CHICAGO (AP) — When it comes to saving lives, God trumps doctors for many Americans. An eye-opening survey reveals widespread belief that divine intervention can revive dying patients. And, researchers said, doctors "need to be prepared to deal with families who are waiting for a miracle."
More than half of randomly surveyed adults — 57 percent — said God's intervention could save a family member even if physicians declared treatment would be futile. And nearly three-quarters said patients have a right to demand such treatment.
When asked to imagine their own relatives being gravely ill or injured, nearly 20 percent of doctors and other medical workers said God could reverse a hopeless outcome.
"Sensitivity to this belief will promote development of a trusting relationship" with patients and their families, according to researchers. That trust, they said, is needed to help doctors explain objective, overwhelming scientific evidence showing that continued treatment would be worthless.
Pat Loder, a Milford, Mich., woman whose two young children were killed in a 1991 car crash, said she clung to a belief that God would intervene when things looked hopeless.
"When you're a parent and you're standing over the body of your child who you think is dying ... you have to have that" belief, Loder said.
While doctors should be prepared to deal with those beliefs, they also shouldn't "sugarcoat" the truth about a patient's condition, Loder said.
Being honest in a sensitive way helps family members make excruciating decisions about whether to let dying patients linger, or allow doctors to turn off life-prolonging equipment so that organs can be donated, Loder said.
Loder was driving when a speeding motorcycle slammed into the family's car. Both children were rushed unconscious to hospitals, and Loder says she believes doctors did everything they could. They were not able to revive her 5-year-old son; soon after her 8-year-old daughter was declared brain dead.
She said her beliefs about divine intervention have changed.
"I have become more of a realist," she said. "I know that none of us are immune from anything."
Loder was not involved in the survey, which appears in Monday's Archives of Surgery.
It involved 1,000 U.S. adults randomly selected to answer questions by telephone about their views on end-of-life medical care. They were surveyed in 2005, along with 774 doctors, nurses and other medical workers who responded to mailed questions.
Survey questions mostly dealt with untimely deaths from trauma such as accidents and violence. These deaths are often particularly tough on relatives because they are more unexpected than deaths from lingering illnesses such as cancer, and the patients tend to be younger.
Dr. Lenworth Jacobs, a University of Connecticut surgery professor and trauma chief at Hartford Hospital, was the lead author.
He said trauma treatment advances have allowed patients who previously would have died at the scene to survive longer. That shift means hospital trauma specialists "are much more heavily engaged in the death process," he said.
Jacobs said he frequently meets people who think God will save their dying loved one and who want medical procedures to continue.
"You can't say, 'That's nonsense.' You have to respect that" and try to show them X-rays, CAT scans and other medical evidence indicating death is imminent, he said. Continue >>
RSS
Cheers for the country club discription, guvner.....
Yes poor old Donna, The doc is taking a break in 2009 but will be back in 2010, in that time there will be three "specials though with the first one at Christmas. In the mean time we are addicted to two other BBC programmes, Spooks and Life On Mars, have you seen either.
Best wishes
Steve
"Not sure what a country club is"
It's a private club for rich people. It's a snobbish short of place with golf, tennis, swimming and expensive events like meals and such.
Here's a website to one on line: http://www.greenvillecc.com/
Yep...poor Donna...atleast she doesn't know the difference. There will be another season, right?
wbmoore,
It's just an evangelist who comes through our area every year or so. Her name is Lois Bunch, out of Dallas. She is a mighty speaker, evangelist, and prophetess.
Prophet, I'm so glad to hear your testimony. Could you share which revival, evangelist? Or if you prefer, leave me a comment on my blog (its private unless I approve the comment).
Thanks.
ifeelfine, you take 80 out of Hazard going east, after about 48 miles you come to 23. You go about 1 mile north to Prestonsburg or 20 miles south to Pikeville.
believer: Pikeville is the other direction from Prestonsburg if you were in Hazard, right?
Thanks for your reply prophet, looked through my original post but can't see where I wrote about you being narrow minded etc..I'll take it you where also replying to somebody else who wrote that about you as well.
Best wishes
Steve
P.s Not sure what a country club is, I'll take it that its a wierd American tradition...:-)
ifeelfine, I pastored in Hazard from 91-95 and we now live in Pikeville where I am the Director of Missions for the Pike Association of Southern Baptists.
aritonang,
And my wife who had chronic depression with bouts of suicide her whole life. I married her in that condition. Wondering everyday if I was going to come home to a dead wife. Even meds weren't helping her. And she'd go into rages for like 30-40 minutes where she'd go beserk and get physically abusive. And when she was done, she'd have no recollection of what happened.
One day at a evangelistic revival, God healed her instantaneously. All depression was gone. Never another thought of suicide. Never another bout of rage. She was as normal as me.
Doctors also told her that she'd never be able to have children. She could get pregnant, but never carry a baby to term. She had a number of misscarriages. Then God intervened. We have two beautiful children that she carried without incident the whole term.
My son was diagnosed with ADHD. He was having difficulties in elementary school because of it. Doctors prescribed medicine and said he would be on it the rest of his life and that he would still struggle in school because of it.
God healed him. He's been without meds for 6 years. Began tutoring other children while he was in 5th and 6th grade. Been on the honor roll in junior high more times than not.
My daughter was born with ASD (Atrial Septal Disorder) which is a hole between the chambers of her heart. Doctors said only open heart surgery would fix it. Though it posed no immediate life-threatening complecations, they said it significantly increases her chance of a heart attack and pneumonia, along with stunting her growth.
God closed the hole up.
God does move. He heals. He raises from the dead. He gives the blind their sight back, and the deaf their hearing. Amen and glory to God.
Meanwhile people in the Mosque nearby said their God, Allah of the Islamic world intervene in protecting Usama bin Laden from the American invaders.
So I guess logical science cannot help Americans to bring UBL to justice, can it now?
Example: My uncle had a heart-attack in 2006, resuscitated in hospital by doctors but failed, declared dead by hospital and recorded by officials, then brought to his family's house and then we call all our family members and our pastor. Three hours later while we are singing and praising God lead by our pastor in front of the open casket, while one by one our family members gathered -Lord Jesus revived our uncle. That is what happens in front of our eyes, all of us there.
Our pastor said that it is normal, considering that Lazarus was 3 days dead inside his tomb in Bethany and got called back.
There are several other examples, my aunt who got cancer and was diagnosed by doctors in Singapore to not last till 2007, this was in 2005. She is still singing in our church choir and now has full head of hair once again after numerous chemotherapy.
Others; a friend who was in a road accident and suffered what doctor said was head trauma and cannot be save. He is still here today
I have seen God's intervention revived the dying before. But like my late grandmother said last after our pastor was reading her last rites, she just want to return to the Lord and meet her husband, my grandfather in paradise - and not looking forward to stay in this world.
I believe people in different parts of this world has different view on this issue. Some place to much value on this life and would carry on living even in vegetative state, while some are looking forward to returning back to our Lord after fulfilling his/her duty.
orange,
"In other words, you take it all on faith, or you don't."
And all this time, I didnt think you were learning anything...I was wrong.
believer: Hazard, KY? Are you from that area of KY? My wife's family is from Prestonsburg.
believer,
Ah but it was fossilized, and it wasn’t until the bones were treated by a process known as desalination did the tissue become fibrous/spongy at all, they certainly didn’t pull it out of the ground oozing blood.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dinosaur/blood.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dinosaur/flesh.html
“the earth's magnetic field has been decaying so fast that it couldn't be more than about 10,000 years oldâ€Â
But this was debunked over a decade ago, it's like the 2nd law, it just keeps coming back, over and over. What Morris fails to mention is that this decaying is cyclical, in fact we have evidence for it on the oceanic floors as the polarity periodically reverses and we can see how it has changed polarity in relation to how the ocean floor has been expanded in trench areas.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html#magnetic
Here’s what I was going to suggest…
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html
'are plenty of examples both great and small'
good, then you'll be happy to cite and source them, since they are SO plentyful, yes?
'He also said this generation looks for a sign and will be given none.'
