Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
What I find to be a remarkable coincidence is the way that God answers prayers at the exact same rate as if he didn't exist.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Yeah.It seems odd to have a 'personal hunch' concerning the personaliity of the supernatural.
Really. Well, my experience is entirely different from yours, but as I said before, faith precedes the miracle, not the other way around.What I find to be a remarkable coincidence is the way that God answers prayers at the exact same rate as if he didn't exist.
Looking at correlation without an understanding of causation, it would have been a good idea to adhere to every Jewish practice, not just keeping kosher: assuming that they were healthier (which I admit is just a presumption), the correlation would be just as strong between health and circumcision, or health and celebrating Jewish holidays, as it would be between health and dietary customs.I'm not aware of any evidence that the ancient Israelites enjoyed unusually good health and longevity, or that such health and longevity as they did enjoy was due to kashruth. However, if that were true, it would have been a good idea to keep kosher even if one didn't understand why.
Still, assuming that God healed them is the alternative that has the most new assumptions built into it. If we consider some sort of psychic ability like I mentioned, we need to assume an unknown mechanism by which the healing could happen, but the originators of that healing, i.e. the people themselves, obviously exist. If we consider that a God healed the people, not only do we have to assume an unknown mechanism like we would for pyschic abilities, but we also have to assume the existence of God as well. I know that Occam's Razor isn't a guarantee of correctness, but we have to look at the situation objectively: one alternative requires a 5-gallon bucketfull of baseless assumptions; the other requires a god-plus-5-gallons-sized bucket.The scenario Kat proposes is considerably more remarkable. Given a choice between believing that there is a God of some sort and believing that theists are able to achieve a 100% success rate at healing cancer in others through some natural process involving positive thinking and spoken words, the proposition that there is a god of some sort seems more likely to me. That doesn't mean that even under those circumstances you should look for me in the choir.
Good point. If you didn't understand the process, it would be impossible to know which of the behaviors were beneficial.Looking at correlation without an understanding of causation, it would have been a good idea to adhere to every Jewish practice, not just keeping kosher: assuming that they were healthier (which I admit is just a presumption), the correlation would be just as strong between health and circumcision, or health and celebrating Jewish holidays, as it would be between health and dietary customs.
You're right, and I concede the point. I guess that having been a theist for so long, I haven't yet completely overcome a mental bias in favor of theism. That's a good thing to be aware of.Still, assuming that God healed them is the alternative that has the most new assumptions built into it. If we consider some sort of psychic ability like I mentioned, we need to assume an unknown mechanism by which the healing could happen, but the originators of that healing, i.e. the people themselves, obviously exist. If we consider that a God healed the people, not only do we have to assume an unknown mechanism like we would for pyschic abilities, but we also have to assume the existence of God as well. I know that Occam's Razor isn't a guarantee of correctness, but we have to look at the situation objectively: one alternative requires a 5-gallon bucketfull of baseless assumptions; the other requires a god-plus-5-gallons-sized bucket.
What I find to be a remarkable coincidence is the way that God answers prayers at the exact same rate as if he didn't exist.
I used to have faith; I had faith for quite a long time. But I still don't have any remarkable tales of miracles to tell. It's true that I could always find my keys if I asked St. Phanourios to help me find them, but that's the sort of miracle that not only doesn't impress atheists, it doesn't even impress believers who aren't disposed to believe in praying to saints.Really. Well, my experience is entirely different from yours, but as I said before, faith precedes the miracle, not the other way around.
But actual controlled studies indicate that I'm right. Here's an example: Don't you think thousands of committed, faithful Christians prayed for Hurricane Katrina to turn away from New Orleans? Did it do any good? Did it have any effect? Try this: For the next week, pray for warm, dry weather. Then compare it to the weather for the last ten years during the same period. Do Christians win the lottery at a higher rate than atheists? Don't you think they pray to do so? It doesn't matter what order you do them in; prayer has no measurable effect, except on the person praying.Really. Well, my experience is entirely different from yours, but as I said before, faith precedes the miracle, not the other way around.
Thanks for your input, autodidact. I disagree, but that should come as no great surprise.But actual controlled studies indicate that I'm right. Here's an example: Don't you think thousands of committed, faithful Christians prayed for Hurricane Katrina to turn away from New Orleans? Did it do any good? Did it have any effect? Try this: For the next week, pray for warm, dry weather. Then compare it to the weather for the last ten years during the same period. Do Christians win the lottery at a higher rate than atheists? Don't you think they pray to do so? It doesn't matter what order you do them in; prayer has no measurable effect, except on the person praying.
