Countless Claims to "Answered" Prayer(s)

[POI]

We have countless claims, from Christians, to God/Jesus answering prayers for healing to human affliction(s). And by 'answered' prayer, I mean God/Jesus states -- (yes, I will grant you this prayer request to remove the human affliction).

For Debate:

1. Does God "answer" any of these prayer requests? If not, why?
2. If so, why does God/Jesus perpetually skip the following afflictions (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebral palsy, dementia, diabetes mellites 1, amputation, muscular dystrophy, hunington's disease, epilepsy, parkinson's disease, paget's disease, motor neuron disease, and so on)?

[1213]

Can you point to any recent prophet, messiah, seer or mystic who claims to heal people or do any other kind of miracle being killed? If you can't, your argument collapses.

If no such a prophet today, it doesn't mean it would not happen.

Here, the reason why prayers aren't answered on a reliable basis relies on making normal and everyday happenstance look like God's work.

By my experience prayers are answered reliably exactly as told in the Bible.

[TRANSPONDER]

Can you point to any recent prophet, messiah, seer or mystic who claims to heal people or do any other kind of miracle being killed? If you can't, your argument collapses.

If no such a prophet today, it doesn't mean it would not happen.

Here, the reason why prayers aren't answered on a reliable basis relies on making normal and everyday happenstance look like God's work.

By my experience prayers are answered reliably exactly as told in the Bible.

Just because a species of fiery dragons did not once terrorise the land does not mean it will not happen, but nobody lives in belief that it will surely happen. You may say 'nobody predicts fiery dragons' but that makes it worse - if people had predicted fiery dragons because of some ancient book and religion and it never happened, we'd be laughing at them. But that is the situation with Biblical prophecy.

"Fool me once". When I was a kid, the JW end of world failed. When I was a teen,the BCM ambassador (world tomorrow) end of world failed. Since then every darn prophecy has failed, except the ones in the Simpsons, it seems. Shame on them for continuing to try to fool me and us and shame on those who excuse, apologise for and aid and abet them,. I have a particular dislike for doom - mongers.

As for prayer, we have discussed this, as I recall and it was shown clearly that prayer is NOT answered as promised in the Bible, but you tried to confute (is that a word?) how prayer actually gets answered (sometimes - it has happened to me, even when I wasn't praying, which was every day, no pray) with the Gospel guarantee - what you ask in Faith will be granted. We discussed how it must work - prayers could not be answered willy - nilly but appropriately. That is not what the Bible promises and never could be, and I recall you took this view yourself.

That is 'What the Bible says is not actually what it means'. Thus Prayer is NOT answered as promised in the Bible and never could be.

[POI]

Christians, I'm continuing to bump this thread. Do you guys have any intelligent answers here?

Why does God/Jesus perpetually skip/ignore petitionary and/or intercessory prayer requests for the following afflictions --- (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebral palsy, dementia, diabetes mellites 1, amputation, muscular dystrophy, hunington's disease, epilepsy, parkinson's disease, paget's disease, and motor neuron disease)?

[Clownboat]

Christians, I'm continuing to bump this thread. Do you guys have any intelligent answers here?

Why does God/Jesus perpetually skip/ignore petitionary and/or intercessory prayer requests for the following afflictions --- (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebral palsy, dementia, diabetes mellites 1, amputation, muscular dystrophy, hunington's disease, epilepsy, parkinson's disease, paget's disease, and motor neuron disease)?

I'm no longer a Christian, but the answer to this question is painfully obvious and is why most Christians will avoid addressing it.

What's the difference between a god that doesn't heal the above and one that doesn't exist at all?

[bluegreenearth]

I'm neither an experienced apologist nor a Christian (anymore) but was recently made aware of a universal apologetic solvent that claims all of us have countless guesses as to what an infinite god's ultimate purpose might be. When this universal solvent is applied to the second question of the original post, the apologetic asserts that we can only guess as to what a god's ultimate purpose might be for granting some prayer requests and not others. Although it is not explicitly stated in the apologetic , I think we are just supposed to be satisfied with that unfalsifiable explanation and retreat to an intellectually dishonest FAITH in the existence of the god.

[POI]

I'm neither an experienced apologist nor a Christian (anymore) but was recently made aware of a universal apologetic solvent that claims all of us have countless guesses as to what an infinite god's ultimate purpose might be. When this universal solvent is applied to the second question of the original post, the apologetic asserts that we can only guess as to what a god's ultimate purpose might be for granting some prayer requests and not others. Although it is not explicitly stated in the apologetic , I think we are just supposed to be satisfied with that explanation and retreat to an unfalsifiable FAITH in the existence of the god.

The only attempt I remember reading, so far, was that faith trumps all. Meaning, clearly answered prayer would ruin faith. If we know there is a prayer answering God, then there would be no more reason for faith, as expressed in the Bible as needed. It was amusing to read, none-the-less.

[TRANSPONDER]

I'm neither an experienced apologist nor a Christian (anymore) but was recently made aware of a universal apologetic solvent that claims all of us have countless guesses as to what an infinite god's ultimate purpose might be. When this universal solvent is applied to the second question of the original post, the apologetic asserts that we can only guess as to what a god's ultimate purpose might be for granting some prayer requests and not others. Although it is not explicitly stated in the apologetic , I think we are just supposed to be satisfied with that unfalsifiable explanation and retreat to an intellectually dishonest FAITH in the existence of the god.

