Question about prayer

[CheeseNrice]

I have a question regarding prayer and "answers" supposedly from god. An example that brings about such questions are in relation to that mining disaster where so many of those miners were trapped and died.

I remember so many people gathering together at the churches and praying for the miners to be alive. Then, when they were told that all of the miners were alive, they all cheered and rejoiced proclaiming that "god answered our prayers." Now, hours later, when they found out that the miners were actually dead, how do they explain this?

Did god give them the "wrong answer"?

Did god give the same exact answer to all of those people who prayed? You mean to tell me that there was not one person there (even out of the clergy) who got the message from god that sorry, no, the miners were not alive and not coming home? Why did so many people get the wrong answer?

Did the people misinterpret what god's answer was? (in which case, it doesn't seem like prayer is of much use if you can't even reliably interpret the answer).

Did people really not get any answer at all from god, but were just deceiving themselves believing that god gave them an answer (which was wrong)?

[Flail]

No one knows the answer to God and Prayer. There are many books of speculation,like the Bible and the Koran, on the subject. Reason would imply that God is not involved in the world at all and there is no evidence that He is involved. He may have created the world and then placed men of reason,men of the mind, within the world to take care of it...but most have become as sheep of idolatry and indoctrination,seeking to have answers to the unknown and salve for every sore.

I find it offensive for those who have allegedly accepted the gift of eternal life, to remain obsessed with death and dying and suffering and money,asking God to intercede at every road block in life. I would imagine God saying, "I gave these ungrateful people eternal life...they can never die,yet they will not live....and they beg me for more and more and more like spoiled children..." prhaps this is why Jesus referred to the religionists of his day as 'sheep'...if you truly believe that you can never die,why would you be so arrogant as to ask for any other gifts?...when around you people suffer?....perhaps it is in attending to others that we find God...rather than in attending our tribal dances and meeting of indoctrination and blessing!!!!!!!!!!

[RyanP]

I would add that the atheist is like a conspiracy theorist. Have you ever tried to argue with a conspiracy theorist? There is nothing at all that you can point to that will shake his faith in his theory, because there is nothing that cannot be explained as part of the conspiracy.

Very good point.

How exactly is it a 'very good point'? Did you miss the part where I explained how different atheists have different views on acceptance of evidence because atheists can be different in any and all other ways except that of disbelief in God? If not, how can you call this a 'good point' when it has been shown to be an inaccurate description?

It was a very good point because when he said I thought, "gee, that sounds pretty familiar." There's nothing we can say to convince you atheist (edited profanity) jerks. And you sit here with "prove this" and "prove that" and "we're just trying to be logical" and "fallacy this" and it's really all just a bunch of (edited word) bull.

[Fallibleone]

I would add that the atheist is like a conspiracy theorist. Have you ever tried to argue with a conspiracy theorist? There is nothing at all that you can point to that will shake his faith in his theory, because there is nothing that cannot be explained as part of the conspiracy.

Very good point.

How exactly is it a 'very good point'? Did you miss the part where I explained how different atheists have different views on acceptance of evidence because atheists can be different in any and all other ways except that of disbelief in God? If not, how can you call this a 'good point' when it has been shown to be an inaccurate description?

It was a very good point because when he said I thought, "gee, that sounds pretty familiar." There's nothing we can say to convince you atheist (edited wording) jerks. And you sit here with "prove this" and "prove that" and "we're just trying to be logical" and "fallacy this" and it's really all just a bunch of (edited wording) bull.

Your tone says more about the vacuousness of your argument than I ever could. The reasonable theists on this site will be filled with despair at the manner in which you choose to represent them.

[C-Nub]

It was a very good point because when he said I thought, "gee, that sounds pretty familiar." There's nothing we can say to convince you atheist (edited out original wording) jerks. And you sit here with "prove this" and "prove that" and "we're just trying to be logical" and "fallacy this" and it's really all just a bunch of (edited out original wording) bull.

