What's the Point of Prayer?

[POI]

In regards to the following verses -- Matthew 7:7, Matthew 21:22, Mark 11:24, John 14:13-14, John 16:23....

What do they really mean? I've debated many theists, and get a whole mess of conflicting answers. It will likely be no surprise if that continues here. After some thought, here are some findings...

1. All prayer is pointless, as any "answered prayer" would merely mean, <at best>, that it already aligned with God's will. Why? Because you cannot make God change His will. But this seems to go against all the verses listed above.

2. Ignore the above! God answers all prayer with a (yes, no, or later). His answer, of course, would be "no" if you are asking God to commit a 'sin.' But if this option is the case, I guess he will always say no to the requests of restoring lost limbs, reversing cerebral palsy, and downs syndrome. Why? Because they will die with these conditions, which means they remained unfulfilled until natural death. But this seems to go against all the verses listed above, as there really exists no such caveats....?

3. Ignore choices 1. and 2.! Prayer is only meant for giving thanks, other. God is not a slot machine! But this seems to go against all the verses listed above.

I'm sure there exists a plethora of other explanations........ You get the gist....

For Debate:

What is the point of prayer? I guess we can start here, and see where this goes....

[AquinasForGod]

I will give you Thomas Aquinas' answer, which I agree with.

In Classical Theism, God is timeless and doesn't change. God is one eternal act. God's essence is his existence.

With that said, Aquinas says that God answered prayers from this one eternal act. God doesn't wait around for you to pray, then answers if he wishes to. Rather, God knows what you will pray and in his one eternal act, he either answers or not. If it doesn't contradict his plan for maximal goodness, then he might answer, depending on if you are in his graces or not and whatever else God chooses to answer based upon.

Then the question is asked, why pray at all then? Because if you don't ask, then there is never something to answer.

In Aquinas' own words

...our motive in praying is, not that we may change the Divine disposition, but that, by our prayers, we may obtain what God has appointed.

That is the answer to prayer interfering with god's plan - it is part of it, but we still have to do it as we have (so to speak) already done it. It is one apologetic that does answer. But it does have its' own problems, and to anticipate the answer, it is why the Bible, Christianity and Anselm don't make sense; there is no small print in the Gospels. God says that whatever you sk in Faith will be grnted; he doesn't say 'assuming of course that it is ok for you to have it, in which case My father will just say No, or rather just not give it to you, just as if He wasn't there at all, and you'll just have to have Faith that He is there." The Christians have to provide that apologetics excuse.

But if you take the verse with a bit of reason, it is not possible that it means whatever you ask for, otherwise, God would be saying if you ask to be the best rapist to ever exist that God would grant it. It seems to me that it must mean the prayer must fall in line with God's will.

[TRANSPONDER]

I will give you Thomas Aquinas' answer, which I agree with.

In Classical Theism, God is timeless and doesn't change. God is one eternal act. God's essence is his existence.

With that said, Aquinas says that God answered prayers from this one eternal act. God doesn't wait around for you to pray, then answers if he wishes to. Rather, God knows what you will pray and in his one eternal act, he either answers or not. If it doesn't contradict his plan for maximal goodness, then he might answer, depending on if you are in his graces or not and whatever else God chooses to answer based upon.

Then the question is asked, why pray at all then? Because if you don't ask, then there is never something to answer.

In Aquinas' own words

...our motive in praying is, not that we may change the Divine disposition, but that, by our prayers, we may obtain what God has appointed.

That is the answer to prayer interfering with god's plan - it is part of it, but we still have to do it as we have (so to speak) already done it. It is one apologetic that does answer. But it does have its' own problems, and to anticipate the answer, it is why the Bible, Christianity and Anselm don't make sense; there is no small print in the Gospels. God says that whatever you sk in Faith will be grnted; he doesn't say 'assuming of course that it is ok for you to have it, in which case My father will just say No, or rather just not give it to you, just as if He wasn't there at all, and you'll just have to have Faith that He is there." The Christians have to provide that apologetics excuse.

