If you pray

[Zzyzx]

.
1. If you pray for rain and rain begins, has God answered your prayer?

2. If you pray for a traffic light to turn green and it does, has God answered your prayer?

3. If you pray for a team to win a game or an army to win a battle and that happens, has God answered your prayer?

4. If you pray for someone to recover from an illness or accident and they do recover, has God answered your prayer?

Justify your answers

[Zzyzx]

.

Are the proposed 'gods' equally verifiable? Can any actually be shown to produce what they supposedly promise?

You and all of the others, who seem that have no problem saying that I said things that I did not,

Have you actually been misquoted? Citation? URL?

are still focused on the sugar daddy analogy.

The 'sugar daddy analogy' appears to be very popular in Christendom " people asking for favors.

I am saying that prayer is not about asking for goodies. It is about conversing. I am also not saying that I know that that answers I am getting are without a doubt the cause of certain things, though some psychologists would beg to differ on that. Nor, am I saying that prayer is an isolated proof of the existence and nature of spiritual beings. What I am saying is that it is a conversation and it is not isolated to theists. There are atheistic mystics who also pray, though not to a deity.

I have no objection to people thinking they have conversations with various entities.

Now, you may say, based on your belief system, that such prayers are not answered,

I have NOT said that prayers are not answered. What I HAVE said is that the claimed answering of prayers has not been shown to be anything more than imagination or wishful thinking.

because there is no scientifically replicable verification.

Exactly what sort of verification of any kind, scientific or not can be offered to show that prayers are answered?

Is there anything other than 'I / he / they say so " take our word for it'?

Note that something repeated is no assurance it is true.

However, I contend that is not the purpose of prayer.

There appears to be strong disagreement within Christendom regarding the 'purpose' of prayer. Many seem to favor the notion that its purpose is to appeal for favors (such as praying for sick people to get well).

To you in may be just appear to be self talk, but to others it does not appear that way.

Yes, there is disagreement. You are entitled to an opinion " as is everyone else.

[Zzyzx]

.

If God is true

I honestly don't know what this statement means. Can you explain it for me, please?

Ya, if Christianity is true, i.e Jesus actually came as the fulfilment of the scripture, he died for the forgiveness of our sin, and was resurrected. If the scripture is true.

The key term is IF

That has not been established " so it is nothing more than conjecture and/or opinion.

Are the proposed 'gods' equally verifiable? Can any actually be shown to produce what they supposedly promise?

Ya if the scripture is true.

Again, the key term is IF

which I may say so, I have never encouraged truth like the truth of Christianity.

You are entitled to an opinion.

I mean every other spiritual belief I encountered was superficial, skin deep,there was no results.

Exactly the same can be said for Christianity. Have you encountered many or most of the world's 4000 religions?

Christianity on the otherhand does answer prayers.

Does it? Kindly show readers verifiable evidence that Christianity answers prayers.

Christianity does exactly what it says it would. From a seed of faithhaving miraculous powers, born again, being called to repentace, receiving the holy spirit, the helper, being set free and called out of the world.

Christianity may say / claim all of those things. So what?

This is miraculous stuff,

Or it is imaginary stuff or it is wishful thinking or it is indoctrination or it is opinion.

and it is the answer to Christianity and it is an answer to prayers.Christianity succeeds where the world fails. Wherechacing worldly things leads you nowhere, even a spiritual death.Christianity answers the prayers to the things it tells us it would do.I had no chance to living a fulfilled life,I had no chance to repenting to my sins, I had no chance to accomplish the achievementsihave. And God had a direct role, because he did exactly what he said he would.

This is pure preaching " perhaps suitable for revival meetings but meaningless and inappropriate in debate (which is what we do here " at least some of us).

[MadeNew]

.

If God is true

I honestly don't know what this statement means. Can you explain it for me, please?

Ya, if Christianity is true, i.e Jesus actually came as the fulfilment of the scripture, he died for the forgiveness of our sin, and was resurrected. If the scripture is true.

The key term is IF

That has not been established " so it is nothing more than conjecture and/or opinion.

Are the proposed 'gods' equally verifiable? Can any actually be shown to produce what they supposedly promise?

Ya if the scripture is true.

Again, the key term is IF

which I may say so, I have never encouraged truth like the truth of Christianity.

You are entitled to an opinion.

I mean every other spiritual belief I encountered was superficial, skin deep,there was no results.

Exactly the same can be said for Christianity. Have you encountered many or most of the world's 4000 religions?

Christianity on the otherhand does answer prayers.

Does it? Kindly show readers verifiable evidence that Christianity answers prayers.

Christianity does exactly what it says it would. From a seed of faithhaving miraculous powers, born again, being called to repentace, receiving the holy spirit, the helper, being set free and called out of the world.

Christianity may say / claim all of those things. So what?

