Directed toward religious folks obviously, but definitely open for debate and discussion from anyone.
I ask the question because God (insert your god if you wish) is all-knowing, correct? If he/she/it is all-knowing, why would it be necessary in any way for a believer to ask or suggest something to God through prayer? He/She/It already knows exactly what your prayer will be and already has "the plan" for you. Certainly God doesn't need reminders!
I obviously plan on getting some of the "it creates comfort" answers and the "keeping a relationship with God/Jesus" answers. But is that really all there is to it for people? Interested to hear 
Prayer has the power to abolish heavenly decrees which define the destiny we are subordinate to.
Noah didn't pray for his generation so his generation was lost with the flood.
By Moses' generation G-d wanted to slaughter everyone and create a new nation starting from Moses yet Moses prayed on their behalf.
If Moses didn't, there would be no King David, Solomon nor Messiah since David didn't descend from Moses, the tribe of Levi, rather they descended from the tribe of Judah.
... i have a hard time following that. But that's not an answer. God wouldn't need to be prayed to cause he knows what you want cause he is all knowing.
Say there is a hot girl I want... if G-d knew I wanted her and just gave her to me, what stops the next person from hogging her to themselves? You see... what we really are doing is battling against other people's desires which contradict our own. The girl probably also has her own dude in mind. Many times women word their desires as "I want a husband" and as a result end up sleeping with someone else's husband.
When generations are destroyed, the desire of person A is that all his enemies be destroyed and person B also has the same desire thus the whole world would be in ruins if both were answered. Thus only sincere prayers which come before G-d are answered. Essentially the act of using a prayer book for prayer is to work on ourselves to desire what everyone else desires which use wording that benefits the majority as a whole. However just reading from it isn't actually effecting our desires, thus the reason for sincerity in prayer. Many times a person can pray better at home by brainstorming their desires and finding proper wording for them so they actually benefit you and the ones you love. It isn't enough however just to know what you want, you must materialize your desires by directing them at the one that has the power to do something about it.
Last edited by Aredon on Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:51 pm; edited 3 times in total
| Quote: |
| Thus only sincere prayers which come before G-d are answered. |
So the people who prayed for their children to be saved in the Indonesian Tsunami were not sincere?
The father praying for his daughter to survive cancer is not sincere?
Hmm.. | Aredon wrote: |
| Say there is a hot girl I want... if G-d knew I wanted her and just gave her to me, what stops the next person from hogging her to themselves? You see... what we really are doing is battling against other people's desires which contradict our own. The girl probably also has her own dude in mind. Many times women word their desires as "I want a husband" and as a result end up sleeping with someone else's husband. |
So praying is a competition between believers? That's kind of odd. Still, God knew thousands of years before your existence who would be the victor in each specific competition, so it still doesn't add up. Your future is already completely planned, every choice you will make is completely known by God years beforehand.
I still have to ask: What is the point of praying if your "destiny" is completely planned from life until death?non-praying athiest sticks his nose in...
i have heard people say that prayer helps you to focus your mind on an issue. i can see that it might help to apply your mind in a concentrated way, get things clear in your mind and help you arrive at choices and options. it might help you to help yourself to pray, even if theres no god there to do your dirty work for you. as an athiest i can see the sense in this, maybe i ought to try it.
| johnny99 wrote: |
non-praying athiest sticks his nose in...
i have heard people say that prayer helps you to focus your mind on an issue. i can see that it might help to apply your mind in a concentrated way, get things clear in your mind and help you arrive at choices and options. it might help you to help yourself to pray, even if theres no god there to do your dirty work for you. as an athiest i can see the sense in this, maybe i ought to try it. |
Wouldn't that just be problem solving and weighing negatives/positives??? | liljp617 wrote: |
Wouldn't that just be problem solving and weighing negatives/positives??? |
i guess it would. i was suggesting that the point of prayer could be to help you focus on these things thereby helping you to bring about yourself that which you would pray to happen.Simple - to make the person doing the praying feel better.
| Aredon wrote: |
| Say there is a hot girl I want... if G-d knew I wanted her and just gave her to me, what stops the next person from hogging her to themselves? |
Her choice, maybe? ^_^;
| liljp617 wrote: |
| I still have to ask: What is the point of praying if your "destiny" is completely planned from life until death? |
i think the problem is far beyond that. It's not just a matter of planning, it's the fact that the planning was done by... God! It always amuses me that atheists take God's alleged power more seriously than theists. Theists who are into praying seem to have no issues with the fact that they are quite literally saying that they think they can plan better than God - that whatever God's plan might be, their plan (should God choose to heed their prayer) is better.
Think about that seriously for a minute. If God is good, and knows a lot more than you... it's pretty safe to say that whatever God's planned is probably for the best. If he's perfectly good and omniscient... it's absolutely certain that whatever he's got planned must be for the best. So why pray? Seriously! If you do nothing, then whatever happens must be for the best! If you pray and request a change... it can't make things better. You're just screwing yourself.
| johnny99 wrote: |
| i have heard people say that prayer helps you to focus your mind on an issue. i can see that it might help to apply your mind in a concentrated way, get things clear in your mind and help you arrive at choices and options. it might help you to help yourself to pray, even if theres no god there to do your dirty work for you. as an athiest i can see the sense in this, maybe i ought to try it. |
| myleshi wrote: |
| Simple - to make the person doing the praying feel better. |
This is a small sampling of the PC excuses atheists make to avoid calling the practice silly. Is praying silly? i don't know, but i've yet to see a good argument to show that it's not.
These two arguments fail as well.
Does prayer help you focus your mind on your problems? No, it does not. It is a distraction. Rather than trying to find a way to solve your problems, you are looking for an excuse not to solve them. You're asking Big Daddy in the Sky to solve them for you. There is no rational way that getting on your knees and talking to an imaginary friend leads to any kind of solution at all. If it's "focus" you need, it's much more efficient to just fricken focus. Sit down, lay out your problem point by point and think about it. That is focussing on a problem. That will likely lead to a solution.
Does prayer help the praying person feel better? Probably. Is it the best way to do it? Absolutely not. For some people and some problems, they would be better off simply confronting the problem, and coming to terms with it somehow. That's not what prayer does. In other cases, direct confrontation may not be wise or helpful... in those cases it might be better to focus your attention on something else to distract you, maybe take up a project or a hobby, read books, watch movies, or even take a trip. Any one of those things can comfort you, but all of them have the benefit of not doing so by self-delusion... with the added benefit that they will teach you new things and possibly get you involved with other people (who may help you cope, and possibly move on). None of that is what prayer does.
Frankly, if there is no god listening to the prayer, there is nothing prayer offers - no benefits at all - that aren't better offered by other means. | Quote: |
| This is a small sampling of the PC excuses atheists make to avoid calling the practice silly. Is praying silly? i don't know, but i've yet to see a good argument to show that it's not. |
Sure it's silly. Talking to an invisible man would get you sent to the booby hatch, if you said you were not praying but just jawing with your secret friend.
I really don't consider myself an atheist, although I have never seen or heard anything supernatural in my life - I have concluded there simply is nothing out there except nature.
