Topic awaiting preservation: Let us talk about Prayer.

The passing of the Pope has left me with an interesting observation :

Prayer doesn't work.

Millions (literally!) prayed for the Pope. It didn't help, not even a little.

If the prayers of millions do not have even the slightest effect on the xian god, then why do xians think that a couple will make a difference?

I have come to the conclusion, that prayer only helps sooth those who are praying. But surely, in the light of this massive prayer and the lack of result in the case of the Pope, that even the most religious out there must realize that prayer does not have the desired results.

Is it then just a placebo, designed to make those who use it feel better?

How can you claim from that observation that prayer doesn't work.

What about gods will, Fate etc...

Perhaps it was God's will that the Pope die, perhaps in his death we will learn new things about ourselves.

Perhaps prayer did work a little, the Pope almost died a week or so ago but maybe the power of prayer kept him going just a little longer.

If prayer to you is about getting what you ask for as simple as that, then I guess you're absolutely right, prayer doesn't work.

I think prayer is a method of focus and meditation, allowing for inspiration (perhaps from God) to achieve or gain or see what we prayer for.

Cheers,

Here is one possibility likely to be controversial. But first, some context. Quotes can make much more sense out of it than my words.

quote:

---

"It is the bounden duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist, and as to what Antichrist is no sane man ought to raise a question. If it be not the Popery in the Church of Rome there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name. It wounds Christ, robs Christ of His glory, puts sacramental efficacy in the place of His atonement, and lifts a piece of bread in the place of the Saviour....If we pray against it, because it is against Him, we shall love the persons though we hate their errors; we shall love their souls, though we loathe and detest their dogmas...."
- C. H. Spurgeon

"...the Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power."
-Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (The Promotion of True Religious Unity), Encyclical promulgated on January 6, 1928.

?...We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty..."
- Pope Leo XIII, in Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae (The Reunion of Christendom), Encyclical promulgated on June 20, 1894.

"...We declare, state and define that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all human beings that they submit to the Roman Pontiff [pope]."
- Pope boniface VIII, Bull Unum Sanctum, 1302

"...I will be like the most High."
- Lucifer, Isaiah 14:14

"...the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."
- 2 Thessalonians 2:2-4

"...and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is."
- Revelation 17:8

"I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another..."
- Isaiah 42:8

---

Why would God answer prayers to save one who is the head of an organization which steals His glory? He is a jealous God, is he not?

Just a thought.

Ramasax

(Edited by Ramasax on 04-04-2005 11:45)

quote:

---

Perhaps prayer did work a little, the Pope almost died a week or so ago but maybe the power of prayer kept him going just a little longer.

---

You are not being serious here, are you? Obviously the prayers didn't work - the Pope is dead.

The reason I am putting this issue forward, is because millions prayed for the Pope. I am curious, that if millions of prayers do not have the desired result, what is the chance of a few?

(Edited by WebShaman on 04-04-2005 12:48)

WebShaman:

quote:

---

I have come to the conclusion, that prayer only helps sooth those who are praying. But surely, in the light of this massive prayer and the lack of result in the case of the Pope, that even the most religious out there must realize that prayer does not have the desired results.

Is it then just a placebo, designed to make those who use it feel better?

---

You doubt it ?

Well, there were/are some studies going on, about how concious thought can actually influence events. I was considering that maybe prayer in such masses might have an influence along those lines.

But it looks like it doesn't.

Prayer can be looked at in two different ways.

As blaise alluded to, it can be a kind of meditative activity. Focusing your psoitive thoughts, clarifying your feelings, etc.

Then there is gideon view - prayer can save people who are dying.

This is obviously the view that WS is talking about, and obviously in part becuase of the posts gideon has made in regard to such things.

I think it is a significant point in that regard. The most highly regarded holy man in the christian world (even, in many cases, by non-caatholics), millions of people praying, and nothing. Makes the whole issue pretty silly, IMO.

Outside of that narrow field, my reaction is "yeah, no shit".

1st because prayer doesn't/shouldn't work like that.

2nd because it's pretty obvious that praying to imaginary figures isn't going to accomplish anything =)

Oooh shocking!

I was serious about what I said WS, but I was putting a suggestion forward (although written as though it was an opinion/belief).

I read an article once on research with prayer, they had a group of people that were the prayers, and their role was to pray for people in a given ward in a given hospital. the prayers had pictures and items belonging to the sick people.

There was a split of 50-50 of sick people that were prayed for and those that weren't, they all shared the same ward and were not seperated otherwise.

