> Is God real, or is he imaginary? It is one of the most important
> questions in America today, because this question lies at the heart of
> the American culture wars.
> If God is real and if God inspired the Bible, then we should worship God
> as the Bible demands. We should certainly post the Ten Commandments in
> our courthouses and shopping centers, put "In God We Trust" on the
> money, pray in our schools and eliminate the theory of evolution from
> every curriculum. We should focus our society on God and his infallible
> Word because our everlasting souls hang in the balance.
> On the other hand, if God is imaginary, then religion is a complete
> illusion. Christianity, Judaism and Islam are pointless. We should
> eliminate God from our society because God is meaningless. Belief in God
> is nothing but a silly superstition, and this superstition leads a
> significant portion of the population to be completely delusional.
> But how can we decide, conclusively, whether God is real or imaginary?
> Since we are intelligent human beings living in the 21st century, we
> should take the time to look at some data. That is what we are doing
> when we ask, "Why won't God heal amputees?"
> If you are an intelligent human being, and if you want to understand the
> true nature of God, you owe it to yourself to ask, "Why won't God heal
> amputees?"
> Why won't God heal amputees?" may seem like an odd name for a Web site.
> The reason for choosing it is simple: this is one of the most important
> questions that we can ask about God.
> The question, "Why won't God heal amputees?" probes into a fundamental
> aspect of prayer and exposes it for observation. This aspect of prayer
> has to do with ambiguity and coincidence.
>   Watch the video
> To help you understand why this question is so important, let's look at
> an example. Let's imagine that you visit your doctor one day, and he
> tells you that you have cancer. Your doctor is optimistic, and he
> schedules surgery and chemotherapy to treat your disease. Meanwhile, you
> are terrified. You don't want to die, so you pray to God day and night
> for a cure. The surgery is successful, and when your doctor examines you
> again six months later the cancer is gone. You praise God for answering
> your prayers. You totally believe with all your heart that God has
> worked a miracle in your life.
> The obvious question to ask is: What cured you? Was it the
> surgery/chemotherapy, or was it God? Is there any way to know whether
> God is playing a role or not when we pray?
> Unless you take the time to intelligently analyze this situation, it
> looks ambiguous. God might have miraculously cured your disease, as many
> Christians believe. But God might also be imaginary, and the
> chemotherapy drugs and surgery are the things that cured you. Or your
> body's immune system might have cured the cancer itself.
> When your tumor dissappeared, in other words, it might simply have been
> a complete coincidence that you happened to pray. Your prayer may have
> had zero effect.
> How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the
> cure? One way is to eliminate the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous
> situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no
> ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.
> That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.
> Think about it this way. The Bible clearly promises that God answers
> prayers. For example, in Mark 11:24 Jesus says, "Therefore I tell you,
> whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and
> it will be yours." And billions of Christians believe these promises.
> You can find thousands of books, magazine articles and Web sites talking
> about the power of prayer. According to believers, God is answering
> millions of their prayers every day.
> So what should happen if we pray to God to restore amputated limbs?
> Clearly, if God is real, limbs should regenerate through prayer. In
> reality, they do not.
> Why not? Because God is imaginary. Notice that there is zero ambiguity
> in this situation. There is only one way for a limb to regenerate
> through prayer: God must exist and God must answer prayers. What we find
> is that whenever we create a unambiguous situation like this and look at
> the results of prayer, prayer never works. God never "answers prayers"
> if there is no possibility of coincidence. We will approach this issue
> from several different angles in this book, but Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8
> are particularly important:
> · Chapter 5 - Why won't God heal amputees?
> · Chapter 6 - Why do you need health insurance?
> · Chapter 7 - Why can't you move a mountain?
> · Chapter 8 - Why do bad things happen to good people?
>   Watch the video
> The fact that prayers are never answered when the possibility of
> coincidence is eliminated meshes with another fact. If we analyze God's
> responses to ambiguous prayers using statistical tools, what we find is
> that there is never any statistical evidence for prayer. In other words,
> when we statisically compare prayer to coincidence for explaining any
> situation, they are identical. For example, this article points out:
> One of the most scientifically rigorous studies yet, published earlier
> this month, found that the prayers of a distant congregation did not
> reduce the major complications or death rate in patients hospitalized
> for heart treatments. [ref]
> It also says:
> A review of 17 past studies of ''distant healing," published in 2003 by
> a British researcher, found no significant effect for prayer or other
> healing methods.
> No valid scientific study has ever found any evidence that prayer works.
> See this page for details.
> You can see the same effect in the following prayer. Let's assume that
> you are a true believer and you do believe that God cures cancer. What
> would happen if we get down on our knees and pray to God in this way:
> Dear God, almighty, all-powerful, all-loving creator of the universe, we
> pray to you to cure every case of cancer on this planet tonight. We pray
> in faith, knowing you will bless us as you describe in Matthew 7:7,
> Matthew 17:20, Matthew 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14, Matthew 18:19
> and James 5:15-16. In Jesus' name we pray, Amen.
> We pray sincerely, knowing that when God answers this completely
> heartfelt, unselfish, non-materialistic prayer, it will glorify God and
> help millions of people in remarkable ways. If God cures cancer, then
> this is an easy prayer for an omnipotent, all-loving God to answer.
> The fact is, what this prayer does is remove ambiguity. As soon as we do
> that, we see the true nature of "God." There is no way that a
> coincidence can answer this prayer, and, sure enough, the prayer goes
> unanswered.
> If you look at the data, you can see exactly what is happening here:
> · When we pray to God about any non-ambigous situation, God never
> answers the prayer.
> · When we analyse any ambiguous prayer using statistical tools, we find
> zero effect from prayer.
> In other words, every "answered prayer" truly is a coincidence, nothing
> more. "God" doesn't "answer prayers" at all. The belief in prayer is
> pure superstition. Non-ambiguous prayers (like those of amputees) show
> us, conclusively, that the whole idea that "God answers prayers" is an
> illusion created by human imagination.:

 

> Is God real, or is he imaginary? It is one of the most important questions
> in America today, because this question lies at the heart of the American
> culture wars.
> If God is real and if God inspired the Bible, then we should worship God
> as the Bible demands. We should certainly post the Ten Commandments in our
> courthouses and shopping centers, put "In God We Trust" on the money, pray
> in our schools and eliminate the theory of evolution from every
> curriculum.

 

> > Is God real, or is he imaginary? It is one of the most important questions
> > in America today, because this question lies at the heart of the American
> > culture wars.
> > If God is real and if God inspired the Bible, then we should worship God
> > as the Bible demands. We should certainly post the Ten Commandments in our
> > courthouses and shopping centers, put "In God We Trust" on the money, pray
> > in our schools and eliminate the theory of evolution from every
> > curriculum.
 

> Is Don Really Real?  Rumor has it that he's Really Kiddin'

 

> Is God real, or is he imaginary? It is one of the most important
> questions in America today, because this question lies at the heart of
> the American culture wars.
> If God is real and if God inspired the Bible, then we should worship God
> as the Bible demands. We should certainly post the Ten Commandments in
> our courthouses and shopping centers, put "In God We Trust" on the
> money, pray in our schools and eliminate the theory of evolution from
> every curriculum. We should focus our society on God and his infallible
> Word because our everlasting souls hang in the balance.
> On the other hand, if God is imaginary, then religion is a complete
> illusion. Christianity, Judaism and Islam are pointless. We should
> eliminate God from our society because God is meaningless. Belief in God
> is nothing but a silly superstition, and this superstition leads a
> significant portion of the population to be completely delusional.
> But how can we decide, conclusively, whether God is real or imaginary?
> Since we are intelligent human beings living in the 21st century, we
> should take the time to look at some data. That is what we are doing
> when we ask, "Why won't God heal amputees?"
> If you are an intelligent human being, and if you want to understand the
> true nature of God, you owe it to yourself to ask, "Why won't God heal
> amputees?"
> Why won't God heal amputees?" may seem like an odd name for a Web site.
> The reason for choosing it is simple: this is one of the most important
> questions that we can ask about God.
> The question, "Why won't God heal amputees?" probes into a fundamental
> aspect of prayer and exposes it for observation. This aspect of prayer
> has to do with ambiguity and coincidence.
>   Watch the video
> To help you understand why this question is so important, let's look at
> an example. Let's imagine that you visit your doctor one day, and he
> tells you that you have cancer. Your doctor is optimistic, and he
> schedules surgery and chemotherapy to treat your disease. Meanwhile, you
> are terrified. You don't want to die, so you pray to God day and night
> for a cure. The surgery is successful, and when your doctor examines you
> again six months later the cancer is gone. You praise God for answering
> your prayers. You totally believe with all your heart that God has
> worked a miracle in your life.
> The obvious question to ask is: What cured you? Was it the
> surgery/chemotherapy, or was it God? Is there any way to know whether
> God is playing a role or not when we pray?
> Unless you take the time to intelligently analyze this situation, it
> looks ambiguous. God might have miraculously cured your disease, as many
> Christians believe. But God might also be imaginary, and the
> chemotherapy drugs and surgery are the things that cured you. Or your
> body's immune system might have cured the cancer itself.
> When your tumor dissappeared, in other words, it might simply have been
> a complete coincidence that you happened to pray. Your prayer may have
> had zero effect.
> How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the
> cure? One way is to eliminate the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous
> situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no
> ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.
> That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.
> Think about it this way. The Bible clearly promises that God answers
> prayers. For example, in Mark 11:24 Jesus says, "Therefore I tell you,
> whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and
> it will be yours." And billions of Christians believe these promises.
> You can find thousands of books, magazine articles and Web sites talking
> about the power of prayer. According to believers, God is answering
> millions of their prayers every day.
> So what should happen if we pray to God to restore amputated limbs?
> Clearly, if God is real, limbs should regenerate through prayer. In
> reality, they do not.
> Why not? Because God is imaginary. Notice that there is zero ambiguity
> in this situation. There is only one way for a limb to regenerate
> through prayer: God must exist and God must answer prayers. What we find
> is that whenever we create a unambiguous situation like this and look at
> the results of prayer, prayer never works. God never "answers prayers"
> if there is no possibility of coincidence. We will approach this issue
> from several different angles in this book, but Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8
> are particularly important:
> ·      Chapter 5 - Why won't God heal amputees?
> ·      Chapter 6 - Why do you need health insurance?
> ·      Chapter 7 - Why can't you move a mountain?
> ·      Chapter 8 - Why do bad things happen to good people?
>   Watch the video
> The fact that prayers are never answered when the possibility of
> coincidence is eliminated meshes with another fact. If we analyze God's
> responses to ambiguous prayers using statistical tools, what we find is
> that there is never any statistical evidence for prayer. In other words,
> when we statisically compare prayer to coincidence for explaining any
> situation, they are identical. For example, this article points out:
> One of the most scientifically rigorous studies yet, published earlier
> this month, found that the prayers of a distant congregation did not
> reduce the major complications or death rate in patients hospitalized
> for heart treatments. [ref]
> It also says:
> A review of 17 past studies of ''distant healing," published in 2003 by
> a British researcher, found no significant effect for prayer or other
> healing methods.
> No valid scientific study has ever found any evidence that prayer works.
> See this page for details.
> You can see the same effect in the following prayer. Let's assume that
> you are a true believer and you do believe that God cures cancer. What
> would happen if we get down on our knees and pray to God in this way:
> Dear God, almighty, all-powerful, all-loving creator of the universe, we
> pray to you to cure every case of cancer on this planet tonight. We pray
> in faith, knowing you will bless us as you describe in Matthew 7:7,
> Matthew 17:20, Matthew 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14, Matthew 18:19
> and James 5:15-16. In Jesus' name we pray, Amen.
> We pray sincerely, knowing that when God answers this completely
> heartfelt, unselfish, non-materialistic prayer, it will glorify God and
> help millions of people in remarkable ways. If God cures cancer, then
> this is an easy prayer for an omnipotent, all-loving God to answer.
> The fact is, what this prayer does is remove ambiguity. As soon as we do
> that, we see the true nature of "God." There is no way that a
> coincidence can answer this prayer, and, sure enough, the prayer goes
> unanswered.
> If you look at the data, you can see exactly what is happening here:
> ·      When we pray to God about any non-ambigous situation, God never
> answers the prayer.
> ·      When we analyse any ambiguous prayer using statistical tools, we find
> zero effect from prayer.
> In other words, every "answered prayer" truly is a coincidence, nothing
> more. "God" doesn't "answer prayers" at all. The belief in prayer is
> pure superstition. Non-ambiguous prayers (like those of amputees) show
> us, conclusively, that the whole idea that "God answers prayers" is an
> illusion created by human imagination.:

 

> Is God real, or is he imaginary? It is one of the most important
> questions in America today, because this question lies at the heart of
> the American culture wars.
> If God is real and if God inspired the Bible, then we should worship God
> as the Bible demands. We should certainly post the Ten Commandments in
> our courthouses and shopping centers, put "In God We Trust" on the
> money, pray in our schools and eliminate the theory of evolution from
> every curriculum. We should focus our society on God and his infallible
> Word because our everlasting souls hang in the balance.
> On the other hand, if God is imaginary, then religion is a complete
> illusion. Christianity, Judaism and Islam are pointless. We should
> eliminate God from our society because God is meaningless. Belief in God
> is nothing but a silly superstition, and this superstition leads a
> significant portion of the population to be completely delusional.
> But how can we decide, conclusively, whether God is real or imaginary?
> Since we are intelligent human beings living in the 21st century, we
> should take the time to look at some data. That is what we are doing
> when we ask, "Why won't God heal amputees?"
> If you are an intelligent human being, and if you want to understand the
> true nature of God, you owe it to yourself to ask, "Why won't God heal
> amputees?"
> Why won't God heal amputees?" may seem like an odd name for a Web site.
> The reason for choosing it is simple: this is one of the most important
> questions that we can ask about God.
> The question, "Why won't God heal amputees?" probes into a fundamental
> aspect of prayer and exposes it for observation. This aspect of prayer
> has to do with ambiguity and coincidence.
>   Watch the video
> To help you understand why this question is so important, let's look at
> an example. Let's imagine that you visit your doctor one day, and he
> tells you that you have cancer. Your doctor is optimistic, and he
> schedules surgery and chemotherapy to treat your disease. Meanwhile, you
> are terrified. You don't want to die, so you pray to God day and night
> for a cure. The surgery is successful, and when your doctor examines you
> again six months later the cancer is gone. You praise God for answering
> your prayers. You totally believe with all your heart that God has
> worked a miracle in your life.
> The obvious question to ask is: What cured you? Was it the
> surgery/chemotherapy, or was it God? Is there any way to know whether
> God is playing a role or not when we pray?
> Unless you take the time to intelligently analyze this situation, it
> looks ambiguous. God might have miraculously cured your disease, as many
> Christians believe. But God might also be imaginary, and the
> chemotherapy drugs and surgery are the things that cured you. Or your
> body's immune system might have cured the cancer itself.
> When your tumor dissappeared, in other words, it might simply have been
> a complete coincidence that you happened to pray. Your prayer may have
> had zero effect.
> How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the
> cure? One way is to eliminate the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous
> situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no
> ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.
> That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.
> Think about it this way. The Bible clearly promises that God answers
> prayers. For example, in Mark 11:24 Jesus says, "Therefore I tell you,
> whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and
> it will be yours." And billions of Christians believe these promises.
> You can find thousands of books, magazine articles and Web sites talking
> about the power of prayer. According to believers, God is answering
> millions of their prayers every day.
> So what should happen if we pray to God to restore amputated limbs?
> Clearly, if God is real, limbs should regenerate through prayer. In
> reality, they do not.
