(March 2, 2015 at 8:17 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: I said doctors assist nature, if nature could do it on it's own, it wouldn't need an assist would it?

If you claim to be a "healer" , my question to you is, could you "heal" a cadaver?

Irrelevant question.

A cadaver is dead. Death can't be healed. And mythical stories of the dead returning to life are just that: stories.

I have revived patients on the edge of death, many times

That's not what I'm saying, forget retuning the dead to life.
I'm saying, could you heal a wound on a cadaver?

(March 2, 2015 at 8:30 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: That's not what I'm saying, forget retuning the dead to life.
I'm saying, could you heal a wound on a cadaver?

Still an irrelevant question.

And I think you're just trying to play word games, now.

By it's very nature something dead cannot be healed, because the body's mechanisms have shut down.

And there's a huge difference between a living body and a cadaver.

I'm not playing word game I'm making a point.
If you possessed the power to heal, why would it matter if a body is alive or not? If the prerequisite for you to "heal" is that the patient must be alive then that shows that healing power lies within the body, not you.

If monkeys could fly out of my ass would they be bonobos?

(March 2, 2015 at 8:54 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: I'm not playing word game I'm making a point.
If you possessed the power to heal, why would it matter if a body is alive or not? If the prerequisite for you to "heal" is that the patient must be alive then that shows that healing power lies within the body, not you.

Some, yes.

But our modern medicine has overcome nature in so many ways. There are illnesses and diseases that we can heal/cure, call it what you will, that nature cannot.

We can remove a dying, diseased heart, and replace it with a healthy one from a donor. And, at the rate we're going, the donor won't be required within around ten years.

(March 2, 2015 at 8:54 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: I'm not playing word game I'm making a point.
If you possessed the power to heal, why would it matter if a body is alive or not? If the prerequisite for you to "heal" is that the patient must be alive then that shows that healing power lies within the body, not you.

Banal ignorant bullshit. My wife suffered a ring avulsion injury four years ago. The doctor had to take a vein from her arm to repair artery damage. Unfortunately, she lost the tip of her finger (essentially from just behind the nail bed), but the rest was saved. Although soft tissue is regenerative, she would have lost the entire finger if she relied on the healing power of her body alone.

Any guesses as to whether or not the tip of her finger grew back? Just like all other amputees in the history of mankind, it hasn't. This leaves us with two clear options regarding your God: 1)He's one incredible asshole or 2)He doesn't exist.

What part of "assisting nature" do you not understand? I could transplant a tree to a different location, but I can't make it grow...

(March 2, 2015 at 7:51 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: It's written in old English, I don't suppose I have to tell you that words change their meaning over time, for instance, Gay doesn't mean what it used to.

Wrong again, little one. It's written in early modern English. You wouldn't be able to read old English. Additionally, if words change meanings over time -- and they do, you're right -- then you're asserting that your god's book is open to human interpretation. That renders it less than authoritative, given human imperfection.

(March 2, 2015 at 7:51 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Aramaic is a Semitic dialect, the same as Hebrew. the New Testament, however was written in Greek.

A dialect is not the same language, either; it is a smaller branch of it which uses -- get this -- different meanings. And given the fact that the Bible was written in three different languages, your point about one Hebrew word translating to one English word is, well, pointless.

(March 2, 2015 at 7:51 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: http://biblehub.com/hebrew/529.htm

אֵמֻן noun [masculine] trusting, faithfulness (on formation compare Ges§ 84a R. 12). 1. 1 בָּנִים לֹא אֵמֻן בָּם children in whom there is no trusting Deuteronomy 32:20 (poetry) 2. אֱמוּנִים plural abstract faithfulness; ׳צִיר א messenger of faithfulness, trusty messenger Proverbs 13:17; ׳עֵד א faithful witness Proverbs 14:5; compare ׳אִישׁ א Proverbs 20:6; ׳שֹׁמֵר א keeping faithfulness Isaiah 26:2, perhaps also Psalm 31:24 ׳נצד א see I. [ אָמַן].

I asked for a reputable source. Give me a link from a source specializing in linguistics, not apologetics. An academic source would be ideal, so long as the erudition doesn't aggravate your allergies.

You are playing a word game, and yet you continue to be a ridiculous liar about it.

You have just redefined the word "heal" as something only the body can do to itself.

Well, Huggy, not gonna fucking happen here. You repeatedly attempt to make your living here redefining everything so it fits your narrative and then expect everyone to just fall in line. Get real.