Have god call me on my cell phone and then I'll reconsider. | Indi wrote: |
| Frankly, if there is no god listening to the prayer, there is nothing prayer offers - no benefits at all - that aren't better offered by other means. |
In short terms, it all comes down to this DAMNED old question!! lol 
Watch the movie the secret :p
In that movie they say that if you want something badly, and you focus all your energy to it, it'll come to you eventually... A prayer kinda works the same :p
I don't believe in either but the movie was quite funny to watch ^_^
| myleshi wrote: |
| I really don't consider myself an atheist, although I have never seen or heard anything supernatural in my life - I have concluded there simply is nothing out there except nature. |
That would be a text-book definition of an atheist.... | Bikerman wrote: |
| myleshi wrote: | | I really don't consider myself an atheist, although I have never seen or heard anything supernatural in my life - I have concluded there simply is nothing out there except nature. |
That would be a text-book definition of an atheist.... |
Tsk, you need a spankin'. ^_^; That would be a the text-definition of a materialist, not an atheist. A theist could theoretically believe in material - non-supernatural - gods. | liljp617 wrote: |
Directed toward religious folks obviously, but definitely open for debate and discussion from anyone.
I ask the question because God (insert your god if you wish) is all-knowing, correct? If he/she/it is all-knowing, why would it be necessary in any way for a believer to ask or suggest something to God through prayer? He/She/It already knows exactly what your prayer will be and already has "the plan" for you. Certainly God doesn't need reminders!
|
The point of prayer?
There can be many different points. I suppose i could make a few categories:
-Praying for yourself: A person can pray to recieve sucess or blessings or the person might pray for strength (of the soul) for example, during a temptation
-Praying regulary: Muslims pray five times a day in a ritual prayer, and there are many benefits from this, Muslims believe
-Praying for others: A person might pray for the hope that a person recovers from a disease
There are probably a few others, but those are the main ones.
| Quote: |
I obviously plan on getting some of the "it creates comfort" answers and the "keeping a relationship with God/Jesus" answers. But is that really all there is to it for people? Interested to hear
|
Muslims pray five times a day because they believe that it is good physically, good mentally, good spiritually. The purpose of this special prayer is to communicate with God, to worship Him, and thank Him for any blessings we have. This prayer, called 'salat'.
I hope my answer helps in any way.
Peace.I see again that people most likely not so familiar with praying see it as an useless act. Widen your perspectives to see also the benefits, don't just exacerbate it to fit into your own picture of the world.
Example Indi was saying that prayer is a distraction and a way not to face your problems. That's true in some cases, but same way people who don't pray have their share of those who don't want to face their problems.
When I pray, I pray briefly and usually ask for strength to face the problems. And then I face them, if I feel like I'm falling short I pray again briefly, and then carry on. So personally prayers help me to face the problems rather than distracting me away from them. And I know I'm not alone with my way of praying.
And again what comes to a usefulness of prayers if God knows all and so. God knows all what we want, but getting everything that we want wouldn't make us happy. When on the other hand things that we WILL are most likely to make us happy. Prayer is a way of showing what you will, and eventhough God knows it there should be a ritual to show that you really mean it. If I wanted God to lay some understanding and caring on other peoples lives, I would pray as a showing that it's my very will. But if I wanted to win in a lottery, it would be just a common wanting of my greedy thoughts and I wouldn't bother God with such nonsense.
What comes into the philosophy of Augustinus (=God decides before we are born that who go to heaven and who don't), it's pretty complicated philosophical guestion. First of all God doesn't decide, He just knows as people have their own free will. And that's the reason we have missionaries. To reach every born human and to lay Gospel on their minds. Then again it's up to people themselves whether they want to research further and to believe or not to believe.
| Indi wrote: |
| Bikerman wrote: | | myleshi wrote: | | I really don't consider myself an atheist, although I have never seen or heard anything supernatural in my life - I have concluded there simply is nothing out there except nature. |
That would be a text-book definition of an atheist.... |
Tsk, you need a spankin'. ^_^; That would be a the text-definition of a materialist, not an atheist. A theist could theoretically believe in material - non-supernatural - gods. |
Hmm...I take the point, but a God is normally defined as either supernatural or preternatural (either 'above' or 'outside' natural). I suppose that myleshi could possibly be a pantheist, which is, as you say, a theist position that does not require the super/preternatural, but I've always found it difficult to distinguish naturalistic pantheism from atheism. Naturalistic Pantheism (as I understand it) takes the position that nature=God=all. That is so far removed from any notion of a deity that I think it is not unreasonable to equate it to atheism - 'atheism for nature lovers' | Bikerman wrote: |
| Quote: | | Thus only sincere prayers which come before G-d are answered. |
So the people who prayed for their children to be saved in the Indonesian Tsunami were not sincere?
The father praying for his daughter to survive cancer is not sincere?
Hmm.. |
Ms. Indi gave a likely answer to your question:
| Indi wrote: |
| Aredon wrote: | | Say there is a hot girl I want... if G-d knew I wanted her and just gave her to me, what stops the next person from hogging her to themselves? |
Her choice, maybe? ^_^;
|
Not everyone wants to stick around here. You can't pray to "save" someone that would much rather go to a better place and expect for God to intervene to violate their free will.
| Indi wrote: |
| liljp617 wrote: | | I still have to ask: What is the point of praying if your "destiny" is completely planned from life until death? |
i think the problem is far beyond that. It's not just a matter of planning, it's the fact that the planning was done by... God! It always amuses me that atheists take God's alleged power more seriously than theists. Theists who are into praying seem to have no issues with the fact that they are quite literally saying that they think they can plan better than God - that whatever God's plan might be, their plan (should God choose to heed their prayer) is better.
Think about that seriously for a minute. If God is good, and knows a lot more than you... it's pretty safe to say that whatever God's planned is probably for the best. If he's perfectly good and omniscient... it's absolutely certain that whatever he's got planned must be for the best. So why pray? Seriously! If you do nothing, then whatever happens must be for the best! If you pray and request a change... it can't make things better. You're just screwing yourself.
|
So, God's existences means that we should all just be spiritual door mats? Your conception of God appears to be as a cosmic slave master. That is not taking God's power more seriously, that is simply responding in fear to God's power (that is what atheism is, ostrich with it's head in the sand kind of thing). Trying to cast atheistic existentialism as a religion that hold's God's power in more respect than theists do is just polemic rhetoric with no concrete meaning. | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Ms. Indi gave a likely answer to your question: |
Really? I must have missed it then. I thought I had read Indi's posting quite carefully. Perhaps you would care to tell me how Indi answered this particular point? You say that only sincere prayers are answered. I say that prayers are not answered - whether they are sincere or not.
If an amputee prays sincerely for his leg/arm to be restored it is NOT going to happen, ever, under any circumstances. If I pray for an amputee's limb to be restored, in all good faith, and with completely unselfish motives, it is NOT going to happen, ever (or, I should say, it has NEVER happened that we know about, and I would be willing to bet everything I own that it won't happen in the future).
If, however, I get off my knees and start doing something about it, I might be able to come up with a usable prosthesis. Given time and other like-minded people I might even be able to come up with a method of regeneration.