> Why not? Because God is imaginary. Notice that there is zero ambiguity
> in this situation. There is only one way for a limb to regenerate
> through prayer: God must exist and God must answer prayers. What we find
> is that whenever we create a unambiguous situation like this and look at
> the results of prayer, prayer never works. God never "answers prayers"
> if there is no possibility of coincidence. We will approach this issue
> from several different angles in this book, but Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8
> are particularly important:
> · Chapter 5 - Why won't God heal amputees?
> · Chapter 6 - Why do you need health insurance?
> · Chapter 7 - Why can't you move a mountain?
> · Chapter 8 - Why do bad things happen to good people?
>   Watch the video
> The fact that prayers are never answered when the possibility of
> coincidence is eliminated meshes with another fact. If we analyze God's
> responses to ambiguous prayers using statistical tools, what we find is
> that there is never any statistical evidence for prayer. In other words,
> when we statisically compare prayer to coincidence for explaining any
> situation, they are identical. For example, this article points out:
> One of the most scientifically rigorous studies yet, published earlier
> this month, found that the prayers of a distant congregation did not
> reduce the major complications or death rate in patients hospitalized
> for heart treatments. [ref]
> It also says:
> A review of 17 past studies of ''distant healing," published in 2003 by
> a British researcher, found no significant effect for prayer or other
> healing methods.
> No valid scientific study has ever found any evidence that prayer works.
> See this page for details.
> You can see the same effect in the following prayer. Let's assume that
> you are a true believer and you do believe that God cures cancer. What
> would happen if we get down on our knees and pray to God in this way:
> Dear God, almighty, all-powerful, all-loving creator of the universe, we
> pray to you to cure every case of cancer on this planet tonight. We pray
> in faith, knowing you will bless us as you describe in Matthew 7:7,
> Matthew 17:20, Matthew 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14, Matthew 18:19
> and James 5:15-16. In Jesus' name we pray, Amen.
> We pray sincerely, knowing that when God answers this completely
> heartfelt, unselfish, non-materialistic prayer, it will glorify God and
> help millions of people in remarkable ways. If God cures cancer, then
> this is an easy prayer for an omnipotent, all-loving God to answer.
> The fact is, what this prayer does is remove ambiguity. As soon as we do
> that, we see the true nature of "God." There is no way that a
> coincidence can answer this prayer, and, sure enough, the prayer goes
> unanswered.
> If you look at the data, you can see exactly what is happening here:
> · When we pray to God about any non-ambigous situation, God never
> answers the prayer.
> · When we analyse any ambiguous prayer using statistical tools, we find
> zero effect from prayer.
> In other words, every "answered prayer" truly is a coincidence, nothing
> more. "God" doesn't "answer prayers" at all. The belief in prayer is
> pure superstition. Non-ambiguous prayers (like those of amputees) show
> us, conclusively, that the whole idea that "God answers prayers" is an
> illusion created by human imagination.:

 

>> Is God real, or is he imaginary? I

 

> >> Is God real, or is he imaginary? INo, actually I didn't do that. I posted the website that asked that,
> after suggesting that people don't go there, and pasted some of the text
> that was at that website. Don't shoot the messenger.

 

> There is nothing in all of life that tests faith more than suffering -
> both on the part of the one who suffers and on the part of those who
> must watch a loved one suffer.
 

> There is always the tendency to cry out, "Why me, Lord?" There is
> always the temptation to do as Job's wife suggested - to curse God and
> die (Job 2:9).
 