Seriously? That's the way you're going? We're (edited out profanity) "jerks" strictly for being atheist? Aren't we a reasonable, loving little theist. Ignored all the parts about love and tolerance in the Jesus-part of the bible, did we? You'll pardon me for speaking to you as if you were a child, but, well, you kind of are, so I don't feel too bad about it over here. Let me break it down a little for you, in terms as unbias as I can manage.

I am an atheist, or at the very least, a tooth-fairy agnostic, which is tantamount (bonus points for 'tantamount') to the same thing.

As a person, I use what I like to call 'logic' and 'rational thinking' to define my universe. As such, my world and universal view, in all things, is defined by what I can observe, research, experience and deduce. My ability to observe is dependent entirely on the reliability of my senses. My ability to research is dependent on the reliability of my sources, their senses, and the experiments on which they base their conclusions. My ability to experience the world around me, and to reap from that experience knowledge and wisdom, is dependent on my intelligence and memory, in that I am forced to deduce, from this experience, what it is that has happened and the consequences of that.

Theism of any kind, at present, fails to meet the criteria I have set for myself to understand and find meaning in the world, because there is nothing out that that, to my satisfaction, indicates the presence, involvement or existence of anything that could meet any of the standard definitions for 'God.'

For this philosophy, I am a 'fuck' to you?

Because you are someone who believes in a being who, assuming it's the Christian God, violates several of the laws of physics, communicates through riddles and strange go-betweens, including blazing shrubbery. You believe this being loves you, despite ebola, AIDS, war, Muslims who are as sure about their God as you are about yours, Republicans, malaria, asteroids from space, and the whole, aformentioned violation of the Universes physical laws. Further more, you believe that when you die, some unquantified aspect of your being, a soul if you will, will transcend this physical plane to exist in one we have in no way observed to live eternally in the grace of this manifested creator-being who himself has simply always 'been' without any sort of origin himself(/herself/itself/zantharself) despite the fact that the whole soul/heaven dynamic also, not to belabor the point, violates the laws of the universe in regards to the exchanges of energy, or more specifically the insistence that it cannot be created, despite the obvious need for that to occur in order for a single soul to exist endlessly.



It's this sort of attitude that turns moderate atheists into militant ones, it is this sort of unsupported condescension that prompts us to be less and less tolerant of religious ideologist and the superiority complexes they breed and support amongst the 'faithful.' You believe in a fairy-tale indistinguishable from those we accept to be false regarding Zeus and Ra and Thor, except that people still continue to believe it, and while clinging to this indefensible creation myth that flies in the face of all that we as a species have actually managed to learn despite the resistance of various churches like yours throughout our history, and somehow in the process of such backwards behavior, you have decided that it is we, the skeptics, the scientists, those who demand evidence and support for the beliefs that we wish to hold up as 'facts' for all mankind to accept, are the (edited out the profanity) 'jerks' here?

That's staggering. You, sir, and I mean that with none of the respect that is usually implied by the word and use it only to cover the fact that I don't think you're worth the respect and energy it would take to commit your name to even my short-term memory, are a stunning and staggering example of how ignorant, judgmental, divisive and downright objectionable a human being, another two words I use somewhat loosely, can be. Such an attitude is indicative of such staggering uselessness that we might be well served to stop thinking of you as a person and start thinking of you as that which your philosophy makes you; an obstacle to our progress as a species and a strong argument against our future evolutionary viability.

[jmac2112]

Wow! I step away from the computer for a day, and behold, things have turned ugly. If it does any good, I heartily condemn Ryan P's language and sentiments. I don't wish any harm upon Ryan P, of course, but I hope that he will reconsider his ways.

As to the rest, I don't even know where to begin, since these discussions always go in five directions at once. I can only begin with a few general observations.