For one 'not experienced' you've done pretty well. While one might argue about what prayer achieves if we only had Jesus praying in the gospels, discussion would be as pointless as you say. But it is specific. If someone asks (prays for) in Faith (Luke says as much as a mustard seed) then God will grant it even for some big things. Given that asking for the world to be turned into Tofu would hardly be granted, one would expect a success rate that Christians would be trumpeting. They are not. They are only offering excuses as to why it doesn't seem to work.

You are right in that Faith is the bedrock of all their apologetics, which is why all their apologetics are irrational at bedrock znd their mindset is biased to begin with.

cue 'so are atheists'. No, because the logic is the burden of proof falls on the claim. The non -believer in the claim does not have to prove anything other than a duty (as I see it) to explain why the arguments put forward as evidence do not persuade. Of course 'Faith' is the subject of semantic jigglery. Accepting scientifically validated conclusions (e.g that whale ancestors as land critters - proved speciation), is valid 'faith', but denying that evidence because they believe that all critters were made as 'kinds' that do not change beyond visual similarity, is based on Faith; specifically what an old book of legendary history claims.

Incidentally I must mention Ken Ham's Ark which has a replica Pakicetus on - the idea being that this IS the ancestor of whales but super-evolved from a land animal to a sea -going animal - just as evolution and speciation claims, but over a thousand years at most, not millions.

"Evolution isn't true - there wasn't enough time" was an old creationist meme that we don't hear now - for good reason. Creationists seem to want to cram ALL biological evolution into the time between the Flood and Ancient Egypt (which some say overlap anyway) .

[1213]

Just because a species of fiery dragons did not once terrorise the land does not mean it will not happen, but nobody lives in belief that it will surely happen...

It is interesting that some say dragons meant in ancient time comets. I can see why it could be so and I wouldn't be surprised, if "fiery dragons" would destroy places on earth.

"Fool me once". When I was a kid, the JW end of world failed. When I was a teen,the BCM ambassador (world tomorrow) end of world failed. Since then every darn prophecy has failed, except the ones in the Simpsons, it seems. Shame on them for continuing to try to fool me and us and shame on those who excuse, apologise for and aid and abet them,. I have a particular dislike for doom - mongers.

Funny thing is that the climate doom prophets who have failed in their predictions several times are still held in high regard.

As for prayer, we have discussed this, as I recall and it was shown clearly that prayer is NOT answered as promised in the Bible...

I don't think anyone has shown that. And the problem seems to be that the prayer deniers take just one line from the Bible and ignore the rest, because it doesn't fit to their anti Christian narrative.

[TRANSPONDER]

Just because a species of fiery dragons did not once terrorise the land does not mean it will not happen, but nobody lives in belief that it will surely happen...

It is interesting that some say dragons meant in ancient time comets. I can see why it could be so and I wouldn't be surprised, if "fiery dragons" would destroy places on earth.

"Fool me once". When I was a kid, the JW end of world failed. When I was a teen,the BCM ambassador (world tomorrow) end of world failed. Since then every darn prophecy has failed, except the ones in the Simpsons, it seems. Shame on them for continuing to try to fool me and us and shame on those who excuse, apologise for and aid and abet them,. I have a particular dislike for doom - mongers.

Funny thing is that the climate doom prophets who have failed in their predictions several times are still held in high regard.

As for prayer, we have discussed this, as I recall and it was shown clearly that prayer is NOT answered as promised in the Bible...

I don't think anyone has shown that. And the problem seems to be that the prayer deniers take just one line from the Bible and ignore the rest, because it doesn't fit to their anti Christian narrative.

There is no evidence that comets have destroyed anything on the earth. But the KT Extinction and the Tunguska and the other old craters have been shown to have been meteoric. And the Chinese thought Lightning was dragons, but not comets. Please show anything to that says people thought comets were dragons and caused destruction anywhere. Except in fairy tales. In any case, even if anything you wrote was right, it is a nit -pick as i would simply have to find another simile for beliefs based on nothing.

Your kneejerk science- denial snipe at science only proves my point. If we can't trust those who purport to base doom -predictions on science can't be trusted, why on earth should we trust those who base their doom -predictions on revelation, especially as they have been wrong every darn time?

I recall that I have made the case that prayer doesn't work and all you could do was denial and evasion. You in fact (as I recall) tacitly conceded that it DOESN'T work but looked for excuses why it doesn't (because God knows it isn't what they should have) and your pushback is ludicrous. If the Bible says so just once, that is a guarantee as in a contract - you don't have to make a clause promise more than once for it to be a breach if you break it.

It is rather that reality -deniers ignore all the evidence because it doesn't fit their faithbased denialist narrative,

[1213]

There is no evidence that comets have destroyed anything on the earth. But the KT Extinction and the Tunguska and the other old craters have been shown to have been meteoric. And the Chinese thought Lightning was dragons, but not comets. Please show anything to that says people thought comets were dragons and caused destruction anywhere. Except in fairy tales. In any case, even if anything you wrote was right, it is a nit -pick as i would simply have to find another simile for beliefs based on nothing.

Maybe asteroid or meteor would have been a better word in this case. And for example there is evidence Sodom was destroyed by meteor.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/fernandeze ... -of-sodom/

But, was comets/meteors called dragons. I say only that some people say ancient people thought so. It may be wrong information.

...You in fact (as I recall) tacitly conceded that it DOESN'T work...

Where have I said so? Sorry, if i have been unclear, I think prayer works exactly as told in the Bible.