But if you take the verse with a bit of reason, it is not possible that it means whatever you ask for, otherwise, God would be saying if you ask to be the best rapist to ever exist that God would grant it. It seems to me that it must mean the prayer must fall in line with God's will.

Yes of course that is how it has to be, even if it was not obvious and known to beleivers that many, many prayers do not get answered, and aside the implications of that, the Bible apologists have to invent the get - out clause that should have been there, or the written guarantee to grant even absurd things like uprooting mountains (even apart from there might be people snowboarding on it) should never have been given. It will not do to make written promises like that and then later on argue in court that nobody would suppose it was ever intended to be taken seriously.

[AquinasForGod]

I will give you Thomas Aquinas' answer, which I agree with.

In Classical Theism, God is timeless and doesn't change. God is one eternal act. God's essence is his existence.

With that said, Aquinas says that God answered prayers from this one eternal act. God doesn't wait around for you to pray, then answers if he wishes to. Rather, God knows what you will pray and in his one eternal act, he either answers or not. If it doesn't contradict his plan for maximal goodness, then he might answer, depending on if you are in his graces or not and whatever else God chooses to answer based upon.

Then the question is asked, why pray at all then? Because if you don't ask, then there is never something to answer.

In Aquinas' own words

...our motive in praying is, not that we may change the Divine disposition, but that, by our prayers, we may obtain what God has appointed.

That is the answer to prayer interfering with god's plan - it is part of it, but we still have to do it as we have (so to speak) already done it. It is one apologetic that does answer. But it does have its' own problems, and to anticipate the answer, it is why the Bible, Christianity and Anselm don't make sense; there is no small print in the Gospels. God says that whatever you sk in Faith will be grnted; he doesn't say 'assuming of course that it is ok for you to have it, in which case My father will just say No, or rather just not give it to you, just as if He wasn't there at all, and you'll just have to have Faith that He is there." The Christians have to provide that apologetics excuse.

But if you take the verse with a bit of reason, it is not possible that it means whatever you ask for, otherwise, God would be saying if you ask to be the best rapist to ever exist that God would grant it. It seems to me that it must mean the prayer must fall in line with God's will.

Yes of course that is how it has to be, even if it was not obvious and known to beleivers that many, many prayers do not get answered, and aside the implications of that, the Bible apologists have to invent the get - out clause that should have been there, or the written guarantee to grant even absurd things like uprooting mountains (even apart from there might be people snowboarding on it) should never have been given. It will not do to make written promises like that and then later on argue in court that nobody would suppose it was ever intended to be taken seriously.

To my knowledge, the early church fathers never understood it that way. For example, when Jesus says the faith of a mustard seed can move mountains, he is just saying that a little faith goes a long way. Early Christians were not trying to move mountains or split the moon.

[TRANSPONDER]

I will give you Thomas Aquinas' answer, which I agree with.

In Classical Theism, God is timeless and doesn't change. God is one eternal act. God's essence is his existence.

With that said, Aquinas says that God answered prayers from this one eternal act. God doesn't wait around for you to pray, then answers if he wishes to. Rather, God knows what you will pray and in his one eternal act, he either answers or not. If it doesn't contradict his plan for maximal goodness, then he might answer, depending on if you are in his graces or not and whatever else God chooses to answer based upon.

Then the question is asked, why pray at all then? Because if you don't ask, then there is never something to answer.

In Aquinas' own words

...our motive in praying is, not that we may change the Divine disposition, but that, by our prayers, we may obtain what God has appointed.

That is the answer to prayer interfering with god's plan - it is part of it, but we still have to do it as we have (so to speak) already done it. It is one apologetic that does answer. But it does have its' own problems, and to anticipate the answer, it is why the Bible, Christianity and Anselm don't make sense; there is no small print in the Gospels. God says that whatever you sk in Faith will be grnted; he doesn't say 'assuming of course that it is ok for you to have it, in which case My father will just say No, or rather just not give it to you, just as if He wasn't there at all, and you'll just have to have Faith that He is there." The Christians have to provide that apologetics excuse.

