[PERMANENTLY CLOSED] Amputee... miracle?

[itisi]

I'm an amputee, lost my right leg due to cancer just few years back. I'm all ok now, thanks to the good doctors. Recently I've been conversing with a good friend of mine who is a Mormon on the subject of amputee healing. Reviewing the scriptural texts we struggled to figure out Christian view on this matter. Is there a chance for limb regrowth through miracle? What verses are there to support this notion?

Thanks for your input!

 

[Wryetui]

It might interest you the miracle that happened to Miguel Juan Pellicer Blasco, he was an amputee too, but the Virgin Mary re-growth his lost leg to the state he had it before they amputed it (with the same birthmark). There's a notarial act created by the major of the city and by several witnesses about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Calanda

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Scientists are working on growing limbs in the lab.

 

[Davian]

It would seem that the healing powers of deities is limited.

"...the comment of French writer Anatole France: On a visit to the shrine, seeing the discarded canes and crutches, he exclaimed, “What, what, no wooden legs???”

Lourdes Medical Bureau Rebels | Center for Inquiry

 

[The Cadet]

It might interest you the miracle that happened to Miguel Juan Pellicer Blasco, he was an amputee too, but the Virgin Mary re-growth his lost leg to the state he had it before they amputed it (with the same birthmark). There's a notarial act created by the major of the city and by several witnesses about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Calanda

This miracle is yet another case of a miracle that happened long before any sort of rigorous documentation, with the kind of holes you could drive a truck through. Gangrene sets in usually within 72 hours. If your wound is going to become gangrenous, you are not going to live for 55 days without amputation. This is a pretty big problem for the story, and it's not very well-documented that it was gangrenous, or that he did get it amputated. Skeptoid has an expose:

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4247

Here's a question. Why are there so many miracle claims before meticulous record-keeping, before photography, before video... And so few after? It seems like miracles, much like bigfoot, nessie, and all other manner of cryptozoology, have become shockingly scarce ever since almost every person in the western world started carrying around a camera all the time.

 

[The Cadet]

I accidentally quoted you in the wrong thread. My bad. Imma put the discussion back here, if you don't mind.

Why do you think miracles don't happen today? That's a lie. Miracles happen everyday to those who are worth it, to the saints or to those who have a high level of prayer, but they don't follow it as a purpose, but it's an extent of their holiness, a product of their sanctity.

Great, so given that in the western world, virtually every single person has a camera and internet connection on them literally all the time, it should be really easy to provide a whole bunch of very convincing evidence. Right?

...Right?

Here is one advice for you, if someone ever tells you they have been working these miracles or they have witnessed it, always see if their life if sinless. If they don't have a single sin,

The bible teaches that no-one is without sin. So, with that in mind, isn't every miracle we've seen from the devil?

 

[Wryetui]

I accidentally quoted you in the wrong thread. My bad. Imma put the discussion back here, if you don't mind.



Great, so given that in the western world, virtually every single person has a camera and internet connection on them literally all the time, it should be really easy to provide a whole bunch of very convincing evidence. Right?

...Right?



The bible teaches that no-one is without sin. So, with that in mind, isn't every miracle we've seen from the devil?

If we are to interpret mot-a-mot every thing the Bible says we wouldn't go too far. Following your logic that means Jesus was sinful too, or the Theotokos, or God, right?

Everybody is born in sin and have a sinful nature, but we can heal through Christ and we can become like God by living in His Church, according to His will and having communion with Him in our hearts, it's called divinization. So yes, people can become sinless, people can return to the state our protoparents had in Eden which is our purpose in life.

 

[The Cadet]

If we are to interpret mot-a-mot every thing the Bible says we wouldn't go too far. Following your logic that means Jesus was sinful too, or the Theotokos, or God, right?

Everybody is born in sin and have a sinful nature, but we can heal through Christ and we can become like God by living in His Church, according to His will and having communion with Him in our hearts, it's called divinization. So yes, people can become sinless, people can return to the state our protoparents had in Eden which is our purpose in life.

Honestly, that's not the part I cared about. Theological quibbles are not my forte. No, what really interested me is the evidence for these miracle claims.

 

[Wryetui]

It depends on what evidence are you looking for.

The best evidence would be experiencing God on your skin, experiencing His uncreated energies and having a theoria of Him in His full grace, but for that you have to struggle in ascetism, in unstopped prayer and in sinlessness, but that's too hard, right? It's easier to stay in your "atheist" world being a skeptic and not wanting answers instead of actually doing something about things.

