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)?

[TRANSPONDER]

To me that is like blind man saying, world doesn't exist, because I don't see it.

Hmm... So God sometimes does answer prayers to remove afflictions -- which some are born with, or some others later develop, like myotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebral palsy, dementia, diabetes mellites 1, amputation, muscular dystrophy, hunington's disease, epilepsy, parkinson's disease, paget's disease, motor neuron disease, downs syndrome, and so on? If so, can you provide demonstrable examples for this poor old blind man?

For example it is said:

And Jesus went around all Galilee teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every disease and every one of the illnesses among the people. And the report of Him went out into all Syria. And they brought to Him all the ones having illness, suffering various diseases and torments, also those having been demon-possessed, and those having been moonstruck, and paralytics; and He healed them.
Matt. 4:23-24

I understand that you don't believe that really happened. But, it is said that they got healed. And there seems to be disease similar to what you list. Now the problem is, how to prove it really happened. I don't have any means to prove it. But, neither you can prove it didn't happen. This is why it is possible it happened. And this means, I don't think honest person can then say God never answers such prayers.

You are falling into the apologetiucs trap of 'believe - or not'. The thing to do is assess whether on reason or evidence, it is credible. In the normal way, miracles aside, could a person go around curing diseases like that, even with a modern medial kit? Would he then lie to people how he was doing it or what the causes of disease were?

Of course not, you are claiming a miracle and 'miracles don't happen' is based on what we know of how the world works, not on 'believe or not'.

cue 'ok, but Jesus was a one off - prayer may not do miracles today, but it did with him. That's why healings were 'Signs'. If anyone could do it is wouldn't prove anything about Jesus'.

True, but then can we trust the record about Jesus'signs?' We cannot. The first sign (water into wine) is only in John. The second (healing at a distance) has Jesus in Cana in John but in Capernaum in Matthew and Luke and it isn't in Mark at all. The Third (Jairus' daughter) doesn't appear in John, and the young man of Nain appears nowhere but in Luke, though a raising of a young man (Lazarus) does appear in John. You may deny it, but to me, the problem that none of the synoptics mention that last and most stunning miracle makes the go - to hypothesis is that it is made up.

Add to which, John has no healing of Bar Timaeus, though he does have a healing of a blind man in Jerusalem; and to that John had a healing of a palsied man "Take up your bed and walk" in Jerusalem, but that is in Galilee in the synoptics.

Can you blame me if I reckon that these are not witness report but made up stories to prove what never happened - Jesus doing healing miracles? And i doubt they even made those tall tales up themselves.

[TRANSPONDER]

...The illogic is of course the old one The 'they denied powered flight' fallacy. It is equating with the world we know exists, a result (answered prayer) we don't know is real. It goes like this: 'The man who denied stuff because he can't see it looks silly; now, you don't want to look silly, do you? So you had better accept my claim about what is not visible."

I don't say people must accept anything without seeing. My point is, people should not accept anything just because someone doesn't see.

This is still doing 'believe - or not'. It is still Faithbased thinking. The thread on the moving stones was about opting for a natural explanation, even if there isn't a hypothesis yet, rather than opting for a supernatural explanation. Our pal Tam protested that nobody claimed a supernatural cause; rather they accepted it was probably natural.

Yes, that is the correct way to do it and is the materialist default. But here you are, arguing for supernatural is at least as valid as natural where one doesn't know. And it is only in the Big Three unknowns (Life, universe and consciousness) that has any validity; otherwise, the 'scientific' explanation gets the (well -earned) credit, not Faith - claims. Not even as a more probable hypotheses, yet to be confirmed. Religious apologetics rather claims these faithclaims as lifechanging Truth, where they are a less probable hypothesis (Life evolved, it was not made in one lump), has no evidence for it (the Exodus) and is in defiance of all evidence (Sun made later than daylight).

Your argument is back to front.

[POI]

To me that is like blind man saying, world doesn't exist, because I don't see it.

Hmm... So God sometimes does answer prayers to remove afflictions -- which some are born with, or some others later develop, like myotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebral palsy, dementia, diabetes mellites 1, amputation, muscular dystrophy, hunington's disease, epilepsy, parkinson's disease, paget's disease, motor neuron disease, downs syndrome, and so on? If so, can you provide demonstrable examples for this poor old blind man?