> Suffering is paradoxical. It has a way of making or breaking us. It can
> convert a person into a bitter, depressed and vengeful wretch who
> spends his time shaking his fist at God. Or, it can have the opposite
> effect; it can draw a person deeper into faith.
 

> The response depends upon the quality of one's faith. As Billy Graham
> has often put it, "The same sun that melts the butter hardens the
> clay."
 

> The Example of Job
 

> Why must the righteous suffer? It is a difficult question. The Bible is
> full of many examples of righteous people who suffered mightily.
> Ezekiel says that Job was one of the three most righteous men who ever
> lived. Yet, who has ever suffered as Job did?
 

> Job's incredible suffering was aggravated by his so-called friends who
> came to him and blamed it all on his sins. Their accusations were
> unjustified, for the very first verse of Job says he was "blameless,
> upright, and a God-fearing man."
 

> Unfortunately, the friends of Job are alive and well today, anxious to
> blame all our misfortunes - all our suffering - upon our personal sins.
 

> Later, another friend of Job gave him a partially correct answer to the
> reason for his suffering. He said it was for the purpose of refining
> Job in righteousness: a "partially correct answer" because the Bible
> teaches that suffering can refine us spiritually if our hearts are
> truly yielded to God.
 

> Consider these words of Paul, another righteous man, who suffered
> mightily:
 

> "Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God
> through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our
> introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult
> in hope of the glory of God.
 

> "And not only this, but we also exult in our sufferings, knowing that
> suffering brings about perseverance; and perseverance, proven
> character; and proven character, hope . . ." (Romans 5:1-4)
 

> Job suffered that he might be refined in righteousness. But there was
> another, more important and ultimate reason for his suffering.
 

> As Job continued to cry out, "Why me, Lord?" the Lord finally appeared
> to him and responded to his question with a long series of questions:
> "Where were you when I created the heavens and the earth?" "Where were
> you when I spoke the lion into existence?" "Where were you when I hung
> the stars in space and gave them names?" (See Job 38-41.)
 

> In short, the Lord was saying, "Who are you to question Me?"
 

> Other Biblical Examples
 

> God never answers the question, "Why me, Lord?" Instead, He calls upon
> the questioner to lean on his faith and trust that God knows best and
> that all things work together for good for those who know the Lord.
 

> Thus, when Habakkuk cried out, "Why me, Lord?" The Lord answered, "The
> righteous shall live by faith" (Hab. 2:4).
 

> When Paul cried out, "Why me, Lord?" The Lord answered, "My grace is
> sufficient for you" (2 Cor. 12:9).
 

> Those are tough answers. They call for a tough faith.
 

> God's Promise
 

> God never promises that the righteous will not suffer. But what He does
> promise regarding suffering is that He will walk through the suffering
> with us and give us the grace and strength to deal with it
> victoriously. In Psalm 23 He says: "I will walk with you through the
> valley of the shadow of death." In Isaiah 43 He says: "I will pass with
> you through the high waters and will walk with you through the fire."'
 

>  Paul, speaking of the Second Coming of Jesus, said in Romans 8:18: "I
> consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be
> compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us."
 

> "But all that sufferin' was not to be compared
> With the glory that is to be."
 

> (Bob Dylan - In The Summertime)
 

> Mr Jinx

 

> That would never happen in a Tim Horton's in Canada.

 

> No, no, it's the mystery of selective suffering that is the big one. The
> blind can see, the lame can walk  a cancer can go into remission, all
> thanks to the power of prayer and gods divine intervention. The question
> is why amputees have been singled out to never receive god's grace in this
> manner.

 

> No, no, it's the mystery of selective suffering that is the big one. The
> blind can see, the lame can walk  a cancer can go into remission, all
> thanks to the power of prayer and gods divine intervention. The question
> is why amputees have been singled out to never receive god's grace in
> this manner.
 

> But the real question is, Jinx, what inspired you to write all this? It
> must be the xmas season getting to you.