It's the simple fact that theological "quibbles" are not your forte that you lose all the credibility. You talk about God like you talk about sports or politics, without any kind of theological preparement or culture, only vague things you read on the internet or books, since when that's theology?

Let's suppose a peasant from the countryside is arguing with a mathematician. The peasant keeps yelling that the Pythagorean theorem it's a lie and that he has no proofs for it, while the mathematician keeps telling that he can teach the peasant to make the theorem himself and that it of course exists, but it's the peasant's fault that he has no preparation to observe it or to calculate it.

To me, you will always be that peasant unless you want to change.

 

[South Bound]

I'm an amputee, lost my right leg due to cancer just few years back. I'm all ok now, thanks to the good doctors. Recently I've been conversing with a good friend of mine who is a Mormon on the subject of amputee healing. Reviewing the scriptural texts we struggled to figure out Christian view on this matter. Is there a chance for limb regrowth through miracle? What verses are there to support this notion?

Thanks for your input!

There's nothing in scripture to indicate such acts are normative. And, even if they were, you're an atheist.

 

[South Bound]

It might interest you the miracle that happened to Miguel Juan Pellicer Blasco, he was an amputee too, but the Virgin Mary re-growth his lost leg to the state he had it before they amputed it (with the same birthmark). There's a notarial act created by the major of the city and by several witnesses about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Calanda

What evidence is there that some dead woman caused a lost limb to regrow? Where does the Bible say Mary ever had such an ability or the authority to do so? Honestly, this may be the dumbest post I've read here yet,

 

[South Bound]

If we are to interpret mot-a-mot every thing the Bible says we wouldn't go too far. Following your logic that means Jesus was sinful too, or the Theotokos, or God, right?

Everybody is born in sin and have a sinful nature, but we can heal through Christ and we can become like God by living in His Church, according to His will and having communion with Him in our hearts, it's called divinization. So yes, people can become sinless, people can return to the state our protoparents had in Eden which is our purpose in life.

Sorry, but that isn't even remotely Biblical.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

It depends on what evidence are you looking for.

The best evidence would be experiencing God on your skin, experiencing His uncreated energies and having a theoria of Him in His full grace, but for that you have to struggle in ascetism, in unstopped prayer and in sinlessness, but that's too hard, right? It's easier to stay in your "atheist" world being a skeptic and not wanting answers instead of actually doing something about things.

It's the simple fact that theological "quibbles" are not your forte that you lose all the credibility. You talk about God like you talk about sports or politics, without any kind of theological preparement or culture, only vague things you read on the internet or books, since when that's theology?

Let's suppose a peasant from the countryside is arguing with a mathematician. The peasant keeps yelling that the Pythagorean theorem it's a lie and that he has no proofs for it, while the mathematician keeps telling that he can teach the peasant to make the theorem himself and that it of course exists, but it's the peasant's fault that he has no preparation to observe it or to calculate it.

To me, you will always be that peasant unless you want to change.

The difference is that the mathematician is able to prove that her theorem works. She is able to show the peasant the process by which she reached her conclusions. You want to be treated like the mathematician in this hypothetical? Then show us that you actually have the "mathematical" proficiency you claim to possess.

 

[OliviaMay]

It depends on what evidence are you looking for.

The best evidence would be experiencing God on your skin, experiencing His uncreated energies and having a theoria of Him in His full grace, but for that you have to struggle in ascetism, in unstopped prayer and in sinlessness, but that's too hard, right? It's easier to stay in your "atheist" world being a skeptic and not wanting answers instead of actually doing something about things.

It's the simple fact that theological "quibbles" are not your forte that you lose all the credibility. You talk about God like you talk about sports or politics, without any kind of theological preparement or culture, only vague things you read on the internet or books, since when that's theology?

Let's suppose a peasant from the countryside is arguing with a mathematician. The peasant keeps yelling that the Pythagorean theorem it's a lie and that he has no proofs for it, while the mathematician keeps telling that he can teach the peasant to make the theorem himself and that it of course exists, but it's the peasant's fault that he has no preparation to observe it or to calculate it.

To me, you will always be that peasant unless you want to change.

That is fine and dandy, but sort of misses the point that amputees or other easily visible ailments like large severe burns or downs are never healed. It is always stuff like lower back pain or other ailments that can go away on their own by other means.

 

[Wryetui]

Sorry, but that isn't even remotely Biblical.

I seriously doubt you know the Bible better than St. Gregory Palamas or an actual theologian.