For example it is said:

And Jesus went around all Galilee teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every disease and every one of the illnesses among the people. And the report of Him went out into all Syria. And they brought to Him all the ones having illness, suffering various diseases and torments, also those having been demon-possessed, and those having been moonstruck, and paralytics; and He healed them.
Matt. 4:23-24

I understand that you don't believe that really happened. But, it is said that they got healed. And there seems to be disease similar to what you list. Now the problem is, how to prove it really happened. I don't have any means to prove it. But, neither you can prove it didn't happen. This is why it is possible it happened. And this means, I don't think honest person can then say God never answers such prayers.

The absolute best you could possibly argue, is that Jesus used to answer prayers to remove requested afflictions. But let's not be quite this hasty yet, being the Bible is (the claim) in question. And it would be quite nonsensical to use (the claim) to prove (the claim) in question -- (i.e.) that Jesus answers prayers.

Where it comes to such answered prayer requests today, please provide demonstrable example(s) for any of the following afflictions listed below. If you cannot, then it would appear you are as blind as the rest of all of us; being that these listed afflictions below do not ever get resolved today. Is it a coincidence that Jesus is completely skipping prayer requests to remove these afflictions, in which people are born with, or later develop? Or, is it more logical to conclude Jesus is not there to answer prayer, and you are merely talking to yourself?:

- downs syndrome
- cerebral palsy
- amputation
- ALS
- dementia
- Huntington's disease
- muscular dystrophy
- Paget's disease

I could list more, but this will get you started; and will also demonstrate my point.

It's safe to say if I were to ask an earnest Christian to pray to remove any of the above listed afflictions, they might do so. However, they would know (internally) that such prayer(s) will remain unanswered.

[brunumb]

For example it is said:

And Jesus went around all Galilee teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every disease and every one of the illnesses among the people. And the report of Him went out into all Syria. And they brought to Him all the ones having illness, suffering various diseases and torments, also those having been demon-possessed, and those having been moonstruck, and paralytics; and He healed them.
Matt. 4:23-24

I understand that you don't believe that really happened. But, it is said that they got healed.

If the reports went out into all Syria, why are there no records of any of this? No reports from the countless allegedly cured people. They must have returned home and yet no one thought it of interest to record anything. No doctors or historians were impressed enough to note down anything or investigate further. It all sounds more like Jesus doing a few tricks where he gavs the illusion of curing diseases and the stories just got embellished with each telling, like that big fish that got away.

[TRANSPONDER]

I want to stay on topic so I won't go down the rabbit -hole of 'The Gospel miracles make more sense as set up tricks', but will point out the numerous online exposes of faith healings that are presented as fraudulent and indeed look quite absurd.

Yet people still give these people credit and money. Even if the reports about Jesus were true, doesn't mean they were real miracles. As is usual, the faith - claim is starting with the conclusion, not ending with it. I find the same with the resurrection - we do not argue through the 'evidence' to the conclusion, but start with the faithbased conclusion and argue the evidence to fit it.

Cue 'well atheists start with the conclusion it isn't true'. Not quite. It starts with no conclusion before the evidence is considered, otherwise called "Don't know". The believers never understand the burden of proof.

[1213]

For example it is said:

And Jesus went around all Galilee teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every disease and every one of the illnesses among the people. And the report of Him went out into all Syria. And they brought to Him all the ones having illness, suffering various diseases and torments, also those having been demon-possessed, and those having been moonstruck, and paralytics; and He healed them.
Matt. 4:23-24

I understand that you don't believe that really happened. But, it is said that they got healed.

If the reports went out into all Syria, why are there no records of any of this? No reports from the countless allegedly cured people. They must have returned home and yet no one thought it of interest to record anything. No doctors or historians were impressed enough to note down anything or investigate further. It all sounds more like Jesus doing a few tricks where he gavs the illusion of curing diseases and the stories just got embellished with each telling, like that big fish that got away.

I think it is good to notice, we have very few records of common people from that era. Some say common people were not very literal, which may explain that not lot of written words from the common people.

Also, the writings that survived seems to be in the Bible, and as it seems, Bible is the only written historical record that is not accepted, because it supports Christian view.

And lastly, Christians were persecuted, they were not accepted by the rulers. The leaders probably tried to destroy any trace of Jesus and his miracles. And those that they couldn't destroy, were probably well hidden and maybe all not yet found.