Oh, but we're told of stories all the time where people *get a sign from god* and they do so and attribute the most ordinary and pedestrian of things as miracles. 'I found my way back on the freeway, it's a miracle!' Here were are talking about the lack of signs, while earlier others were refering to such 'miracles' as such signs, so which is it? One can't blame us for doubting this religion if it lacks any credibility in such signs, while also trying to twist it that miracles happen all the time, but are (somehow?) not a sign.
'You either believe Him or you don't.'
In other words, you take it all on faith, or you don't.
Pro,
"How is that any more proof? If aritonang is making up the fact that he's seen miracles, I'm sure he can make up example to support his claim."
If I had to gueess, Ithink essen is refering to some way of defining the tests so they can be evaluled and possibly refuted. A simple one liner that aritog offered isn't much of anything. Independent, objective testing which produces repeatable results, IE SCIENCE. If he's producing mere hearsay rhetoric, and not backing it up at all, then it should be dismissed as such, unless you don't understand logic.
My world view is based upon the Word of God. Is God all inclusve? Only those who accept His offer. And those who don't call Him (and us) narrow minded, and judgemental.
A man asks his friend to join the Country Club. This man declines, saying it's not for him. Would it be right for him to now say that the Country Club is narrow minded and exclusive because they won't let him play golf on their course? Or do you think he should have common sense and realize that the offer was made, and he declined, and the only person to blame is himself if he can't reap the benefits of someone who accepted the offer.
Hello prophet
In your worldview, is there room for people who feel that the evidence (or lack of it) leads them to a diffrent conclusion to you? They have no ulterior motive (i.e rebellion etc..)they just read it diffrently to you...period. In my world and interaction with others I accept that, even though I believe myself to be right (it causes my daughter and I no end of arguements, though I would have it no other way) others come to diffrent conclusions to me. Why do you have a problem with that?
Kind regards
Steve
Daniel,
That is so true. God Himself could come and talk personally and physically with someone, and they would still dismiss it as a delsusion caused from eating bad sausage or something. If people don't want to believe, they will always find a reason (excuse) for not believing, no matter how overwhelming the evidence.
"What can asserted without evidence can be equally dismissioned without evidence."
Oh, is that why Obama is falling in the polls? (Sorry, just had to go there.)
As I have said, my wife is a nurse who does open heart recovery. She has been an ER Supervisor. There are plenty of examples both great and small. People they didn't think would make it off the table just went right through surgery and recovery. My own mother should have died of a massive stroke when I was in the second grade but made enough of recovory to be able to get her drivers license back. Having been raised in a family in the ministry there are reports of people being raised from the dead in Africa where quite a revival was going on in the 80's.
Still, Jesus said that people who simply don't want to believe won't even if someone were raised from the dead. He also said this generation looks for a sign and will be given none. Jesus isn't here to entertain you with 'proof'. You either believe Him or you don't.
essen,
What proof do you want? Specific examples? How is that any more proof? If aritonang is making up the fact that he's seen miracles, I'm sure he can make up example to support his claim. The only real irrefutable proof is physical proof, not word of mouth.
But, then again, where's the proof that Jesus did what the Bible says He did?
Faith.
i have no interest in having a discussion of hypotheticals.
aritonang,
It is prudent to at least support your claim with evidence, otherwise it's bad form. What can asserted without evidence can be equally dismissioned without evidence.
God's Intervention Can Revive the Dying
Yes, I have witness it many many times.
Thanks for the good article
agent, Satan can indeed bring diseases on people, Job is an excellent example, but I did not say Satan is the reason God can't heal amputees or he keeps God from healing period. If God chooses to do anything it's a done deal, it happens. What I have been saying is that I am not God therefore I can not answer for God, but there are some things I know about God that are taught in the Bible. My wife and I have been married for 33 years and there are many things I do know about her, but then again sometimes she does things that I don't understand or are totally unexpected or unexplainable, but she is still my wife and I realize I don't know her as well as I think I do and I still have a lot more to learn about her. In many ways the same is true of God, I know Him but He does things I don't understand sometimes and I've got a whole lot more to learn about Him. But the major difference is God is perfectly God who is all-powerful, all- knowing, ever-present, just, but for us He is love (Agape) and as a result He can be wholeheartedly trusted.
I know a man who is a psychologist and a professor. He went on a short term mission trip to Australia. While there, as a presentation was concluded, he noticed a barefooted man limping down to the stage in response to an invitation for anyone who wanted prayer to come down and receive it. He saw this man's twisted and clubbed foot straighten and grow to normal size and the toes grew as well, until the foot was well formed. To say the least, this professor's mind was blown for a few days, as while he had had a stated belief that such things were possible, there was no real faith in the idea.
This same man went to the other side of Australia and was praying with a prayer partner , with their hand on the person receiving prayer, praying for healing of the woman's multiple large tumors. Before their eyes, her tumors reduced in size and disappeared.
We have no idea why God sometimes answers pray for healing and sometimes not. But I think at least some part of it has to do with motivation and faith.
James says it is because we do not ask, or when we ask we do not have the right motivation (James 4:3-4). The gospels tell us that Jesus did few miracles in one location because of the lack of faith of the people (Matthew 13:58). Paul saw a man had the faith to be healed and so healed him (Acts 14:8-10).
Sometimes people are healed to show the work of God (John 9).
Just because we don't see it, or understand it, does not mean it does not happen.
agent, "Refuting Evolution" page 112, Evidence For A Younge World, here are a couple of quotes, "Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years", "the earth's magnetic field has been decaying so fast that it couldn't be more than about 10,000 years old. Rapid reversals during the flood year and flucuations shortly after just caused the field energy to drop even faster." All of chapter 8 in the book, 12 pages is devoted to talking about the old earth vs. young earth issue.
'for instance I did not say that the reason God doesn't heal amputees is because Satan interferes'
I don't know, but the quote below seems to indicate he can interfer. You say satan could causes diseases, but then you're not sure. well if you're not sure, how do you know he can or can't interfer at all?
Satan doesn't cause disease, diseases and sickness is caused by microbes like viruses and bacteria. science, remember?
"believer Wed Aug 20, 2008 3:56 pm : 0 : 0 Flag
agent, plus another issue that enters the debate is the role of Satan in some of these supposed healings or miracles outside of those recorded in the Bible"
Believer, what I was actually hinting at was a specific line, or pags, or piece of evidence from a particular source/text, this way it's easier to address them in succession if needed. Simply listing the books doesn't help.
"The Genesis Flood" by Henry Morris, Refuting Evolution"
Oh please, please lets hear these ones. Just a question, are any of these texts from authors who are actully doing science, and publish their works in public peer reviewed scientific literture? Behe is/was, but Ken Ham, Morris, they don't ring a bell.
agent, when I share the Gospel with somebody I speak very little if any about hell and damnation. I talk about having a relationship with God through Christ, the love of Christ, the work of Christ on the Cross at Calvary. The fact that God desires to have a personal relationship with each of us and the fact He was willing to allow His only Son to die so we could have that relationship and the fact that Christ willingly paid a price that only He could pay so we could have an opportunity to have that relationship. I speak of how sin is keeping a person from having that type of relationship and if a person would turn from their sins, receive God's forgiveness for their sins, and put their complete faith/trust in the person and finished work of Christ alone they can have that relationship with God for the rest of eternity. My wife led our son to the Lord when he was six years old and several months later our Pastor would ask if you don't know for sure you're going to heaven raise your hand, he came to us and told us our son was raising his hand. So when we got in the car I asked him if he knew because he was a Chrisitian he got to go to heaven and he said no, but that night he went to our Pastor and said that he wasn't going to raise is hand anymore because he found out that when he became a Christian it meant he would go to heaven someday. You see for him it was all about having a relationship with God and nothing else.