I do not support the miracle. First of all, that miracle happened within the Catholic Church which is not my church so it's not part of my, let's say, world. I just posted it so the OP can see something to relate to, something that seemed to me like adequate to this post and an example for him.

 

[Wryetui]

The difference is that the mathematician is able to prove that her theorem works. She is able to show the peasant the process by which she reached her conclusions. You want to be treated like the mathematician in this hypothetical? Then show us that you actually have the "mathematical" proficiency you claim to possess.

And I am able to show you the process by which I reached my conclusions too. Anyway, you seem to not understand at all my example.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

And I am able to show you the process by which I reached my conclusions too. Anyway, you seem to not understand at all my example.

I understand your example well, which is why I'm holding you to it. Show us, as a mathematician would, the process that lead you to your specific theological "theorem."

 

[South Bound]

Your insults are duly noted.

 

[The Cadet]

It depends on what evidence are you looking for.

Solid, well-documented evidence of an event that cannot reasonably be explained through the naturalistic means we have available to us and/or seems to strongly indicate some sort of supernatural cause. Basically, let's say I told you that your house would be hit by a meteor if you didn't send me $100. What kind of evidence would you expect before forking over the cash? Probably not this:

The best evidence would be experiencing God on your skin, experiencing His uncreated energies and having a theoria of Him in His full grace, but for that you have to struggle in ascetism, in unstopped prayer and in sinlessness, but that's too hard, right?

"Too hard"? Dude, let's be clear on something here! You're asking me to undergo a whole lot of suffering - not just prayer and religious rituals, but active ascetism - in order to receive a benefit I do not believe exists.

Imagine you're speaking to someone, and they tell you, "Okay, I've got this awesome mega-mansion in the Caribbean with a dolphin pool and a games lounge with every video game ever published and a 10-story water slide." Then, you tell them that you don't believe that they have any such thing. But they continue, "Dude, if you do my laundry for a year, I'll take you on vacation with me to see the mega-mansion!" Would you do their laundry for a year if you didn't believe them on the off chance they might be telling you the truth?

Please, try to put yourself in my shoes for a minute. Try to look at this from my perspective. I don't believe that any god exists. I am asking why you might believe this, or how I might come to know god. In response, you offer me something which not only opens me up to massive self-delusion (along the veins of "I can't be wrong, there must be a god, I've spent my whole life suffering for this!") but which requires a massive shift in my lifestyle. Huh. That's nice. I'm not going to do your laundry, though. Can you understand why?

Let's suppose a peasant from the countryside is arguing with a mathematician. The peasant keeps yelling that the Pythagorean theorem it's a lie and that he has no proofs for it, while the mathematician keeps telling that he can teach the peasant to make the theorem himself and that it of course exists, but it's the peasant's fault that he has no preparation to observe it or to calculate it.

Of course, the difference being that demonstrating the pythagorean theorem is very basic, and doesn't require any massive lifestyle shift. It requires nothing more than a simple application of logic in accordance with well-established mathematical definitions. To put it bluntly, you're comparing changing your entire life to, well, this:

It is a big square, with each side having a length of a+b, so the total area is:

A = (a+b)(a+b)

First, the smaller (tilted) square has an area of A = c2

And there are four triangles, each one has an area of A =½ab
So all four of them combined is A = 4(½ab) = 2ab

So, adding up the tilted square and the 4 triangles gives: A = c2+2ab

The area of the large square is equal to the area of the tilted square and the 4 triangles. This can be written as:

(a+b)(a+b) = c2+2ab

NOW, let us rearrange this to see if we can get the pythagoras theorem:

Start with: (a+b)(a+b) = c2 + 2ab

Expand (a+b)(a+b): a2 + 2ab + b2 = c2 + 2ab

Subtract "2ab" from both sides: a2 + b2 = c2

If your god was as easy to prove as that, there would be no atheists. Hell, pick any solved mathematical theorem - if your god was that easy to prove, there would be no atheists.

But instead, the path to proving your god involves undergoing a massive shift in one's own life. The kind of shift nobody would perform if they did not already believe, or did not desperately want to believe; the kind of shift that sets us up for massive self-delusion. If that is the only way to prove god, then you don't have proof.

 

[Wryetui]

We are doing a great off-topic here. I understand you very well, The Cadet and I am willing to teach what I know and to explain it but that would have to be on a private conversation because we are not allowed to do it here.

If you want to start a conversation on this subject with me, I am more than pleased to talk with you.