But if you take the verse with a bit of reason, it is not possible that it means whatever you ask for, otherwise, God would be saying if you ask to be the best rapist to ever exist that God would grant it. It seems to me that it must mean the prayer must fall in line with God's will.

Yes of course that is how it has to be, even if it was not obvious and known to beleivers that many, many prayers do not get answered, and aside the implications of that, the Bible apologists have to invent the get - out clause that should have been there, or the written guarantee to grant even absurd things like uprooting mountains (even apart from there might be people snowboarding on it) should never have been given. It will not do to make written promises like that and then later on argue in court that nobody would suppose it was ever intended to be taken seriously.

To my knowledge, the early church fathers never understood it that way. For example, when Jesus says the faith of a mustard seed can move mountains, he is just saying that a little faith goes a long way. Early Christians were not trying to move mountains or split the moon.

That just underlines what I was saying - that it is so absurd and identifiably not true, that not only do Bible apologists today have to explain it away as 'This thing that Jesus supposedly said; this guarantee, done with a practical demonstration of blasting a figtree, codified supposedly under God's inspiration, into the Bible, is in no way to be taken seriously,' but they saw that even back in the early days of the church, when they seemed happy to swallow a virgin birth and a mobile star.

Ok, you are not dumb, and neither am I. We both know what's involved here. That prayer guarantee is not true. So it must be something else. Let's say 'metaphorical'. I have a more analytical explanation, but let's say 'Metaphorical'. Then how much of the rest of the miraculous stuff cn we trust? The shekel eating fish? The loaves and fishes? The miraculous drafty of fish? The feeding of the five thousand with fish? The Passover release custom that apparently never existed? None of this stacks up, anywhere, either in practice, polemic or print.

[POI]

BUMP:

Well, I've let this topic marinate long enough to realize that Christians do not want to come forward to explain the concept of prayer. What IS the point of prayer? As I await THE answer from the Christian populous, I will place forth relevant questions related to this topic. Christians, if you cannot explain the point of prayer, maybe instead answer some/all of these questions?

1) A Muslim and a Jew pray for their friend in the hospital to recover. The friend recovers. Who takes the credit, the Muslim, the Jew, the hospital, or other?

2) If God answers prayer, why perpetually skip requests to undo amputees, cerebral palsy, and downs syndrome?

3) If god only answers prayers that he knows you need, than what is the point of prayer? Prayer is then only demonstrated effective if it already agrees with god's predetermined plan for you.

4) You are diagnoses with a curable disease. You are presented with only two options for treatment, but you cannot choose both. These options are a) medical treatment, or b) prayer. Which one do you choose and why <a) or b)>?

5) Does prayer, before surgery, ever change the outcome? If yes, how might one know?

6) Two patients are diagnosed with cancer and both receive treatment. The one that was prayed for dies, and the one who was not prayed for lives. What rationale is presented by the Christian family, who's loved one died? I would assume that the patient whom died, was not prayed for to perish.

7) In the old testament, individuals would pray for victory in war and claim god helped them win. If the opponent had also prayed to the same god, would the outcome have changed? Either way, doesn't this demonstrate that god plays favorites?

8) By what mechanism was used to determine god actually answers your prayers? Remember, people pray to differing god(s). They also claim to receive answers in prayer. What truth assignment function was used to determine your prayer is successful, but the differing prayed to god(s) are all false or unanswered?

9) A Christian enters a Mosque, sees many Muslims praying, in accordance with Islamic principles. What's more likely, that every single person there is delusional, and is merely talking to themselves? Or, some or all are actually receiving answers to their prayers, and/or are communicating with their claimed deity? How were you able to determine this conclusion?

10) When and if you feel you receive a response in prayer, how do you know it is from the deity you are actually praying to, and not from a competing spirit because you have channeled an alternate dimension? Or maybe, you are just talking to yourself? Since you only have your brain, how do you know if you are talking to yourself, self diluting yourself, talking to some other supernatural entity, or actually talking to the god your are praying to? Is it by faith alone? If so, what value does faith actually represent?