At the end of the research it conlcuded that praying (perhaps positive though) seemed to positively effect the sick people that were prayed for.

There were no relations between the sick and the praying people. the research was taken over a matter of weeks/months.

I'll see if I can find the source for you guys if you're interested.

I find prayer a really interesting topic because it's something that all religions take part in, but it doesn't stop there, many theologies and phylosophies on life also have a form of prayer like meditation, such as Yoga and Taoism.

Cheers,

[doh]typo[/doh]



(Edited by Blaise on 04-04-2005 14:40)

In my prayer life, I never ask God for a favor, money, power, status, love, a better life, etc. I ask God for power to love, endurance, peace and patience to accept whatever life sends me. I will be in pain, agony, suffer life's hardship, but with the help of God, I can endure it.

Sure we can ask God for aid and assistance in making someone well. But it would be God's will not mine in determinig, why God will or will not make that person well. Christians know that "our ways are not Gods ways" In the case of Pope John Paul, he was old, sick and had suffered very much and our prayers for him were not in vain. His journey in his mortal body was over. And the life he was intended to live has already begun in eternity. John Paul will continue to pray from wherever he is to help souls here on earth. THis is biblical teaching from Revelations. In Christian theology, the belief is that the world is sustained by prayer. Its like radio waves going to heaven and radio waves coming back to earth communicating every second of the day.

All prayers were and are directed for the Pope's soul, the church and the healing of hearts. Could we help, that we wanted John Paul in our world a little longer. In our humaness we tend to cling life even when its time to go. In understanding the relationship with the Pope and his flock, its like he is the only spiritual father we have ever known. Its a very deep and personal realtionship. I know I have a bilogical father and he taught me to live a spiritual life, but thur prayer and faith, I feel connected to John Paul and all our flock as a family. And he was the head of our family. I will miss him very much and feel the loss. This week will be much sadness but in the weeks to come, we will have a new Pope and it will be a time for celebration and joy.

The world wide coverage of the Popes passing and the Catholic faith from all corners of the world is tremedous. Every cable news channel devoted much time to the Catholic church and its faithful.

quote:

---

our prayers for him were not in vain.

---

How do you know this? I see no evidence to the contrary - he is dead.

quote:

---

All prayers were and are directed for the Pope's soul, the church and the healing of hearts.

---

This is NOT what is being reported from those interviews with those who prayed in masse for the Pope - at least, that is not what they were telling reporters.

Blaise: It's demonstrated that placebo, even when taken consciously, works. It works to a really slighter degree than real drugs but it does work and activates the same areas in the brain that the drugs they are supposed to replace.

If the patients in the study you mention were aware that someone might be ( as they didn't know if they were in the test group or the witness group ) praying for their recovery, it's exactly like a placebo. So now, how to figure what really did effect between the placebo effect and the prayers themselves ? I'm curious to see if the same results were obtained if one said to a group of patients that some people pray for their recovery while there's nobody praying in fact. Does the fact of "knowing" somebody pray for you works alone ? If so, it'd show that the prayers have the exact same effect as a placebo.



(Edited by poi on 04-04-2005 16:53)

Web, you seem really intent on proving this whole religion thing is garbage. I hate to break it to you, but it just can not be done. There is and will always be an answer to any arguement you put forth, because it is setup that way.

You have two main response that can be applied to any arguement:

1. Its gods will
2. Humans don't understand his message

So anything you put forth can be attributed to one of the two.

Q: Why do millions of people starve to death?
A: Its gods will.

Q: Why do we have wars in the name of god?
A: People don't understand his true message.

Q: Why doesn't prayer work every time?
A: It is gods will.

Q: Why do humans suck?
A: We are dumb and we can not understand his message.

You can just keep going on like this ad nausium. The one thing that you can not do is prove them wrong. They have an all powerful idea that solves all questions all the time without the need to address the main issues. This is a basic premise of the ideology.

You can not hope to apply rational thought to irrational ideas, it just does not work.

As a rational individual you should know that, and it pains me to see you fall into this trap. Snap out of this little bender of railing against religion, I promise you will feel better in the morning.

<sidenote>If you happen to stumble upon a really good orater they will take the time to quote passages from their sacred story book to make their answer seem even more authoritive, then they will go on to explain to you how god work, such as explaining how starving to death brings you closer to god because you know the suffering that was experienced by one of their mythical figures, or that going out and killing heathens is an act of piety before god. And then to tell you dying for the cause will grant you the ability to partake in all of the sins you are not allowed on earth, in the life after death. It is really a fascinating experince.</sidenote>

Dan @ Code Town

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
our prayers for him were not in vain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



How do you know this? I see no evidence to the contrary - he is dead.



Web

The answer is Faith. Faith in beliving without seeing.





John 14: 15-19: "19 If you love me, you will keep my commandments. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always. 17 the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you. 19 In a little while, the world will no longer see me, but you will see me, because I live and you will live. On John 14: 25-26 Jesus says, "I have told you this while I am with you. 26 The Advocate, the Holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name--he will teach you everything and remind you of all that I told you."
Thomas, called Didymus, one of the Twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples said to him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see the mark of the nails in his hands and put my finger into the nailmarks and put my hand into his side, I will not believe." 26 Now a week later his disciples were again inside and Thomas was with them. Jesus came, although the doors were locked, and stood in their midst and said, "Peace be with you." 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here and see my hands, and bring you hand and put it into my side, and do not be unbelieving, but believe." 28 Thomas answered and said to him, "My Lord and my God!" 29 Jesus said to him, "Have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed." Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples that are not written in this book. 31 But these are written that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through this belief you may have life in his name."

Faith... damnit, I forgot to make mention of that one. Faith is simply the word given to the combination of responses one and two.

Dan @ Code Town

WarMage: It's just too tempting to ( try to )give a grasp of reality to the faithful. Though we know we are preaching in the desert. God ways are not our ways and blah blah blah ...

Didn't read too thoroughly so sorry if this has already been said.

WS: You seem to be thinking that those who pray believe they're going to "get what they pray for;" that prayer is just a mechanism for making things happen.

But isn't prayer more simply a way of *talking* to (a) god? When you think of it like that, it makes a lot of sense that you don't always get what you ask for. The idea, I believe, is that if we ask for something and there's no problem, god will grant it; but if he has a better idea, then he won't. It's a method of communication.

If I asked my friend if I could borrow $100, and he said no, did our conversation "not work?"


 

Because I am curious WM.

I am curious on how far abroad from reason, logic, and cause&effect some will go. I am interested in how one convinces oneself into believing something with total lack of evicdence.

I am interested in this process, how it starts, how it is continued, and the purpose behind it, and what drives it in some people.

In other words, I am seeking to understand it.

I know what it was inside myself that caused this. However, I am not everybody else. These discussions here do sometimes reveal little insights into this from the point of view of others, and have helped me to understand this process a bit better.

I am aware of the "It's god's will", Faith, and everything else under the sun. Standard bs to such questions. And I am not really interested in that, of course. But sometimes the reasoning (or unreasoning, as the case may be) process behind this becomes apparent, or moreso. It is this insight which intrigues me.

So forgive me if I sometimes go "over the edge" with these topics.

quote:

---

WarMage said:

Web, you seem really intent on proving this whole religion
thing is garbage. I hate to break it to you, but it just can not be
done. There is and will always be an answer to any arguement you put
forth, because it is setup that way.

---

Yep there is always wiggle room:

Q: Why didn't the rains come? We prayed hard and offered many gifts.
A: You didn't pray hard enough - give us more gifts!!

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

if I went 'round saying I was an Emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!

Blaise, If I recall the study accurately it was later found to have been not at all scientific, but conducted by a religious group bound, bent and determined to prove prayer worked.

I believe a subsequent study based on scientific principles was also conducted and results were somewhat different.

I will look to see if I still have the references in my favourites and post saem if found.

As to prayer, just talkin' to yerself.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Jade:

I noticed that all of the things you will ask for in prayer are things that you can pretty much controll yourself. What is up with that? Seems to me that maybe we should handle the little stuff ourselves......

I'm surprised no one has given this response yet:

quote:

---

God always answers prayers. Sometimes the answer is "No".

---

To obvious?

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

briggl: There's another variant :

quote:

---

God always answers prayers. Sometimes the answer is "Go to hell!".

---

Sorry couldn't resist

Wish I had said that!

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

Then there is gideon view - prayer can save people who are dying.

---

I never said that prayer will save someone who is dying. It might, but that is not what prayer is used for.

Sometimes people see God as the Santa Clause in the sky: He will give you whatever you want if you just ask Him. I think that Slime and someone else... had the right idea. It is more about getting closer to God to know His will for your life. You can ask for His blessings, you can ask for healing, you can ask for whatever you want, but sometimes God has a different plan, and sometimes He doesn't. Prayer just lets God know what you want, but can you tell God what to do?

Hey Warmage, I'm going to have to disagree with you. Many religions have answers for those questions other than"it is God's will."

"You must unlearn what you have learned."
~Yoda

quote:

---

You can ask for His blessings, you can ask for healing, you can ask for whatever you want, but sometimes God has a different plan, and sometimes He doesn't. Prayer just lets God know what you want, but can you tell God what to do?

---

The point being, that when compared to what happens when there is no praying, there is absolutely no difference!

So praying and not praying have the same effect (or lack thereof).

Meaning that prayer to god is just as effective as not praying.

quote:

---

Jade:

I noticed that all of the things you will ask for in prayer are things that you can pretty much controll yourself. What is up with that? Seems to me that maybe we should handle the little stuff ourselves......

---

We do handle them, but we realized where the strength to cope comes from:

One night a man had a dream. He dreamed
he was walking along the beach with the LORD.
Across the sky flashed scenes from his life.
For each scene he noticed two sets of
footprints in the sand: one belonging
to him, and the other to the LORD.
When the last scene of his life flashed before him,
he looked back at the footprints in the sand.
He noticed that many times along the path of
his life there was only one set of footprints.
He also noticed that it happened at the very
lowest and saddest times in his life.
This really bothered him and he
questioned the LORD about it:


"LORD, you said that once I decided to follow
you, you'd walk with me all the way.
But I have noticed that during the most
troublesome times in my life,
there is only one set of footprints.
I don't understand why when
I needed you most you would leave me."

The LORD replied:


"My son, my precious child,
I love you and I would never leave you.
During your times of trial and suffering,
when you see only one set of footprints,
it was then that I carried you."



(Edited by jade on 04-05-2005 17:46)

Strange that I always had to help myself, when times were hardest...

Nice little quote, but it won't save your ass when the bullets are flying.

So cute.

WebShaman: If it is God's will, the bullet will freeze in the air and the offender will see the light and feel the love of Jesus Christ the All Mighty Lord or us mere mortals. Yes God can do that if he wants.




(Edited by poi on 04-05-2005 22:23)

quote:

---

Yes God can do that if he wants.

---

Nope... it's Superman who does that. =)

God can bend the matrix at will.

http://www.valleyskeptic.com/pray.htm

Lets face it what they really mean is "Prey".

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

If it is God's will, the bullet will freeze in the air and the offender will see the light and feel the love of Jesus Christ the All Mighty Lord or us mere mortals. Yes God can do that if he wants.

---

But he never does.

quote:

---

WebShaman said:
The point being, that when compared to what happens when there is no praying, there is absolutely no difference!
So praying and not praying have the same effect (or lack thereof).
Meaning that prayer to god is just as effective as not praying.

---

This is where things get very interesting, and where you'll find arguments between different religions, or even just different denominations, but here's what I believe:

When you are a young child, your mother will feed you each and every day, irrespective of whether you acknowledge her or not (up to a point of course!). So, why bother acknowledging her at all?
Because, just like with praying, it's about relationship. At least, it is from where i'm standing. Some may pray out of superstition, or duty, or habit, or fear, but I believe the purpose of prayer is to talk with God.

I do not believe that God is limited by our prayer - he's not sitting up there, with a big wand, aching to give you something, and just waiting for you to pray the magic words so that he's able to give them to you.

I believe he did, however, create us for his pleasure, and his glory; and therefore enjoys it when we decide to engage in an active relationship with him.

I do not believe in 'the power of prayer'. I believe that prayer is powerful in that it allows you to speak with God, but prayer won't heal the pope, won't fix your car, and won't remove unsightly stains from your shirts. As i'm sure you realise, i do believe that God is powerful, and merciful - and can choose to do what his children ask. In the OT, there are cases of prophets or leaders bargaining with God, 'persuading' him - in genesis 18:16, you read of Abraham pleading for sodom - asking God not to destroy Sodom if there are 50 righteous people, then 45, then 40, and eventually, even if there are only 10 righteous people there.

To second what other folks have said - God is not a vending machine. It stands to reason that God does not allow every prayer to be answered with a 'yes' - this would cause catastrophe, especially at finals time (after all, both teams can't win, can they?)!

Prayer is about telling God how you feel, asking him for things that you feel are important, for giving praise to him, and for asking for forgiveness. And guess what - more 'christlike' folk will have more of their prayers answered, simply because what they ask for is more in line with his will.

Dan - i think you're almost right on the money with that argument. although that form of circular reasoning doesn't help at all when it comes down to intellectual debates, if one believes that there is a sovereign, all-powerful God, who controls everything, then from that viewpoint, any answer could be boiled down to "it's God's will". When dealing with components which have factors of infinity, normal logic seems to get stretched a little. The real problem, when it comes to discussions like these, is how little intelligence and reasoning 'believers' provide before supplying the "it's God's will" argument.

quote:

---

but prayer won't heal the pope, won't fix your car, and won't remove unsightly stains from your shirts

---

Damn, looks like I'll have to throw this shirt away after all!

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/041220/20prayer_2.htm


Well, it may seem that prayers don't mean much to some, but for the most part earthlings have been praying and offering since the beginnings and throughout all of our history.

I believe that God allows some suffering by his reason. In my faith, we believe we are allowed to atone for our sins in our earthly life in the form of a suffering(s) and thus become purged. So that maybe our purging state will not be that long or maybe we not have to be purged at all and go thur a purified state. For example if someone has suffered excruciating pain of cancer or other heath problems or if some have a terrible hardship or has had a hardship life, God uses this as a purifying. I believe there is a scripture relating to this. I will have to look for the verse.

Then again, I believe the degree of faith one has also determines the healing as you as see from the passage of the NT.

Matthew 8:6-13 NIV "Lord," he said, "my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering." Jesus said to him, "I will go and heal him." The centurion replied, "Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, 'Go.' and he goes; and that one, 'come,' and he comes. I say to my servant, 'do this,' and he does it." When Jesus heard this, He was astonished and said to those following Him, "I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. I say to you that many will come from the East and the West, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Then Jesus said to the centurion, "Go. It will be done just as you believed it would." And his servant was healed at that very hour.

Purify of/for what ?

Are children and women being abused guilty of anything and thus need to purify their soul ? Are children starving in the third world guilty and need to purify their soul ? Did the people of South Asia need to purify and undergo a massive tsunami ?

quote:

---

Purify of/for what ?

Are children and women being abused guilty of anything and thus need to purify their soul ? Are children starving in the third world guilty and need to purify their soul ? Did the people of South Asia need to purify and undergo a massive tsunami ?

---

I don't know why, but the way I see it is this way this way.....The wicked ways of the world do not come from God. Abused persons already or will carry a cross their whole lives. Already they are laden with a tremendous heavy burden of emotional trauma. Since we and our ancestors have sinned, we committed a treason against God and as a result all of nature is now in a rebellion against God and its proper order. We humans are currently not in our place of sovereignty over creation as we were meant to be. So, we are not getting what we deserve but rather what we do not deserve. God did not owe it to us to create us. Does he owe us breath, food, water, the sun and the moon, friends, warmth, etc. Are we not surprised that any bad things happen to good people, but rather that God is gracious to give us all good things that we experience--including this time we have in which to turn from our sins, trust in Christ, and follow Him. We are urged to take advantage of this time God has given us at Christ's expense, and turn from our sinful ways. Bad things happen to good people all the time. In scripture we are reminded about this in the story of " Job." And the most perfect example wa a man named " Jesus of Nazareth."
I do not hold God responsible for illnesses, accidents, and natural disasters. Its silly to blame God for everything bad that happens. God hates suffering but cannot eliminate it, more easily than I can worship a God who chooses to make children suffer and die, for whatever exalted reason. God does not cause our misfortunes. Some are caused by bad luck, some are caused by bad people, and some are simply an inevitable consequence of our being human and being mortal, living in a world of natural laws. I feel the painful things that happen to us are not punishments for our misbehavior, nor are they in any way part of some grand design on God's part. Because the tragedy is not God's will, we need not feel hurt or betrayed by God when tragedy strikes. We can turn to Him for help in overcoming because we can tell ourselves that God is as outraged by it as we are.

Ok, let's say God is not be responsible for illnesses, accidents, and natural disasters. If it's not his will to make people suffer why does he let them suffer anyway ? But why does he/she/it let them happen since he's so powerful ? Is he too lazy to use his super power and stop the tsunamis, earthquake, violent husbands, ... ? Or does he simply don't care about his little creatures ? You say he owes us nothing for having created us. But parents owes care to their children when they go wrong.

poi: Parenting is a great anology between Creator/creation and parent/child, God cares for his children and tells them that certain actions have certain consequences (just like parents). I find God to be much more consistent by being able building in these consequences, parents have no such luxury and have to do it all by force of will (which is easily weakened by the "life" factor, the 'flesh" as us xianspeakers like to refer to it).

It's not that parents don't love their children when the children bite the other children, they administer discipline in hopes that the child will recall that actions have consequences. Individuals cannot have someone else's will forced on them, God or parent or police or whatever. We're all doin our own thing and gettin by as best we can, and gettin beat down when we screw up. Our authority figures still love us tho and want to help us be the best we can be, cept for maybe the coppers and politicians

Now, don't make fun of me for loving my dad and I'll take it easy on your lack of hair

Oh my aching back.

On the one hand the mythicists want us to believe their god is responsible for everything (genesis).

But when the logical flaw in that alleged reasoning is pointed out all of a sudden it is "oh, but not the bad stuff".

Sorry but, as out Amurican friends are fond of saying, that dawg won't hunt.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

meh, now that I've got in here against my better judgement I should say that I'm trackin with reitsma regarding "what prayer is". It's a conversation with my Father. It's my understanding and faith (the faith came first actually) that he's got the goods when it comes to wisdom so I'm very eager to hear his voice and talk to him as well. It's in these times of quiet conversation that my burdens and joys are most clear, to the point that I can find the most graceful way to respond to them and live them in out within the context of this life I'm living.

I think the "Lord's Prayer" as it's called, the one where Jesus gives his disciples an outline for prayer, is as it should be and is the model for effective prayer. There is nothing in that prayer that assumes that my will should be considered over his. Jesus' own prayer in the garden of Gethsemane (didn't _even_ bother looking up the proper spelling on that one) was one of resignation to the role he was playing, he expressed his deep desire to not be humiliated, tortured, thought of as a mortal nutjob criminal and killed as a common criminal, but in the end it was "not my will, but thine".

Most of you guys' antichristian arguments seem to assume that we know exactly what we're supposed to be doing and that's just not the case! Getting by as best we can is all, figuring it out as we go along, just like everyone else. The faith of a bazillion people is not to be taken piece by piece from a bazillion different sources and crammed together as an argument against the very thing we're struggling to attain.

If I fully figure this stuff out this will be my first stop but as I haven't, you'll have to pardon me for stopping by so infrequently.

quote:

---

Oh my aching back.

---

Yep, that was definitely the will of God.

I'm going to limit my response to your last comment, Ehtheist, simply because it's starting to wander off topic, and i know you like keeping things on topic.

Try and see where you are, from our situation. You say God doesn't exist - or if he does, you sure don't want anything to do with it. Essentially, God wants a relationship with humans, and you tell him, on no uncertain terms, to get stuffed. (Now, let's be honest - we all have.) Now, there's evil, and sadness, and wrong in the world, and you blame God?

Now, if a child does a good thing, you might give them a reward. If they then do a bad thing, and you still reward them, won't that screw things up a little? Of course, in the world, it's a little more complicated, and the causal effects are less direct, on many occasions. But essentially, we're all living in an imperfect world, and all that bad stuff? Well, that's just people getting their own way, without God getting in there.

Of course, luckily for us, he IS still here, doing little things like maintaining laws of physics, and keeping our bodies from spontaneous decombustion.... but eventually, those folk who lived and died their lives wanting to do things their own way, not wanting anything to do with God, will get what their after - life without God. But i don't think it will be quite as peachy as they think.

Ok, sorry about that continued discourse - shall we get back to prayer?

quote:

---

WarMage said:

There is and will always be an answer to any arguement you put forth, because it is setup that way.

---

I think you hit the nail square on its ugly head WarMage. You can't win arguments against zealots.

Drummond: If, as they say, the sun stood still, they must have had some kind of an idea that the sun moved around the earth. Do you think that's the way of things? Or don't you believe that the earth moves around the sun?

Brady: I have faith in the Bible.

Drummond: You don't have much faith in the solar system.

Brady: The sun stopped.

Drummond: Good! Now, if what you say actually happened -- if Joshua stopped the sun in the sky -- the earth stopped spinning on its axis, continents toppled over one another, mountains flew into space, and the earth, shriveled to a cinder, crashed into the sun. Now, how come they missed that little tidbit of news?

Brady: They missed it because it never happened.

Drummond: But it had to happen. It must've happened, according to natural law. Or don't you believe in natural law, Mr. Brady? Would you ban Copernicus from the classroom along with Charles Darwin? Would you pass a law throwing out all scientific knowledge since Joshua? Revelations, period?!