This is miraculous stuff,

Or it is imaginary stuff or it is wishful thinking or it is indoctrination or it is opinion.

and it is the answer to Christianity and it is an answer to prayers.Christianity succeeds where the world fails. Wherechacing worldly things leads you nowhere, even a spiritual death.Christianity answers the prayers to the things it tells us it would do.I had no chance to living a fulfilled life,I had no chance to repenting to my sins, I had no chance to accomplish the achievementsihave. And God had a direct role, because he did exactly what he said he would.

This is pure preaching " perhaps suitable for revival meetings but meaningless and inappropriate in debate (which is what we do here " at least some of us).

Dude. Practically every response you type is crying "preacher", can't have a positive argument for Christianity without you crying preacher. Its ridiculous. Or crying about some kind of logistics of debate... Like suposably not answering the op.

[MadeNew]

This man asks for justification of why prayers are answered and cries preacher for the justification. This is ridiculous. This kind of invalidating debate shouldn't be allowd but only left to moderators for moderator commentary.

[MadeNew]

You make this site, with your passive aggressive trolling, a frustration to exchange in any kind of debate. This site sucks because of this crap, so you can take all the hours you sit at your computer waisting your time trolling any kind of reasonable discussion about God, and you can shove it up your ass. Good riddens.

[Zzyzx]

.

Moderator Action

MadeNew has been banned for offensive comments and language



______________

Moderator actions indicate that a thread/post has been locked, moved, merged, or split.

[bluethread]

.

Are the proposed 'gods' equally verifiable? Can any actually be shown to produce what they supposedly promise?

You and all of the others, who seem that have no problem saying that I said things that I did not,

Have you actually been misquoted? Citation? URL?

I am referring primarily to post #10. I'm not saying that you are misquoting me, but that at least that post attributes conclusions to me that I did not post.

are still focused on the sugar daddy analogy.

The 'sugar daddy analogy' appears to be very popular in Christendom " people asking for favors.

Yes, but that is not my view.

I am saying that prayer is not about asking for goodies. It is about conversing. I am also not saying that I know that that answers I am getting are without a doubt the cause of certain things, though some psychologists would beg to differ on that. Nor, am I saying that prayer is an isolated proof of the existence and nature of spiritual beings. What I am saying is that it is a conversation and it is not isolated to theists. There are atheistic mystics who also pray, though not to a deity.

I have no objection to people thinking they have conversations with various entities.

Good then, at least in that regard, you have no problem with me.

Now, you may say, based on your belief system, that such prayers are not answered,

I have NOT said that prayers are not answered. What I HAVE said is that the claimed answering of prayers has not been shown to be anything more than imagination or wishful thinking.

Well, have you considered that it may be transformative, resulting in actions that lead in better outcomes?

because there is no scientifically replicable verification.

Exactly what sort of verification of any kind, scientific or not can be offered to show that prayers are answered?

Is there anything other than 'I / he / they say so " take our word for it'?

Note that something repeated is no assurance it is true.

"An interesting bit of science attached to this ethnocentric and geocentric evolution of prayer comes out of Duke University Medical Center, where a study found that, within a group of 150 cardiac patients who received alternative post-operative therapy treatment, the sub-group who also received intercessory prayer (they were prayed for) had the highest success rate within the entire cohort. The fascinating thing about the study is that it was double-blind - neither the researchers, nor those on the receiving end of the intercessory prayer knew that these patients were being prayed for -- suggesting an intervening variable.
A comparable double-blind study, conducted at San Francisco General Hospital's Coronary Care Unit, demonstrated similar results. Those patients "prayed for" showed a significantly diminished need for imminent critical care, maintenance medications and heroic measures, as well as witnessing fewer deaths - again, suggesting an intervening variable."


Michael J Formica MS, MA, EdM
Enlightened Living
The Science, Psychology, and Metaphysics of Prayer
Psychology Today July 28, 2010

However, I contend that is not the purpose of prayer.

There appears to be strong disagreement within Christendom regarding the 'purpose' of prayer. Many seem to favor the notion that its purpose is to appeal for favors (such as praying for sick people to get well).

They can provide support for that. Since this thread appears to question any purpose to prayer, I have presented my view.

To you in may be just appear to be self talk, but to others it does not appear that way.

Yes, there is disagreement. You are entitled to an opinion " as is everyone else.

I will thank you for noting that, and pray that others will do the same, rather than object to such statements as obvious.

[Zzyzx]

.
Before MadeNew optioned for martyrdom with an obnoxious parting shot, I had constructed a reply to an earlier post. Here it is verbatim as written:

Dude.

Kindly refrain from addressing fellow debaters with derogatory terms.

Practically every response you type is crying "preacher", can't have a positive argument for Christianity without you crying preacher.

