• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is This Man a Faith Healer?

Is This Man a Faith Healer?

  • YES!

    Votes: 1 10.0%
  • NO!

    Votes: 7 70.0%
  • It is possible!

    Votes: 2 20.0%
  • OTHER

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    10
Well... this seems to be a poll that is to complicated. No one wants to watch the videos :(
 
Nah - I don't think so.
 
I’ll pay attention when this so called ‘faith’ healer can re-grow limbs with prayer.
 
Well... this seems to be a poll that is to complicated. No one wants to watch the videos :(

People who take advantage of others fear and ignorance are despicable. And doing this under the guise of religion is worse.
 
People who take advantage of others fear and ignorance are despicable. And doing this under the guise of religion is worse.

Well I agree with you BUUUT Dr. Oz is a very reputable doctor. I suppose he is going for ratings BUUUUT these people AND science say they were cured!
What do you think cured them then??? :unsure13:
 
Well I agree with you BUUUT Dr. Oz is a very reputable doctor. I suppose he is going for ratings BUUUUT these people AND science say they were cured!
What do you think cured them then??? :unsure13:
I have seen a lot of this o'er the years from many "faith healers".
I do not know what to make of it, I've heard a lot of it is staged, do I trust them ?
no
I tried to listen to the videos, but my sound quality is terrible and I am 50% deaf ( but no trouble with the commercials...lol)
 
Well I agree with you BUUUT Dr. Oz is a very reputable doctor. I suppose he is going for ratings BUUUUT these people AND science say they were cured!
What do you think cured them then??? :unsure13:

I didn't see where "science" said they were cured. It seemed up for debate as to what exactly some of these people had in the first place.
 
Also, the video seemed to be missing one or two parts. Found part 3, but not the next part where they were going to do a faith healing live on stage.
 
One does not have to watch a video to know a grift. Faith healing was preformed for one reason during the time the infant church was establishing doctrine, and that purpose was to confirm new revelation from God....what new revelation does this supposed faith healer present and if there is a new communication presented to mankind through proxy of the Holy Spirit of Truth why is this new revelation not recorded as are the other scriptures derived through divine inspiration?

The scriptures are vividly clear, the gift of supernatural healing along with the other gifts were only temporary and were going to end. Yet some people want to pretend they have some kind of supernatural power when its a most simple thing to compare these supposed miracles with the miracles preformed in the New Testament, I have yet to see the blind from birth to see, or the dead to live, what we do see is a suggestion that these miracles somehow depend upon the faith of the one being healed when there is example after example of Jesus healing people not because of the people that were there believed but because UNBELIEVERS were in their midst and He used this instance to glorify God even in the presence of the unbelievers (Mark 3:1-5), Jesus never blamed a sick person for a lack of faith, he simply healed them. In fact it was the faith of the healer not the healee that was important (Matthew 17:14-21).

True, some of the people had faith already, but some did not have any faith but were begging asking for money (Acts 3:1-6).

The Scriptures are clear. These miraculous power that were evident in the 1st century were given through Holy Spirit Baptism and by the Apostles laying on of hands to pass these gifts on to certain other people in order to help establish the infant church. (Acts 2:14) Has Jesus promised anyone today they would be endowed with power from on high, the way Jesus promised the Apostles (Acts 1:8)? (Acts 8:14-18).

But now, today there is but ONE BAPTISM, and that is water baptism (Eph. 4:5), which men can preform (Matt. 29:19). Those who claim to have these supernatural gifts today never claim all of them, there is a list of 9 such gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:1-10), but they just claim some...the ones that are untestable....why? If one gift exists today....all of them do, if not, why not...where are the dead and the evidence of them arising from the grave? Where are blinded from birth that now see? If there are such prophets still on earth, each revelation they utter should be added to scripture...for that was the purpose of the miraculous, SIGNS and WONDERS to confirm the word of God. Examples ( 2 Cor. 12:12), but that revelation has already been confirmed ( Heb. 2:3,4). There is no purpose for SIGNS and WONDERS today.

The scriptures tell us that these Signs and Wonders would cease when that "which is perfect (made whole, complete in the original Greek) comes". -- 1 Cor. 13:10. That which was perfect has come....THE PERFECT (the same Greek word used in Cor.) LAW OF LIBERTY as it was made complete with the New Testament revelations of God (James 1:25).