[POI]

But if you take the verse with a bit of reason, it is not possible that it means whatever you ask for, otherwise, God would be saying if you ask to be the best rapist to ever exist that God would grant it. It seems to me that it must mean the prayer must fall in line with God's will.

I guess addressing the 'undoing' of amputees, cerebral palsy, and downs syndrome is against His will?

Further, if it must fall within his will, then isn't the prayer pointless anyways?

[POI]

I will give you Thomas Aquinas' answer, which I agree with.

In Classical Theism, God is timeless and doesn't change. God is one eternal act. God's essence is his existence.

With that said, Aquinas says that God answered prayers from this one eternal act. God doesn't wait around for you to pray, then answers if he wishes to. Rather, God knows what you will pray and in his one eternal act, he either answers or not. If it doesn't contradict his plan for maximal goodness, then he might answer, depending on if you are in his graces or not and whatever else God chooses to answer based upon.

Then the question is asked, why pray at all then? Because if you don't ask, then there is never something to answer.

In Aquinas' own words

...our motive in praying is, not that we may change the Divine disposition, but that, by our prayers, we may obtain what God has appointed.

This response still does not answer the question. Why? Because we are still talking about God's will. Your prayer cannot change his will. Your prayer will only be answered if it already aligns with his will. Hence, your assertion about god being outside of time is irrelevant.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #35]

What IS the point of prayer?

The point of prayer is similar to the point of worship. It is for our benefit. God knows if we worship that it will benefit our souls on earth. We do not pray that we may change God's mind, but we pray that we may receive what God has appointed. If we never pray/ask then we never receive.

1) A Muslim and a Jew pray for their friend in the hospital to recover. The friend recovers. Who takes the credit, the Muslim, the Jew, the hospital, or other?

It sounds like this question assumes God only answers Christians. If any prayer is actually answered by God then all glory goes to God, so the answer is other.

2) If God answers prayer, why perpetually skip requests to undo amputees, cerebral palsy, and downs syndrome?

Only God sees into the infinite sea of history. Only goes knows what actions/interventions in this world lead to maximal goodness. God would thus only answer prayers thusly, for God would not go against what he knows is necessary for maximal goodness. BTW, there are stories of such people being healed by God, but as to their truth, I cannot speak.

Think of the butterfly effect. Maybe God answering a simple prayer like your headache going away doesn't have much effect on the whole history of things, whereas growing some dude's legs back does.

3) If god only answers prayers that he knows you need, than what is the point of prayer? Prayer is then only demonstrated effective if it already agrees with god's predetermined plan for you.

The point of prayer is to receive God's appointed grace. If you do ask then you do not receive.

4) You are diagnoses with a curable disease. You are presented with only two options for treatment, but you cannot choose both. These options are a) medical treatment, or b) prayer. Which one do you choose and why <a) or b)>?

That is easy. Medical treatment. Medical treatment is a kind of answer to our prayers. We have been praying for a long time for many diseases and God opens our minds to find the answers.

5) Does prayer, before surgery, ever change the outcome? If yes, how might one know?

I do not think we can know this. But I will pray so I can receive the grace of God.

6) Two patients are diagnosed with cancer and both receive treatment. The one that was prayed for dies, and the one who was not prayed for lives. What rationale is presented by the Christian family, who's loved one died? I would assume that the patient whom died, was not prayed for to perish.

I wouldn't learn anything new by this outcome.

7) In the old testament, individuals would pray for victory in war and claim god helped them win. If the opponent had also prayed to the same god, would the outcome have changed? Either way, doesn't this demonstrate that god plays favorites?

Only God knows this. Suppose God does play favorites, would that be an issue? He knows our whole history after all. God doesn't know you by what has happened. God knows the whole you from beginning to end.

8) By what mechanism was used to determine god actually answers your prayers? Remember, people pray to differing god(s). They also claim to receive answers in prayer. What truth assignment function was used to determine your prayer is successful, but the differing prayed to god(s) are all false or unanswered?

I do not believe in multiple gods. Either God answers your pray or he doesn't, regardless of how you view God. If you think God is Allah, God can still answer prayers and move you to where you need to be. There is no way to know for sure God answered your prayer or not. You pray, you get an answer. Maybe it was a coincodense. You have to decide what you believe.

