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]

The way I use 'Faith' (and meanings before words) is believing in something without good reason. ...

In Bible faith is loyalty. For example Noah was loyal to God and did what was asked and because of that, he was saved from the flood. IT was not about believing in God, after all, Noah got the message from God. It was about will Noah believe what God said, and is he loyal to God.

That is why for me faith is not believing without good reason. It is essentially loyalty to God, believing what He said, not believing in God.

You skipped over post 124. Just when I feel we may start to actually get somewhere in this exchange.

The thing is here, as I recall, what Faith is in current Christian terms and whether it is Faith or Works (good deeds) that saves, and it seems was being 'saved' means. It is faith in Jesus as risen messiah, who saves people from sin - death through his sacrifice on the cross. That salvation is not being saved from having your car stolen, or eaten by sharks, but from what happens after you die or Jesus comes again, whichever eschatology one uses.

That faith was (according to Paul) like the righteousness through faith in God. Sure, that also requires doing what God says, because you can believe someone exists (Satan) but does not do what it says. But one has to believe in the thing first.

Also, as I said, it is not doing good that counts, but doing what the god says, no matter what human morality considers good deeds. This Faith requires allegiance to that divine being, whether God (before Jesus) or JesusGod after Jesus.

One might regard being saved from drowning in the flood as symbolic of saving from what happens after death. If it didn't, what is the saving from Sin, and what do the afterlife consequences have to do with it?

Our pal seems to have a personal doctrine that may, for all I know, resemble the Pharisee last days resurrection and perfect life on earth. Mainstream Christianity talks rather about judgement after death and being saved or not. It is Christianity, not some Christianized Pharisee/JW doctrine that is not what Christians generally talk about.

Thing is, If I supposed Fsoa that 1213 was right and Righteousness was following God's (and Jesus') instructions, and that 'saved'people from misfortunes on earth (He also denies that prayer doesn't work, we heard) we would have an ignored doctrine of resurrection, judgement after death, escaping either hell or armageddon and in fact nothing about what happens when we die.

Cue: 'well we get saved from bad things after death (or at the Last Days) by following Gods (Jesus') words'. But that is what being saved by Faith means as i was using the term. But I also reckon that following Jesus' words (or the ones that are convenient - not including giving everything to the poor) without Faith (belief) in God/Jesus by people with other religions will not save. Not as I understand the way Christian thought works.

[1213]

The way I use 'Faith' (and meanings before words) is believing in something without good reason. ...

In Bible faith is loyalty. For example Noah was loyal to God and did what was asked and because of that, he was saved from the flood. IT was not about believing in God, after all, Noah got the message from God. It was about will Noah believe what God said, and is he loyal to God.

That is why for me faith is not believing without good reason. It is essentially loyalty to God, believing what He said, not believing in God.

You skipped over post 124. Just when I feel we may start to actually get somewhere in this exchange.

I think I already answered it in post 120.

[POI]

I think I already answered it in post 120.

For which I then asked:

I would appreciate an honest answer. I do not feel I'm getting one. Let's try again... If anyone was to ask you to pray for their cerebral palsy, amputation, or DM1 to go away, wouldn't you already know such prayer request(s) would go unanswered? I think you would.

[1213]

I think I already answered it in post 120.

For which I then asked:

I would appreciate an honest answer. I do not feel I'm getting one. Let's try again... If anyone was to ask you to pray for their cerebral palsy, amputation, or DM1 to go away, wouldn't you already know such prayer request(s) would go unanswered? I think you would.

And my answer to that is, God answers always, maybe sometimes the answer can be no. I really don't know will some prayer get no for answer.

[boatsnguitars]

I think I already answered it in post 120.

For which I then asked:

I would appreciate an honest answer. I do not feel I'm getting one. Let's try again... If anyone was to ask you to pray for their cerebral palsy, amputation, or DM1 to go away, wouldn't you already know such prayer request(s) would go unanswered? I think you would.

And my answer to that is, God answers always, maybe sometimes the answer can be no. I really don't know will some prayer get no for answer.

So, the same as random chance?

But, I have to echo POI's frustration. It appears you aren't willing to recognize that your response is tailor made for any charlatan for any religion to claim their God is perfect and does all kinds of things - or not - and is completely immune to critique. How convenient!
After all, if someone were to say the same about Krishna, you'd rightly balk at the answer (or should!).