But if further testing showed, absolutely, positively, that prayer worked....then you would have to reconsider the possibility of god, no?Katzpur,
To answer your initial post;
If the experiment with the sick patients ended up as you said, I would definately be intrigued. I wouldn't drop everything and believe in god on the spot, but I would certainly want to pursue further testing.
I think part of my problem with intercessionary prayer, at least in the Christian context, is the inherent self-contradiction I see in it: if you truly believed that God had a perfect plan and would see to your every need (i.e. that God is the Provider God described in Matthew 6:25-31), then why would you ask Him to change that plan?I've actually seen the results of a couple of these studies and, as interesting as they are, I don't see them as particularly pertinent to my OP. I intentionally didn't put this thread in the debates forum, because I'm not particularly interested in trying to convince anybody that prayer works.
I think if 500,000 people spontaneously had their cancer removed by prayer, I'd reconsider my opinions about God. However, I wouldn't automatically be convinced that God must have been the cause of it.My whole purpose in posing the question I did in the OP was to see to what degree the results I described would influence atheists to reconsider. I'm just happy to see that that the subject has generated as much discussion as it has. Most of my threads fall flat.
Thanks for your input, autodidact. I disagree, but that should come as no great surprise.
I'm not sure why this is a problem. The premise that we're evaluating is whether an intelligent God exists, who presumably has the power to exercise His own judgement on requests being made of Him. When intercessionary prayer doesn't work, there are multiple explanations available; without other evidence, there's no reason to pick "God doesn't exist" over "God doesn't want to do that".This is what I call "Heads I win/Tails you lose" argumentation. If intercessory prayer works, it is evidence for the existence of the God prayed to. If it doesn't, it is not evidence against. Inconsistent standards.
Facts? :biglaugh:Listen, how about we make a deal, you and I? I won't try to tell you how the God I believe in works, and you don't try to tell me about how the God you don't believe in doesn't work. The less you and I try to communicate, the better off we'll both be.You disagree with the facts that I stated?
Good point. I've thought a lot about that over the years. I believe that a big part of His plan is that we learn to trust Him and have faith in Him. I further believe that there are times when He chooses to respond to a prayer offered in faith and that there are sometimes several different directions His plan could take and still be perfect.I think part of my problem with intercessionary prayer, at least in the Christian context, is the inherent self-contradiction I see in it: if you truly believed that God had a perfect plan and would see to your every need (i.e. that God is the Provider God described in Matthew 6:25-31), then why would you ask Him to change that plan?
Well, that's an interesting concept, too. Frubals for your good points!Actually, I should qualify my last statement. In the Mormon context, I can potentially see a didactic point: since, as I understand it (and correct me if I'm wrong), you teach that people can become elevated to the status of gods, it would be understandable for God to want to train people for that eventuality. In that case, it'd be like having a child say "please pass the ____" at the dinner table: the parents would never let the child starve; the objective of having the child do this is good manners, which is a part of preparing the child for life as an adult.
Facts? :biglaugh:Listen, how about we make a deal, you and I? I won't try to tell you how the God I believe in works, and you don't try to tell me about how the God you don't believe in doesn't work. The less you and I try to communicate, the better off we'll both be.
Don't you think thousands of committed, faithful Christians prayed for Hurricane Katrina to turn away from New Orleans? Did it do any good? Did it have any effect? Try this: For the next week, pray for warm, dry weather. Then compare it to the weather for the last ten years during the same period. Do Christians win the lottery at a higher rate than atheists? Don't you think they pray to do so? It doesn't matter what order you do them in; prayer has no measurable effect, except on the person praying.
Right. And if you count up those times, they just happen by coincidence to be the exact same number of times as if He didn't exist.Good point. I've thought a lot about that over the years. I believe that a big part of His plan is that we learn to trust Him and have faith in Him. I further believe that there are times when He chooses to respond to a prayer offered in faith and that there are sometimes several different directions His plan could take and still be perfect.
I don't put people on ignore. Even the most obnoxious, hateful ones.I believe the board has an "ignore" button if you don't want to talk with me.
Educate you? Give me a break. There are some miracles even I don't believe are likely to happen. The only factual issue here is that intercessory prayer has a real, detectable effect on me. That's all the evidence I need, and you are not in a position to tell me I'm wrong about that. Now if you wouldn't mind, let's get back to the topic of the OP -- which, incidentally, was not why God didn't stop Katrina dead in its tracks. If you want to debate the existence of God, do it on a debate forum and don't look for me to participate.What do you disagree with? That Christians did NOT pray for Katrina to turn? That it worked? That if you prayed for warm, dry weather it would work? That Christians do win the lottery? That they don't pray to do so? That intercessory prayer has a real, detectable effect on the external world? These are factual issues. Which of them is incorrect? Educate me.