This means, if the Bible story is really true, it would be very difficult to find any traces of it.

[1213]

...
Where it comes to such answered prayer requests today, please provide demonstrable example(s) for any of the following afflictions listed below. If you cannot, then it would appear you are as blind as the rest of all of us; being that these listed afflictions below do not ever get resolved today....

I think it is interesting that you seem to think, if anyone can't prove your claim wrong, it is then automatically correct. No, it doesn't work that way. Your claim is true, if you can prove it correct, otherwise it is just your subjective opinion.

[TRANSPONDER]

...
Where it comes to such answered prayer requests today, please provide demonstrable example(s) for any of the following afflictions listed below. If you cannot, then it would appear you are as blind as the rest of all of us; being that these listed afflictions below do not ever get resolved today....

I think it is interesting that you seem to think, if anyone can't prove your claim wrong, it is then automatically correct. No, it doesn't work that way. Your claim is true, if you can prove it correct, otherwise it is just your subjective opinion.

But that is exactly how it works with YOUR claim. In fact in your post above excusing why there is no decent evidence for the Christian claims outside the Bible, you refer to evidence (the book has to be accepted) rather than demanding that the claim be disproved - though we get that with cosmic origins.

The writings of the Church fathers citing writings and even gospels that are or were not known shows that the Church saw to it that writings they didn't like were suppressed. In fact you'd think that the early writers would repeat any extra Biblical source that confirmed the Bible. It is not found. We do get efforts to fiddle history to accommodate Christianity - I recall Tertullian trying to wangle the '2nd census' argument, but where are the references to the extra Biblical histories referring to the healings and massive crowds? If they aren't there, can't we assume it's because they weren't there, even before persecutions?

[POI]

...
Where it comes to such answered prayer requests today, please provide demonstrable example(s) for any of the following afflictions listed below. If you cannot, then it would appear you are as blind as the rest of all of us; being that these listed afflictions below do not ever get resolved today....

I think it is interesting that you seem to think, if anyone can't prove your claim wrong, it is then automatically correct. No, it doesn't work that way. Your claim is true, if you can prove it correct, otherwise it is just your subjective opinion.

What I think is interesting is that you skipped much of my response and instead offered a straw man argument. If I were to ask you for evidence in "answered prayer" for a curable affliction, you would have had no problem doing so. I'm asking you questions about what conclusion is more logical? (i.e.) Does God skip many afflictions which are deemed incurable by man (or) is God not there to answer any prayer, as the 'answered prayer' would not necessitate the need for a God?

You seem to have NO problem offering 'evidence' from the Bible, which is merely from (the claim) itself. However, when I ask for 'evidence', outside (the claim) itself, you then pivot substantially. I'll ask AGAIN. Please address the two points in bold this time around.:

1) Is it a coincidence that Jesus is completely skipping prayer requests to remove these listed afflictions, in which people are born with, or later develop? Or, is it more logical to conclude Jesus is not there to answer prayer, and you are merely talking to yourself?:

- downs syndrome
- cerebral palsy
- amputation
- ALS
- dementia
- Huntington's disease
- muscular dystrophy
- Paget's disease

2) It's safe to say if I were to ask an earnest Christian to pray to remove any of the above listed afflictions, they might do so. However, they would know (internally) that such prayer(s) will remain unanswered, right?

[POI]

Also, the writings that survived seems to be in the Bible,

You are incorrect. We only have much later 'copies'. Whatever was written before did not survive. Seems odd that Jesus/God cared not to preserve it.

and as it seems, Bible is the only written historical record that is not accepted, because it supports Christian view.

I do not think any theological texts are accepted as historical. This is not exclusive to Christian writings.

It's not accepted, by me, for many reasons. For me, one of the reasons I do not accept it is because, as this topic points out, God/Jesus seems to perpetually skip any prayer requests which involves the list in the OP. And yet, the Bible claims such prayer requests are not excluded from the 'ask Jesus' list.

And lastly, Christians were persecuted, they were not accepted by the rulers. The leaders probably tried to destroy any trace of Jesus and his miracles. And those that they couldn't destroy, were probably well hidden and maybe all not yet found.

This means, if the Bible story is really true, it would be very difficult to find any traces of it.

And yet, all Jesus would need to do today, is to demonstrate he still performs miracles. We can start with the list I provided. Again, "answered prayer" is all around us. And yet, nothing with the list?