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....

[POI]

All these questions and hypotheses and puzzles only add up to agnosticism, which means we don't know until science tells us. That means no god of any kind until validated.

Great point! "AFG" likes to point out philosophy, and that 'science' cannot confirm a god, because 'science' is limited. But think about how many gods we now reject, or lack faith, because of the introduction of 'science'.... Take "Zeus", for instance.... If "science" did not exist, many of us may still have faith "Zeus" is up there throwing down lightening bolts. And sure, a "Zeus" believer could still argue that he does, because you cannot prove that he doesn't....

Or how about how it's safe to say many now feel they have no choice but to rationalize Genesis as allegorical, verses stating it's literal....

So though 'science' cannot disprove a god, for this/that reason, it sure does look to continue to objectively reduce/tighten the (god of the gaps).

[TRANSPONDER]

You seemed to miss the point.

Right back at ya.... Please address what I actually highlighted and wrote about.

I bet neither of you have watched the 3 mistakes atheists make yet. You should. You owe it to yourselves so you stop making the mistakes.

After I'm done watching, can I point out the many mistakes you are making, without having to also provide a video to boot?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou6hi-r6GlM&t=344s The guest here is Joe Schmid, Majesty of Reason on Youtube, a philosopher and agnostic. If you could learn to reason like this guy, you would have a much stronger position. I wish you could see just how unconvincing your position is. In fact, it is not even a world view. It is just skepticism without substance.

And yet, you have appeared to abandon this thread, after I thoroughly picked apart your rationale for "prayer." Meaning, you never addressed post #114. So go ahead and huff and puff. It's entertaining, at least...

Quite possibly A4G thinks I am being harsh, even angry . He may even see my post as an 'emotional response' . But I reckon that I have been more respectful than I might have been. I note that the topic has long been abandoned for the tedious old Theist ploy of chucking apologetics tracts at us, as though we were gormless dunderheads just ready and ripe to be sucked into the religious pyramid scheme.

Sure, the Sophistry is a cut above the Cloud Cover apologetic or 'The evangelists wrote from different points of view - that is why they terminally refute one another'. And aside from the total evasion of the 'Which God?' argument, as the theists almost always do, which usually end up staggering off to get our wounds dressed without ever getting beyond the case for a Creator, or the cheap and demeaning "this erudite fellow agrees with me, and if you could reason as well you'd be smarter than you are", this constant gambit of referring us to various Authorities (often presented as atheist professors who can't deny that a god exists) is as dismal an argument as the doorstep evangelist who who upon having the claim that there are no transitional fossils refuted (1) shoves a handful of tracts into the hand before escaping.

And they ain't so different, as questions are ignored and, if one apologetic is refuted, a link to another one is given, and we are expected to watch the video, post the argument and then beaver way to refute it while he sits with his feet up laughing at us, with another link to an Authority all ready to post. Yep, it probably isn't his intent, but that is how he is treating us - with disrespect.

(1) the museums are full of them - oh yes, the Creationists may deny that they are transitionals, but that is not the same as 'there are none' (expected to be heard as 'Evolutionists have never found any').

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #120]

Let me know when you finish watching the video so we can have a real discussion.

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #120]

Let me know when you finish watching the video so we can have a real discussion.

3rd request... Let me know when you are actually going to address post #114, so we can <continue> our already existing real discussion. Why? Because I had already asked you... Your follow up response was a distractor...

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #114]

I have already answered this.

Why would prayer be pointless if God exists and answers some prayers? You have given me zero reasons to think God does not exist. You have given me zero reasons to believe God doesn't answer some prayers.

Oh, but God doesn't answer this particular type of prayer, and? So God answers nothing?

God also will never answer your prayer of being the best rapist ever, so I guess that means prayer is pointless because you cannot get an answer to some types of prayers.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to AquinasForGod in post #123]

Why don't you watch the video and post the reason why God exists, never mind how it relates to topic, instead of demanding that I do the work for you? I think in fact I've already said this and you are doing what I've seen many times before - having lost the initiative - stick to the one thing ht appears to have legs and harp on that.

[Replying to POI in post #114]

I have already answered this.

Why would prayer be pointless if God exists and answers some prayers? You have given me zero reasons to think God does not exist. You have given me zero reasons to believe God doesn't answer some prayers.

Oh, but God doesn't answer this particular type of prayer, and? So God answers nothing?

God also will never answer your prayer of being the best rapist ever, so I guess that means prayer is pointless because you cannot get an answer to some types of prayers.

Thank you. You seem to be retreating without even putting up a defence. The burden of proof is on you to give reasons why a god exists, even before we get to which one. It is not on us to prove that it doesn't exist. Posting expressions of your Faith proves nothing, no more than trying to send me off to read books or watch videos that you reckon will make the case for you. This is the good old reversal of the burden of proof that makes you think that I have to go and disprove this or that tome by some old time god -apologist, then argue you into accepting that refutation, which the believer never does as they operate on Faith anyway. Don't you get it that you have to do the work yourself? And you have to do better that pretend that I have somehow signed up to Kalam and thus really ought to accept God. I loved that one.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #126]

Incorrect. God's existence is not the topic of this thread. You might be confusing threads.