The miracles performed in the 1st century were carried out by godly men who never begged for so much as a dime for any miracle. Indeed what a contrast to the Fake Healers and TV Evangelists of today, who openly declare "God loves you....but, SEND YOUR MONEY TO MY ADDRESS."

Jesus nor His Apostles had to debate anyone over their ability to work miracles, for even their enemies could testify to what they had witnessed (Acts 4:16). They were more than willing to be placed to the test. Jesus commended the church at Ephesus for testing those who claimed to be be apostles but were lying (Rev. 2:2).

I am of the same opinion, "WHOSO BOASTETH HIMSELF A FALSE GIFT IS LIKE CLOUDS AND WIND WITHOUT RAIN." -- Prov. 25:14
 
Last edited:
I just voted YES. The guy IS a faith healer. He says in the video that he heals "by the Grace of God, it is God healing through me." That seems like the definition of a faith healer. Does he have success? Well, there seem to be plenty of people there who believe they have been helped by him. If they believe they have been helped and they feel better as a result, then that is some degree of success. Good for the Doc! Is what he does scientifically verifiable? I don't think so, because our understanding of the interaction of the mind and the body is still quite rudimentary. I would venture that what he is doing is entirely psychosomatic. That doesn't mean that what he does doesn't have real physiological outcomes, because clearly it does. But can one explain his healing entirely through allopathic medicine? No. Nor do you have to. The various different approaches to healing can work hand-in-hand.

I have 2 problems with 'alternative' approaches to healing:
  1. When 'alternative', or 'comlementary' approaches claim to be scientifically valid. Homoeopathy is the worst offender here. It cannot be explained in empirical scientific terms. It has not been proven and cannot be proven. I'm not saying it doesn't work, just that you cannot explain it away as 'another branch of science' because the evidence isn't there to support it.
  2. When 'complementary' medicine becomes a complete alternative. When conventional medicine can cure a serious or life-threatening condition but the patient or guardians of a patient (much worse!) put their faith entirely in the 'alternative'. Such cases rarely have a good outcome.

    Apart from those cases, what's not to appreciate? If something works, it works and we don't HAVE to be able to understand every last detail of the mechanism by which it heals, although that would be nice.
 
Faith healing and prayer therapy are absurd forms of pseudoscience. They are DANGEROUS, because they discourage people from seeking real treatment. If this method actually works, why doesn't this doctor conduct some double-blind experiments and write up his results for the New England Journal of Medicine?

Answer: Because it's complete bull****, and this guy knows his claims won't stand up to scientific scrutiny.
 
Last edited:
Faith healing and prayer therapy are absurd forms of pseudoscience. They are DANGEROUS, because it discourages people from seeking real treatment. If this method actually works, why doesn't this doctor conduct some double-blind experiments and write up his results for the New England Journal of Medicine?

Answer: Because it's complete bull****, and this guy knows his claims won't stand up to scientific scrutiny.
I can't agree. Is it anything more than the placebo effect? It appears to be, but perhaps not. Does the placebo effect work? Yup.

You can't seriously ask this methods to apply double-blind. It's not the kind of healing that you can measure that way. But I would only support provided it DIDN'T discourage people from seeking allopathic treatment. It can do, and in those cases it needs to be trashed, but I don't believe that it inevitably discourages people from accepting treatment from the mainstream system.
 
Is it anything more than the placebo effect?

If I physically cut off your arm with a saw that is not a placebo effect. If I put chemicals in your body that physically alters your body's chemistry and functions that is NOT a placebo effect.

Perhaps you can MENTALLY ignore the pain from me having sawn off your arm or MENTALLY ignore the caffeine rush after drinking a coke. But you CANNOT deny that these are real, physical, quantifiable effects that have ramifications on your body's functions.

Homeopathy have no physical effects. Their effects are indistinguishable from a placebo in doubleblind studies.


Does the placebo effect work? Yup.
Then you don't need to buy a $25 homeopathy treatment. Just take a sugar pill.


You can't seriously ask this methods to apply double-blind. It's not the kind of healing that you can measure that way.
.
Why? Explain. Explain why its not reasonable to
1) give 1000 people a homeopathy medicine
2) 1000 people a placebo but tell them its a homeopathy medicine.
Then compare the results to see if the homeopathy ACTUALLY works better than the placebo.
 
If I physically cut off your arm with a saw that is not a placebo effect. If I put chemicals in your body that physically alters your body's chemistry and functions that is NOT a placebo effect.