 

> > No, no, it's the mystery of selective suffering that is the big one. The
> > blind can see, the lame can walk  a cancer can go into remission, all
> > thanks to the power of prayer and gods divine intervention. The question
> > is why amputees have been singled out to never receive god's grace in
> > this manner.
 

> > But the real question is, Jinx, what inspired you to write all this? It
> > must be the xmas season getting to you.
 

> Don't shoot the messenger.  I just copied it off a web site.
 

> Thought I'd post it here because this amputee question of yours seems
> to have people stumped and rather than leave them without a leg to
> stand on I thought I'd hop into the debate.
 

> It's important not to sentimentalize. Amputees can be difficult people,
> too.  Just look at Heather Mills.  Surely a test sent to St. Paul.
 

> Mr Jinx

 

> Is this a joke or is this for real?

 

> Thanks!

 

> > Is this a joke or is this for real?
 

> Beppe, this is as real as anything ever gets. What
> whywontgodhealamputees.com has done is prove the non-existence of an
> interventionist god in a most astute way.
 

> The idea that amputees never have their limbs grow back is something I'd
> never thought of before, but now I see it is a fundamental proof that
> god never answers prayers. Imagine, all these amputees praying in vain
> that god somehow regrow their lost arms or legs. Who wouldn't pray if
> they suffered an amputeeing?  Yet in all human history there's never
> been an amputee in human history who's had his limb grow back. So, I
> don't think its a joke when they say that that the most important
> question arising from the bible is why won't god heal amputees?
 

> > I've been reading and re-reading this for a week now and I can't get
over
> > it.
> > On one side I can't believe someone can be so naive and disingenuous to
> > write such childish stuff, on the other hand I've got a hunch some
branches
> > of fundamentalist atheists might stretch so far and write crap like
this.
> > But I dont' believe a clever guy like you may fall head and feet into it
so
> > easily.
> > So, before posting what my objections to these comedians would be
(provided
> > they were, instead, serious) could you please tell me if you (they) are
> > joking?
 

> > Thanks!

 

>> Is this a joke or is this for real?
 

> Beppe, this is as real as anything ever gets

 

>>  > really real
>>> please tell me.
 

>>> Is this a joke or is this for real?
 

>> Beppe, this is as real as anything ever gets
> ************************************
> I don't think its a joke when they say that that the most important
>> question arising from the bible is why won't god heal amputees?
 

> Ok, Don.
> In a nutshell, then.
> (we'll have time to get deeper, if you like....:-D...)

 

> This is just to put it in a nutshell, my friend, as I said above.

 

> It's all about believing in pie in the sky when you die

 

> Beppe, your emails tend to get a little confusing. I thought I had
> answered your questions.

 

> If it turned out that Bob Dylan had become an atheist, would you stay away
> from rmd?

 

> No, you haven't.
> And my questions were not only relegated in the final part of my post.
> There were plenty in my quick survey on *why the godhaters are silly*

 

> > That is the crux of the purpose of the website.  Of course everyone knows
> > God doesn't say yes to every prayer.  But why has God always, every single
> > time, for all time, said "no" to the prayers of amputees when he's
> > supposedly answered the prayers of others.  Why is God so hateful towards
> > amputees?  Why are cancer, etc victims more worthy of having their prayers
> > answered than amputees?
 