That occurs in cases where members are unable or unwilling to distinguish between preaching and debating.

There are members capable of presenting positive arguments for Christianity without preaching.

Its ridiculous.

It IS ridiculous to preach in the C&A sub-forum or to fail to distinguish between preaching and debating.

Preaching may be appropriate in revival meetings " but not here.

Or crying about some kind of logistics of debate... Like suposably not answering the op.

Those who dislike Forum Rules and Guidelines are welcome to go elsewhere to sites that are more to their liking. This Forum will not adjust to your preferences.

Shall I apply for 'prophet' status?

[bluethread]

Shall I apply for 'prophet' status?

Well, if you do you had better not be wrong in the future, because if you are I will have to take you out and get you stoned. Just a second, I don't think that is quite how the Scriptures put it.

[Zzyzx]

.

I have no objection to people thinking they have conversations with various entities.

Good then, at least in that regard, you have no problem with me.

Right. I also have no objection to Rikuoamero referring to conversations with a milk jug. However, if someone claims that their conversations produce positive (or any) effect, I will likely ask for verifiable evidence.

Now, you may say, based on your belief system, that such prayers are not answered,

I have NOT said that prayers are not answered. What I HAVE said is that the claimed answering of prayers has not been shown to be anything more than imagination or wishful thinking.

Well, have you considered that it may be transformative, resulting in actions that lead in better outcomes?

Of course. All sorts of psychological, emotional, physical activities can 'lead in better outcomes'. Taking up running can have a transformative effect on a person's life " as can meditation, various religions, quitting drinking alcohol or taking drugs, psychological counseling, military service, attending school, etc, etc. So what?

What, if anything, is special about Christian prayers as a transformative agent? Can prayer be shown to be as effective as or more effective than psychological counseling in producing transformative effects?

"An interesting bit of science attached to this ethnocentric and geocentric evolution of prayer comes out of Duke University Medical Center, where a study found that, within a group of 150 cardiac patients who received alternative post-operative therapy treatment, the sub-group who also received intercessory prayer (they were prayed for) had the highest success rate within the entire cohort. The fascinating thing about the study is that it was double-blind - neither the researchers, nor those on the receiving end of the intercessory prayer knew that these patients were being prayed for -- suggesting an intervening variable.
A comparable double-blind study, conducted at San Francisco General Hospital's Coronary Care Unit, demonstrated similar results. Those patients "prayed for" showed a significantly diminished need for imminent critical care, maintenance medications and heroic measures, as well as witnessing fewer deaths - again, suggesting an intervening variable."

Michael J Formica MS, MA, EdM
Enlightened Living
The Science, Psychology, and Metaphysics of Prayer
Psychology Today July 28, 2010

Note that Michael J. Formica is a writer " not a researcher: he is a board certified counselor, integral life coach, teacher and self-development expert who writes and lectures extensively on spirituality

From Duke University Clinical Research Institute: https://today.duke.edu/2001/11/mm_prayerand.html

A study from the Duke Clinical Research Institute reports intriguing findings about the healing power of prayer. In this pilot study, called the MANTRA project, 150 heart patients were randomized into five groups. One group received standard, high-tech cardiac care, while each of the other groups also received one of four "noetic" therapies. Project co-director Suzanne Crater, a Duke nurse practitioner, identifies these therapies as: "...imagery, stress relaxation, touch therapy, and off-site intercessory prayer."

Duke cardiologist and project co-director Mitchell Krucoff says that patients receiving the "noetic" therapies had suggestively better outcomes and fewer complications than those who received standard care alone.

"In the prayer therapy group, there was a little more than a 50 percent overall reduction."

Krucoff notes that these early findings were interesting enough to merit a Phase Two study, which is now underway. He says that intercessory prayer has also shown promising results in preliminary studies with HIV patients and infertile couples.

"The human spirit obviously has at least a potential role both in how we get sick and how we recover in every organ system."

And

Meta-studies of the literature in the field have been performed showing evidence only for no effect or a potentially small effect. For instance, a 2006 meta analysis on 14 studies concluded that there is "no discernible effect" while a 2007 systemic review of intercessory prayer reported inconclusive results, noting that 7 of 17 studies had "small, but significant, effect sizes" but the review noted that the most methodologically rigorous studies failed to produce significant findings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studies_o ... ory_prayer

Thus, it is reasonable to observe that the proposed effects of prayer are far from being proved. There are studies that show different results -- positive, negative and neutral -- so a statement that prayer IS effective is tentative at best.

To you in may be just appear to be self talk, but to others it does not appear that way.

Yes, there is disagreement. You are entitled to an opinion " as is everyone else.

I will thank you for noting that, and pray that others will do the same, rather than object to such statements as obvious.

Opinions should be treated as such " the right of the individual " but of no consequence or evidentiary value in debate.