S
Silver Bullet
Guest
- Thread starter
- #21
A close relative of mine believes she was healed by Mr. Hinn. Nevermind that the condition she suffered from is well recognized to rapidly and spontaneously remit in a large proportion of cases.
I should qualify my initial statement: my relative says that it was actually God who healed her rather than Mr. Hinn. That is, she would have been healed even if she hadn't seen Mr. Hinn because that proved to be God's will. This naturally raises the question if Mr. Hinn is doing anything special at all.
So here's the crux: if you really want to know if he can heal, you must subject him to the same test that any therapy ought to be subject to, namely, a randomized controlled trial.
Because some people get better on their own, and sometimes a placebo effect is powerfully active, you must do an experiment that involves many people (single cases are not considered good evidence of a treatment effect) where half get the treatment in question and half don't. Ideally, the half that doesn't get the active treatment gets a similar but inactve treatment (for example, if the treatment is a pill, then the comparison is between the active pill and a "dummy" pill that looks and tastes the same but is inactive, a "placebo"). Countless randomized controlled trials, now the "gold standard" for determining the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of all modern medical treatments, are underway around the world.
Designing a trial of the healing effect of Benny Hinn would involve something like hundreds or thousands of patients with a specific condition being randomly assigned to receive a healing from Mr. Hinn versus a healing from me perhaps (since I am an atheist), where the study subjects are not aware which of us is the purported healer. Then the patients would be followed up to determine how many in each group actually recover or improve. Statistical analyses would help to determine the likelihood that any observed differences in the outcomes of the 2 groups are due to a treatment effect or chance alone. Any result would be strengthened if multiple such studies showed similar results (reproducibility).
There is every reason to believe that Mr. Hinn could afford to carry such a study out, though it would not be in his interest given how successful he is without the need of such evidence.
If Benny Hinn really has an impact upon in this world, it ought to be detectable and measurable. That is the only way to know.
I should qualify my initial statement: my relative says that it was actually God who healed her rather than Mr. Hinn. That is, she would have been healed even if she hadn't seen Mr. Hinn because that proved to be God's will. This naturally raises the question if Mr. Hinn is doing anything special at all.
So here's the crux: if you really want to know if he can heal, you must subject him to the same test that any therapy ought to be subject to, namely, a randomized controlled trial.
Because some people get better on their own, and sometimes a placebo effect is powerfully active, you must do an experiment that involves many people (single cases are not considered good evidence of a treatment effect) where half get the treatment in question and half don't. Ideally, the half that doesn't get the active treatment gets a similar but inactve treatment (for example, if the treatment is a pill, then the comparison is between the active pill and a "dummy" pill that looks and tastes the same but is inactive, a "placebo"). Countless randomized controlled trials, now the "gold standard" for determining the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of all modern medical treatments, are underway around the world.
Designing a trial of the healing effect of Benny Hinn would involve something like hundreds or thousands of patients with a specific condition being randomly assigned to receive a healing from Mr. Hinn versus a healing from me perhaps (since I am an atheist), where the study subjects are not aware which of us is the purported healer. Then the patients would be followed up to determine how many in each group actually recover or improve. Statistical analyses would help to determine the likelihood that any observed differences in the outcomes of the 2 groups are due to a treatment effect or chance alone. Any result would be strengthened if multiple such studies showed similar results (reproducibility).
There is every reason to believe that Mr. Hinn could afford to carry such a study out, though it would not be in his interest given how successful he is without the need of such evidence.
If Benny Hinn really has an impact upon in this world, it ought to be detectable and measurable. That is the only way to know.