enlightenment
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,302
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
I propose that the practice of so called 'faith healing' is, among other things, potentially very dangerous.
I recall a story a time ago, about a well known US televangelist.
Now, you can dismiss these guys if you like, but the truth is that there is clearly a demand for them, at least in the US, and no shortage of those prepared to pay to attend live sermons, or donate via their credit card.
In the case of this chap, he would invite people up onto stage, or sometimes go down among them. He would appear to amaze them by identifying their name, when in reality the info was being given to him through an earpiece.
Most cynically and dangerous of all was his so called faith healing, in some cases telling people that they should throw away medications that health professionals had given them to control serious conditions.
Hey, if someone persuaded your dear old nan that she no longer needed to take her insulin for diabetes, and she grew so ill she died, would you be calling that manslaughter, because I think I would.
It is one thing to permit these men air time to exploit the desperate, but quite another to give them the freedom to make people believe that god is acting through them, and that they can cure some terrible affliction that they have. It is utterly irresponsible to suggest or instruct someone to dispense with normal medical practice, and there are surely grouds in which to make that unlawful, surely?
There is no human being known to me that can cure cancers, blindness, or return the limbs to amputees by any supernatural means.
Any that have claimed to be able to do these things have always shown to be fakes, only in it to expoit what they can in terms of $.
It's religion meets captialism US style, as I doubt that such people would gather as much support here, just a different outlook and cultue, imo.
And even when one is exposed as a liar and a fake, it doesn't seem to resonate with the people who still merrily send off their money to other televanagelists and faith healers.
There is no scientific explaination that I know of, short of a pseudo scientific one, which could attest to the fact that you can lay your hands on someone, and cure them of an ill, such as a tumour.
It is entirely misleading, and potentially dangerous to inform people that this can be done, imo.
Imagine I were to put out information into the public domain that said that drinking large amounts of white spirit could cure HIV. If that belief existed enough, then am I not at least in part responsible if someone decides to test the claim, and do that?
Well, it is the same with peddling an unscientific, unrpoven 'cure' onto people, and I think there should be stricter controls over these things, to be honest, to save the gullible from themselves.
I recall a story a time ago, about a well known US televangelist.
Now, you can dismiss these guys if you like, but the truth is that there is clearly a demand for them, at least in the US, and no shortage of those prepared to pay to attend live sermons, or donate via their credit card.
In the case of this chap, he would invite people up onto stage, or sometimes go down among them. He would appear to amaze them by identifying their name, when in reality the info was being given to him through an earpiece.
Most cynically and dangerous of all was his so called faith healing, in some cases telling people that they should throw away medications that health professionals had given them to control serious conditions.
Hey, if someone persuaded your dear old nan that she no longer needed to take her insulin for diabetes, and she grew so ill she died, would you be calling that manslaughter, because I think I would.
It is one thing to permit these men air time to exploit the desperate, but quite another to give them the freedom to make people believe that god is acting through them, and that they can cure some terrible affliction that they have. It is utterly irresponsible to suggest or instruct someone to dispense with normal medical practice, and there are surely grouds in which to make that unlawful, surely?
There is no human being known to me that can cure cancers, blindness, or return the limbs to amputees by any supernatural means.
Any that have claimed to be able to do these things have always shown to be fakes, only in it to expoit what they can in terms of $.
It's religion meets captialism US style, as I doubt that such people would gather as much support here, just a different outlook and cultue, imo.
And even when one is exposed as a liar and a fake, it doesn't seem to resonate with the people who still merrily send off their money to other televanagelists and faith healers.
There is no scientific explaination that I know of, short of a pseudo scientific one, which could attest to the fact that you can lay your hands on someone, and cure them of an ill, such as a tumour.
It is entirely misleading, and potentially dangerous to inform people that this can be done, imo.
Imagine I were to put out information into the public domain that said that drinking large amounts of white spirit could cure HIV. If that belief existed enough, then am I not at least in part responsible if someone decides to test the claim, and do that?
Well, it is the same with peddling an unscientific, unrpoven 'cure' onto people, and I think there should be stricter controls over these things, to be honest, to save the gullible from themselves.