As far as testing a metaphysical thing, it cannot be done with science cannot affirm or deny the metaphysical.

9) A Christian enters a Mosque, sees many Muslims praying, in accordance with Islamic principles. What's more likely, that every single person there is delusional, and is merely talking to themselves? Or, some or all are actually receiving answers to their prayers, and/or are communicating with their claimed deity? How were you able to determine this conclusion?

You are not giving enough options. What is more likely to me is that Muslims are praying based on their level of knowledge. God either answers or doesn't. God's grace cannot be earned. God is not going to force his grace upon you, so ask. There is but one God in classical theism. In fact, it is not even possible for there to be more than one. If you are not familiar with why, look into the argument from change, which leads to God being purely actual.

Then you can look into, for example Aquinas's metaphysics of why there cannot in principle be more than one purely actual being.

10) When and if you feel you receive a response in prayer, how do you know it is from the deity you are actually praying to, and not from a competing spirit because you have channeled an alternate dimension? Or maybe, you are just talking to yourself? Since you only have your brain, how do you know if you are talking to yourself, self-diluting yourself, talking to some other supernatural entity, or actually talking to the god your are praying to? Is it by faith alone? If so, what value does faith actually represent?

The first question follows my same answer. My metaphysics only allows for one God because God is purely actual. Actus purus. Pure act, his essence is existence. God is existence itself, which is why our existence is God.

There cannot be more than one in principle, because if there were two purely actual beings, then by the law of identity, the two would actually be the same thing. They have no properties that differ, not even spacial properties because God doesn't occupy space. It would be like if I claimed two electrons existed but they were identical in every way, including spacially, then I would not be talking about two but one in the same thing.

Sure, maybe I am deceiving myself. That obviously doesn't seem likely or I would be agnostic.

There is really no need into going into my experiences that convince me because you would not believe them anyway.

[brunumb]

[Replying to AquinasForGod in post #38]

One can make up all sorts of excuses 'til the cows come home, but the simplest and most obvious answer is that no prayers are actually answered because there is no deity there to answer them.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to POI in post #35]

What IS the point of prayer?

The point of prayer is similar to the point of worship. It is for our benefit. God knows if we worship that it will benefit our souls on earth. We do not pray that we may change God's mind, but we pray that we may receive what God has appointed. If we never pray/ask then we never receive.

1) A Muslim and a Jew pray for their friend in the hospital to recover. The friend recovers. Who takes the credit, the Muslim, the Jew, the hospital, or other?

It sounds like this question assumes God only answers Christians. If any prayer is actually answered by God then all glory goes to God, so the answer is other.

2) If God answers prayer, why perpetually skip requests to undo amputees, cerebral palsy, and downs syndrome?

Only God sees into the infinite sea of history. Only goes knows what actions/interventions in this world lead to maximal goodness. God would thus only answer prayers thusly, for God would not go against what he knows is necessary for maximal goodness. BTW, there are stories of such people being healed by God, but as to their truth, I cannot speak.

Think of the butterfly effect. Maybe God answering a simple prayer like your headache going away doesn't have much effect on the whole history of things, whereas growing some dude's legs back does.

3) If god only answers prayers that he knows you need, than what is the point of prayer? Prayer is then only demonstrated effective if it already agrees with god's predetermined plan for you.

The point of prayer is to receive God's appointed grace. If you do ask then you do not receive.

4) You are diagnoses with a curable disease. You are presented with only two options for treatment, but you cannot choose both. These options are a) medical treatment, or b) prayer. Which one do you choose and why <a) or b)>?

That is easy. Medical treatment. Medical treatment is a kind of answer to our prayers. We have been praying for a long time for many diseases and God opens our minds to find the answers.

5) Does prayer, before surgery, ever change the outcome? If yes, how might one know?

I do not think we can know this. But I will pray so I can receive the grace of God.

6) Two patients are diagnosed with cancer and both receive treatment. The one that was prayed for dies, and the one who was not prayed for lives. What rationale is presented by the Christian family, who's loved one died? I would assume that the patient whom died, was not prayed for to perish.