It has been said before (by me, and others), but it is perhaps worth repeating;
There is no evidence that prayer accomplishes anything. Such evidence that there is* tends to support the notion that prayer is malign rather than beneficial when the person being prayed for is aware of it, and otherwise it is completely ineffectual.
* http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:G-G_G4R-uo4J:www.templeton.org/pdfs/articles/060331NYTimes_Benson.pdf+templeton+foundation+study+prayer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=uk
Summary: - http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html | Bikerman wrote: |
| LutheranMafia wrote: | | Ms. Indi gave a likely answer to your question: |
Really? I must have missed it then. I thought I had read Indi's posting quite carefully. Perhaps you would care to tell me how Indi answered this particular point?
|
Indi brought up the issue of free will, which I reiterated. Do you need to have your hand held through that simple interchange? It was not a complicated or nuanced point, it was very elementary.
| Bikerman wrote: |
You say that only sincere prayers are answered.
|
No, God answers jerks sometimes too. I simply said that God doesn't run rough shod over the wishes of those being prayed for, simply to satisfy the wishes of the ones doing the praying.
| Bikerman wrote: |
I say that prayers are not answered - whether they are sincere or not. If an amputee prays sincerely for his leg/arm to be restored it is NOT going to happen, ever, under any circumstances. If I pray for an amputee's limb to be restored, in all good faith, and with completely unselfish motives, it is NOT going to happen, ever.
|
Personal opinions are always *so* fascinating, however, the preponderance of evidence over 40 years of scientific studies on the issue have consistently demonstrated that prayers do have a statistically significant effect on the health of the ill. Engaging in hyperbole about how prayer does not grant one the power to jump over mountains is merely an evasive maneuver that has nothing to do with a realistic evaluation of what science has clearly demonstrated that prayer can do.
| Bikerman wrote: |
| If, however, I get off my knees and start doing something about it, I might be able to come up with a usable prosthesis. Given time and other like-minded people I might even be able to come up with a method of regeneration. |
No time to think, only time to do? You won't get much done that way! 
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Bikerman wrote: | | LutheranMafia wrote: | | Ms. Indi gave a likely answer to your question: |
Really? I must have missed it then. I thought I had read Indi's posting quite carefully. Perhaps you would care to tell me how Indi answered this particular point?
|
Indi brought up the issue of free will, which I reiterated. Do you need to have your hand held through that simple interchange? It was not a complicated or nuanced point, it was very elementary. |
What has that got to do with God refusing to answer sincere prayers? Indi's point was that prayer is pointless because (if you are a theist) God knows best. I agree. That has nothing to do with this particular question, however, where the poster posited that sincere prayers are answered and insincere ones are not.
| Quote: |
| Personal opinions are always *so* fascinating, however, the preponderance of evidence over 40 years of scientific studies on the issue have consistently demonstrated that prayers do have a statistically significant effect on the health of the ill. Engaging in hyperbole about how prayer does not grant one the power to jump over mountains is merely an evasive maneuver that has nothing to do with a realistic evaluation of what science has clearly demonstrated that prayer can do. |
OK provide your sources then. You say that science has shown something. I say it has not. I have provided the only scientific study that I know about. Let's see your evidence!
I engaged in no hyperbole. I rather think your 'jumping over mountains' falls into that category. My point was eminently reasonable, since prayer-advocates often claim miraculous interventions but never in cases of amputation or other gross physical injury. Why is that I wonder?
The 'personal opinion' which you dismiss so readily is not personal opinion at all. It is the result of the largest ever study conducted into prayer and its effects by a sympathetic group (Templeton Foundation). The study was, to the credit of the TF, conducted using proper scientific double-blind protocol, and was pretty unambiguous in its findings (see the previous link).
PS - I do hope you know what is meant by a scientific study (since you use the term so readily). It means something written up in the peer-reviewed journals, not something published on a religious website. | Bikerman wrote: |
| LutheranMafia wrote: | | Bikerman wrote: | | LutheranMafia wrote: | | Ms. Indi gave a likely answer to your question: |
Really? I must have missed it then. I thought I had read Indi's posting quite carefully. Perhaps you would care to tell me how Indi answered this particular point?
|
Indi brought up the issue of free will, which I reiterated. Do you need to have your hand held through that simple interchange? It was not a complicated or nuanced point, it was very elementary. |
What has that got to do with God refusing to answer sincere prayers?
|
*Sigh* I already explained that a request can be against the other persons wishes, regardless of how sincere it is. How many times does this 2nd grade point have to be repeated before you can think your way through this simple matter?
| Bikerman wrote: |
| Indi's point was that prayer is pointless because (if you are a theist) God knows best. |
You are quite the tortured evasive subject changer, Indi made that point later in his post, but that was not what I quoted. I quoted his first statement, which says nothing of what you just commented on. You just like to huff and puff don't you, but you have no regard for honesty and integrity. You really enjoy these puerile pedantic manipulations, such as knowingly altering the context of a statement and then claiming that the person doesn't make any sense. After all, it worked with that ridiculous omnipotent argument against God, so why not try it with people too, aye?
| Bikerman wrote: |
I agree. That has nothing to do with this particular question, however, where the poster posited that sincere prayers are answered and insincere ones are not.
|
Let's review for Mr. Attention Deficit's benefit: Indi replied that the horny dude's prayer to get laid might not work because the chick didn't want him. There, Mr. Attention Deficit, do you remember the context now??
| Bikerman wrote: |
| PS - I do hope you know what is meant by a scientific study (since you use the term so readily). It means something written up in the peer-reviewed journals, not something published on a religious website. |
You *are* a genius! I hope that you can muster the maturity and mental focus of a teenager, maybe then stomping your ridiculous and facile arguments might be worth the dull effort.You should probably relax to be honest lol
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Indi wrote: | | Aredon wrote: | | Say there is a hot girl I want... if G-d knew I wanted her and just gave her to me, what stops the next person from hogging her to themselves? |
Her choice, maybe? ^_^;
|
Not everyone wants to stick around here. You can't pray to "save" someone that would much rather go to a better place and expect for God to intervene to violate their free will. |
i have no idea what you're talking about. ^_^; Aredon apparently thinks that if someone wants me (presumably to have as a lover), they can pray to God and God will... "give" me to them - or if i want someone, i can pray to God and God will "give" them to me. What the hell does any of that have to do with "sticking around" or "going to a better place"?
Do you think God is in the flesh trade? Do you think if you pray to God hard enough, sincerely enough, whatever enough, that God will tamper with the free will of another human being so that you can "have" them?
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Indi wrote: | | liljp617 wrote: | | I still have to ask: What is the point of praying if your "destiny" is completely planned from life until death? |
i think the problem is far beyond that. It's not just a matter of planning, it's the fact that the planning was done by... God! It always amuses me that atheists take God's alleged power more seriously than theists. Theists who are into praying seem to have no issues with the fact that they are quite literally saying that they think they can plan better than God - that whatever God's plan might be, their plan (should God choose to heed their prayer) is better.