agent, I do wish you would quit putting words in my mouth, for instance I did not say that the reason God doesn't heal amputees is because Satan interferes. If your goal is to ridicule and belittle then knock yourself out, but at least do it by using the things I did say and stand for and not by putting words in my mouth or assuming I automatically agree with a view I share on a subject. As much as I disagree with your views I don't believe I've ever ridiculed or belittled you, maybe a jest every now and then, but I've done my best not to misquote you or assume where you stand on various issues. And I simply expect the same from you, that is mutual respect, thanks believer
believer,
Ah, but there is a distiction from the actual world that we can readily observe, interpet and make logical conclussions based on such evidence like an oncomming truck that is going to hit us. We can identify it readily as reality as is of this natural world. What we don't have is actual evidnence for the supernatural, much less that any hell or damnation is anything but some imagine place conjured up from religion to have people believe in sake of not believing at all. Fear can cause people to toss their logic or do other things they normaly wouldn't, and the use of fear in religions is epic, it's darn near a required. Sure, to your religious persustion such a 'hell' is darn right scary, but there is no way to readily test the existend for this proposition of hell, ergo it is fear mongering. A better analogy using hell is fear mongering would be the example used by george bush in the lead up to the war with iraq where we couldn't go 5 minutes without hearing about nuclear weapons.
orange,
But as he said..if he told you there was a bridge out ahead, and it was around a sharp corner and you couldn't see it....
agent, as far as my sources for my believing the earth is "approximately" 20,000 years old. Here are some: "Is The Big Bang Biblical?" by John Morris, "The Genesis Flood" by Henry Morris, "The Early Earth" by John Whitcomb, "Refuting Evolution" by Jonathan Sarfati, along with several videos from Answers In Genesis, the only reason I don't name them is one of our Pastors is doing a series on Creation and using them.
agent, God does not and will not allow Satan to supersede His sovereign/universal will and in fact God is already aware of Satan's every move. But the bottomline is we know the end of the story and God's side wins. As for eternal damnation, if I saw you in a car headed down a road where the bridge had just been washed out and I tried to stop you before it was too late and you drove into the raging river, would that be fear mongering or would it be doing the right thing?
"when you are neither a Christian, nor spiritual is rather dumb, for lack of a better word."
Translation: 'when you don't accept things purely on faith, and instead insist on using logical deductions, rational based conclussions based on evidence, of course you can't understand it!'
You're asking me to toss logic and reason at the door, but why should I? You certaintly don't do this in any facet of your life. Only in religion do people do this, and it makes sense why, it's not easy questioning ones religion. Religion requires one to compartimentalize their brains so as to prevent the logic and rational mindset from interfering with their beliefs. 'Waht you say, the earth isn't 6000 years young and you have tons of evidence for it? Well, that sounds illogical for it be 6000 years young based on all that evidence, but nevertheless, I got faith that it is!'
This is basically what you're asking. 'just have faith'.
True. I should have stopped at "You almost had me convinced. Then I realized you were an atheist who knew nothing about God. Nor do you want to know anything about God. And since you know nothing about God, all you have is your opinion."
And asking a Biblical/Theological question, and expecting to understand the answer, when you are neither a Christian, nor spiritual is rather dumb, for lack of a better word.
It's kind of like a first grader asking a question about an algebra problem, and then expecting to understand the answer. Until you accept God into your life, and seek Him in your life, you will never understand many of the answers that we give. Those of the flesh cannot understand the things of the spirit.
"Take the Ten Commandments off the wall."
This has more to do with the law about govt. not directly endorssing any religion, but the whole idea of having them in a court is a tad ironic. After all, we only enforce 2 of those 10 laws, and for all the other odd laws from the OT, we certainly don't enforce them with such zeal as we have progressed beyond such barbaic times. If you want to put 10 commandments up, then we'd better start following them ALL 100+ and in accordance with their punishments, which means we will have A LOT of executions to hand out. To do anything less, would be a tad hypocritcal.
I was in a rational discussion about evidence for a 20,000 year old universe/earth (you got some?), and you end up going waaaaaay off. I am looking for logical reasons and ratinoal explinations for your beliefs and why 57% of average people (and under 20% of medical staff) think such a thing.
so God can only do pedestrian prayers then? Anything BUT a new limb?
orange,
Please. You're not that important for you to think I was simply talking about our little conversation here.
"Then I realized you were an atheist who knew nothing about God"
well, why should that matter, here we have 'believer' who over and over endlessy said he couldn't describe any details about god on how he explains amputees who don't get new limbs and when he failed to explain it he declared 'satan dun it!'
"he may find himself in a debate, but that's about it."
what debate? I asked him like 5 times how he got the evidence for the Earth being 20,000 years and he still hasn't supplied a single source.
"If a Christian voices his beliefs, atheists do what they can to shut him up."
What are you talking about, we're engaging in dialog, I am not gagging him! Besides, looking at the history of religions, every time they've gotten into power they've burnt/destroyed/outlawed the works of knowledge/science. Don't get all hurt if someone is questioning WHY you believe in propositions based on faith alone, like a talking snake, or a 6000 YO earth/universe, this is just normal enquiry. Is your view so fragile that it can be crushed in 3000 words?
You almost had me convinced. Then I realized you were an atheist who knew nothing about God. Nor do you want to know anything about God. And since you know nothing about God, all you have is your opinion.
But that's the wonderful(?) thing about America. Everyone can voice their opinion whether it's back by facts, or just simply a angry person venting.
But the difference between atheists and Christians is this. If an atheist voices his disagreement with Christianity, he may find himself in a debate, but that's about it.
If he wants to write a book about atheism, that's alright. I don't have to read it.
If a Christian voices his beliefs, atheists do what they can to shut him up.
Take the Ten Commandments off the wall. It's not hurting anyone. Well, except the atheists. Somehow their life is worth less with the Ten Commandments on the wall of a court house. Or maybe they just don't like being reminded. I don't know.
Maybe they figure "Out of sight, out of mind." If they can't see or hear anything that has to do with God, He must not exist. Maybe they don't like the constant reminder that there is Someone above them that they have to be accountable to. Maybe they just don't like being responsible for their actions.
There are innumerable reasons. Each atheist has one, and they differ.
They disguise their uneasiness as "separation of church and state." They say that America wasn't founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs. Yet, the Supreme Court has been opening in prayer since the day they were instituted. Same with the House of Representatives. Congress.
That is why almost all of our Presidents have spoken of God and quoted the Bible often.
No. I don't see any ties between our government and God. (sarcasm)
But what I do see are atheists running around saying the our country wasn't founded on God, in order to make their plight to eliminate all mention of God from all walks of life that much easier. Too bad it won't work.
"God allows Satan to remain for a season, so that we would have the choice of whether we wanted to love God, or love Satan."
What? take satan out of the picture then, people would still have a choice to follow god or not, that in itself is a choice. You don't have to nessisarily choose god (coke) or satan (pepsi), one could choose to follow god (drink coke) or not follow god (not to drink coke).
but believer is refering to instances of believers in which satan is blamed for why healings don't work, or can't work. 'god can't heal amputees!' 'nope, it's Satan!'
What nonsense. so God can only do pedestrian prayers then? Anything BUT a new limb?
Your statement died right there as these believers are, above non-belivers, and followers of all other religions, above else those who should be prefered in such prayers, but apparently they don't and in this good ol 'satan' is brought out to explain it all away. Following science isn't a sin, nor is it prefering satan either.
orange,
Free will. God created us with free will to choose. And to choose there must be what? More than one choice.
God allows Satan to remain for a season, so that we would have the choice of whether we wanted to love God, or love Satan.
" he does meddle in the world and in fact at the present time he is ruler of this world,"
Ok, but then you're saying God can't supecede this then? Is God impotent to overcome the will of satan or not? And if so, why is satan even factored into the equation as it would be logical that since God and overcome his will, that in turn, no matter what satan attempts to do is null and void by the acts of god.
"God can take him out anytime He chooses"
Ok, so why doesn't he then. It sure would elinate him from the whole equation, now wouldn't it? It would also mean god wouldn't have to worry about satans future attempts to thwart his will or cause havoc. So again I ask, if god can, why doesn't he? Is he impotent, or not willing?
