the author is trying to use the existence of amputees as a way to disprove the existence of God. As we have both said to you, we think that the existence of amputees neither proves or disproves the existence of God. All the authors are doing is using personal opinion and sensationalism to attract people's attention.

Lizzie, I'm sorry to insist, but I don't think I'm getting my point across effectively. The website doesn't argue that god doesn't exist because amputees do. The website argues that god doesn't exist because he doesn't answer prayers. They use us in their argument because it's a binary indicator. Either your limb regrows or it doesn't. Any equally unambiguous indicator could have been used. They chose amputees.

I think the Rabbi, psychologists and psychiatrists quoted in this thread all have a similar opinion: That a healthy minded person acknowledges that they are only a small part of an enormous universe. The key is acknowledgement. To be part of a universe and to not acknowledge the fact demonstrates either a significant learning difficulty or a problematic ego.

I'm not sure how you arrive at "learning disability" or "problematic ego", but I'm sure most people acknowledge they're a small part of a huge universe. Belief in a god isn't a necessary part of that acknowledgement. That's easily accomplished by simply looking up at night.

IMHO. Someone, who acknowledges that they are a small part of the universe, may or may not also believe in a 'higher being', however, the two are often closely associated. The faith (or belief) in a higher being (and I don't mean religion, I mean faith - the two are very different) is a very personal thing. You either believe or you don't.

Believing in anything, including a god, is personal. That belief being true, however, isn't. I'm not debating yor right to believe. I'm debating the truth value of belief in a god.

I take it that you don't believe? If I'm correct, then why don't you believe?

I don't believe in the supernatural because there isn't a shred of valid evidence supporting it.

If it's because you can prove God's existence scientifically, then why do so many scientists believe in the existence of a 'higher being'?

Some do, but not many. Around 90% of the scientists in the NAS have no belief in the supernatural. That aside, the number of scientists who believe or not is irrelevant to the question of the lack of evidence supporting the existence of the supernatural and the abundance of evidence against it.

Anyway, in a few years/decades time, we may have developed the knowledge to regrow an amputated limb. Not everyone could be helped with that technology though. But at the moment, we humans have to be satisfied with just regrowing skin, hair and liver cells and remodeling our skeletons. The fact that we can regrow a large section of our liver - isn't that amazing enough?

Those are all amazing scientific accomplishments and I'm looking forward to enjoying them.

Btw, I enjoy a good debate, however, I don't think you are reading the responses thoroughly, objectively or sensitively (at least one very personal experience has been recounted) enough. Therefore, I will no longer be taking part in this thread.

I'm sorry to hear you won't be participating in the thread any longer, but I disagree with the reasons you've based your decision on. I read the replies thoroughly and objectively. My answers are presented respectfully and, when required, appropriately supported. As for sensibility, that's quite subjective. The fact that you disagree with what I say doesn't mean I'm being insensitive.

That said, I also enjoy a good debate and hope you reconsider your decision to leave this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As always, with religion and politics, it can get very heated.... Discussion is one thing, being insistant is another... There is a difference in discussing and being heavy handed...

Let's not forgot the original reason of this forum, for amputees.

Gil, I, like Marilyn, one would like to discuss your post, even if it is done in private.... I, over anyone else, know who held me the day of my accident..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well-said, Higgy! The general problem with most of "this type" of discussion is usually not WHAT everyone believes, but THAT everyone believes... in WHATEVER they happen to believe in, be it science, god, logic, fairies, or little green men from Mars.

When "believers" confront "believers," it's not likely that anyone's beliefs will be changed, for change would require that you doubt your beliefs to begin with. Therefore, the best anyone can logically hope for is an exchange of viewpoints and an "agreement to disagree."

Since everyone's exchanged their points of view, and no-one seems inclined to change their beliefs, we seem to have pretty well exhausted this particular part of the discussion.

At least, that's what I believe...............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amen. No pun intended. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agreee with you Cheryl......mostly, right now, I don't have the time for such heavy handed debates..

This site is first and foremost for amputees....sometimes, discussion can get very far off track....I'm not saying that every post has to be absolutely related to dealing with some amputation in one way or another...I'm just saying that was a loaded topic to start with, and was getting a little to heavy. We give a lot of leeway in things here, as it should be, this isn't a dictatorship. So, deep breath taken for everyone and back to our old selves........... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

old selves? :ph34r: .......go easy on the "old" bit :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are those nine lives of yours feeling a bit old today? Or just one of them? :o :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×