Perhaps you can MENTALLY ignore the pain from me having sawn off your arm or MENTALLY ignore the caffeine rush after drinking a coke. But you CANNOT deny that these are real, physical, quantifiable effects that have ramifications on your body's functions.

Homeopathy have no physical effects. Their effects are indistinguishable from a placebo in doubleblind studies.



Then you don't need to buy a $25 homeopathy treatment. Just take a sugar pill.


.
Why? Explain. Explain why its not reasonable to
1) give 1000 people a homeopathy medicine
2) 1000 people a placebo but tell them its a homeopathy medicine.
Then compare the results to see if the homeopathy ACTUALLY works better than the placebo.

Well, I would go into some detail in explaining my position... if we were discussing homoeopathy, but we're not.
 
Faith healing is a scam.
 
I have seen a lot of this o'er the years from many "faith healers".
I do not know what to make of it, I've heard a lot of it is staged, do I trust them ?
no
I tried to listen to the videos, but my sound quality is terrible and I am 50% deaf ( but no trouble with the commercials...lol)

I bet you'd believe if he fixed your hearing:)
I know there are a lot of fakes out there, but I still believe it's possible. This guy may be legit.
 
I’ll pay attention when this so called ‘faith’ healer can re-grow limbs with prayer.

That is as dumb as it gets. Can your body regrow limbs? Can your body health itself? Show me a doctor who can regrow limbs?
 
I can't agree. Is it anything more than the placebo effect? It appears to be, but perhaps not. Does the placebo effect work? Yup.

A doctor who can do no better than a placebo is a quack.

Andalublue said:
You can't seriously ask this methods to apply double-blind. It's not the kind of healing that you can measure that way.

Why not? Some people were supposedly cured, and others were presumably not. That seems relatively easy to have a control group and a test group. Why can't he do a double-blind experiment and write the results up for a respected medical journal?

Andalublue said:
But I would only support provided it DIDN'T discourage people from seeking allopathic treatment. It can do, and in those cases it needs to be trashed, but I don't believe that it inevitably discourages people from accepting treatment from the mainstream system.

If people believe that they are taking part in a treatment program with a high likelihood of success, they are unlikely to be searching for other treatment programs.
 
I'm calling you out at a liar :)
I'm afraid I can't get to a liar at the moment.

Here is a thread on homeopathy started yesterday. Its about James Randi $1,000,000 challenege to show that any homeopathic treatement works as advertised.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/relig...emonstrate-homeopathy-has-desired-effect.html
I'm with James Randi. As I said in my previous post, the claims of homoeopathy to being scientifically proven, or even provable, are bunk. That doesn't mean it doesn't work, for those who believe it does. Repeating: it may have similar or better results than pure placebo and certainly costs a hell of a lot more, but this comment of yours...
Then you don't need to buy a $25 homeopathy treatment. Just take a sugar pill.
...clearly shows you don't understand how the placebo effect works.

Now, toddle off and sneer at someone who DOES believe in the 'science' of homoeopathy.
 
A doctor who can do no better than a placebo is a quack.
Someone who claims to be doing better, when they're not, is a quack.

Why not? Some people were supposedly cured, and others were presumably not. That seems relatively easy to have a control group and a test group. Why can't he do a double-blind experiment and write the results up for a respected medical journal?
Because a lot of the ailments that seem to be most helped by this approach are difficult to quantify or measure using physical evidence. Didn't you notice the two people interviewed in the video? The first was a woman who said she was partially sighted and then, after visiting Dr Nemeh, said she could see her sons properly for the first time. The second was a chap claiming to have suffered from chronic myalgia for years. He visited the Doc and waddyaknow?

All sorts of ailments that allopathic medicine really struggles to have a effect on are the life-blood for alternative therapists: allergies, chronic pain, chronic fatigue, palpitations, digestive complaints, food intolerances etc etc. In other words, a whole load of complaints that have very physical manifestations of psychosomatic origin. The mystical, faith or New Age-y elements of the treatment, the talking part of the cure, are what elevates the rate of healing above the straight placebo effect. Whether it's much above, and whether that improvement is worth the money it can cost, is debateable.



If people believe that they are taking part in a treatment program with a high likelihood of success, they are unlikely to be searching for other treatment programs.
That might be true, but it might not. I think it depends on the individual. I do know people who have had their ME dismissed by traditional doctors and had it alleviated 90% by acupuncture and shiatsu massage. They went through the entire allopathic labyrinth before trying the alternative.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom