As the debate in the public square continues regarding the legal basis of same sex marriage, Francis Beckwith has written an important article that unpacks and argues why racial discrimination is not a good analogy for the same sex marriage debate.
for a helpful Summary, click here
(H/T Stand to Reason)
For the Christian, we know full well that we inhabit a broken and fallen world. Things are not the way they ought to be. And, if we are honest, we all have questions that won’t be answered this side of heaven. But sometimes skeptics throw this question at Christians to stop them in their tracks or to “disprove” God–Why Won’t God Heal Amputees? What would you say?
““Why won’t God heal amputees?” The question caught me by surprise.
I had just finished my “Why I Am a Christian” talk at Calvary Chapel Chino Valley’s youth conference in April. After talking with a few students and leaders, a young man approached. He challenged me with this question, explaining his atheist friend had asked it earlier in the week. And he had no answer for his friend.
Apparently, it’s a question atheists make a big deal about. There is even an entire website dedicated to it (www.whywontgodhealamputees.com). The website claims “this is one of the most important questions we can ask about God.” Sometime, somewhere I had heard the objection but had never given it much attention. Now it was staring me right in the face. Immediate attention was required.
I proceeded in usual fashion—by asking clarifying questions. “What conclusion does your atheist friend draw from this question?” I inquired. He responded, “Well, if God doesn’t heal amputees when we pray for them, then He doesn’t exist.” I followed with a few more questions, gathering the gist of the atheist’s argument.
The atheist claims that alleged healings, like the disappearance of a cancerous tumor or diagnosed disease, seem to be ambiguous. Did God supernaturally heal the person or is modern medicine responsible? Both causes could be offered and both could be disputed. But according to the atheist, if an amputee grew back a missing limb after intercessory prayer was offered on his behalf, this would be a clear case of the miraculous and thus proof for God’s existence. On the other hand, no new limb means no God. A fail-proof test, right? Wrong.
First, I pointed out this atheist’s argument is guilty of…(more)
We all ask big questions and we all want answers…
Also available on DVD.
Can we become more like Jesus? Really? Yes. There is a word for this that the Bible uses often–Holy. Here is a link to the sermon I preached at our church on sunday exploring the often confusing and (guilt producing) idea of becoming more holy–how does it work? what is my part? God’s part?
I hope you find it helpful!
For more, see Revolution of Character by Dallas Willard
Philip Goldberg has written an interesting article that raises some helpful questions for new atheist Sam Harris’s search for a completely scientific (read from neuroscience) account of ethics (Click Here).
“Harris begins with the proposition that “human beings seek to maximize something we choose to call ‘well-being.'” Fair enough. But the premise that follows is: “The amount of well-being in a single person is a function of what is happening in that person’s brain, or at least in their body as a whole.” Is it? Can we be sure of that? Harris continues, “That function can in principle be empirically measured.” Can it? In principle, perhaps, but in reality?
I wonder if this isn’t an example of seeing everything as nails because your only tool is a hammer. As a neuroscientist, does Harris assume that his discipline can develop a body of knowledge about “well-being” that is so complete that we could extrapolate a coherent system of ethics and morality from it? Is that a reasonable assumption? If he proceeds on that basis, what would be left out? While neuroscience has already accomplished awe-inspiring feats, the discipline is in its infancy, and every discovery seems to generate a new universe of unanswered questions. Can we assume that it will one day explain everything we need to know about the mind and emotions? Perhaps Harris’s project will teach us as much about the limitations of science as it will about the shortcomings of religious codes.”