Does Prayer Work? Is There a God?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
342

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
forlife wrote:
Does it not make you a little suspicious that your belief system is, by definition, unconfirmable? You’ve set up the perfect crime for yourself.

Think about it.

You can claim whatever you want about your god, and how your life is blessed in material ways due to your faith and prayers.

However, the moment anyone actually attempts to assess the truthfulness of those claims, you respond that your god refuses to be measured in such a way.

Thus, it is impossible to actually confirm any of your claims.

Given that your claims literally cannot be substantiated, what differentiates them from any fairy tale that someone might concoct?

I have one question, how is our faith uncomfirmable? Which is not a word by the way, but I get your gist. You can very well see if you look at the earth that there has to be some creator.[/quote]

No, the earth is amazing however everything on it can be explained without the need of recourse to a supreme being. It is lazy to use a supreme being to fill in the gaps in your personal understanding or education.

343

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
forlife wrote:
Does it not make you a little suspicious that your belief system is, by definition, unconfirmable? You’ve set up the perfect crime for yourself.

Think about it.

You can claim whatever you want about your god, and how your life is blessed in material ways due to your faith and prayers.

However, the moment anyone actually attempts to assess the truthfulness of those claims, you respond that your god refuses to be measured in such a way.

Thus, it is impossible to actually confirm any of your claims.

Given that your claims literally cannot be substantiated, what differentiates them from any fairy tale that someone might concoct?

I have one question, how is our faith uncomfirmable? Which is not a word by the way, but I get your gist. You can very well see if you look at the earth that there has to be some creator.

No, the earth is amazing however everything on it can be explained without the need of recourse to a supreme being. It is lazy to use a supreme being to fill in the gaps in your personal understanding or education.[/quote]

While I generally tend to agree with this (I believe in evolution and prescribe to no religion), I have to say that not everything can be satisfactorily (for me) explained using only science. If you look at the universe from a scientific perspective, it is really just one huge chain of cause-and-effect phenomena. However, go back to the beginning and try to explain the FIRST event in the history of the universe–you cannot do it without violating the principle that no thing can be in motion without being set in motion. I’m not saying that I necessarily believe in an omnipotent, bearded old man who said some words and thereby created the universe. What I AM saying is that I find it hard to explain the existence of matter without appealing to some being that is above the laws of science (namely the principle that no thing can move without being moved). The one way out of this is to say that matter itself is this thing, in which case I guess matter is your God.

344

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

I have one question, how is our faith uncomfirmable? Which is not a word by the way, but I get your gist. You can very well see if you look at the earth that there has to be some creator.[/quote]

Logic fail happening here. You cannot very well see there has to be some creator just from looking at the earth.

345

[quote]smh23 wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
forlife wrote:
Does it not make you a little suspicious that your belief system is, by definition, unconfirmable? You’ve set up the perfect crime for yourself.

Think about it.

You can claim whatever you want about your god, and how your life is blessed in material ways due to your faith and prayers.

However, the moment anyone actually attempts to assess the truthfulness of those claims, you respond that your god refuses to be measured in such a way.

Thus, it is impossible to actually confirm any of your claims.

Given that your claims literally cannot be substantiated, what differentiates them from any fairy tale that someone might concoct?

I have one question, how is our faith uncomfirmable? Which is not a word by the way, but I get your gist. You can very well see if you look at the earth that there has to be some creator.

No, the earth is amazing however everything on it can be explained without the need of recourse to a supreme being. It is lazy to use a supreme being to fill in the gaps in your personal understanding or education.

While I generally tend to agree with this (I believe in evolution and prescribe to no religion), I have to say that not everything can be satisfactorily (for me) explained using only science. If you look at the universe from a scientific perspective, it is really just one huge chain of cause-and-effect phenomena. However, go back to the beginning and try to explain the FIRST event in the history of the universe–you cannot do it without violating the principle that no thing can be in motion without being set in motion. I’m not saying that I necessarily believe in an omnipotent, bearded old man who said some words and thereby created the universe. What I AM saying is that I find it hard to explain the existence of matter without appealing to some being that is above the laws of science (namely the principle that no thing can move without being moved). The one way out of this is to say that matter itself is this thing, in which case I guess matter is your God.[/quote]

Have you considered an infinite regress? I personally am much more comfortable (not that my comfort has anything to do with what is actually true) with the idea of events extending infinitely forward and/or backwards through time, than I am with the idea of an uncaused cause.

346

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
No, you cannot be blessed by “chance” now can you. You cannot quantify prayer…

Dude, you’re seriously not getting it.

We’re not talking about being blessed by “chance”. Chance, in statistical jargon, refers to outcomes due to variables other than what is being specifically addressed in the study. It’s also referred to as “statistical noise” (see the reference I provided earlier).

The point is that a certain number of positive outcomes are expected to occur due to completely natural causes (for example, spontanteous remission of cancer).

In order to demonstrate a supernatural effect, you have to show that more positive outcomes occur than could be explained solely by the above.

Claims that people experience supernatural “blessings” in the material world can be measured, and compared to the normal, mundane incidence of such outcomes. Unfortunately, in studies where this has been investigated, there is zero evidence for any difference. Regardless of claims of supernatural intervention, the number of positive outcomes remains what would be expected through purely natural causes.

I’ll have to say, impressive argument. To bad it is slightly unaligned with Scripture. And that the other arguments against a Creator are completely illogical.

With your argument you say that, by man-made standards, God does not exist. That is not really how “experiments” are supposed to work. Plus this psychoanalysis stuff is considered modernism, and most of it has no roots. It has been in use for one generation, it is a fad, another attempt (a poor one) at proving God, or prayer does not exist. Just like Marxism, and all the schisms that are being called proof, that are no more than modernistic fads.[/quote]

So b/c it’s “unaligned” with scripture, it’s untrue? I hate to tell you, the argument was valid. Scripture… not so much.

Are you just messing with us with the rest of your post? It’s a mix of non-facts and ad hominem attacks against philosophies no one on this board has been talking about.

347

[quote]mbm693 wrote:
smh23 wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
forlife wrote:
Does it not make you a little suspicious that your belief system is, by definition, unconfirmable? You’ve set up the perfect crime for yourself.

Think about it.

You can claim whatever you want about your god, and how your life is blessed in material ways due to your faith and prayers.

However, the moment anyone actually attempts to assess the truthfulness of those claims, you respond that your god refuses to be measured in such a way.

Thus, it is impossible to actually confirm any of your claims.

Given that your claims literally cannot be substantiated, what differentiates them from any fairy tale that someone might concoct?

I have one question, how is our faith uncomfirmable? Which is not a word by the way, but I get your gist. You can very well see if you look at the earth that there has to be some creator.

No, the earth is amazing however everything on it can be explained without the need of recourse to a supreme being. It is lazy to use a supreme being to fill in the gaps in your personal understanding or education.

While I generally tend to agree with this (I believe in evolution and prescribe to no religion), I have to say that not everything can be satisfactorily (for me) explained using only science. If you look at the universe from a scientific perspective, it is really just one huge chain of cause-and-effect phenomena. However, go back to the beginning and try to explain the FIRST event in the history of the universe–you cannot do it without violating the principle that no thing can be in motion without being set in motion. I’m not saying that I necessarily believe in an omnipotent, bearded old man who said some words and thereby created the universe. What I AM saying is that I find it hard to explain the existence of matter without appealing to some being that is above the laws of science (namely the principle that no thing can move without being moved). The one way out of this is to say that matter itself is this thing, in which case I guess matter is your God.

Have you considered an infinite regress? I personally am much more comfortable (not that my comfort has anything to do with what is actually true) with the idea of events extending infinitely forward and/or backwards through time, than I am with the idea of an uncaused cause. [/quote]

I have considered it, though it is impossible for me or any human being to truly fathom. In the end, either there was a “first cause” or there was not (i.e. there is a chain of causes and effects that extends infinitely into the past). Both options are amazing and probably beyond our comprehension.

348

[quote]mbm693 wrote:
smh23 wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Brother Chris wrote:
forlife wrote:
Does it not make you a little suspicious that your belief system is, by definition, unconfirmable? You’ve set up the perfect crime for yourself.

Think about it.

You can claim whatever you want about your god, and how your life is blessed in material ways due to your faith and prayers.

However, the moment anyone actually attempts to assess the truthfulness of those claims, you respond that your god refuses to be measured in such a way.

Thus, it is impossible to actually confirm any of your claims.

Given that your claims literally cannot be substantiated, what differentiates them from any fairy tale that someone might concoct?

I have one question, how is our faith uncomfirmable? Which is not a word by the way, but I get your gist. You can very well see if you look at the earth that there has to be some creator.

No, the earth is amazing however everything on it can be explained without the need of recourse to a supreme being. It is lazy to use a supreme being to fill in the gaps in your personal understanding or education.

While I generally tend to agree with this (I believe in evolution and prescribe to no religion), I have to say that not everything can be satisfactorily (for me) explained using only science. If you look at the universe from a scientific perspective, it is really just one huge chain of cause-and-effect phenomena. However, go back to the beginning and try to explain the FIRST event in the history of the universe–you cannot do it without violating the principle that no thing can be in motion without being set in motion. I’m not saying that I necessarily believe in an omnipotent, bearded old man who said some words and thereby created the universe. What I AM saying is that I find it hard to explain the existence of matter without appealing to some being that is above the laws of science (namely the principle that no thing can move without being moved). The one way out of this is to say that matter itself is this thing, in which case I guess matter is your God.

Have you considered an infinite regress? I personally am much more comfortable (not that my comfort has anything to do with what is actually true) with the idea of events extending infinitely forward and/or backwards through time, than I am with the idea of an uncaused cause. [/quote]

An infinite regress is a logical fallacy. It begs the question and is circular.

349

[quote]pat wrote:
No, neither is yours. You cannot prove that the things you believe are correct. You cannot prove that the way you think the universe/ world works is even remotely correct. [/quote]

The difference between you and me is that I choose not to believe in ideas for which there is zero empirical evidence. On the other hand, lacking any evidence, you have chosen not only to believe in certain ideas, but to invest a good deal of your life following those ideas as if they are real.

If you don’t know something is true, why not admit it and withhold judgment, instead of choosing to believe in it anyway? How does believing in something for which there is zero evidence make any sense whatsoever?

350

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
I have one question, how is our faith uncomfirmable? Which is not a word by the way, but I get your gist. You can very well see if you look at the earth that there has to be some creator.[/quote]

I was referring to claims about divine intervention, which supposedly affect the material world.

On the reason for the earth’s existence, there are many possible hypotheses, none of which requires a supernatural explanation.

351

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
A Vacuum Cleaner can not say Yes, or create man. Man created the Vacuum Cleaner, so how can it be God, that I speak of.[/quote]

At least you can see, touch, and confirm the existence of the Vacuum Cleaner. And I guarantee every prayer is answered by the Vacuum Cleaner, either yes or no. If you don’t hear the answer, you aren’t listening with enough faith. If you don’t get the answer you want, who are you to argue with the will of the Vacuum Cleaner?

352

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
With your argument you say that, by man-made standards, God does not exist.[/quote]

If by “man-made standards”, you mean “claims that can actually be confirmed in the real world”, then I suppose you are right.

Anybody can concoct a voice in his head, or claim that X must have been due to divine intervention. Billions have done so, invoking a whole panthenon of gods over the millenia. But none of that means any of these gods actually exist outside of these people’s imaginations.

353

[quote]smh23 wrote:
While I generally tend to agree with this (I believe in evolution and prescribe to no religion), I have to say that not everything can be satisfactorily (for me) explained using only science. If you look at the universe from a scientific perspective, it is really just one huge chain of cause-and-effect phenomena. However, go back to the beginning and try to explain the FIRST event in the history of the universe–you cannot do it without violating the principle that no thing can be in motion without being set in motion. I’m not saying that I necessarily believe in an omnipotent, bearded old man who said some words and thereby created the universe. What I AM saying is that I find it hard to explain the existence of matter without appealing to some being that is above the laws of science (namely the principle that no thing can move without being moved). The one way out of this is to say that matter itself is this thing, in which case I guess matter is your God.[/quote]

What if the universe has always existed? The first law of thermodynamics in fact confirms that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed. We’ve discussed it extensively in other threads, just wanted to point out that you are assuming a beginning when it is unnecessary to do so.

354

[quote]pat wrote:
An infinite regress is a logical fallacy. It begs the question and is circular.
[/quote]

How is it a logical fallacy? You believe in an infinite regress as well, the difference is that you believe your god has always existed, instead of believing that the universe has always existed.

355

[quote]forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
An infinite regress is a logical fallacy. It begs the question and is circular.

How is it a logical fallacy? You believe in an infinite regress as well, the difference is that you believe your god has always existed, instead of believing that the universe has always existed.[/quote]

An infinite regression results when one asserts that a given event caused another, and yet that first event requires another, identical event, to cause it. An infinite regression follows the form:

P1 causes Q1
Q2 causes P1
P3 causes Q2
Q4 causes P3
And so on, forever

It’s circular reasoning, it begs the question eternally, it is a logical fallacy. The infinite regress fallacy is well known. There is nothing obscure about it.

356

It is only a logical fallacy if you ignore the possibility of eternity. And you didn’t answer my question. How is your god not subject to the same “logical fallacy”, since your god similarly “requires another, identical event, to cause it”?

357

[quote]forlife wrote:
smh23 wrote:
While I generally tend to agree with this (I believe in evolution and prescribe to no religion), I have to say that not everything can be satisfactorily (for me) explained using only science. If you look at the universe from a scientific perspective, it is really just one huge chain of cause-and-effect phenomena. However, go back to the beginning and try to explain the FIRST event in the history of the universe–you cannot do it without violating the principle that no thing can be in motion without being set in motion. I’m not saying that I necessarily believe in an omnipotent, bearded old man who said some words and thereby created the universe. What I AM saying is that I find it hard to explain the existence of matter without appealing to some being that is above the laws of science (namely the principle that no thing can move without being moved). The one way out of this is to say that matter itself is this thing, in which case I guess matter is your God.

What if the universe has always existed? The first law of thermodynamics in fact confirms that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed. We’ve discussed it extensively in other threads, just wanted to point out that you are assuming a beginning when it is unnecessary to do so.
[/quote]

And the second law of thermodynamics confirms that, given enough time, every system will reach thermodynamic equilibrium. If the universe had existed forever, we would not be having this conversation right now because, by definition, all of it would have come to thermal, mechanical, and chemical equilibrium.

358

Not necessarily contradictory, if you posit an infinite series of universal expansions/contractions OR posit an infinite series of universes OR posit that the second law only describes the current state and is not an eternal principle.

359

Pat,

I wouldn’t waste too much time with those two, they each have a lifestyle agenda and God deosn’t exactly fit in. I wonder if they’d believe if the Bible encouraged homosexuality, and a host of other “fun” things that they like?

I bet we’d not be having this debate huh? Some people are easy to figure out, they want what they want and anything that tells them the can’t just can’t be real.

Anyone who has studied Christianity knows that the Bible is one of the most well researched ancient documents of all time. More accurate than all the works of Socrates, Plato and many other well respected ancient writers. One only has to use google, it’s not a hidden secret.

The Bible is true and It’s the word of God.

I’ve had many prayers answered in my life and I know many others who have as well. Some very amazing things have happened just from prayer alone. We don’t need a scientist to stand by measuring the perceived accuracy to know that prayers are indeed answered.

However, it is all about faith and you cannot argue science to confirm faith.

One last thing, many if not most of the “atheists” on this site are between the ages of about 21 and 30’s. When they grow up and stop playing “know it all” they just might come around. For those who don’t maybe a life changing event or two will bring them around, maybe not.

As my grandfather used to say " I never saw an atheist in a foxhole."

Take care Pat and God Bless!

360

Nice try, but I have quite a few gay friends that believe in god. Call me crazy, but I choose not to believe in things for which there is no evidence.

361

[quote]forlife wrote:
Nice try, but I have quite a few gay friends that believe in god. Call me crazy, but I choose not to believe in things for which there is no evidence.[/quote]

AMEN!