Anyone professing belief in Christianity would do well to study the prayer that Jesus Himself gave us. It consists of acts of humility, trust, adoration, submission to the Divine will, and petition. The only parts of it that could be interpreted in a "gimme what I want" sort of way are "give us this day our daily bread" and "lead us not into temptation (or "the test", a la Job). I believe "Thy will be done" is meant to govern all the petitions that we make, and that idea is contained in Jesus' prayer as He was facing death. Prayer is primarily about love of God and union with the will of God, and only secondarily about asking for particular favors. In my view, no prayer should ever be uttered without at least an implicit "Thy will be done."

I used to work with a young woman who was into New Age spirituality and Wicca. I read one of her books one day, and it astounded me that it was basically a book of "prayers" intended to manipulate various unseen forces in order to obtain whatever one wants. This is the attitude that Christianity has generally opposed as "magic." What I found surprising about it was that the belief in magic was making a comeback in such a blatant form. But I don't think you will find any Christian theology (as distinct from the behavior of this or that person) which maintains that we should use prayer as a way to manipulate God. I should not speak so broadly, however, since the world is full of interesting theologies. I will only say that in Catholic theology (what I adhere to) you will not find that view.

I don't have the powers to convince anyone who does not want to be convinced of the Christian God, but I can at least explain some points of belief. If our conception of God means anything, it means a Being who is the creator and sustainer of space, time, matter, and causality, and who is Himself not a part of it (in the manner of Pantheism). So we do not maintain that God is some guy who sat down a long time ago and planned out how the world should go, and that we are forever trying to change His mind about stuff. He "knows" in a way that is not discursive, and everything is present to Him at once.

I don't think that most Christians believe in prayer primarily because of the results of prayer. If one does not first believe in the existence of God, then prayer itself is an alien notion. I think that most people who believe in God, or at least those who have given the matter much thought, do so because of an overwhelming perception that there is entirely too much that cannot be explained in terms of matter, or Nature, or things that can be directly sensed. The frustration that was expressed so crudely by Ryan P. is one felt by most believers in God when faced with people who adamantly adhere to the notion that everything that we CAN see is just a big accident. The improbability of ANYTHING in nature, let alone the improbability of EVERYTHING TOGETHER, seems staggering. The atheist plays up the "bad" and the "disordered" (by whatever name he chooses to call them), and downplays order, beauty, honor, love, and everything else that makes life worth living. It seems as though he is willing to cling to ANY SHRED of hope that there is no God. And there is no amount of reasoning that can break through the barrier of faith in Chance that the atheist erects. The only way would be for him to experience some "Oh crap!" flash of insight that might overcome him in an unguarded moment.

Someone (I forget who) was taunting me because the Holy Spirit was not able to use my words to make him believe. Why not go directly to the Holy Spirit yourself? Not even God Himself can make you believe in Him if you don't want to, but if you want to do an experiment, try asking God to grant you belief in Him, if He really exists. I know this is a very old idea, but maybe you could try it anyway. A little openness would be necessary here.

Gotta run now. Peace upon you all!

[McCulloch]

Is this the kind of prayer you're discussing?

Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer offered in faith will restore the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up, and if he has committed sins, they will be forgiven him.
Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another so that you may be healed. The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.
Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the earth for three years and six months. Then he prayed again, and the sky poured rain and the earth produced its fruit.

[Confused]

I would add that the atheist is like a conspiracy theorist. Have you ever tried to argue with a conspiracy theorist? There is nothing at all that you can point to that will shake his faith in his theory, because there is nothing that cannot be explained as part of the conspiracy.

Very good point.

How exactly is it a 'very good point'? Did you miss the part where I explained how different atheists have different views on acceptance of evidence because atheists can be different in any and all other ways except that of disbelief in God? If not, how can you call this a 'good point' when it has been shown to be an inaccurate description?

It was a very good point because when he said I thought, "gee, that sounds pretty familiar." There's nothing we can say to convince you atheist (edited out original wording) jerks. And you sit here with "prove this" and "prove that" and "we're just trying to be logical" and "fallacy this" and it's really all just a bunch of (edited out original wording) bull.

