"Why Won't God Heal Amputees?"

[Bu]

So says the Bible. Oh yeah, and God is "fair". I suppose some sort of "higher" logic is what goes on. 

Maybe, if our hermeneutics is static and sterile. Or the interpretation could be wrong or a little off. If you think, as a Christian, that every single verse should be viewed literally and that there's no room to maneuver or modify passages--and I'm sure some might claim doing so is an affront to the intentions of the original writers, whoever they really were (we can't question that now, either!)--then we should keep our lips sealed. 

[Bu]

     Are you looking for a poetic or a factual understanding? Which is important to you? Are you trying to get some benefit or learn what's actually there? You could be a wiseass and say getting the truth is a benefit....but it's a rather strictly defined benefit which you ought to have little opportunity to fiddle with through belief. If, that is, you really want to know something like if there is a Hell or New Jersey instead of just defend their existence weakly against the mockery of....you know, moi. 

Hmmmm............... I don't know if I believe in the traditional hell as supposedly elaborated in the Bible.  Wether its a place or condition doesn't always concern me, but offering a differing view can at least provide G$ with another perspective.  He did notice the apparent contradictions of thought in the texts (eg, God as an all-loving deity who seeks the redemption of His creation as opposed to eternal punisher for rejecting his love). I'm only pointing out that, with such radical differences in character and mood, perhaps our hermeneutic is limited and off because, in the example given, a literal fundamentalism just doesn't work here.

[greg]

Still if you're stuck at the "what's a God good for?" stage you could consider that nothing is the most likely answer for a being that is not supposed to be in the business of intervening.

That's what I concluded...

[DavidRoss]

Why won't God heal amputees?

Because he gets a chuckle out of watching them try to turn a double play?

[greg]

Why won't God heal amputees?

Because he gets a chuckle out of watching them try to turn a double play?

Your avatar matched this post.

It's like, "Let me try a one-liner here- don't know if it's gonna work or not, but I think I'll just throw up my hands in a silly gesture anyway."

[greg]

I just had this thought...
Alright, imagine this story.

One day, a guy named Bob goes out to play. Bob was always a good Christian; followed every rule, tried his best to do the right thing- sure, sometimes he slipped up, but whenever he did, he always asked for forgiveness immediately.
However, since he was playing golf on a Florida golf course with dark clouds overhead like an idiot, he got struck by lightning and died.
He awakens at the judgement seat of God. However, he noticed something odd. God was wearing a turban! 
"You have disappointed me, almighty Allah!" screamed God.
Bob was a bit surprised. "Ummm... is this a joke?"
"Stop mocking me! I have given you fair enough chance! Ever hear of a little thing called Islam? You do know what happens to nonbelievers, right?"
"Uhhhh... yeah, I have studied a little bit of it before."
"Good, then you shouldn't be surprised. I never knew you- depart from me."
And then, good ole boy Christian Bob was thrown into the Lake of Fire, where his flesh melted slowly, for all eternity.

...
...
...
Is this just?
What if "Bob" were "Arif" and "Allah" were "Jehovah"?

[Daidalos]

I just had this thought...
Alright, imagine this story.

One day, a guy named Bob goes out to play. Bob was always a good Christian; followed every rule, tried his best to do the right thing- sure, sometimes he slipped up, but whenever he did, he always asked for forgiveness immediately.
However, since he was playing golf on a Florida golf course with dark clouds overhead like an idiot, he got struck by lightning and died.
He awakens at the judgement seat of God. However, he noticed something odd. God was wearing a turban! 
"You have disappointed me, almighty Allah!" screamed God.
Bob was a bit surprised. "Ummm... is this a joke?"
"Stop mocking me! I have given you fair enough chance! Ever hear of a little thing called Islam? You do know what happens to nonbelievers, right?"
"Uhhhh... yeah, I have studied a little bit of it before."
"Good, then you shouldn't be surprised. I never knew you- depart from me."
And then, good ole boy Christian Bob was thrown into the Lake of Fire, where his flesh melted slowly, for all eternity.

...
...
...
Is this just?
What if "Bob" were "Arif" and "Allah" were "Jehovah"?

Ooh, did chick tracts serve as the inspiration for that example, inverted as though it might have been?

I think the only ones who might consider the examples just would be the fundamentalists of the respective religions; others? Not very much.

[greg]

Ooh, did chick tracts serve as the inspiration for that example, inverted as though it might have been?

I think the only ones who might consider the examples just would be the fundamentalists of the respective religions; others? Not very much.

Actually, no, at least not at first- though I did realize how what I started to think was similar to what I've seen. 
I think it was the one where this guy (probably named "Bob") was undecided about what to believe in, and then at the very last frame, you see him falling into fire, as he burns for eternity.

[drogulus]

     

Actually, no, at least not at first- though I did realize how what I started to think was similar to what I've seen. 
I think it was the one where this guy (probably named "Bob") was undecided about what to believe in, and then at the very last frame, you see him falling into fire, as he burns for eternity.

     I have a better one. Bob is hooked up to a robot from the future (let's call him Omega I, in honor of Teilhard de Chardin ).The robot knows everything. It is just as materialist or otherwise as the truth, which it knows, calls for. The robot asks Bob a question: "Bob, does God exist?" If Bob gets it wrong, the robot tortures him forever. What should Bob say?

[greg]

     
     I have a better one. Bob is hooked up to a robot from the future (let's call him Omega I, in honor of Teilhard de Chardin ).The robot knows everything. It is just as materialist or otherwise as the truth, which it knows, calls for. The robot asks Bob a question: "Bob, does God exist?" If Bob gets it wrong, the robot tortures him forever. What should Bob say?

Nothing. Bob should just pour acid all over the stupid robot for being such a jerk, and then casually walk away.
But when it explodes, he shouldn't look back. After all...

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/Sqz5dbs5zmo

[Brian]

Cheater. 

[drogulus]

Nothing. Bob should just pour acid all over the stupid robot for being such a jerk, and then casually walk away.
But when it explodes, he shouldn't look back. After all...

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/Sqz5dbs5zmo

     I was going to say the safest answer would be one that didn't "get it wrong" by being unresponsive. So the right answer would be "Splunge!" or "Nice robot!". But you've got the right idea.

     However you could decide to accept the challenge. Since the robot is an omniscient entity that threatens to torture you forever the answer would be yes. That's a god in my book. 

[greg]

     I was going to say the safest answer would be one that didn't "get it wrong" by being unresponsive. So the right answer would be "Splunge!" or "Nice robot!". But you've got the right idea.

     However you could decide to accept the challenge. Since the robot is an omniscient entity that threatens to torture you forever the answer would be yes. That's a god in my book. 

I would say yes.
Then I would say yes to any other robot that threatens to torture me forever, as well.  0:)

[drogulus]

      
     Gort!

     

     Be Nice!


     Leave his guitar alone!

   

      *



    _{* You can't leave him alone for a minute!}
   

[drogulus]

I dunno.............does hell have to be a literal, eternal place?  And is it necessarily a final destination?  This life on earth can be unbearable enough--in its own way, a hell during difficult times.

     Short answer? No, it has to not be that. There is no that, words meaning what they do.

     As for what it might be, could hell just be a stupid, evil idea grandfathered into the modern world by old beliefs? Is that too far-fetched? Not at all. It happens all the time. As a matter of fact, new stupid, evil ideas are produced even now. So it shouldn't surprise you that the old ones can hang on. Perhaps a more pressing question (for me, at least) is why you appear to be confused about the difference between ideas that are just that and other ideas that actually refer to something. Also, it is not the case that the falsity of the most literal view implies the truth of some less literal version. If hell does not "literally" exist that does not mean it's any more likely that it exists in a "sort of" way. There is no mid-point between existence and metaphor to rescue false beliefs.

     If you pay attention to what words mean you might begin to have trouble with all of the "quasi-existent" modes non-literalists are fond of. They are escape hatches, pure and simple, a way of maintaining that something really exists though it literally doesn't. The absence of "literal" hell closes the subject. The miseries of human life are something else, and shouldn't be used to prop up this shitty concept.

     

So says the Bible. Oh yeah, and God is "fair". I suppose some sort of "higher" logic is what goes on. 

     It's the higher logic of Madman Mundt.

     

     I'll show you the life of the mind!

[Szykneij]

     

We was beat up by a bible salesman and banished from Woolworths.
I dont know, Everett, was it the one branch or all of them?

[drogulus]

    
  "Stay the hell out of the Woolworths!"

     

   

[greg]

 
     
     It's the higher logic of Madman Mundt.

     

     I'll show you the life of the mind!

Didn't recognize that until I saw the picture of that other guy. 
Actually, I watched about 30 minutes of that movie just the other day. Before that, I saw it 2 or 3 times...

[drogulus]

Didn't recognize that until I saw the picture of that other guy. 
Actually, I watched about 30 minutes of that movie just the other day. Before that, I saw it 2 or 3 times...

      It's a sneaky good movie that only the Coens could make. Everyone should be forced to watch it until I'm satisfied that they've had enough and not a moment before. Is that too strict? Anyway, every time I watch it it gets better.

      Mastrionotti: Started in Kansas City. Couple of housewives.
     
      Deutsch: Couple days ago we see the same M.O. out in Los Feliz.
     
      Mastrionotti: Doctor. Ear, nose and throat man.
     
      Deutsch: All of which he's now missin'.
     
      Mastrionotti: Well, some of his throat was there.
     
      Deutsch: Physician, heal thyself.
     
      Mastrionotti: Good luck with no fuckin' head.

      Watch for Tony Shalhoub, he practically steals the film, even though it's impossible to steal a film from Goodman and Lerner.

      Geisler: Mayhew, some help, the guy's a souse!

      Barton: He's a great writer...

      Geisler: A great souse!

      Barton: You don't understand...

      Geisler: Souse!

      Barton: He's in pain, because he can't write...

      Geisler: Souse! Souse! Can't write? He manages to write his name on the back of his paycheck every week!