> They aren't worthier at all.
> That's why:
> (read particularly points from 5 to 9)
> *********************************************************
> 1. God doesn't *answer* prayers, WE are supposed to pray [untiringly and
> always (sic) ]
> 2. We are not supposed to know which prayers are going to be fulfilled
> 3. Ultimately, prayers are meant to ask God what we have to ask God, as
> Pastor Marc has recently
> pointed out much better than I'll ever be able to do.
> 4. Surely prayers can't go a *wrong* direction (re: asking for s.o. to die)
> 5. We are not supposed to pray for things which we are not suppoed to hope
> for
> If you are ill, you may hope to recover thus you pray God you'll be healed
> If you are in a coma, your parents may hope you wake up thus they pray God
> you will wake up.
> If you have lost a child you DO NOT hope yout child gets back here, thus
> nobody has ever prayed for children to get back to them
> 6. All parents who lost children pray God to give them strength and hope and
> to give their children eternal peace but they NEVER pray for them to come
> back to life.
> Have they (the godhatesetceteras, I mean) wondered why?
> 7. Things we pray for are *natural* things, then.
> 8. If God = bad or God = superstition because God doesn't heal the amputees,
> why not
> God = bad or God = superstition because God doesn't rule out the Holocaust?
> God = bad or God = superstition because God doesn't reset the universe to
> *Man = Good*?
> God = bad or God = superstition because God doesn't make us all young again?
> 9. These things are *unprayable* because they are not *hopeable*
> ( I know, I know, horrible attempts at neologisms, just wanted to make it
> claer...:-)))
> 10. This thing of the amputees is as stupid as it can be, in the end, unless
> it is simply (but it seems it's not the case, they really mean it!)
> a metonymy of the bigger (biggest, possibly) question; *Why does God accept
> evil*?
> 11. If we put it this way, the question becomes serious (and actually
> unaswered) even though, as I suppose you perfectly know, Christians believe
> God has accepted evil because he wanted // had to accept it.
> re: God *can* create a stone so big he can't move it but he won't because he
> will be able to do it, then, remember? :-D
> ***********************************************************
 

> --
> 'till next time
> take care
> Beppe
> www.giuseppegazerro.com

 

> Jeeeezusss  keee-rist on a stick....

 

> PM

 

> > i am not quoting anyone, tho I REALIZE that im not the only one
> > that is confused on the LOTTERY number question. are they OK
> > to hope for, and if not, why not? the worse that can happen if
> > you do hit the JACKPOT is you win MONEY.
 

> :-)))
> No, it's not ok.
> Lotteries, winning money, betting..............they all belong to the realm
> of *luxury* and *greed*.
> Like asking to get rich.
> A contradiction in terms.
> *__*

 

> Loophole???
> I'd rather call them *reading comprehension* problems!!!
> :-D)
> All jokes apart, my sentence was :
> *We are not supposed to pray for things which we are not suppoed to hope
> > for*
> not the one you mis(wrote).
 

> I take for granted you understand its meaning and, contextually, the big
> difference with the sentence you wrongly reported from my post.
 

> --
> 'till next time
> take care
> Beppe
> www.giuseppegazerro.com

 

> I've been praying for that Power Ball for years now, and so far it's
> not working.  I just hope the Lord comes through for me before I hit
> 65.

 

> >Wilbur Slice wrote:
> >> On 27 Dec 2006 07:22:40 -0800, "musicaner" <musica...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
 

> >> >> An atheist said, "If there is a God, may he prove himself by striking
> >> >> me dead right now." Nothing happened. "You see, there is not
> >> >> God." Another responded, "You've only proved that He is a
> >> >> gracious God."
 

> >> >> PM
 

> >> >you GOTTA be kidding.
 

> >> I liked the way George Carlin put it at one of his gigs:
 

> >> If there is a god, let him send a lightning bolt and strike...
 

> >> ... this audience dead right now...
 

> >how about LOTTERY numbers? are they on the OK list to hope for?
 

> I hope so.  I'm counting on the lottery for my retirement.  Puh-LEEEZE
> Jay-zusss, come to Poppa...  I NEED those numbers!
 

> I've been praying for that Power Ball for years now, and so far it's
> not working.  I just hope the Lord comes through for me before I hit
> 65.

 

> Beppe, you old rascal. You don't believe in an interventionist God.

 

>> Actually I only (very) partially do.
>> Surely I don't believe in the anthropomorphic shape an intervening God
>> would assume.
 

> So you believe in a shapeless, interventionist god that doesn't violate
> the laws of physics. Can this god do anything at all useful for us in our
> lifetimes?