"lake of fire (hell) for the rest of eternity"
Ooooooo, fear mongering at its best. sorry, but if in the absense of evidence all you can provide it fear rhetoric, that shows how hollow the proposition actually is. This is elementary logic.
and the sources for the 20,000 year old earth/universe again? You seem to be somewhat dodging it.
agent, the bottomline is that Satan can only do what God allows him to do and God hasn't told us what those things are that He will and won't allow Satan to do. The only exceptions I know of are in the story of Job we're told he couldn't take Job's life and we're also told he cannot pluck a child of God out of the hands of God, he can't cause us to lose our salvation.
agent, he does meddle in the world and in fact at the present time he is ruler of this world, but he cannot change God's universal will and God can take him out anytime He chooses. Once again not being God I can't tell you why He doesn't take him out right now, but one day God will and he along with all his cohorts along with everyone who has rejected Jesus Christ will be cast into the lake of fire (hell) for the rest of eternity. Plus as a Christian one has the ability to resist Satan through the power of the Holy Spirit and the Armor of Christ, but a believer must be surrendered to both the Lordship of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit to experience victory over Satan, sin, and the temptations that lead us to sin.
"Satan, but he is not co-equal with God and he is subject to God's sovereign will"
Ok, but earlier you'd stated satan medels in this world and could apparently (somehow?) overcome Gods will as satan could prevent or cause issues with healings. Well, which is it? Either Gos is all powerfull and can negate satan entirely or he's not. More importantly, why doens't God just get rid of this satan charlatan, it would make our lives much easier, no? So what, is he not willing or impotent to remove him from the equation?
Satan comes as an angel of light. He can perform miracles too. As we see in Revelation. If the antichrist is a real person, then satan restores him back to life after he is killed.
"but primarily the books and articles."
Ok, and how do we know it's accurate? creation articles, ok can you cite any to back it up? really, what do they use to provide such a date of 20,000, any empircal testing outside of just the bible perhaps?
I guess you're familiar I will cite science, namely physics and geochemistry, which show the age of the earths minerals and isotope decay rates, so if you want the details I am good for it, just ask. And no, I wont use AIG, I'll pick something for a track record for producing verified peer reviewed literture like Science, or Nature, or Cell.
" how many times has that figure changed and how many more times will it change? "
Ah, but you see this figure is updated based on evidence, as new evidence comes forth we are able to test and determine how much older it actually is. This revision that is done is a strenght is science as it's able to accomidate and use new evidence, something religion absolutely cannot do. Before we had knowledge of physics, radiation and isotope decay rates, the earth was expected to be at least 100 million years old, (around the year 1880) but as evidence came forth that showed the Earths temperature is from the result of such radition, so the idea of 100 million years didn't fit with the evidence and as more testing was done and more evidence came in, it was shown the oldest rocks were at least 4.4 billion years old, all of this new evidence was consistant and pointed to a very much older earth. The only reason 100 million years was accepted was that the only form of energy production at that time was combustion, they didn't know of fusion or fission, in which atoms collide or seperate, releasing energy and thus keeping the earths inner core warmer.
agent, I don't know it's accurate that's why I used the word "approximately", like I said you are a tough nut to crack. I got that "approximate" figure from books and articles I've read or seen on creationism as well as the facts of the Bible, but primarily the books and articles.
agent, and how many times has that figure changed and how many more times will it change?
agent, did I not say that I am not totally sure where I stand on Satan's involvement in the area of healings and miracles or even if he has any involvement at all, but I do know at this time God has given him the freedom to influence worldly matters and in fact the New Testament teaches that this world is under the power of Satan, but he is not co-equal with God and he is subject to God's sovereign will. And most importantly by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ he is a defeated being whose been judged already. His main goal now is to keep as many as possible from becoming believers and to keep believers from being effective in their witness for Christ. But as Christians we have by the power of the Holy Spirit and the armor of Christ the ability to resist the devil and flee from any temptation he or anyone else throws at us and as a result we can mature in Christlikeness and be an effective witness for Christ.
"can you give an exact date for the age of the universe, no,"
13.7 billion years old, is that exact enough? Give science some time and as always this measurement like in other things in science will be further refined and made more accurate. this is how science works through reductionism.
20,000 years is no where near the age of the earth, its off by a factor of like a trillion, it's not even close to within 1% to 2% margin of error. so no, your 20,000 isn't 'approximate' by any measure.
Fine, we don't have to even mention evolution at all, I was only asking for the age of the earth and universe, which is more realted to geochemistry, chemistry, physics, and cosmology, and not biological evolution. So, how'd you get your figure and more importantly, how do we know it's accurate?
agent, can you give an exact date for the age of the universe, no, like me you can only give an approximate age. Plus, I do not claim to be either gifted or an expert in the sciences and I know that arena is both your passion and expertise and on many other sites I've read your viewpoints and realize I can't come close to defending my point of view with regards to scientific matters dealing with evolution vs. creation.
"if Satan in some of these supposed healings or miracles outside of those recorded in the Bible."
Oh of course, when god is not willing or impotent to help in healing, then you have your ace - satan. So as to explain away anything which isn't comforting. Horrid logic! If god can supercede anything, even satan, then saying 'satan did it' or preveneted something is to imply god is not all powerful and can't overcome satan. But even I, a naive theological person, have read enough to know this isn't what is written, so using satan as your ace is totally without logic.
Got fossils in the ground testing your faith? 'SATAN DID IT!' DNA evidence showing how we are related to all living apes? SATAN again!
"I would say probably no older than 20,000 years, but I would not plant my feet in concrete on that."
Ok, but on what independent evidence is this figure of 20,000 years built on, how do you know? Also, you make decliration of date, but then try infer you don't know anyway, so why say 20,000 at all then?
"can we agree to disagree about our evolution vs. creation views and continue on,"
And why is this, are you afraid of learning something? shouldn't you actully want to test what you know and determine how qualitative is it? Shouldn't we 'test all things', yes?
agent, the Bible is not an exhaustive book when it comes to reporting all the works of God, but it is the authoritative Word of God alone. And therefore it does not record every possible miracle or healing of God.
agent, I would say probably no older than 20,000 years, but I would not plant my feet in concrete on that. But with regards to this discussion can we agree to disagree about our evolution vs. creation views and continue on, thanks.
agent, man you're a hard nut to crack, I do not know if they're legitimate, but I said if they (the healings or miracles) are then the God of the Bible is the one responsible.
agent, plus another issue that enters the debate is the role of Satan in some of these supposed healings or miracles outside of those recorded in the Bible. There are some who believe since Satan is capable of putting diseases on people could he not also remove those diseases in order to turn us away from God and either point us to him or to someone other than God. To be honest I'm not totally sure where I stand on that issue. That's why although I believe God is ultimately responsible for all healing I don't dwell on physical healings or miracles, but rather on seeing people come to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ and in fact that's the primary reason for both true healings and miracles is to point people to Christ. Because as I said earlier eventually we are all going to die physically unless Christ returns before we do and after that we will appear before one of the two judgement seats of God. God's desire is that as many people as possible will choose to be saved by becoming a child of His.
"there eventually comes a point where faith must enter in"
And there you have it folks, the whole answer for why one thinks miracles or such healings are occuring.
"Ibut there was a person who supposedly said he figured out the exact age of the earth,"
Yup, Usher, around 1700's. Exact? not at all. So it's how old/young according to you again?
"I can't answer to the miracles of other religions, but I do know if they were legitmate then the God of the Bible is the one who performed it."
If they are the god of the bible, then why is the first commandment about having NO OTHER gods? Sounds a little off. If they are his miracles, why aren't they mentioned them in the bible as well?
How do you know they're legit when all these other religions remark on their gods and miracles and supernatural acts? it's totally illogical to claim 'my god is real b/c of miracles' but then when you find other religions who have other miracles to then usurp that those miracles are of your god too.
agent, I can't answer to the miracles of other religions, but I do know if they were legitmate then the God of the Bible is the one who performed it.
agent, I can't answer for star2, but there was a person who supposedly said he figured out the exact age of the earth, but many have found several gaps in his addition. One being how long were Adam and Eve in the Garden before they sinned and the Bible does not record that.
agent, when it comes to God and the things and work of God there eventually comes a point where faith must enter in, either you have it or you don't, but without it no one can come into a personal relationship with God through the person and finished work of His Son, Jesus Christ alone. Part of that faith is to allow God to be God and know that He is in control and knows what He is doing and has a purpose for everything He does and/or allows to happen. That includes those of us who will be healed and those of us who will not be healed. But as I said the most important healing of all is when we are forgiven for our sins and become a child of God.
"I don't adhere to the 6,000 year "
So how young is young then, 10,000 years? the difference between 6,0000 and 10,000 isn't so signicant when compared to geological time of 4.6 billion. I am curious why star thinks, emphatically it says 6,000, while others like yourself would say it doesn't.
"as a minimum we have recoreded in both the Old and New Testament alike true stories of God's miraculous healing, so we do know with all certainty that God does indeed heal. "
At a minimum we have other miracles, and stories of supernatrualim acts in every other religion ever existed. So why are the miracles in those other 3000 religions any different than those in yours and why should those other not be taken as serously as yours? Perhaps it has mostly to do with it being YOUR religion and your own preference to adhere to it above all others.
agent, I don't adhere to the 6,000 year old earth concept because the Bible does not say that the world/universe is only that old.
agent, as a minimum we have recoreded in both the Old and New Testament alike true stories of God's miraculous healing, so we do know with all certainty that God does indeed heal.
"I'm a young earth creationist"
Seriously.... why? I thought star2 was the only one. Where is the clincher in which, the universe/earth is abviously only 6000 years young?
The whole conclussion you give is false. The premise you have is, HE heals. Well, how can we know this is indeed true, unless we have a we to verify or refute it? You can't assume it is the case b/c you simply want to believe it, you have to show it by testing. Show your work.
It's impossible to refute it if it's not at all defined, and this is basically what you imply. 'I can't define it'. Well, then it's unfalsifiable, which means it's utterly worthless as it can't be verified in the first place.
"we know that God heals and we know how He has chosen to bring healing, "
You know, how do you KNOW? Ah, but for some odd reason you can't explain why amputees never get healed? Odd isn't it.
"but we can not determine which method He will use or if He will choose to heal."
So, it you can't know if he will heal or not, or how exactly he could do it. You're implying you (or humanity) haven't a clue if he does it at all, or how he could or would do it, so it's outside of be being possibly refuted b/c there is no definitive answer on how its done to begin with!! It is totally ambigous and the process isn't defined at all or described in any detail which provides for it to be critiqued. This is why supernaturalism fails, as in such answers as 'godidit', such a statement reveals absolutely nothing, and isn't even falsifiable as there are no details behind it to critique it in the first place.
This is essentially what you've done with the efficacy of prayers.
How exactly can you certainly say he heals at all and refute such a claim, unless one actually defines what he can and can't, or will or wont do? Amputees appears to be one of them, by why? Perhaps it's not REALITSIC.
agent, since you know I'm a young earth creationist you know I don't put much creedence in some of what you said with regards to the development of human intelligence. But with regards to medicine we must keep in mind that death and disease had no part in God's design for this universe or mankind. So all death and disease is ultimately the result of sin. Not necessarily the sin of the one who is dying or has the disease, but none the less the result of sin. God in His mercy allows for people to be healed and/or to live longer, but ultimately everyone of us will die a physical death, even people who have been raised from the dead, with of course the exception of Jesus Christ. But the Bible teaches there is a second death and that is eternal seperation from God in hell. When a person comes to accept Christ as their personal Lord and Savior, they are then assured of eternal life with God in heaven when they leave this world through either physical death or Christ's return. That is the ultimate healing that God desires to bring into the life of every human being, but He will not force it on any one, but only on those who are willing to turn from their sins and turn to Him through the person and finished work of His Son, Jesus Christ alone.
agent, we know that God heals and we know how He has chosen to bring healing, but we can not determine which method He will use or if He will choose to heal. There is no contradiction in terms here because knowing how God can choose to heal does not determine whether or not He will choose to heal or when He will choose to bring healing. It's just like saying I know my wife can drive a car and in fact I've seen her drive a car, but I don't when she will drive or if she will even choose to drive. But not knowing those two things does not change the fact that she can still drive a car and that I've seen her drive a car.
"So what I've learned the hard way in many cases is to simply allow God to be God."
So you can declare how god works, and doesn't work, and then in the next sentance basically imply you haven't a clue as it's all up to him in end, more or less saying one can never REALLY know if his will is being exicuted or not, as ultimately his own actions are not at all known well enough to base any conclusion on them. So, by this logic how can we even certainly know, if in a given instance, it was actually his will helping to aid in someones recovery, and not simply a misdiagnosis, or the cancer going into remission naturally? and why should such prayers ONLY seem to work for otherwise naturally curable things, and not for say an amputee?
Me thinks it has a lot to do with how Sise, a Catholic doctor also refering to how it's unrealistic. Well, if it IS realistic, then why call it a miracle at all?
Only b/c the prayers seem not to work overwhelming enough for them to follow prayers and abandon medicine and doctors all together is why you make this claim. and this is why people adhere to wester medicine, over say, only adhering to prayers.
"but who gifted man with the intelligence"
Why does it even have to be a 'who', perhaps your premise question is false. Could not intellegence have evolved like other traits/features have evolved for other species? The fossil record for it surely points to a large increase in cranium increase over the past 3 million years, I guess you think this had nothing to do with it?
"If God is Creator, then He ultimately is the one who gave us intelligence"
He gave us intelligence so we could discover the process of science and exclude supernaturlism (inatvertantly him also) from the equation on how/why things work in a natural setting, thus reducing the need for belief in him/supernaturalim in such related matters. Mmmmkay. But this conclussion is a sort of a self defeating argument, as it infers he gave us intelligence to only later reject supernaturalistic magic and replace it with science. Talk about really testing your faith.
agent, but we're not God and it is God who decides how He will bring healing or even if He will bring healing. And when we try to think for God is when we tend to give God a bad name. So what I've learned the hard way in many cases is to simply allow God to be God.
agent, yes, but who gifted man with the intelligence to discover the medicine or perform the surgery that allowed Him to send healing into the life of the patient? If God is Creator, then He ultimately is the one who gave us intelligence.
"how I believe that's how you view God, that man created God."
Well considering how many Gods (3000+) have come and gone in the recorded history of humanity, it kinda goes to show how easily we appeal to magic or supernaturalism to explain things in sake of actually studying them.
"or surgery or He can choose to heal a person miraculously "
And that is just my point, you wont allow humanity to get credit where credit is due, you'd rather say 'god worked through the medicine', but this is entirely illogical as god didn't make the medicine, man did!
If people are so utterly convinced that 'god heals', and worldly medicine is bunk, then why do they bother with doctors at all? Their actions reek of hypocracy! They would be better off finacially too as they wouldn't have to pay such bills, and they wouldn't have to waste time in their offices. In fact, if what they say is true, their prayers would put doctors out of business. Why go to the Dr., when you just pray?
No, but we don't see this, and we both know why. Only a fool would stay home and for sake the modernity of science.
abhodim,
what science is able to show us, is that those things which we used to associate as being only the causation of the supernatural, (rainbows!) actually have natrual explinations which work much better in providing humanity knowledge on how and why certain things act as they do.
Science can't absolutely rule out ALL supernaturalism for all time and space, but it CAN show how supernaturalism isn't needed to explain natural things we readily study on each test. But in this sense, it goes to show that for all the testing we've done, we continue to find, again and again natural explinations for natural things. No magic needed.
The reason why positing the supernatural is forbidden in science is b/c it doesn't produce anything of value, as it's unverifiable. Positing magic is an intellectual shrug of the shoulders, and rather then saying we don't know, they hammer in magic, as if it really explained something in any detail.
agent, I sent you a post at another site talking about the album "Aqualung" by the group Jethro Tull and I shared how I liked it because it talked to how it appears that men created God in their image as opposed to the truth that God created us in His image. I went on to share how I believe that's how you view God, that man created God. Your last post shows that once again where you suggest that for a person who believes God can do miracles it's wrong if they go to say a doctor or hospital. But the reality is God is the healer in every situation, He may choose to work through doctors, medicines, or surgery or He can choose to heal a person miraculously or He may choose not to allow healing at all. Because He is God that is His call and why He chooses to heal some and not heal others is a question only He can answer. So when we pray, as I said in an earlier post, we can let God know what our desires are, but more importantly we need to pray that God's will be done. Jesus set the standard for how we should pray when it comes to God's will when He prayed to His heavenly Father in the Garden the night before He went to the Cross.
Agento,
In one respect, thank you for your clarification. There is a world of difference between the supernatural can't be detected and science has proven that the pusernatural doesn't exist.
The scientific process is based on observation, a naturalistic explanation is onlt posited. There is also a world of difference between the statement "That phenomena I observed was freaky. We shall research and sutdy it, and we may find a logical explanation (in our lifetime, perhaps)" and "That phenomena I observed was freaky. We shall research and study it, and we must find a logical explanation." The difference is pure scientific endeavor and accepting some mataphysical basis for future discovery.
agent, the reality is that each of the Gospels along with Paul records the fact that Jesus rose from the dead. And each of the Gospels was written with a specific purpose to a specific group of people at the time of there writing, but all four along with Paul acknowledge and affirm the fact that Christ died on the Cross and was raised from the dead. And the reality is I don't have to prove that to you because it is your eternal destiny that is on the line here and not mine. But for a person who appears to be as intelligent as you are it would make sense to me that you would investigate this matter because a lot is at stake here if we Christians are right and you are wrong. I have given you two of many excellent sources to look to if you choose to seriously investigate this information. As for the man who died and came back to life, I'm sure the doctors who pronounced him dead had a specific protocol they had to follow before they could pronounce him dead, do I know specifically what it was, no I don't, but considering issues such as malpractice suits, I'm sure the protocol was a very rigid one in order to protect both the doctors and the hospital from being sued if they were wrong.
"Sise, a Catholic doctor working in a Catholic hospital, said miracles don't happen when medical evidence shows death is near.
"That's just not a realistic situation," he said
Oh really, now, why might he say this? Talk about getting cold water dumped on you. So apparently, only when death isn't near, do miracles or miracles occur in this situation....well, if for the patient death isn't exatcly near, why call it a miracle at all in the first place?
"God trumps doctors for many Americans. An eye-opening survey reveals widespread belief that divine intervention can revive dying patients."
If this is actaully the case, why do these people persist in going to hosptials to get help from a Dr. at all?
Certainly these 57% also go to hospitals and go in for care when someone is deathly ill, so aren't by these actions they acting just a tad hypocritical?
If it really trumps worldly care, one would logically think they'd just stay home and pary for eachother when they are sick. Got a headache? Pray! Cancer? Pray! Heart attack? Pray! But this doesn't happen, they like everyone else bring their sick to the hospitals b/c they know our materialistic science can actually help a lot.
DanielPaul
Isn't a body thats missing a limb broken? Would'nt a limb growing back fix it?
Steve
"perhaps I made an assumption about if the doctors checked to see if he was brain dead since I'm not sure what they would need to do to ensure someone is dead"
Perhaps? The only way a person is offiically decalred dead is when their brain activity stops, and for a fair amount of time, when that is done there no comming back. Perhaps them not defning how they declared him/her dead has something to do with it.
"Unfortunately, I was not there when they pronounced him dead, but I was certainly there when he came back to life"
Ok, back it up, cite it, source it, show it actually occured and is on record somewhere. If what you say is true, it should be recorded somewhere. Oh, but I know, now you'll say you don't think they recorded it, or don't know a source for it. In other words, all I have is your hearsay account. Worthless!
"when I went to the nurses"
HELLO, misdiagnosis, it happens, espeically considering it sounds they didn't even declare him brain dead. and what exactly was wrong with the person to be in the hostpital in the first place?
More over, if you think a Dr's work is worthless, why bother taking him there at all, why not just stay at home and pray for them?
"Would they count as third party points of view?"
Are they recorded somewhere? If not, then no.
"yes they do differ slightly in minor details that have no impact on the fact that Christ did arise from the dead"
Ah, but why at all should they differ in details, I mean some of the details John gives (I think) none of the others mentioned at all, like the walking dead. Now how could John be the only witness to this at this event, but all others missed it?
"this was written by Josephus in Antiquities 18.3,3"
I thought I mentioned Josephus works on this were found to be partially forged and interpolated.
"Healing refers to fixing something that is broken ... not replacing something that is missing. It's just what the word means...."
What a cop out. Ok, so you're saying god can heal the sick, both mentally and physically, fix the blind, raise the dead, yaddda, yadda, yadda,.....but somehow, just somehow, he can't figure out how to form a new limb for a person who prays? Are you seriously that deluded? Like where's the cutoff point, why is raising the dead ok, or curing Cancer ok, but not forming a a new limb? I thought the books proclaimed that if one prays for it, it shall be recieved? Or is there some by-law exception rule that was left out which forbid new limbs or something?
abhodim,
uhhhhh...huuuuh? Science cannnot detect the supernatural, it is by its very design undetectable by Science and it all has to with how science is only allowed to use natural explinations. I guess not too many people CP are familar with that concept.
"If there be a point,"
With this long winded rant, I don't see possiby how, it's entirely hypothetical, not based on any factual points, it's bascially hot air.
"it is dealing with the foundational skepticism that you use"
Ah, but we are ALL normally quite skeptical in out everyday lives, and we use logic and rational thinking in everything else. Only when religion is involved does it seem people toss their logic, skepticism, and rational judgement. your very sentance translats to :'give up your logic and skepticism, just BELEIVE!' as if this would convince anyone in believing in Santa Claus either.
Hey pal, apparently you don't understand how the scientific process works, it's not allowed to invoke magic, miracles, or the supernatural to make sense of things. And for good reason, they are intellectually useless.
"But you'll notice a limb lost in an accident never grows back. Why is that?"
Healing refers to fixing something that is broken ... not replacing something that is missing. It's just what the word means....
agent, perhaps I made an assumption about if the doctors checked to see if he was brain dead since I'm not sure what they would need to do to ensure someone is dead, but for two doctors to declare a person dead I am sure they would have done something to confirm that diagnosis. Unfortunately, I was not there when they pronounced him dead, but I was certainly there when he came back to life. As far as third parties, when I went to the nurses station and asked if a dead person's chest continues to move up and down after they are pronounced dead, in a matter of moments a number of medical people were headed to his room and indeed confirmed that he was alive. Would they count as third party points of view? I was there because of my position as a hospice chaplain and this event occurred in 1998 in Hazard KY at the Appalachian Regional Hospital.
agent, "Now there was about that time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him man; for he was a doer of wonderful works...for he appeared alive on the third day... this was written by Josephus in Antiquities 18.3,3
agent, yes they do differ slightly in minor details that have no impact on the fact that Christ did arise from the dead. And by the fact that the details do differ slightly it shows that there was more than one eyewitness to the fact that Christ rose from the dead. But it's apparent that you are either an agnostic or an atheist, so let me ask you this. What would have to happen in your life for you to come to believe that there is a God and He indeed is the God of the Bible?
mathetes, I hear you loud and clear on this one, thanks. Have you heard anymore about your possible call to the church who was considering you?
Agento,
I have followed your line of reasoning in your posts, and it reminds me of a joke that has made a bit of the rounds in my neighborhood. Bear with me on two counts. First, I'm more a "laugher" than a "relater," and I hope I can do justice to the original teller of the jest. Second, you need not feel that there is something "aesopian" to the story; should it give a little insight, fine. If it falls flat, fine as well.
A scientist, zealous to prove whether or not divine intercession was possibly scientific verifiable, decided to use the latest technology to create a "divine intercession detection apparatus (DIDA, for short). He spared no expense at contructing a working model, integrating the most sensitive filters, sensors, dectors, and so on, throwing in all the bells, whistles, buzzers, and flashing lights to make DIDA a marvel of scientific engineering. He estimated that with such gizmos, he would be able to detect the fluttering of an angel's wing half a galaxy away.
He turned it on, and monitored the device for two solid years. In the whole, not a whistle wailed, buzzer blared, lights flashed, bells chimed. Nothing. Convinced that DIDA had established the impossibility of divine intervention, he recorded and published his results to an appreciative scientific community.
He was also convinced that DIDA would have been the hit of the upcoming scientific symposium ... if it hadn't been struck by lighnting on the trip over.
If there be a point, it is dealing with the foundational skepticism that you use. You wish to insist on the evidence that is necessary to convince you, and dispense with the evidence offered as invalid. You may have a point about the hypothetical nature of the argument in re divine intercession, but it is double0edged. If (and, again, I'll grant you the point of hypothesis) there is incontrovertible evidence offered in support of divine activity in history, to find another level of skepticism and hammer in?
believer,
Remember what Abraham said to the rich man concerned for his brothers, "If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets , neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead."
"there are at least five accounts of the Resurrection of Christ in the Bible alone"
And? Don't these accounts differ in slight details though?
"the four Gospels and in Paul's writings"
Paul didn't write about it till 40 year after the fact, right? and the Gospels are not exactly uniform in their details on how things went down that day, and didn't they come after Sauls writings as well?
"Jewish historian also speaks to it."
They write of his execution, but not of his resurection. if you mean josepheus, you can't tell me you've not heard of how these were later interporlated either.
"I don't know that God hasn't healed amputees,"
Oh I am farily sure it's never happened, for if it had we'd know about it by now, especially with all those war victims, and people praying left and right. But we both know why it hasn't happened or will not happen.
"I'm sure they didn't check to see if he was brain dead,"
Well, then that means perhaps he wasn't dead to begin with. If they didn't check, or couldn't tell b/c they didn't bother, well you can't exactly pronounce him as dead now can you? You're sure they didn't check if he was brain dead, but you're also sure the Dr.s said he was dead, well those 2 just don't work, as technically you're not dead till you're brain dead. Sounds like you're stretching the story a tad, or you can't recall what happened exactly. Another reason why eyewitness is bunk.
Try to get me a story of a person who is confirmed brain dead and comes back.
"I was there with his wife"
Sure you were. Can you cite me something outside of just your own hearsay account, say a 3rd party which recorded this event and can confirm it?
agent, I don't know that God hasn't healed amputees, so I can't answer your question as to why God doesn't, but if it's true that He doesn't then I still can't answer because I'm not God and God doesn't speak to that issue in His Word.
agent, there are at least five accounts of the Resurrection of Christ in the Bible alone, the four Gospels and in Paul's writings, plus Josephus, a Jewish historian also speaks to it. Plus both Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel have written books which refer to a number of historic writings and records that attest to the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
agent, on the person who was pronounced dead by two doctors, I was there with his wife when he came back to life and the next week spoke with one of the doctors who told me that he didn't know what I did but that the man was dead when he left his bedside. I'm sure they didn't check to see if he was brain dead, but I'm pretty sure that if not one but two doctors pronounce a person as being dead they are dead.
"500 eyewitness accounts"
So 500 eyewitnesses, but only one person wrote it down 40 years later. Sure. One person writing that 500 people witnessed the Resurrection is one account, not 500. I think you mean we have a few accounts that say there were 500 eyewitnesses, that is a little different. 500 eyewitnesses would imply they all 500 signed and wrote and in detail about the whole event, and this you don't have. The idea regarding the burden of proof is that YOU have to prove these 500 or whatever saw it, not that I have to disprove it, the burden of proof lies with whoever is making the claim, that is elementary logic.
But really, is simply an eyewitness testimony from 2000 years ago suffucient enough, especially knowing that people would embelish?
Let's get back on point, why doesn't God heal amputees? It seems like such a pedestrian task.
God trumps everything....
I didn't realize that there might even be a doubt here. But surveys are always right.
believer,
Your example is merely a hypothetical one, unless you have some supportive evidence for it? your claim would be liking asking: 'what do you do when an amputees limbs all of sudden grow back from no where!' Of course this begs the quetion of EVIDENCE for the claim to begin with, for if there is evidence for it, then the hypothetical can and must be explained, but so far no amputees have ever gotten new limbs from praying. They might get crafted 'lotanent Dan' fake limbs, but those obviously weren't crafted by some diety, no, some engineer made them.
"What do you do when a patient is pronounced dead by two doctors and about 15 minutes later is sitting up in his bed?"
First, how'd they qualify the person as dead? Were they BRAIN DEAD, or did their heart simply stop beating? A person isn't technically dead till they are brain dead. again, Got Evidence?
agent, what do you do when a patient is diagnosed with a cancerous tumor which is visible on the x-ray and then a while later the tumor is completely gone and doctors simply cannot explain its' disappearance? What do you do when a patient is pronounced dead by two doctors and about 15 minutes later is sitting up in his bed? I know we'll wait another 14 billion years and natural processes will answer all of these questions for us. But one question your natural processes can't answer is the bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ which had over 500 eyewitness accounts of the fact that He was crucified and died on the Cross and the fact that He was seen several days and weeks later walking, talking, and even eating with His disciples and others. Now if that's not a miracle then tell me what was it?
"The interesting thing is you do not even need to believe in God to believe in miracles. So it's okay for atheists and agnostics to believe in miracles, but then again if not God then who"
beliver, I think you're missing the most obvious thing, which is that we don't fully understand enough about human anatomy and biology to know exactly why, for instance, a given patient recovers from cancer while another doesn't. this is, a young science, and to simply atribute a current 'unknown' as a miracle is not logical. What do you do when the 'unknown' becomes known, does this destory your faith? Of course not, just find another temporal gap of ignorance and hammer it in.
But then again before knowledge of pathogens, people belived simply praying cured things that today we can avoid simply by our knowledge of how to prevent them and how to cure them if they are infected. I mean, people in Europe thought if they prayed, they would be healed from the Plauge, only later through knowlede of what caused it did they begin to prevent it.
"But you'll notice a limb lost in an accident never grows back. Why is that?"
Oh don't worry Will, I think we can all guess why not, I tried posing that question to mathetes, and it didn't seem to sink in. It's a legit question after all, why aren't sever burn victims or amputees healed? The texts infer prayers can moved mountains, so even metaphorically, if they can accomplish this much, surely a new limb with new digits would be possible, yes?
philo777,
Sorry I don't have the specifics about two studies that showed prayer IS effective beyond simple chance, but I can give you enough that you can find them. One study was by Kansas City cardiologists William Harris and James O'Keefe. 1000 heart patients, and the 500 prayed for by the chaplain and a group of volunteers had 11% fewer heart attacks, strokes, and life-threatening complications. Another: Dr. Elizabeth Targ of Pacific College of Medicine in S.F., CA, tested prayer on AIDS patients. The "prayed for" group had six times fewer hospitalizations, and their hospitalizations were significantly shorter than the people who received no prayer.
I'm sure there are other studies that showed no effect, but these were indeed scientifically rigorous research studies which showed the efficacy of prayer in health matters.
philo, you make some excellent observations and I agree that we can sometimes pray for the wrong thing if we are not careful and that's why we need to follow the example of the best Prayer Warrior of all time, Christ. When He was in the Garden he prayed that if it were possible that He wouldn't have to go to the Cross, but He finished the prayer by saying if going to the Cross is the only way that His Father's will could be completed then let the Father's will be done. When we pray I see no problem with letting God know what our personal desires are for either us or the person we are praying for, but our heart's desire should always be that God's will takes precedence over our or anyone elses desires. And yes there have been times when I have said that apparently as much as we don't understand why this is God's will in this matter, but at the same time we can look to Romans 8:28, which says that all things work for good to those that love the Lord and are called according to His purposes.
Oh my, I'm sorry about that post. I'll never do cut-and-paste from Word again, I promise!
Believer:
No, I didn’t think you were doubting me, at all. As always, when this topic comes up on boards like this, the thread rapidly fills with anecdotal stories of miraculous healings which seemingly take place on an endless basis whenever and wherever someone prays for them.
What is the truth, really? To start with, you never see anyone post a message like: “We all prayed for Aunt Martha, but she died anyway.†Obviously, this is the outcome more often then not when the prognosis is terminal, but no one shares it. Why? Well, because the obvious answer is: “It was her time.†Or†“It was God’s plan.†Or, my favorite: “He works in mysterious ways, it will all be revealed to us someday.â€Â
Believer, did you ever stop and think what it is you are doing when you pray for someone? First of all, if you are praying for them, you are assuming that you know what’s best for them, and you could be wrong. Secondly, you are asking for a suspension of natural law, and I ask you, how’s that working out for you?