Think about that seriously for a minute. If God is good, and knows a lot more than you... it's pretty safe to say that whatever God's planned is probably for the best. If he's perfectly good and omniscient... it's absolutely certain that whatever he's got planned must be for the best. So why pray? Seriously! If you do nothing, then whatever happens must be for the best! If you pray and request a change... it can't make things better. You're just screwing yourself.
|
So, God's existences means that we should all just be spiritual door mats? Your conception of God appears to be as a cosmic slave master. That is not taking God's power more seriously.... |
i honestly have no idea what you're talking about. ^_^; What i said has nothing to do with slavery or being "spiritual door mats". It has everything to do with not being an idiot.
Let me try and spell it out again. God is all knowing, yes? (Or at least, a hell of a lot more knowing than we are.) If that is true, then God must know better than we do what is best for us. So far so good, yes? God is smarter than us, therefore God knows what is good for us better than we do. No arguments so far, right?
Now, God is also good, correct? That means that - as much as possible - he wants the best for us. Maybe we muck up the plan by denying him and doing evil things, but without us messing up his script, he is trying to do what is best for all of us.
So, let me make what we have so far clear:
God is trying to do what is best for us (unless we screw up his plan).
God also knows better than we do what is best for us.
Therefore, we should always trust what God has set out for us, because he knows best and he wants the best for us, therefore whatever he has planned must be the best possible plan for us.
Which means!
If you go and pray for a change in the plan - even a small one! - no matter what you ask for, it cannot make your future better. It can only make it worse.
Now you might say - it might not make it better or worse, it might make no major difference... but that's nonsense. If it makes no difference at all, you wouldn't feel the need to pray to ask for it. If you're praying for it, it must be something you really want, which means it must have a significant impact on your life. And since we know it can't possibly make your life any better, it must make it worse.
Therefore: every time you pray, you make your life worse. QED. ^_^;
Amusingly enough, you're actually better off if God doesn't exist. At least that way, if you pray all you do is waste time. Things may get better or worse for it - there's no way to know... but the alternative, if God exists, is that they will always get worse.
Therefore: If God does not exist, you are wasting your time by praying. If God does exist, you are making your life worse by praying. Either way... it seems the safest thing to do... is to not pray. ^_^;
(One thing i should mention: i am talking about intercessory prayer - because it looks to me that that is what the thread is about. That means prayer asking for God to do something or change something. Prayer where you just thank God for everything you have does not count, and neither does prayer where you just kiss God's proverbial ass and tell him how awesome he is.)
And now, to get a little bit serious:
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| ... that is simply responding in fear to God's power (that is what atheism is, ostrich with it's head in the sand kind of thing). Trying to cast atheistic existentialism as a religion that hold's God's power in more respect than theists do is just polemic rhetoric with no concrete meaning. |
Maybe you live in a part of the world where you're a bit sheltered, and this kind of ignorance is commonplace and tolerated. i don't know, and i don't care - but i am an educator at heart, so i'll set your facts straight. Whether you choose to learn from this or just "bury your head in the sand" is not my problem.
You obviously have no clue what an atheist is. You've probably only heard atheists described by pulpit thumping priests who are similarly clueless. Let's pretend we're not morons for a moment and use our brains: does it make any sense to be afraid of something that you do not believe exists? Think about it. Are you afraid of being burned by a dragon, or impaled on a unicorn's horn? I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you've never been to Transylvania. Obviously you must be afraid of vampires then, or you would have gone, right? Of course not - that's just stupid. Yet that is exactly what you are are accusing atheists of. Atheists are afraid of a figment of your imagination? They're afraid of being judged by a five-thousand year old Middle Eastern fantasy bogeyman? Hardly. ^_^;
But that's exactly what you're accusing atheists of right there. You say they're too afraid to admit that God exists because then they'd have to admit their inferiority, and they don't want to do that. Do you believe Cthulhu exists? If you say no, then i'll say it's because you are a coward, and afraid to admit you're inferior to the Old Ones. You're also a coward for not believing in the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Invisible Pink Unicorn, as well as the pantheon of Greco-Roman gods, Maal, Moloch, and a hell of a lot more - which makes you a pretty big coward indeed. That's pretty unfair, hm? Even a little ignorant? Well if you can't take it, don't dish it out.
If you can't be bothered to take the time to understand atheists and what they do (or don't) believe, then don't say anything about them or what they do (or don't) believe. "It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt". There was absolutely no reason for any of those ignorant comments you made about atheists and atheism - they didn't add to your argument or the discussion at all, you just saw a chance to insult atheists and took it. They had nothing to do with anything i wrote. i said nothing at all related to existentialism. Not one word. In fact, i built my argument almost completely around the assumption that God exists, and that he is as powerful as theists usually claim he is (even if they don't stand by those claims in their own beliefs).
If you actually care about atheists and what they may or may not believe, then a good place to start is not by calling them chicken because they don't believe what you believe. If you don't care, fine - but don't expect anyone else to show any respect whatsoever for you or your beliefs if you don't intend to show any respect for theirs.
For the record, when i said that atheists put more stock in God's abilities than theists, it is because i have found by my long study of metaphysics and theology that all apologist arguments are based on assumptions that God is limited in some form or another. This prayer thing is, of course, just one example. If you want more, i'd be happy to oblige, because there are many - but i don't teach bigots, so if you want to hear what i've learned, you're going to have to show a bit more tolerance for other belief systems. | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Bikerman wrote: | | I agree. That has nothing to do with this particular question, however, where the poster posited that sincere prayers are answered and insincere ones are not. |
Let's review for Mr. Attention Deficit's benefit: Indi replied that the horny dude's prayer to get laid might not work because the chick didn't want him. There, Mr. Attention Deficit, do you remember the context now?? |
Oh yes, I remember the context well, but it appears you don't (or choose not to).
I asked why, if sincere prayers are answered, the parents of the Tsunami victims prayers were not answered. This has nothing to do with a 'horny dude' at all and does not involve going against the other persons wishes (unless you think the victims actually wanted to die).
What you are doing is conflating two different postings (Aredon's and mine). Indi was replying to Aredon's posting about wanting sex, not to my point about the Tsunami victims.
If you really believe that the children killed in the Tsunami wanted to die then you must have a pretty bleak view of humanity. In my experience most people do not want to die - particularly children.
It's also a complete cop-out - why did God let them die? Because they wanted to die. How do we know? Well otherwise God would have saved them. Circular reasoning.
| Quote: |
| Bikerman wrote: | | PS - I do hope you know what is meant by a scientific study (since you use the term so readily). It means something written up in the peer-reviewed journals, not something published on a religious website. |
You *are* a genius! I hope that you can muster the maturity and mental focus of a teenager, maybe then stomping your ridiculous and facile arguments might be worth the dull effort. |
LOL..instead of the childish insults why don't you try answering the question. Which scientific studies show that prayer works? | Indi wrote: |
| LutheranMafia wrote: | | Indi wrote: | | Aredon wrote: | | Say there is a hot girl I want... if G-d knew I wanted her and just gave her to me, what stops the next person from hogging her to themselves? |
Her choice, maybe? ^_^;
|
Not everyone wants to stick around here. You can't pray to "save" someone that would much rather go to a better place and expect for God to intervene to violate their free will. |
i have no idea what you're talking about. ^_^; Aredon apparently thinks that if someone wants me (presumably to have as a lover), they can pray to God and God will... "give" me to them - or if i want someone, i can pray to God and God will "give" them to me. What the hell does any of that have to do with "sticking around" or "going to a better place"?
|
You can’t see the connection between sex and death? In France sex is called the little death, in Mexico it is called la noche de entierro, the night of interment (burial).
| Indi wrote: |
Do you think God is in the flesh trade? Do you think if you pray to God hard enough, sincerely enough, whatever enough, that God will tamper with the free will of another human being so that you can "have" them?
|
Now you have no trouble seeing the connecting theme, *but* you are trying to preach my own point at me. If someone feels like this is Hell and they don’t want to live here anymore, it would be a violation of their free will if someone’s prayers forced them to remain on Earth longer.
| Indi wrote: |
i honestly have no idea what you're talking about. ^_^; What i said has nothing to do with slavery or being "spiritual door mats". It has everything to do with not being an idiot.
|
You advocate total spiritual inactivity, the cessation of all spiritual actions. You don’t believe in God so spiritual nihilism is simply a reflection of your disbelief in God, and much as atheistic existentialism has been labeled the doormat philosophy (“fate please step on me”, such as the end of Camus’ The Stranger) this is just an extension of this aspect of atheistic existentialism.
| Indi wrote: |
Let me try and spell it out again. God is all knowing, yes? (Or at least, a hell of a lot more knowing than we are.) If that is true, then God must know better than we do what is best for us. So far so good, yes? God is smarter than us, therefore God knows what is good for us better than we do. No arguments so far, right?
Now, God is also good, correct? That means that - as much as possible - he wants the best for us. Maybe we muck up the plan by denying him and doing evil things, but without us messing up his script, he is trying to do what is best for all of us.
So, let me make what we have so far clear:
God is trying to do what is best for us (unless we screw up his plan).
God also knows better than we do what is best for us.
Therefore, we should always trust what God has set out for us, because he knows best and he wants the best for us, therefore whatever he has planned must be the best possible plan for us.
Which means!
If you go and pray for a change in the plan - even a small one! - no matter what you ask for, it cannot make your future better. It can only make it worse.
|
Part of every good parent’s plan is that you can’t do everything for your kid, your kid has to do things for himself or he will never have any self confidence. The child must make his *own* mistakes, the parent cannot shelter the child from every possible harm because then the child would grow up helpless and utterly dependent, with no capacity to fend for himself.
| Indi wrote: |
Now you might say - it might not make it better or worse, it might make no major difference... but that's nonsense. If it makes no difference at all, you wouldn't feel the need to pray to ask for it. If you're praying for it, it must be something you really want, which means it must have a significant impact on your life. And since we know it can't possibly make your life any better, it must make it worse.
Therefore: every time you pray, you make your life worse. QED. ^_^;
|
You are worse off for claiming your discipline and spiritual power rather than being a passive existentialist doormat waiting to be stepped on?
| Indi wrote: |
Amusingly enough, you're actually better off if God doesn't exist. At least that way, if you pray all you do is waste time. Things may get better or worse for it - there's no way to know... but the alternative, if God exists, is that they will always get worse.
|
A total non sequitur. Since God is all of us in the infinite future, unbound by time, if God does not exist then neither does our future. How are we better off having no future?
Anyway, your message continued on like a self-absorbed novelist, this was as far as I could wade through.
Last edited by LutheranMafia on Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:32 pm; edited 4 times in totalYou really don't get it do you?
You mean, I don't get how snide you are?
How old *are* you kids anyway?? | Bikerman wrote: |
| LutheranMafia wrote: | | Bikerman wrote: | | I agree. That has nothing to do with this particular question, however, where the poster posited that sincere prayers are answered and insincere ones are not. |
Let's review for Mr. Attention Deficit's benefit: Indi replied that the horny dude's prayer to get laid might not work because the chick didn't want him. There, Mr. Attention Deficit, do you remember the context now?? |
Oh yes, I remember the context well, but it appears you don't (or choose not to).
I asked why, if sincere prayers are answered, the parents of the Tsunami victims prayers were not answered. This has nothing to do with a 'horny dude' at all and does not involve going against the other persons wishes (unless you think the victims actually wanted to die).
|
You never heard of people who want to die, or who want to crawl up into a bottle and drink their life away, or who never wanted to come here in the first place... You have much to learn about the great big world out there, young grasshopper.
| Bikerman wrote: |
What you are doing is conflating two different postings (Aredon's and mine). Indi was replying to Aredon's posting about wanting sex, not to my point about the Tsunami victims.
If you really believe that the children killed in the Tsunami wanted to die then you must have a pretty bleak view of humanity. In my experience most people do not want to die - particularly children.
|
Heaven is real, believe it or not, and lots of people upon getting the slightest taste of it, turn and flee from this world. You are merely presuming your own atheistic assumptions in circular fashion. Do you even know what circular reasoning is? You seem to be the poster child for circular reasoning.
| Bikerman wrote: |
It's also a complete cop-out - why did God let them die? Because they wanted to die. How do we know? Well otherwise God would have saved them. Circular reasoning.
|
There is also worthiness as well as personal wishes, maybe some did want to stay here to grow up in abject poverty in the bitterly impoverished 3rd world counties around the Indian Ocean, maybe so, but odds are, once in Heaven they were quite happy with the deal. Unless you think young children would go to Hell when they died?
| Bikerman wrote: |
| LOL..instead of the childish insults why don't you try answering the question. Which scientific studies show that prayer works? |
You can't think your way out of a paper sack with regards to philosophy and you expect me to get into rigorous hard science with you? | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Bikerman wrote: | | LOL..instead of the childish insults why don't you try answering the question. Which scientific studies show that prayer works? |
You can't think your way out of a paper sack with regards to philosophy and you expect me to get into rigorous hard science with you? |
No, Mike, I already know that you can't do rigorous science. I simply expect you to support your statements. Which scientific studies show that prayer works?Heh heh, you think you read minds too? My name is Frank.
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Heh heh, you think you read minds too? My name is Frank. |
Whatever you say Mike. Now, where are these scientific studies?I take it that it is easier for you to read people's minds than to surf the web? Maybe you should stick to mind reading. There are 40 years of peer reviewed studies out there, if you can't find them yourself then you should probably stick to mind reading. | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| I take it that it is easier for you to read people's minds than to surf the web? Maybe you should stick to mind reading. There are 40 years of peer reviewed studies out there, if you can't find them yourself then you should probably stick to mind reading. |
Why should he work to support your argument? -.- I always find it annoying when people take a stance on something in a forum for honest, open discussion/debate, and then they tell their opponent to find the evidence supporting their stance. What's the point of opening your mouth if you have no desire to find your own sources to back you up? | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| I take it that it is easier for you to read people's minds than to surf the web? Maybe you should stick to mind reading. There are 40 years of peer reviewed studies out there, if you can't find them yourself then you should probably stick to mind reading. |
Yes well and none of them shows that prayer has a significant effect. As far as most of us, so if you have that magical peer-reviewed article about it that does show that parayer works. Show it if you don't have it stfu.
You are just saying something something and let the disproving up to the others while you should prove it by your resoning we should believe in:
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_legendary_creatures wrote: |
Á Bao A Qu (Malay) - Entity that lived in the Tower of Victory in Chitor
Aatxe (Basque mythology) - evil spirit, that takes the form of a bull
Abada (African mythology) -is a small type of unicorn reported to live in the lands of the African Congo
Äbädä (Tatar mythology) - a forest spirit
Abaia (Melanesian mythology) - a huge magical eel
Abarimon (Medieval Bestiaries) - Savage humanoid with backward feet
Abath (Malay) - One-horned animal
Abatwa (Zulu) - Little people that ride ants
Abumi-guchi (Japanese) - Furry creature formed from the stirrup of a mounted military commander
Abura-akago (Japanese) - Oil-drinking infant
Abura-bō (Japanese) - Spectral fire from Shiga Prefecture, in which the shape of a monk can often be seen
Abura-sumashi (Japanese) - Ghost of oil thieves
|
and the list goes on and on and creatures are even missing from that list.
Even so whe can make up endless amount of creatures and you have to believe in those too.
No you claim something extraordinairy you come of with extraordinairy proof. | Klaw 2 wrote: |
Yes well and none of them shows that prayer has a significant effect.
|
You obviously are not familiar with such studies. I suspect that Bikerman is, and I'm not willing to discuss it with someone who is misrepresenting his position. However, I am perfectly willing to discuss it with anyone who is sincerely interested.
The landmark study that sparked a much bigger wave of these studies was the 1988 experiment at San Francisco General Hospital, by Dr. Randolf Byrd, as reported in the December 1988 issue of the Southern Medical Journal.
http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-33677201_ITM
The most interesting study is the STEP study done at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. This study measured the effect of anonymous prayer (i.e. prayer from strangers that the ill did not know) and interestingly the prayers had a significantly greater positive effect if the patient DIDN'T know for sure if anyone was praying for them. (There were three groups, those that were told yes definitely, those that were told definitely not, and those who were told that they might possibly be prayed for.)
"Father Dean Marek, a Catholic priest who was involved in the research, said he wasn't surprised by the results.
"I am always a little leery about intercessory prayer," said Marek, director of chaplain services at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. "What we have in mind for someone else may not be what they have in mind for themselves…. It is clearly manipulative of divine action and personal choice."
http://www.theheart.org/article/681975.do
http://www.webmd.com/balance/guide/20070201/praying-for-health-study-stirs-debate?page=2 | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| The most interesting study is the STEP study done at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. |
Splendid. I agree completely - the STEP trial is the most comprehensive and scientifically valid study of intercessory prayer ever conducted. That is, in fact, why I referred to it earlier (The STEP trial is actually the same trial that I referenced - the one funded by the Templeton Foundation).
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| interestingly the prayers had a significantly greater positive effect if the patient DIDN'T know for sure if anyone was praying for them. |
No, that is untrue. The prayers had NO statistically significant positive effect at all, whether or not the patient knew they were being prayed for.
Let's look at the actual results of the STEP trial - quoting from the references you provided. | Quote: |
| The prayers of strangers for individuals undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) have no effect on the complication rate following surgery, a new study has found [1]. Intriguingly, investigators also found that among patients who were certain they were being prayed for, there was a higher rate of complications following surgery. |
| Quote: |
| Those receiving blinded prayer fared the same as those who were not prayed for. Paradoxically, those in the awareness group, those aware of prayer being provided for them, actually fared worse. |
In simple terms, praying for strangers has no effect if they don't know that they are being prayed for. If they DO know that they are being prayed for then they do worse than the control group (who were not being prayed for). | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| (There were three groups, those that were told yes definitely, those that were told definitely not, and those who were told that they might possibly be prayed for.) |
No, that is also wrong. There was no group that were told that they were definitely not being prayed for. The three groups were;
* Group 1—Patients who received intercessory prayer after being informed they may or may not receive prayer
* Group 2—Patients who did not receive prayer after being informed they may or may not receive prayer
* Group 3—Patients who received intercessory prayer after being informed they would receive it
The results were that groups 1 and 2 had the same level of complications. Group 3 had significantly more complications than either group 1 or group 2.
This is exactly what I said earlier, it supports the notion that prayer either does nothing, or does harm.
Last edited by Bikerman on Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:41 pm; edited 10 times in total
Yes nice I have to create an account to see that stuff. So I can't read it. | Klaw 2 wrote: |
Yes nice I have to create an account to see that stuff. So I can't read it. |
The link is to a book by the Infinity Institute (a hypnosis organisation). Unfortunately I can't access the source (it is only available in the US/Canada). | Bikerman wrote: |
| This is exactly what I said earlier, it supports the notion that prayer either does nothing, or does harm. |
Does nothing? This study does not support that clearly false assumption in any way. Things that really have an effect tend to be double edged swords, sometimes they help and sometimes they hurt, kind of like a chain saw. If you look a little deeper into the groups involved with doing the praying you can start to see why their prayers could have had such a measurably detrimental effect on the ill. | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Bikerman wrote: | | This is exactly what I said earlier, it supports the notion that prayer either does nothing, or does harm. |
Does nothing? This study does not support that clearly false assumption in any way. |
Err, yes it does - explicitly and unambiguously. Why not read the press release from the STEP team themselves?:
http://web.med.harvard.edu/sites/RELEASES/html/3_31STEP.html
| Quote: |
| Things that really have an effect tend to be double edged swords, sometimes they help and sometimes they hurt, kind of like a chain saw. |
Well, there was no evidence of help and some evidence of hurt. | Quote: |
| If you look a little deeper into the groups involved with doing the praying you can start to see why their prayers could have had such a measurably detrimental effect on the ill. |
We don't have the details of the people doing the praying. We know that there was one protestant congregation (Silent Unity of Lee's Summit, Mo.) and two catholic congregations (St. Paul's Monastery in St. Paul, Minnesota, and the Community of Teresian Carmelites in Worcester, Mass.) - that's all. Are you suggesting that there is something malevolent about those doing the praying?
Why would their prayers have no effect on those who didn't know they were being prayed for, and a detrimental effect on those who did? It was the same bunch of people praying in each case, and those doing the praying didn't know which group was which.I wonder why those who knew they were being prayed for fared worse. Do you think it was simply the odds or a coincidence, or maybe they themselves didn't fight as hard as they would have if they didn't think some divine spirit was going to float down and help them?
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| You can’t see the connection between sex and death? In France sex is called the little death, in Mexico it is called la noche de entierro, the night of interment (burial). |
No, i really can't. But i'll tell you what i can see. ^_^;
- Your facts are wrong. i can't speak for Mexicans, but i've spent a lot of time brushing up on some French. ^_^ The little death does not refer to sex. It refers to orgasm. Since orgasm usually comes at the end of sex (unless you're either really bad or really good at it), just as death usually comes at the end of life... that would imply that sex is associated with living, not death. (If you want to get really technical, the little death might not refer to sex or orgasm, but the refractory period.)
- Your reasoning is stupid. Some places refer to sex as "ploughing", and they talk about "deflowering" virgins. Does that make sex associated with horticulture? ^_^; Oh! Oh! They also talk about "popping cherries"... so sex is associated with fruit juice? ^_^; "Putting the pickle in the burrito"... coooking? ^_^; "Spanking the cat"... animal abuse? ^_^; Man, i could go on all day!
- Your entire argument is completely unrelated to anything being discussed. No one said anything about death or sex. You brought both of those into the discussion... out of nowhere. Aredon was talking about getting a girl, and so was i. And the only place you could go from there - without even bothering to explain how or why to the rest of us - was to sex? Don't you have any girl friends? ^_^; Or is the only thing you could possibly want a girl for ******? (Or killing, which apparently, and horrifically, is the same thing to you. ^_^)
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Indi wrote: | | Do you think God is in the flesh trade? Do you think if you pray to God hard enough, sincerely enough, whatever enough, that God will tamper with the free will of another human being so that you can "have" them? |
Now you have no trouble seeing the connecting theme, *but* you are trying to preach my own point at me. If someone feels like this is Hell and they don’t want to live here anymore, it would be a violation of their free will if someone’s prayers forced them to remain on Earth longer. |
No... ^_^; i do have trouble seeing the connecting theme - which is why you had to explain it to you. And i don't even know what your point is, if you even have one. i was repeating my point.
Where does Hell come from? Beats me, you put it there. i haven't even mentioned Hell in this thread before now. ^_^; See? Look at what i said, and not what you think i said. Come join us in reality. ^_^;
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| You advocate total spiritual inactivity, the cessation of all spiritual actions. You don’t believe in God so spiritual nihilism is simply a reflection of your disbelief in God, and much as atheistic existentialism has been labeled the doormat philosophy (“fate please step on me”, such as the end of Camus’ The Stranger) this is just an extension of this aspect of atheistic existentialism. |
No... ^_^; You say i advocate total spiritual inactivity. ^_^; i don't advocate the "cessation of all spiritual actions". i wasn't advocating everything. i just presented a logical argument for why intercessory praying is a bad idea - using the assumptions of the average theist.
i don't even know what "spiritual nihilism" is. ^_^; What, did you just slap those two words together? But i know what nihilism means, and your labelling what i have presented here as "nihilistic" is just stupid. Nihilism means there is no objective moral certainty to anything. i didn't say a word about morality - not a peep. i just said that intercessory prayer always causes harm. That is an objective claim, but not a moral one. You can apply morality to it by evaluating the morality of knowingly causing harm, but that's your business, not mine. Personally, i don't believe God exists, so in my beliefs prayer is just a waste of time, not guaranteed harm. If you believe in God, then my objective, logical argument shows that intercessory prayer must cause harm according to your belief system.
As for existentialism... that's another idiotic charge. It's like you're just picking labels you don't like and slapping them on me and my argument without knowing what they mean. ^_^; i argued that if God exists in the manner most Western theists believe he does, then intercessory prayer must be dangerous. What part of that is existentialistic? It is an objective, logical argument. Anyone can make it or understand it, regardless of what their beliefs are.
Incidentally, you don't seriously expect anyone here to believe you've actually read 100+ pages Camus if you can't even read through a measly 1000 word web forum posting, do you? ^_^; Dropping names does not make one's argument intelligent.
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Part of every good parent’s plan is that you can’t do everything for your kid, your kid has to do things for himself or he will never have any self confidence. The child must make his *own* mistakes, the parent cannot shelter the child from every possible harm because then the child would grow up helpless and utterly dependent, with no capacity to fend for himself. |
The "God as parent" argument has been done to death in this forum. It doesn't work.
God is not a parent, he is a creator. There is a huge difference. A parent is required to deal with whatever shortcomings their child has been created with - including the need to learn what is dangerous and what is not. A creator can put that information right into the child's head before birth. You wouldn't need to shelter the child from harm if the child was born knowing what was dangerous, and able to understand why. Instead, the child is born stupid. A parent has to work around that fact. God does not - it is his fault the child is born that way.
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Indi wrote: | | Therefore: every time you pray, you make your life worse. QED. ^_^; |
You are worse off for claiming your discipline and spiritual power rather than being a passive existentialist doormat waiting to be stepped on? |
You'll understand my argument better if you actually read it. i'm not going to repeat it again. If you're really smart enough to grok existentialism and nihilism as concepts, and not just as dirty words to hurl at someone who makes an argument you don't like, you'll have no trouble understanding my simple logical argument.
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Indi wrote: | | Amusingly enough, you're actually better off if God doesn't exist. At least that way, if you pray all you do is waste time. Things may get better or worse for it - there's no way to know... but the alternative, if God exists, is that they will always get worse. |
A total non sequitur. Since God is all of us in the infinite future, unbound by time, if God does not exist then neither does our future. How are we better off having no future? |
- Before you can call something non-sequitur, you have to understand the introductory argument. Since you obviously don't - since you apparently haven't even read it, because it's a trivial argument - you can't say anything is non-sequitur.
- Since what? ^_^; If you want to do philosophy, you actually have to provide a logical argument, not just throw shit out with "since" in front of it. i could just as easily say: "since up is down and in is out..." but it would be just as stupid as your sentence. God is all of us? Prove it. Make a philosophical argument to show the basis of that claim. Infinite future? Let's see an argument for that. God is unbound by time? Bring on your argument... and so on.
- All you're doing is putting words in my mouth - and you're doing it badly. ^_^; Where did i say we have no future? Nowhere. You made that up. All i said was that - under the standard theist assumptions - intercessory prayer makes your future worse. Now... think. Seriously. Think. i said prayer makes the future worse. How can i say that and "we have no future" at the same time? ^_^;
| LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Anyway, your message continued on like a self-absorbed novelist, this was as far as I could wade through. |
What can i say? i'm no Camus. ^_^;
| liljp617 wrote: |
| I wonder why those who knew they were being prayed for fared worse. Do you think it was simply the odds or a coincidence, or maybe they themselves didn't fight as hard as they would have if they didn't think some divine spirit was going to float down and help them? |
The best explanation i've heard is performance anxiety. Because they were being prayed for, and they knew that if they did not do better, it would disprove prayer - which they wanted to be proven, for religious reasons - they were more nervous than the other groups. Every little sign that things weren't going well was a sign that God hated them personally (because they were being prayed for, which, if they were good people, should mean they were surely going to get well).
The ones who didn't know just kicked back and relaxed, trusting their faith either way (that they would definitely get better if they were being prayed for, and if not, it was up to medicine). If they got a bad sign, maybe they weren't being prayed for - it didn't necessarily mean that God was abandoning them personally. | liljp617 wrote: |
| I wonder why those who knew they were being prayed for fared worse. Do you think it was simply the odds or a coincidence, or maybe they themselves didn't fight as hard as they would have if they didn't think some divine spirit was going to float down and help them? |
Well, the study authors offered no explanation other than saying it could be chance. I find that a surprising statement given the stats.
The actual results were:
Group 1 (did not receive prayer after being told they might or might not) 51% complications.
Group 2 (did receive prayer after being told they might or might not) 52% complications.
Group 3 (did receive prayer after being told they would receive prayer) 59% complications.
The study authors regarded the slight difference between groups 1 and 2 as statistically insignificant (in which they were perfectly correct, and in-line with normal statistical analysis).
