So now I’m confused.
Are you saying that some amputated limbs (fingertips) can regrow naturally, but cannot be restored by a miracle?
Or are you saying that amputated fingertips (including bone) are not real amputations? Is there no true Scotsman?
Why do atheists typically act like arrogant know it all jerks? Must be that sin nature!
Well I’m willing to change my mind once you present sufficient evidence. I take it you will change yours when you don’t?
^^ GEEPERS, sin nature wouldn’t make atheists arrogant know it all jerks - the point of your argument is that it’s built into human biology, so really either everyone’s a jerk as a result or doesn’t have any affect.
Unless you consider sin to be something that affects this kind of healing not just due to the Fall, but also ongoing, personal human sin?
I’m guessing you’re joking, but the idea that God would decide that the best way to get across his message is to put it in a form that requires you go out and buy another book to read the thing seems… dubious?
The biggest problem with this whole thread is that the OP has set up a “No True ScotsGod” fallacy. Any cite showing amputation healing will be met with the claim that it wasn’t God that did the healing.
Which doctors say this? (Yes, they do! I’ll be here all week, don’t try the veal!)
We crave meat and fruits because they are rare yet highly nutritious in the context of a hunter-gatherer lifestyle which typically lacks good concentrated sources of protein and calories. ETA: so if we didn’t crave meat and fruit, we’d be just as likely to keep eating the beans we’ve been eating for the past couple weeks than to venture out a bit more to gather stuff from the apple tree or even attempt to catch the deer, because it’s easier to gather vegetables because they’re so common.
That’s just absolutely patently false. No doctor is going to tell you that a Big Mac meal once a month is in any way damaging.
So, the death rate from heart disease is high in the western world due to fast food, and the death rate from other causes is high in developing countries because they don’t have access to our western diet and indulges. I see.
It isn’t bad for you. Leaffan 1:53
Yes, a diet heavy in fast food isn’t healthy. Nobody’s arguing with you about that.
I think it has more to do with the fact that they don’t have access to good medical care and vaccinations, so they’re dying of diseases that have been wiped out or almost wiped out (or which have become more treatable, like AIDS) before things like cheeseburgers can become a problem. Eventually I hope that changes: malaria and AIDS kill a lot of children and poor dietary choices are more likely to kill adults.
Your claim about sin causing humans to want bad food and killing us through heart disease really only applies to wealthy countries. Other people are just dying of infectious diseases because of a lack of medical care and good nutrition. How does that fit in with your sin theory again?
It’s a pretty far leap to compare a fingertip with regrowing an entire limb with all it’s complex nerve pathways, muscle and bone structure. A damaged nerve itself repairs very slowly. I’m saying God just didn’t design our bodies with that capability. The process would probably take several decades to complete if you compare the repair rate of a single nerve.
But He did give the body a fighting chance with an immune system, and other things like blood clotting and liver regeneration.
Do you think that atheists have no sense of altruism and no conscience? You are badly mistaken.
It’s because we are a product of evolution. We haven’t evolved to balance our diets precisely. It’s only recently that excessive salt and sugar consumption have become a problem, due to wide availability. That wasn’t the case for the vast majority of human history.
(Bolding mine).
I’m not making fun of you, I’m explaining why your hypothesis doesn’t match observed reality. The concept of sinless lizards makes me smile, but you shouldn’t take it personally.
But god designed our bodies to be raised from the dead?
Actually, that part makes sense. If western diet and indulges is, hypothetically, a poison, then societies with it will have a high death rate from it. Societies that don’t will have a low (i.e. zero) death rate from it, even if nothing else has changed. So by definition, under the hypothetical, developing countries will have a higher death rate from other causes than they do from fast food.
needle scratching record shouldn’t they, if those indulges are the “wage of sin” and inherent to the flesh since the fall ? Or are you implying that people in third world countries are without sin ?
Allow me to present a second, slightly far-fetched hypothesis: we crave meat, fruits and high sugar/sodium foodstuffs because they taste good. If salad tasted like crispy bacon, we’d be all over it.
Actually, Leviticus specifically bans cattle, sheep, or goat fat, as well as the fat of any animal found dead or torn by wild animals. Leaving aside for a moment that Leviticus in that part is about ritual offerings (and that the reason fat is denied is because it’s supposed to be offered; and that the punishment for anyone who eats fat from a food offering, or who eats blood at any point, must be “cut off from their people”) - Leviticus 7:23 has no rule against eating the fat of any other animal.
Are you going to start arguing that animal fat is good for you?
I thought the big atheist argument was that there has never been a single documented case of amputation healing. Hey if I’m wrong, I’m wrong. At least I’m honest enough to admit that. No big deal. It’s just a theory of mine I had kicking around in my head.
Why and how did that happen? In the OP you said this:
My underlining. You went on to say
Wouldn’t the immune system and the body’s healing capability would imply that that’s the case?
You’re saying people don’t like salad? Weird that people invented it and eat it every day, then. 
But we do favor high sugar and high fat stuff for evolutionary reasons - that stuff tastes good to us because we need it to live. In the bad old days, it was harder to find. Now it isn’t, which makes it much easier to overdo it.
Geepers You dismiss statements that your arguments are unsupported by (or contradict) the facts, that you engage in logical fallacies, and that you position is weak by saying ’ That is what an atheist would say of course.’
Well, I believe in the G-d of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (and Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah). I bear the mark of my covenant with Him on my flesh and in my soul. I feel His presence in my daily life.
And your arguments still stink.
Ok folks. I can’t combat some many atheists at once.
Gone to lunch for now. lol
Then address my post. I’m a Conservadox Jew (and proud of it)