Your answer, to be frank, is what we used to tell children in our church to make them stop asking questions. I think we are grown up enough here to have a more sophisticated discussion. However, if you believe your religion tells you to be childlike, I supppose we can't expect much more than childlike answers.

That's up to you. Are you willing to engage in a substantive debate on how one recognizes whether God is the reason for some healing or not? And, if God does heal, why is it never the things that science has proved there is no Material process to heal - like amputation?

Surely, your God is great enough to withstand a little investigation?

[POI]

I think I already answered it in post 120.

For which I then asked:

I would appreciate an honest answer. I do not feel I'm getting one. Let's try again... If anyone was to ask you to pray for their cerebral palsy, amputation, or DM1 to go away, wouldn't you already know such prayer request(s) would go unanswered? I think you would.

And my answer to that is, God answers always, maybe sometimes the answer can be no. I really don't know will some prayer get no for answer.

Did you happen to see my OP line of questioning? "And by 'answered' prayer, I mean God/Jesus states -- (yes, I will grant you this prayer request to remove the human affliction)."

Are you pranking me right now? Your answers are quite frustrating. I'm going to ask again, using differing verbiage.

Do you honestly think that if you were to pray to cure such afflictions, God will ever answer yes? I bet you already know such prayers will remain unanswered. Why? Because these conditions are not curable. Prayers are 'answered' at the same rate as random chance, also without praying. Praying will never cure someone born with cerebral palsy. Prayer will never cure someone with diabetes 1. Prayer will never bring back someone's amputated limb. Deep down, you know this, right? Deep down, you know the most logical answer to this problem is that there exists no God to answer such requests. Right? If not, why not?

[brunumb]

And my answer to that is, God answers always, maybe sometimes the answer can be no. I really don't know will some prayer get no for answer.

Wow. Talk about the ultimate escape clause. When an outcome aligns with a prayer, the prayer was answered. When an outcome does not align with a prayer, the prayer was answered, but not with the requested outcome. If one thinks about it, no God is actually necessary and one can merely attribute any favorable outcome to an imagined God answering prayer.

[TRANSPONDER]

I think I already answered it in post 120.

For which I then asked:

I would appreciate an honest answer. I do not feel I'm getting one. Let's try again... If anyone was to ask you to pray for their cerebral palsy, amputation, or DM1 to go away, wouldn't you already know such prayer request(s) would go unanswered? I think you would.

And my answer to that is, God answers always, maybe sometimes the answer can be no. I really don't know will some prayer get no for answer.

And our answer to that is "It would work the same way if God wasn't answering prayers at all". The believer would accept whatever happens as 'God's answer', yes, no and 'later'. Or 'This is what i think you should have'.

[boatsnguitars]

I think I already answered it in post 120.

For which I then asked:

I would appreciate an honest answer. I do not feel I'm getting one. Let's try again... If anyone was to ask you to pray for their cerebral palsy, amputation, or DM1 to go away, wouldn't you already know such prayer request(s) would go unanswered? I think you would.

And my answer to that is, God answers always, maybe sometimes the answer can be no. I really don't know will some prayer get no for answer.

I'll just say it out loud: This answer is one of the many reasons people find religion to be damaging to Reason; find religious people not very smart; and why I pray to Satan that i never become religious again. I remember saying things like this when I was a teenager. Even when I said it, I knew it was messed up, but I had been convinced the answer did one of two things: 1. enrage the person I was speaking to, so that it made them unable to further engage in the conversation. 2, make me feel like I was being pious and Jesus-like in giving such a "wise" answer.

Saying things like this, or regurgitating Josh McDowell, made me feel like I was part of an exclusive club that defied reason - but somehow placed us above it because we believed in God - that Jesus had our back! I felt adequately persecuted because of the looks I'd get, and I'd strut away thinking that I had won the argument.
The Cult of Christ convinces you that you are doing the Lord's work with such silly responses, but any slightly introspective person will realize the responses are hollow.

Deep down, 1213 knows this is not a good answer. It's a perfect non-answer. After all, he doesn't know! He doesn't know what god thinks. He can't ask God - or if he does, God won't answer. So he plays the fool for the Church, as they require their adherents to be.

[1213]

...When an outcome aligns with a prayer, the prayer was answered....

And on the other hand, if everything would go exactly as requested in prayer, you could still claim it was not because of God. So, this is pointless debate.