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, you may be asking God to deviate from a course he has supposedly mapped out for centuries, or, even more foolishly, you’re asking him to do what he is already going to do anyway. Either way, you’re obviously wasting your time. So my point is, why bother, if you’re doing it for someone else.
If prayer worked, everyone would be doing it, all the time. The churches would be filled, all over the world, and you would have no trouble attracting new Christians to fill your churches and coffers. Unfortunately, there is absolutely no evidence, other then the anecdotal, that prayer works any better then chance alone. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the presence or absence of God, just that if he does exist, he is either a poor listener, oblivious, powerless to act, or just doesn’t give a hoot. Our experience teaches that we live on a geologically active planet, beset with both natural and man-made disasters, which seem to afflict the religious and non-religious indiscriminately.
Believer, if praying brings you comfort, hope, solace or in any other way decreases your human suffering, go for it! I would be the last to fault you for doing what felt good, my only suggestion would be, don’t expect too much. For myself, I would rather do the best I can to stay in each and every moment, do what I can to alleviate human suffering among those I come in contact with, and try not to treat others as I would not like to be treated.
Have a great day!
It seems the only "medical miracles" God performs are those which could have occurred naturally, i.e., cancer goes into remission, grievous wounds heal, people come out of comas, tumors recede, diabetes handled through diet and exercise, etc. But you'll notice a limb lost in an accident never grows back. Why is that?
Given that the majority of patients in hospitals die from medical errors (chief among them are misdiagnoses and simple human errors, the fact that cancer could be there one minute and not later is not at all surprising.
I believe in miracles...I always have and last year I experienced a big one. Having been diagnosed with degenerative disc desease through MRI's and X-rays (they both confirmed it) I had back surgery (to fix only a smaller portion of the big picture) and that again confirmed the damage to three discs. I was facing the prospect of having an even more difficult surgery a couple of years down the road. Went back for post-operative check up 6 weeks later and at that point my tests showed minimal damage to only one disc, not greater damage in three like earlier tests (plural) had confirmed.
People could say that the first test could have been wrong, but it was a whole set of tests that provided the same result plus the doctor's confirmation of the condition while I was in surgery (he saw the extent of the damage with his own eyes).
People could say it was my own body doing that, but even the specialist was surprised of the results..he treats conditions like that one on a daily basis, but he does not see other people's bodies responding like that.
Am I more special than other people who still struggle with the problem I had? No, I am not, but I guess I placed my faith in God and He felt welcome into my situation.
"which God is it that the 57% believe in it?"
Very good question. My guess is they just used the term 'God' to bait the question and looked to see what they caught.
Survey...such a great concept. It uses and defies the laws of mathematics all at the same time....
Well now human ape...I'm afraid evidence is not on your side of the net here. Those in the health care industry have seen God heal quite a bit. We have people in our church whose Xrays clearly showed cancer. All the tests clearly showed cancer. Yet, when they went for treatment...it was gone. Cancer is a one way trip without intervention. Yet, it was gone.
There are cases where some cancer was visually confirmed during biopsey or exploritory and still it just 'was gone' when they went for treatment.
I'd say there is going to be plenty of growing up on judgement day....
Human-ape, where did your sense of morality come from? It surely didn't come from your alleged ancestor the great ape seeing that they don't have any. How come only humans have the capacity to be moral?
philo, please don't think I was questioning what you said, but I was simply pointing out another report on the same issue yet with a totally different outcome. I am not saying that some healing is not a result of either chemistry or biology, but there are some healings that simply can not be explained such as someone who is diagnosed with cancer and yet with out explanation the cancer is found to be completely gone.
On the right-side panel of the website below, see two documented cases that has horrorified Atheists as these two people were RAISED FROM THE DEAD IN JESUS' NAME!!!
http://www.evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
human-ape, I am still waiting on you to come up with an original idea. I have asked you before when you went by a variety of different names but you have yet to answer. Is it because you don't have one?
Just out of interest, which God is it that the 57% believe in it? There's no mention if it is the the same one for all of them. Just wondered.
Steve
Yes, God 'trumps' doctors. That is beyond obvious... like saying that stars are bigger than atoms.
I believe God also gives doctors wisdom; guides their hands; increases their faith. There are, and always have been, countless Christian doctors.
The most important thing is that God receives glory, praise and honor whether or not the outcome of a surgery, treatment, diagnosis, etc... is to man's liking or not. We pray to God for miracles; for healing; not ultimately so the person is healed, but to glorify our Almighty Father.
John 11:4 - "When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby."
2Corinthians 4:15 - "For all things are for your sakes, that the abundant grace might through the thanksgiving of many redound to the glory of God."
1Timothy 1:17 - "Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen."
"so then where does healing come from?"
Good question! Shows you are at least thinking about it, but I humbly suggest you might consider Chemistry and Biology as perhaps possible answers to the question.
Believer:
What you said may be true, but here is a link to the study I quoted:
http://web.med.harvard.edu/sites/RELEASES/html/3_31STEP.html
humanape, every reputable doctor I've asked has said all they can do is prepare a body for healing, but in and of themselves they can heal no one, so then where does healing come from? The interesting thing is you do not even need to believe in God to believe in miracles. So it's okay for atheists and agnostics to believe in miracles, but then again if not God then who?
abhodim, I honestly did have a Pastor whose last name was God. He told me he never had a problem getting a check cashed.
To prevent misunderstanding, my family doctor happens to have the same initial letter as God. Dr. G. is not God, just a warm., friendly physician whom the whole family loves.
philo, that's odd because I read a report that said that when patients know they are being prayed for it often times has a positive effect on both their health and recovery. But the issue here isn't prayer, but whether or not God is capable of doing miracles and the answer is a resounding yes! As a hospice chaplain I saw God do some amazing things and in fact I was present when a man who had been pronounced dead by two doctors came back to life. But the reality is physical miracles while as amazing as they might be do not come close to the most magnificent miracle of all and that is when God's Son, Jesus Christ comes into the life of an unsaved person and makes them a child of God for all eternity. You see that man who came back to life like all human beings eventually died a physical death, but because he was a child of God he is alive and well and living with God and all the other children of God who have gone on to glory, that's the greatest miracle of all and a miracle available to anyone who would repent of their sin and put their complete faith/trust in the person and finished work of Jesus Christ alone.
Several years ago, my mother was dignosed with Guillain-Barre Syndrome. The doctor predicted she would have no function of her arms for two months, involving therapy. One week later, the parlysis was gone, no therapy needed.
The doctor confessed there may have been an error in diagnosis. Whether it be this or divine intervention, it is yet one more way where God trumps doctors. No knock against doctors here; my doctor is a caring individual who has demonstrated commitment for health for all his patients. It's just I can't credit him with omniscience and Dr. G. is smart enough to acknowledge this.
My step-mother-in-law was diagnosed, by one of her best friends, with advanced ovarian cancer with a solid non-cystic mass, and tons of people were praying for her. You can tell via cat scan whether or not a mass is solid or cystic, and it was definitely solid (more than one doctor diagnosed it). But when they went in to remove the cancer via surgery 24 hours later, it had turned into a cystic fluid-filled mass and was not cancerous.
God definitely trumps doctors.
And all this after the release of a comprehensive multi-year study, with thousands of patients, that failed to show any effect whatsoever for intercessory prayer. Oh, I forgot, people in the double-blind study who were being prayed for and knew it suffered a higher rate of mortality then any other group.
Folks want to believe in the possibility of a miracle, and I can't say I blame them when a loved one is involved, but there is just no evidence that "miracle cures" occur at any higher rate then chance allows.
"More than half of randomly surveyed adults - 57 percent - said God's intervention could save a family member even if physicians declared treatment would be futile."
57% of randomly surveyed adults never grew up.
My wife is an open heart recovery nurse. To many doctors...God trumps doctors!