The topic here is what is the point of prayer. Not does God actually exist.

[OneWay]

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....

Communication

[POI]

I have already answered this.

Why would prayer be pointless if God exists and answers some prayers?

I already told you, many times now. If you pray for god to cure "irreversible conditions", he is either going to:

A) perpetually say no (unless it's the 2 examples you gave and/or maybe some poor person in the middle of nowhere who will not be able to demonstrate)
B) not answer because hes not even there

So yea, it's basically pointless to pray for god to cure irreversible conditions. All the other stuff can be addressed without a god.

You have given me zero reasons to think God does not exist. You have given me zero reasons to believe God doesn't answer some prayers.

Right, because I already admitted, from the get-go.... I cannot falsify the unfalsifiable. I cannot prove a negative. I cannot prove he isn't there somewhere... Just like I also cannot do this for any god claim. This is why you can perpetually claim 'victory". Just like all the other god believers, in opposing god(s).

My exchange with you, are for the others watching. Not you. You already told me, long ago, that I am not going to change your mind And I already told you that the ones in the debate hardly ever do....

Oh, but God doesn't answer this particular type of prayer, and? So God answers nothing?

If prayer requests to cure the irreversible conditions, (which would require an external agency), remain unfulfilled, and the reversible requests, (which do not require an external agency), sometimes happen, then it is logical to dismiss any such claimed god.

God also will never answer your prayer of being the best rapist ever, so I guess that means prayer is pointless because you cannot get an answer to some types of prayers.

I'm not bringing that up. We already agreed this god only answers 'good' requests ---> You tried to demonstrate that god healed a baby with downs syndrome. I would assume that healing cerebral palsy and amputations would also be part of that 'good' list'

He's not answering many irreversible 'good' requests. A matter of fact, it's pretty safe to say he's not answering any 'good' irreversible requests.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #129]

I already told you, many times now. If you pray for god to cure "irreversible conditions", he is either going to:

A) perpetually say no (unless it's the 2 examples you gave and/or maybe some poor person in the middle of nowhere who will not be able to demonstrate)
B) not answer because hes not even there

So yea, it's basically pointless to pray for god to cure irreversible conditions. All the other stuff can be addressed without a god.

So then you are not showing why it would be pointless to pray to God. Here is why. Even if God never answers some prayers like retardation, missing limbs, etc, it is possible God does answer prayers like when doctors cannot cure cancer, then they go and touch a holy relic and the cancer goes away. I cited such a case.

A skeptic could say, I think her body healed itself. Okay cool. She rationally believes God answered her prayer.

If it is possible God answers some prayers like this, then it is not pointless to pray.

Also, you are not even considering all the spiritual benefits of prayer, such as getting closer to God. In Catholicism, Classical Theism is true of God, divine simplicity and God is existence itself. God has made us partakers in his divinity by sharing existence with us, which is how we exist at all.

By praying, we are trying to align ourselves with the will of our very existence, thus elevating us closer to perfection, closer to God.

So even if we never get any physical answers to our prayers, we do grow closer to God.

Right, because I already admitted, from the get-go.... I cannot falsify the unfalsifiable. I cannot prove a negative. I cannot prove he isn't there somewhere... Just like I also cannot do this for any god claim. This is why you can perpetually claim 'victory". Just like all the other god believers, in opposing god(s).

That is not true. I can prove the non-existence of a 2D object existence in 2D space that has 3 sides and 4 sides simultaneously, just as I can prove the non-existence of married bachelors.

My exchange with you, are for the others watching. Not you. You already told me, long ago, that I am not going to change your mind And I already told you that the ones in the debate hardly ever do....

Same here, although, I have hope that you might still come to God. Surely, you do not think you have offered any theists a reason to stop believing, right?

If prayer requests to cure the irreversible conditions, (which would require an external agency), remain unfulfilled, and the reversible requests, (which do not require an external agency), sometimes happen, then it is logical to dismiss any such claimed god.

I answered this above.

He's not answering many irreversible 'good' requests. A matter of fact, it's pretty safe to say he's not answering any 'good' irreversible requests.

I am positive that you haven't shown any theist that it is safe to say God is not answering any good irreversible requests because we have medical documentation of incurable diseases going away. You can claim it is the body healing itself, but that doesn't change that we do not have the understanding or technology to reverse the disease. We give them a death sentence because most everyone dies. There are just a small handful of people that miraculously survived.

I don't think a theist will have many issues with God not answering prayers for an arm to grow back. That is like asking God to prove himself, which he clearly is not in the business of doing.