MODERATOR FORMAL WARNING:

As you are more than aware of the rules of this forum RyanP, I will warn you that foul language is not tolerated at all. I have edited out your choice of words and I will request that you do not use them again.

[Confused]

It was a very good point because when he said I thought, "gee, that sounds pretty familiar." There's nothing we can say to convince you atheist (edited out original wording) jerks. And you sit here with "prove this" and "prove that" and "we're just trying to be logical" and "fallacy this" and it's really all just a bunch of (edited out original wording) bull.

Seriously? That's the way you're going? We're (again, edited out wording)"jerks" strictly for being atheist? Aren't we a reasonable, loving little theist. Ignored all the parts about love and tolerance in the Jesus-part of the bible, did we? You'll pardon me for speaking to you as if you were a child, but, well, you kind of are, so I don't feel too bad about it over here. Let me break it down a little for you, in terms as unbias as I can manage.

I am an atheist, or at the very least, a tooth-fairy agnostic, which is tantamount (bonus points for 'tantamount') to the same thing.

As a person, I use what I like to call 'logic' and 'rational thinking' to define my universe. As such, my world and universal view, in all things, is defined by what I can observe, research, experience and deduce. My ability to observe is dependent entirely on the reliability of my senses. My ability to research is dependent on the reliability of my sources, their senses, and the experiments on which they base their conclusions. My ability to experience the world around me, and to reap from that experience knowledge and wisdom, is dependent on my intelligence and memory, in that I am forced to deduce, from this experience, what it is that has happened and the consequences of that.

Theism of any kind, at present, fails to meet the criteria I have set for myself to understand and find meaning in the world, because there is nothing out that that, to my satisfaction, indicates the presence, involvement or existence of anything that could meet any of the standard definitions for 'God.'

For this philosophy, I am a 'xxxx' to you?

Because you are someone who believes in a being who, assuming it's the Christian God, violates several of the laws of physics, communicates through riddles and strange go-betweens, including blazing shrubbery. You believe this being loves you, despite ebola, AIDS, war, Muslims who are as sure about their God as you are about yours, Republicans, malaria, asteroids from space, and the whole, aformentioned violation of the Universes physical laws. Further more, you believe that when you die, some unquantified aspect of your being, a soul if you will, will transcend this physical plane to exist in one we have in no way observed to live eternally in the grace of this manifested creator-being who himself has simply always 'been' without any sort of origin himself(/herself/itself/zantharself) despite the fact that the whole soul/heaven dynamic also, not to belabor the point, violates the laws of the universe in regards to the exchanges of energy, or more specifically the insistence that it cannot be created, despite the obvious need for that to occur in order for a single soul to exist endlessly.



It's this sort of attitude that turns moderate atheists into militant ones, it is this sort of unsupported condescension that prompts us to be less and less tolerant of religious ideologist and the superiority complexes they breed and support amongst the 'faithful.' You believe in a fairy-tale indistinguishable from those we accept to be false regarding Zeus and Ra and Thor, except that people still continue to believe it, and while clinging to this indefensible creation myth that flies in the face of all that we as a species have actually managed to learn despite the resistance of various churches like yours throughout our history, and somehow in the process of such backwards behavior, you have decided that it is we, the skeptics, the scientists, those who demand evidence and support for the beliefs that we wish to hold up as 'facts' for all mankind to accept, are the (again, edited wording) 'jerks' here?

That's staggering. You, sir, and I mean that with none of the respect that is usually implied by the word and use it only to cover the fact that I don't think you're worth the respect and energy it would take to commit your name to even my short-term memory, are a stunning and staggering example of how ignorant, judgmental, divisive and downright objectionable a human being, another two words I use somewhat loosely, can be. Such an attitude is indicative of such staggering uselessness that we might be well served to stop thinking of you as a person and start thinking of you as that which your philosophy makes you; an obstacle to our progress as a species and a strong argument against our future evolutionary viability.

MODERATOR INTERVENTION:

Two wrongs do not make a right. Please don't lower your standards to include the use of profanity simply because another poster has.

[Vanguard]

I would add that the atheist is like a conspiracy theorist. Have you ever tried to argue with a conspiracy theorist? There is nothing at all that you can point to that will shake his faith in his theory, because there is nothing that cannot be explained as part of the conspiracy.

Very good point.

How exactly is it a 'very good point'? Did you miss the part where I explained how different atheists have different views on acceptance of evidence because atheists can be different in any and all other ways except that of disbelief in God? If not, how can you call this a 'good point' when it has been shown to be an inaccurate description?

It was a very good point because when he said I thought, "gee, that sounds pretty familiar." There's nothing we can say to convince you atheist (edited profanity) jerks. And you sit here with "prove this" and "prove that" and "we're just trying to be logical" and "fallacy this" and it's really all just a bunch of (edited word) bull.

Hey, don't lose your cool my friend. I can appreciate as much as the next guy a momentary lose of control but you should now take pains not to make this your legacy by not apologizing. Clean the slate and move on making sure not to disprespect the many "non-believer" posters with reputations that now far surpass your own.

[OnceConvinced]

. The frustration that was expressed so crudely by Ryan P. is one felt by most believers in God when faced with people who adamantly adhere to the notion that everything that we CAN see is just a big accident.

Who here adhers to such a ridiculous notion? Certainly not any of the people I know on this site. Sounds like you may be harbouring some false beliefs about evolution there. I'm not an evolutionist, but the "big accident" concept is something manufactured by religionists to put down evolution. No evolutionist I have come across has mentioned anything about "big accidents".

The improbability of ANYTHING in nature, let alone the improbability of EVERYTHING TOGETHER, seems staggering.

Some people will be so amazed by it they will believe that a God must have been involved. (Argument from personal incredulity). However many others accept that just because something may seem staggering doesn't mean that there is anything supernatural in it. This is not because they are conspiracy theorists, but because it is not in their personality to attribute God to things that amaze them. We are all different so because something may "blow you away" so much that you just have to believe in God, for others it won't.

The atheist plays up the "bad" and the "disordered" (by whatever name he chooses to call them), and downplays order, beauty, honor, love, and everything else that makes life worth living. It seems as though he is willing to cling to ANY SHRED of hope that there is no God.

Really? You really believe that? Then I guess it must be true that on the other hand, Christians will desperately cling to any SHRED of hope that there IS a God. (I have certainly seen a lot of that). See how the argument works both ways? You seem to love painting unblievers with the same brush. I know there are many people here who would love to believe in God (myself one of them), but the fact is, they just can't.

Someone (I forget who) was taunting me because the Holy Spirit was not able to use my words to make him believe. Why not go directly to the Holy Spirit yourself? Not even God Himself can make you believe in Him if you don't want to, but if you want to do an experiment, try asking God to grant you belief in Him, if He really exists. I know this is a very old idea, but maybe you could try it anyway. A little openness would be necessary here.

That was me who was "taunting" you. You want me to try out the Holy spirit for myself, even though it doesn't seem to be working very well for you? That's a little like a car salesman telling me he has the most amazing car for me, but when he tries to turn on the engine, it fails to start. If someone wants to sell me something that appears to be faulty and not working for THEM, why would I buy it?

Let me tell you, I spent over 30 years of my life believing the Holy Spirit was in me and that it was guiding me. So I've been there, done that. I'm now an ex-Christian, because I found first hand it wasn't all it's cracked up to be. So no, I'm not inclined to spend any more time seeking an entity I no longer believe exists. And before you judge me and tell me I was never a true Christian and never really had the HS, my experiences with the HS were pretty much typical of the majority of Christians.