I wouldn't learn anything new by this outcome.

7) In the old testament, individuals would pray for victory in war and claim god helped them win. If the opponent had also prayed to the same god, would the outcome have changed? Either way, doesn't this demonstrate that god plays favorites?

Only God knows this. Suppose God does play favorites, would that be an issue? He knows our whole history after all. God doesn't know you by what has happened. God knows the whole you from beginning to end.

8) By what mechanism was used to determine god actually answers your prayers? Remember, people pray to differing god(s). They also claim to receive answers in prayer. What truth assignment function was used to determine your prayer is successful, but the differing prayed to god(s) are all false or unanswered?

I do not believe in multiple gods. Either God answers your pray or he doesn't, regardless of how you view God. If you think God is Allah, God can still answer prayers and move you to where you need to be. There is no way to know for sure God answered your prayer or not. You pray, you get an answer. Maybe it was a coincodense. You have to decide what you believe.

As far as testing a metaphysical thing, it cannot be done with science cannot affirm or deny the metaphysical.

9) A Christian enters a Mosque, sees many Muslims praying, in accordance with Islamic principles. What's more likely, that every single person there is delusional, and is merely talking to themselves? Or, some or all are actually receiving answers to their prayers, and/or are communicating with their claimed deity? How were you able to determine this conclusion?

You are not giving enough options. What is more likely to me is that Muslims are praying based on their level of knowledge. God either answers or doesn't. God's grace cannot be earned. God is not going to force his grace upon you, so ask. There is but one God in classical theism. In fact, it is not even possible for there to be more than one. If you are not familiar with why, look into the argument from change, which leads to God being purely actual.

Then you can look into, for example Aquinas's metaphysics of why there cannot in principle be more than one purely actual being.

10) When and if you feel you receive a response in prayer, how do you know it is from the deity you are actually praying to, and not from a competing spirit because you have channeled an alternate dimension? Or maybe, you are just talking to yourself? Since you only have your brain, how do you know if you are talking to yourself, self-diluting yourself, talking to some other supernatural entity, or actually talking to the god your are praying to? Is it by faith alone? If so, what value does faith actually represent?

The first question follows my same answer. My metaphysics only allows for one God because God is purely actual. Actus purus. Pure act, his essence is existence. God is existence itself, which is why our existence is God.

There cannot be more than one in principle, because if there were two purely actual beings, then by the law of identity, the two would actually b "e the same thing. They have no properties that differ, not even spacial properties because God doesn't occupy space. It would be like if I claimed two electrons existed but they were identical in every way, including spacially, then I would not be talking about two but one in the same thing.

Sure, maybe I am deceiving myself. That obviously doesn't seem likely or I would be agnostic.

There is really no need into going into my experiences that convince me because you would not believe them anyway.

Thank you; we knew that - prayer is done because it makes the person praying feel good, or I rather suspect not good but having paid a little bit of time and effort to get brownie points with God. In fact I reckon prayer serves many purposes. It is bias confirmation to the believer or top up faith - brainwashing. It can also be fiddled to look like God is working in stuff like medical 'miracles' or lucky coincidences - the unlucky ones like prayers that don't get answered - can be ignored. It's call biased sampling.

I have to reiterate that what you believe counts for nothing. Dismissing prayers answered for other gods, or prayers answered to your god, even in different denominations, all count and you have no logical case to dismiss them just because they don't fit your beliefs.

What more? "science cannot affirm or deny the metaphysical." Then it is an unknown - that means that the god -claim remains without valid evidence. Your posts above are pretty clearly relegating the (supposed or claimed) results of prayer to mere coincidence/ The fuzzy feelings and claims about Grace are claims about nothing and have an evidential value of nothing. It suits unbelievers very well, but it will horrify a lot of believers who are always and desperately looking for evidence of answered prayer as support for their Belief because they know that dismissing the Bibleclaims as 'metaphoric and relying on Faithclims is a stake through through the heart of Bible, God and Christian credibility.