[quote]pat wrote:
My aren’t we an angry little atheistâ?¦[/quote]
Where do you get that from? He doesn’t strike me as angry at all. If I had to describe the perceived tone, it would be calm and very patient.
See? Now that comes off as a bit miffed. Counting off arguments, swearing…
You’ve yourself admitted that praying to a vacuum cleaner works just as well. Much easier to believe in vacuum cleaners too.
[quote]rohay wrote:
http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/
Food for thought…[/quote]
Interesting part on what the Bible says about prayer:
Seems fairly direct and testable. There’s no guidelines to only pray for others, or any indications that “testing” prayer would invalidate it. “Nothing shall be impossible unto you” offers a lot of leeway for what you can pray for. None of that mamby-pamby “only pray for good stuff happening to others…” crap.
Hell, in Matthew 21:21 Jeebus says that you can kill trees and move mountains around and throw them into the sea… How it that not testable?
Any believer here willing to move a mountain somewhere and settle this thread?
[quote]pat wrote:
My aren’t we an angry little atheistâ?¦[/quote]
How did I go from worshipping Katy Perry to being an angry little atheist, lol? And I’m more agnostic than atheist, I choose to withhold judgment unless/until there is actual proof that a particular idea is more than just a fairy tale. Makes sense, no?
Somebody did, you just chose to buy into it. The only difference between you and me is that I believe in one less fairy tale than you do. You recognize all the other “gods” as made up, but choose to believe in the one that you happen to be most familiar with, even though by your own admission there is zero evidence for it.
Being gay, I don’t really care if she is hot…she just needs good moves and good music to be worthy of my worship.
[quote]If one is praying, one should be assuming the existence of God in the affirmative, otherwise whatâ??s the point.
[/quote]
Exactly. But why assume the existence of something for which there is zero empirical evidence?
[quote]bantamamerica wrote:
pat wrote:
The variable, in this case being God, isn’t going to behaving like you want him to and you think he should, first. Second, he specifically said the he cannot be tested and you shouldn’t do it.
How convenient. Of course, anyone can write anything and declare “and if you try to test my claims, they will become purposefully elusive” – you wouldn’t buy into BS that made claims like that if you weren’t raised into it, or embedded in a social group that would spit you out if you disagreed with them, and you know it. So how can you put it forward as a respectable position?
And with respect to the JudeoChristianMuslimBahai god not giving in to temptation to prove itself, why are you sticking up for it? Shouldn’t you emulate that gods behavior, take your beatings and die in silence like the big man did?
(I don’t mean to imply ill will toward you with that last question. Just wondering, as it seems to follow if you believe Christians should try to be more like Christ.)
[/quote]
Whether or not it’s convenient or not is not pertinent. The problem is this experiment or any like it is trying to treat God as a static variable, which he is not. If A, then B doesnâ??t apply here. The normal scientific method doesnâ??t work. It’s junk science at best. You are trying to assess a variable that is not only fluid, but completely control of the situation. There is probably nothing less understood than God. This isnâ??t your average baking soda volcano. This isn’t action reaction. It’s like trying to measure how much your love affects your wife or girl friend. If you take an event and try to ascertain how much your love would alter the outcome of that event that involves wife/gf could you measure that? Of course you cannot.
I am not sure what you mean by the second part, I think you are comparing apples to oranges and I am not claiming any divinity for myself.
Now if you want to argue the whole existence of God thing, I will direct you to this short little thread where it was discussed to excruciating detail. Not feeling up to restating everything again, I would suggest perusing the last 10-15 pages or so for arguments and counter argumentsâ?¦ It was done to death, just recently.
[quote]pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
Prove to me that there’s a difference between praying to my Electrolux and praying to your God.
I can’t. But try it and see.
So you can’t prove any difference between praying to a canister with an air pump attached and your God, yet you defend prayer as effective.
See what I mean by confused?
[/quote]
How am I confused? Sure it works at least for me it does. I can’t speak for anybody else, but you’ll have to take my word for it. There is no deductive reasoning process that I can take you through that will prove that God intervened in my life in very direct ways. I am not worried about proving it to you either, it is some thing you can do yourself. You can pray. Do so if you wish to know, but don’t be an asshole about it, give it a sincere try. You may not notice right away, but somehow, someway, somewhere it will, I am certain, and no I cannot prove it but then you will know.
However, if you aren’t going to be sincere, don’t bother.
If you need some help, I can provide. It’ll take 10 seconds.
[quote]pookie wrote:
pat wrote:
My aren’t we an angry little atheistÃ?¢?Ã?¦
Where do you get that from? He doesn’t strike me as angry at all. If I had to describe the perceived tone, it would be calm and very patient.
One, I created no concept what so ever. Two, I don’t give a shit who you worship,
See? Now that comes off as a bit miffed. Counting off arguments, swearing…
If one is praying, one should be assuming the existence of God in the affirmative, otherwise what�¢??s the point.
You’ve yourself admitted that praying to a vacuum cleaner works just as well. Much easier to believe in vacuum cleaners too.[/quote]
If you cut off what I say then you change the meaning…It was a lame attempt at humor…He was suggesting he was going to worship a girl, I merely suggested she be a hot one. He sounded mad to me, the whole post was just random spouting…
When did I say praying to a vacuum clearer works? This some more creative reading comprehension?
[quote]forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
My aren’t we an angry little atheistÃ?¢?Ã?¦
How did I go from worshipping Katy Perry to being an angry little atheist, lol? And I’m more agnostic than atheist, I choose to withhold judgment unless/until there is actual proof that a particular idea is more than just a fairy tale. Makes sense, no?
One, I created no concept what so ever.
Somebody did, you just chose to buy into it. The only difference between you and me is that I believe in one less fairy tale than you do. You recognize all the other “gods” as made up, but choose to believe in the one that you happen to be most familiar with, even though by your own admission there is zero evidence for it.
Two, I don’t give a shit who you worship, but if you decide to worship a chick, she might as well be hot, like the one I saw dancing at the Luxor, a perfect 10.
Being gay, I don’t really care if she is hot…she just needs good moves and good music to be worthy of my worship.
If one is praying, one should be assuming the existence of God in the affirmative, otherwise what�¢??s the point.
Exactly. But why assume the existence of something for which there is zero empirical evidence?
[/quote]
Your circling back to the same things you were saying in the other thread. God isn’t a concept somebody made up. There is plenty of deductive reasoning, history and empirical evidence to back it up. I stick with deduction because it’s the only thing that is valid in forum like this. I can tell you something happened at a certain time and date, but it’s just my word or somebodies word.
You cannot deductively reason out something that is make-believe. Try it and see.
Empiricism is weak. In it’s best reliable reproduction it can show correlation and imply causation. Unless you can know every event in which a correlative event can happen it will never be more than that. Science is great but it is unreliable at best. Empiricism is not the end all, be all. It is damned useful but no so much to as to compartmentalize everything that ever is, was, and ever will be.
For instance, you say your gay, can you prove it empirically? Can you measure gayness?
A couple of weeks ago I finished reading, The Black swan" a book about the impact of the highly improbable. In it the author tells a story about a greek philospher, Diagoras, a nonbeliever in the gods. He was shown painted tablets showing portraits of some worshippers who prayed, then survived a subsequent shipwreck. The implication being that praying protects you from drowning. In response Diagoras asked, “Where were the pictures of those who prayed, then drowned?”
[quote]pat wrote:
He sounded mad to me, the whole post was just random spouting…[/quote]
That’s what I was asking… where did you get anger from that? Your reply sounded much angrier than any of his have been.
You said you couldn’t prove it wasn’t just as effective as praying to God. Hence it works just as well. If it didn’t you should be able to prove otherwise.
[quote]pat wrote:
It’s like trying to measure how much your love affects your wife or girl friend. If you take an event and try to ascertain how much your love would alter the outcome of that event that involves wife/gf could you measure that? Of course you cannot.
[/quote]
This study is specifically about the health of patients who were prayed for. Much research has been done on the relative health of married women (presumably in love) vs their single peers. Seems to me you can you measure how much love alters the outcome.
[quote]pat wrote:
How am I confused? Sure it works at least for me it does. I can’t speak for anybody else, but you’ll have to take my word for it.[/quote]
Well if we go by people’s word, then everything works and everything’s effective. Some people swear by homeopathy, acupuncture, faith healing, astrology, etc.
I’m very sorry, but I’m a skeptic. You can say “Well (some random bullshit claim) works for me!” and believe it, but that means nothing in regard to whether it actually works or not.
You’re just assigning random coincidences to God. That’s how prayer works… you pray for something, and then whenever something happens that can be construed as “a hit”, you immediately assign it to God. If nothing happens, then you claim that God is trying to tell you something. You can’t lose. You remember and amplify any “hits” and explain away the “misses”.
The same method works just as well with a vacuum cleaner.
What should I pray for? My life is great; the only thing I could wish for is for more people to have as good a life as I do. Family, health, good friends, money, a great job, etc. Whatever problem I’ve had in my life, I worked at getting them resolved by myself.
Can’t really be sincere in praying to a God I don’t believe is there. Could you sincerely pray to the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Help with what?
[quote]mbm693 wrote:
pat wrote:
It’s like trying to measure how much your love affects your wife or girl friend. If you take an event and try to ascertain how much your love would alter the outcome of that event that involves wife/gf could you measure that? Of course you cannot.
This study is specifically about the health of patients who were prayed for. Much research has been done on the relative health of married women (presumably in love) vs their single peers. Seems to me you can you measure how much love alters the outcome. [/quote]
More food for thought…
No Law of Science can be proven. We can only say: ‘To the best of our knowledge…’. Laws are based on empirical data and are truly only probabilities.
Yet we accept them and are fine with them.
The probability that an ordered world exists by chance is infinitly small. Something must have provided the order, with an extremely high level of probability.
Pr(God) = 1 - Pr(no God)
The probabilty on the left is infinitely close to 1.
(I know its the old argument from design, but what the hey)
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
No Law of Science can be proven. We can only say: ‘To the best of our knowledge…’. Laws are based on empirical data and are truly only probabilities.
Yet we accept them and are fine with them.
The probability that an ordered world exists by chance is infinitly small. Something must have provided the order, with an extremely high level of probability.
Pr(God) = 1 - Pr(no God)
The probabilty on the left is infinitely close to 1.
(I know its the old argument from design, but what the hey)[/quote]
To paraphrase Diagoras, what of all the worlds that began, but, because probability was against their survival, failed. This world exists precisely because it didn’t fail … yet.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
There’s a Karma effect. If you pray for the wellbeing of OTHERS, and strangers, and ask for god to help show you HIS will with regard to your own life, then this is a prayer.
That is exactly what happened in the study. Good Christians were praying for OTHERS, not for themselves. Yet the net effect of these prayers was zero, since their heart patients recovered at exactly the same rate as the heart patients that weren’t prayed over.[/quote]
I was telling the young lad that if he wants prayer to work, as per the original topic, he must pray for others.
Prayer does work, and it works to better your own life. You must be willing to embrace it, and do it correctly through the right types of prayer and action for it to work for him.
You want to debate if ones prayer heals another physically. This is NOT what I was addressing.
Heh. I guess this disproves all those prayer only Christian cardiac clinics. While the forehead slapping “you are healed!” types might be dissapointed, I’m not surprised. Whatever physical intercessions do take place, are probably going to be too few in number to even register in some study (or, studies). Like, once in a very, very, deep dark-blue moon. After all, I’m sure our Christian martyrs also prayed for deliverance from their deaths, if it was his will.
Prayer is for thanks-giving, worship, contrition, etc. Bascially, spiritual matters. Now we might put foward a worldy, request, yes. If it’s his will, let it be done. If not, so be it. Christ had to suffer, and Christians still have to put in their recovery time after a cardiac event.
Nah, to be honest, I didn’t realize I could succumb to illness and death until this thread. Next topic, please!
[quote]clip11 wrote:
Now the moment I get that job at McDonalds the first thing im going to hear is “Did you thank God?” and in going to be thinking WHAT THE FUCK!!! Is it a miracle that im flipping hamburgers at McDonalds??? I mean im told God is supposed to be the almighty ruler of the universe, yet the best miracle he can do for me is get me a minimum wage job at a fast food resturaunt! Oh hallelujah! I feel like speaking in tongues!
[/quote]
Take God out of this for a second…You could be making nothing, still looking for any kind of work. See the unemployment thread. Maybe you should be a bit thankful, if even in a secular, atheist approved, kind of way. It’s honest work, that you want to do, for the wage offered. Otherwise, you wouldn’t take it and some other guy, enthusiastic with getting any sized paycheck, could fill it.
[quote]hedo wrote:
I also think religion is the creation of man. I believe in one God who probably gets a good chuckle out of all the religions created by man to understand him. [/quote]
That’s pretty much what I’ve ended up believing as well.
[quote]pookie wrote:
rohay wrote:
http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/
Food for thought…
Interesting part on what the Bible says about prayer:
Seems fairly direct and testable. There’s no guidelines to only pray for others, or any indications that “testing” prayer would invalidate it. “Nothing shall be impossible unto you” offers a lot of leeway for what you can pray for. None of that mamby-pamby “only pray for good stuff happening to others…” crap.
Hell, in Matthew 21:21 Jeebus says that you can kill trees and move mountains around and throw them into the sea… How it that not testable?
Any believer here willing to move a mountain somewhere and settle this thread?
[/quote]
If a mountain was moved that sure would be a thread settler if I ever seen one!
[quote]Sloth wrote:
clip11 wrote:
Now the moment I get that job at McDonalds the first thing im going to hear is “Did you thank God?” and in going to be thinking WHAT THE FUCK!!! Is it a miracle that im flipping hamburgers at McDonalds??? I mean im told God is supposed to be the almighty ruler of the universe, yet the best miracle he can do for me is get me a minimum wage job at a fast food resturaunt! Oh hallelujah! I feel like speaking in tongues!
Take God out of this for a second…You could be making nothing, still looking for any kind of work. See the unemployment thread. Maybe you should be a bit thankful, if even in a secular, atheist approved, kind of way. It’s honest work, that you want to do, for the wage offered. Otherwise, you wouldn’t take it and some other guy, enthusiastic with getting any sized paycheck, could fill it.
[/quote]
I mean, we’re talking about God here…the same one who created the universe…or the same one that parted the red sea. I only pray for an 11 or 12 dollar a hour job, yet I have to settle for a minimum wage job. Now im not asking for Mt Everest to be thrown into the Atlantic, just a 12 dollar a hour job. How hard can that be to God? He should be able to do that as easy as I can take off my socks. And the bible does say all i have to do is have the faith of a mustard seed and if anyone has ever seen a mustard seed its the size of a grain of salt.
And this came from the mouth of Jesus who christians consider to be God in person.