An 8% difference from control in group 3, however, is statistically significant. The probability that this could be a chance occurrence is very low.
One of the surgeons involved in the study offered a more plausible (I think) explanation:
| Quote: |
| "We know that high levels of adrenaline from the anxiety response can make fibrillation worse," said Charles Bethea, a physician at Integris Baptist Heart Hospital, a study site in Oklahoma City, in an April press conference. "The patient might think, 'Am I so sick that they have to call in the prayer team?'" |
[edit - Indi's explanation above also works, since performance anxiety would increase adrenalin levels]
You can read the full study for yourself below...
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:lmqxS4C9uT8J:www.mowatresearch.co.uk/uploaded_documents/Benson.pdf&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=uk | Indi wrote: |
| LutheranMafia wrote: | | You can’t see the connection between sex and death? In France sex is called the little death, in Mexico it is called la noche de entierro, the night of interment (burial). |
No, i really can't. But i'll tell you what i can see. ^_^;
[list=1][*]Your facts are wrong. i can't speak for Mexicans, but i've spent a lot of time brushing up on some French. ^_^ The little death does not refer to sex. It refers to orgasm. |
LOL is this for real? Sex and orgasms have nothing to do with each other and so my entire argument is wrong, aye? I'm not really bored enough to read the rest of your message. | Bikerman wrote: |
The study authors regarded the slight difference between groups 1 and 2 as statistically insignificant (in which they were perfectly correct, and in-line with normal statistical analysis).
An 8% difference from control in group 3, however, is statistically significant. The probability that this could be a chance occurrence is very low.
One of the surgeons involved in the study offered a more plausible (I think) explanation:
| Quote: | | "We know that high levels of adrenaline from the anxiety response can make fibrillation worse," said Charles Bethea, a physician at Integris Baptist Heart Hospital, a study site in Oklahoma City, in an April press conference. "The patient might think, 'Am I so sick that they have to call in the prayer team?'" |
[edit - Indi's explanation above also works, since performance anxiety would increase adrenalin levels]
|
Neither of those explanations elucidates why being uncertain about whether or not one is being prayed for by the three prayer groups lacks a negative effect. Also, three prayer groups is not a broad enough sample to differentiate between the kind of effect that different groups will have. Being a Lutheran I am hardly surprised that a study which focused predominately on Catholic prayer groups ended up actually finding a negative association between health effects and their prayers. But this hardly supports an atheistic notion of no effect to prayer. You yourself admitted that prayer itself could actually be harmful, which is impossible if prayer has no effect. | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| Neither of those explanations elucidates why being uncertain about whether or not one is being prayed for by the three prayer groups lacks a negative effect. Also, three prayer groups is not a broad enough sample to differentiate between the kind of effect that different groups will have. Being a Lutheran I am hardly surprised that a study which focused predominately on Catholic prayer groups ended up actually finding a negative association between health effects and their prayers. But this hardly supports an atheistic notion of no effect to prayer. You yourself admitted that prayer itself could actually be harmful, which is impossible if prayer has no effect. |
Err...it was you that proposed that this study offered some proof that prayer was beneficial - not me. Remember what you said? | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| and interestingly the prayers had a significantly greater positive effect if the patient DIDN'T know for sure if anyone was praying for them. |
Which was, of course, completely untrue. There was no positive effect at all.
If you think the study was flawed then why did you describe it in these terms? | LutheranMafia wrote: |
| The most interesting study is the STEP study done at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. |
So, on the one hand you think this is a bad study, and on the other hand you think this is the most interesting study yet done? OK, that is consistent, but only if you think that all other studies done to date are really crap.
Why do you think that Catholic prayers result in a negative effect? (Remember that one of the groups was Protestant - do their prayers not count? Maybe the evil Catholic prayer negated the positive Protestant prayer?). You strike me as a bigot - Catholic prayer is malevolent? I presume you think that Lutheran prayer would be beneficial? Are you sure that the Protestant congregation who did the praying were not Lutherans?
You say that neither explanation 'elucidates why being uncertain about....etc". Do you actually understand English? If you have a problem (ie if English is not your first language) then please say so, and I will make the customary allowances. Otherwise you are simply dribbling.
The study was not designed to offer any explanations - it was designed to see if intercessory prayer by strangers has any positive effect on the recovery of cardiac patients. It doesn't. End of story.
Finally, as for me saying that prayers have some (negative) effect - I clearly said that there are a couple of credible explanations, neither of which have anything to do with supernatural effects, and both of which have everything to do with the fact that the person KNOWS they are being prayed for.
If a person knows that they are being prayed for, then it is not surprising that they do worse. It has nothing to do with the 'power of prayer' and everything to do with that person's physiological reaction to the knowledge that such prayer is being offered. If you read back you will see one possible explanation from one of the cardiac surgeons involved, and another possible explanation from Indi (though apparently you can't be bothered to read Indi's postings). The KEY point is, however, that if they DON'T know they are being prayed for then prayer HAS NO EFFECT.
In conclusion, you seem to be suggesting that some groups are inherently evil, or at least that their prayers for good will inevitably result in evil consequences. I call that bigotry, and I call you a religious bigot.
(I could go on, but there is little point since you obviously have a problem reading more than a few words at any one time).Perhaps this will shine some light on the subject
What is Prayer in Kabbalah?
So basically it is like:
Your best friend dies.
Of course God is always right so infact you should be mourning over his death but celebrate because god did it and so his death was good. You are only the one who is wrong so you pray that god will change you so that you will be happy with his death.
... 
Yeah Right... | Klaw 2 wrote: |
So basically it is like:
Your best friend dies.
Of course God is always right so infact you should be mourning over his death but celebrate because god did it and so his death was good. You are only the one who is wrong so you pray that god will change you so that you will be happy with his death. |
i know, eh? ^_^; Yet another cheap attempt to shift the blame for the evils in the universe down to the people who are the victims of it, rather than laying it on the gods where it belongs.
But for a specific criticism: according to Mr. Very-fast-moving-chair-guy, everything that happens is good, and the only reason we perceive evil is because of our own weaknesses. Let's think about that. A child taken from her home by a deranged pervert, sexually abused, and then tortured until she dies... is anything that's happening there to her... good? Should she be - as Mr. VFMCG suggests - trying to see the bright side of her kidnapping, rape, humiliation and abuse? "Oh, ok, ya, this hurts like hell, and i'm going to die young having never gotten to experience almost 90% of what's great about the world, but hey, at least i don't have to worry about that math test next week!" No, sorry, i'm not seeing it. Mr. VFMCG is a slime ball, like so many theists who try to whitewash over all of the very real suffering on Earth by either saying it's not real, or that we deserve it. Someone suffering real abuse shouldn't also have to shoulder the guilt he's trying to dump on them. What kind of sick bastard would tell a victim of that kind of crime that what they've experienced isn't really bad, and the fact that they felt like it was bad was their fault?I think so the main point is maintaining communication with God. The other maybe resides in our desire to change His way of action, sometimes it's not possible.
But you have a good point. If God knows everything and knows how to do it, we should abandon ourselves in faith to His aims, but it's so dificult for us to be so confident.
