I took in every moment. Sometimes I listened and sometimes I watched. May’s thumb down was quite a moment. It felt like no amount of evidence would be sufficient. If the medical documentation confirmed that someone was genuinely healed, then that was supposed to be convincing. But blindness isn’t as spectacular as a withered hand being instantly healed, if that was witnessed first hand then they would supposedly believe.
1 Like
No doubt. I don’t see anyone saying, or anyone I would listen to, that prayer is ever predictable.
Have you considered the evidence presented in the video? If you don’t want to watch it, I will summarize it for you.
these are good observations.
I haven’t watched the video yet. I look forward to it. It is a really tough one!
Just from my background–in the last week, I have seen equally improbable catastrophe and blessings. Just judging from improbability, both God and Satan would be at work. It’s much more likely, in my impression, that it’s natural causes, since I don’t think Satan can do that.
I would remain quite skeptical–but I do pray often (throughout the day and night) for my patients, and with them, if I know that they are interested in it. My kids also pray (generically) that my patients will do well.
It leads me to other questions–why would God allow such horrible things in the first place? I don’t want to think of that. I honestly think it’s humble and ok to say “I don’t know.” Thanks.
4 Likes
God isn’t called inscrutable for nothing twice, three times in the Bible words translated that way, OT and New.
It’s a complicated question and we really never know what the answer is for someone else, other than we need to grieve with those who are grieving.
2 Likes
He does not interfere in nature above grounding it and incarnating in it. We know that. On positing Him on account of our greater incarnation story. The God of the Bible is a killer, a perpetrator of such horrible things including disease, for an order of magnitude more sigmas than a saviour and than Satan. We know that. If we can, we can also know that God as He is, if He is, is nothing like that.
There is not a single recorded “miraclel” healing that happened in medical history.Not once.I guess the title is clickbait .if not the video will be a waste of time in my opinion
For three cases where medical documentation is undisputed, the skeptic’s response is psychosomatic. And yet one of the cases was selected precisely because the organ healed is not directly controlled by the brain.
Psychosomatic disorder is a psychological condition involving the occurrence of physical symptoms, usually lacking a medical explanation . People with this condition may have excessive thoughts, feelings or concerns about the symptoms — which affects their ability to function well.
Simple.Tha patient brain snapped and he became well.No miracle healing here .
1 Like
A 2 week old with a stomach condition has tubes surgically installed and he lives with that for 16 years. It was a paralysis of the stomach in layman terms. For 16 years he cannot eat food, and at a prayer meeting he was prayed for by a man who had also experienced healing of intestinal issues. Their was an experience of power after prayer, the tubes were felt to vibrate, and the young man went and ate food that evening. The tubes were removed shortly thereafter.
The medical documentation for this is undisputable.
Says who exactly? And how is that miracle healing?
The mind is a powerfull thing.If i take a placibo for fever beleiving to be a anti-fever drug the body will function the same.
If the boy believed the prayer would help him the brain will do what its supposed to do.
If there were an issue with the documentation, I’m sure the professional skeptic would have uncovered it.
But as we all know, skepticism knows no bounds.
Why?
Are you trying to convince me that miracles of healing do happen? I already believe that.
Are you trying to convince me that that doctors should use miracle healing in their practice of medicine?
You said evidence cannot exist for this ever happening
Nope. That is not what I said.
“Medical evidence for miracles is a contradiction in terms.”
I am thinking about the video and the woman who was healed of blindness this morning. I got to spend some time with my parents yesterday and shared this story with my mom who is normally a pretty difficult person to talk to about faith. It felt like a small miracle she didn’t dispute and accepted the story.
The woman who was healed had been blind for 12 years. She was diagnosed with macular degeneration as a child and lived with blindness for 12 years. Her husband who was a minister, prayed for her in a casual manner after they had returned from a faith healing meeting or campaign. Upon being prayed for her vision returned. She saw her daughter for the first time. And for 50 or 60 years she has been able to see with near perfect eyesight.
I found the article written about her case which fills out some of the details.
It is a remarkable story, but have to admit I am not fully convinced. Confirmation bias is strong both for adherents and skeptics and we tend to see what we want to see. In this case, that is true for the patient in a literal sense as well.
Just a few random observations:
We tend to think we know more than we actually do in medicine. In this case, we don’t really know what caused her loss of vision but it was labeled as juvenile macular degeneration. It may not have been, as the skeptical doctor said.
The language used was imprecise. Terms were thrown about like “completely blind” when actually, she was “legally blind”. In fact, without classes, my vision is in the 20/300-20/400 range, which is not unusual for we who are very nearsighted. So, her blindness is pretty much my vision when I get up in the morning. She was quoted as “everything was dark” which is not how macular degeneration works for the most part, though there could be central visual loss. That is not to say she was not being figurative in her language or just dramatic, but it is typical of those who speak in ways to meet the expectations of their audience. I have read of stories of faith healers who typical pre-select the people they bring forward to be those who be part of the show so to speak (that is also true of hypnosis acts on the stage).
Her illness was not typical of juvenile macular degeneration in its presentation or in what we know of the genetics of it having had an identical twin sister who was unaffected, and no genetic testing that I could see.
Typical of most of these cases I am aware of, there is no hard evidence, only reports and subjective determinations. If they had retinal photographs from back when she was diagnosed, that would be more convincing. Perhaps it an example of what Jesus said when he stated in Matthew, “ An evil and adulterous generation craves a sign. Yet no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah…”
Anyway, interesting stuff. I am unconvinced, but open to miracles for the most part. I suppose What bothers me about most stories of miraculous healing, is that they occur pretty much in the culture that has a vested interest in their being true, whether that be in the Christian religion, or in non Christian settings. Confirmation bias, self-interest, secondary gain etc seems to be common. Color me conflicted, wanting to accept modern miracles on face value, but having my doubts. “I believe, help my unbelief!”
3 Likes
Thank you for your valuable perspective. I appreciate the thoughtful comments. If I may ask a question, what was your feeling about how the alleged evidence was handled by Keener and Brown?
Yep. THAT is what I said.
Medical evidence adheres to the standard of scientific inquiry – not anecdotes which gets people to take radium as a source of long life.
If there were such a thing as medical evidence for healing miracles then they would not be miracles. They are miracles precisely because there is no scientific explanation – nothing we can control or use.
Doesn’t mean I am going to believe that miracle healing is not real. But it does mean that I am not going to think that miracle healing is an acceptable medical diagnosis or treatment.
As for the video… what I see is that a medical doctor can investigate miracle healing and find no evidence for it. Why? Different standards of evidence is the answer. Does that mean we cannot find evidence sufficient for legitimate belief in healing miracles? NO! Nothing is MORE of legitimate reason for belief than personal experience. BUT science and medicine has a different standard of evidence.
The defender of healing miracles in the video says he was challenging Hume’s claim that there are no credible eyewitnesses of miracles. Well I would certainly agree with him in challenging Hume on this. I KNOW there are plenty of credible eyewitnesses.
I do not believe aliens are visiting the earth. The science tells me that this is just too improbable to believe such a thing. But if aliens land right in front of me and introduce themselves, I am not going to make up excuses for not believing my own eyes and experience. But I am also not going to think that such an experience constitutes scientific proof that aliens are visiting the earth because it doesn’t. Yes I am going to believe that aliens visit the earth, but no I am not going to see it as justification for forcing my beliefs on other people.
Healing miracles is the same. Yes I believe they happen, but no I am not going to force this belief on other people. Contrast this with the theory of evolution. In this case there is objective scientific evidence. I don’t have the personal experience by which to know the evolution of man is true, but yes I am going to support the insistence that science classes teach this as fact in biology classes.