Brady: Natural law was born in the mind of the heavenly Father. He can change it, cancel it, use it as He pleases. It constantly amazes me that you Apostles of Science, for all your supposed wisdom, fail to grasp this simple fact.

quote:

---

It's not that parents don't love their children when the children bite the other children, they administer discipline in hopes that the child will recall that actions have consequences. Individuals cannot have someone else's will forced on them, God or parent or police or whatever. We're all doin our own thing and gettin by as best we can, and gettin beat down when we screw up.

---

I absolutely hate the use of this type of analogy.

*IF* we could look around and see where the people who were being "beat down" had screwed up, and those who followed "god's will" in an exemplary fashion were not also being beat down, this analogy might hold up a bit.

But the world doesn't work that way.
Good decent people spend their whole lives doing the right thing, following their religious teachings, and getting beat down for it all the time.

To equate the horrible things in life that so many people go through to punishing a child for biting just don't cut it....
To say that all the bad things that happen are due to people not wanting anything to do with god very clearly misses the point being discussed, and shits all over all the people who have been faithful loving servants of god and died horrible painful deaths anyway, or watched their children die horrible painful deaths...



(Edited by DL-44 on 04-07-2005 03:07)

"beat down" was meant as "experienceing the consequences of our actions" - bad choice of wording there, you should have known I'm prone to flippant rethoric like that and interpreted accordingly

It *does* rain on the just and the unjust alike, no doubt. The story of Job is a prime example. I'm talking about a relationship with God here tho and the consequence of these actions are ultimately seperation from him. Job had a very strong relationship and it couldn't be broken, he suffered bad fu without a doubt but he was not crushed. I was not intending to equate the 2 things, just an analogy, but it is a very close likeness in my opinion, one I stick by without reservation.

Every single one of Jesus' original disciple died grizzly, horrible deaths at the hands of their persecutors, for this relationship that they would not abandon. There's a perspective that seperates our 2 sides of this discussion and that perspective comes from that relationship or lack of, "beat down" but in the full company and good grace of God, it's bearable, even enjoyable (no I'm not going to fly any airplanes into any mosques or liberal think tanks anytime soon). I don't think either of us would convince the other until one of our perspectives came round to the other's, it's just unseeable from t/here.

I'm out! Don't you dare bait me twice! DL the troll.

There is no god.

There is no evidence to even suggest a god which a being from another planet, with no prior knowledge of either gods or humans, would find acceptable as proof.

Therefore reitsma (good dutch name-was related to one through marriage once-politician-'nuff said), your argument holds no water for me whatsoever.

Therefore: when one prays, there is no one listening and you are talking to yourself. This may have some theraputic value.

Consequently prayer is a waste of time, though it may help the pray-er continue to delude themselves.

I have no objection to self-delusion so long as the deluded don't try to infect others with the same delusion, whatever the subject matter.

If you pray and hear voices in response, well...

Zaddy, loved that bit of dialogue

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

There is no god.

---

prove it

this sort of things all comes down to personal perspective. we've all had experiences that have changed us in one way or the other, and it's those same personal experiences that are going to influence whether someone believes or doesn't believe. while these discussions/debates/whatever are interesting i don't think anyone is changing anyone else's mind, tho i do enjoy reading a variety of viewpoints on this sort of thing.

chris


KAIROSinteractive | tangent oriented

quote:

---

There is no god.

prove it

---

Ah, but that is the point - I don't have to prove it. If it doesn't exist, I am certainly not going to try to prove that it does not exist. It is actually doing things backwards scientifically. Normally, one sees evidence of something happening, and then forms a theory, and tests it. One doesn't normally see no evidence of something, form a theory about the lack of evidence, and then attempt to find a lack of evidence to test it.

If I strictly used the scientific method to prove/disprove that god exists, then I can easily prove the non-existence : I never come to the point of seeing evidence of its existence. Therefore, there will be no theory, and no tests to prove it.

Prove that god does exist.

The Xians are saying that their god does exist. Prove it.

Yeah...we've been through that one over and over and over.

I can't prove the non-existence of giant pink dragons with puffy cotton-tails who shoot cotton candy out of their asses either.

=)

quote:

---

But the world doesn't work that way.
Good decent people spend their whole lives doing the right thing, following their religious teachings, and getting beat down for it all the time.

---

This is very true DL. This sums up "the life of a Christian in progress." And the key for the faithful is to follow the example of Job and continue to have faith no matter what obstacles we face in life. We feel we cannot let the ways of darkness which bring accidents, illness, suffering & abuses to kill our spirit. We feel to give into the belief that because life is so hard for some in its tragic circumstances then there must be no God, would be to give into what Satan wants us to believe. And Satan, being the master of deceit and lies is allowed to fool many and has power of them. We must persevere by our faith in prayer which produces many fruits and gifts. Yes, there are good people out there who are not believers. Who live by their own moral code and do not attribute anything created to God. So they do not pray. For myself, I cannot accept that the secular human is not invited to prayer. He is beckoned but resists. Prayer is a surge of the heart, a simple look towards heaven. Its a cry of recognition and love embracing the trials and joys of our life. In our prayer life, humility is the foundation of prayer. So we must let go of our ego. In scripture, it speaks of the soul or the spirit, but most often of the heart (more than a thousand times). It is the heart that prays. If our heart is far from God, the words of prayer are in vain. "The heart is the dwelling-place where I am, where I live where I withdraw" according to the Bible. The heart is our hidden center, beyond the grasp of our reason and of others. Humanity is limited in its understanding of what the heart knows. Only the spirit of God can fathom the human heart and know it fully. The heart is the place of decision, deeper than our psychic drives. It is the place of truth, in where we choose life or death. It is the place of encounter, because as we are made in the image of God we live in relation with God. I will always pray that all hearts will be called to God by prayer.

You can prove that something doesn't exist. There are many current problems that people are working on that people are hoping is true, and would love to prove false. You will ofter in mathematics here about the NP-Hard problems, one of these is factoring large numbers. There is no known method to factor numbers in logarithmic time. You can either try to prove this true, or your can prove this false it is all in how you prove this.

The easiest way to prove something false is a proof by contradiction. Which I have seen here numerous times by many of the individuals here when talking about the bible. We can have a premise like such.

The bible is the word of god therefore Everything in the bible is true.

Now, I am sure we can make a relation of some type linking the bible to god and his omnipotence, so that when an element of the bible is proved false, you prove the word of god false, thus proving god false.

You could also take the statement that god is everywhere. If you are to find a single spot where there is no god, then you have proved god false.

These are all ways to prove something false, logically, using the scientific method. I am sure that they would all be rather complicated. And in the end utterly worthless.

Worthless because human have a great capacity to confuse issues that they don't completely understand. An easy example is people who will misrepresent something like carbon dating because they don't really understand the properties of atomic decay. There are many such things, once you present an idea that would require real effort to verify you are going to have massive numbers of people who will just take it as fact, or another large segment who will completely misrepresent it because they don't really understand it.

Dan @ Code Town

In science, the proof is always in the positive.

That is, if one claims something is thus and so in the absence of any evidence to support that claim, then the one making the the claim must prove it, not the reverse.

You may say "I can prove god exists by all that I see about me!" this proves only your belief in that theory and proves nothing which would fit either legal or scientific requirements.

We who disbelieve await your proof oh mighty Fig.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

To both JK and Jade -

I understand very well the idea of keeping your faith despite hardship and the like. I understand very well doing the right thing regardless of reward - it's the kind of idea that a great number of athiests live by, because we don't see the 'eternal' reward, the concept of which keeps many christians going.

Point is, I am constantly hearing analogies with the purpose of demonstrating that bad things happen because people didn't do what god wants them to. But it doesn't hold up - period.

Job is the perfect example to refute the analogy, yet he is being used to try to hold the analogy together.

It's nonsense.

Bad things happen. Good things happen. They happen to both good and bad people, to the faithful of every religion, to those of no religion, to those who pray, to those who curse god and other deities.

To say that bad things happen because we went against god, and good things happen because we follow god is just plain nonsense.

With that train of thought we're right back to sacrificing goats (and maybe even virgin girls) every time the crop is a little weak...

quote:

---

Prove that god does exist.

The Xians are saying that their god does exist. Prove it.

---

In order to prove God exists you'd have to know exactly what God is, other than the Father allmighty of course

Why wouldn't it be the grand unified theory?

Perhaps the Bible is a book of self-empowering self-delusional stories, based on apparent facts and metophores for events.

If you're an atheist why try and disprove something and discuss something that you don't believe in? Sounds like a waste of enerjy to me...

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

Zaddy, loved that bit of dialogue

---

It was from "Inherit the Wind" based on the famous monkey (Scopes) Trial.

I thought it would illustrate War Mage's point that you can't argue with fanatics...

p.s. an excellent play i've you have the opp to read it.

Thanks etheist.

You've shown that it's not just the xians who resort back to the old default arguments, like dan proposed.

Instead of trying to pursue an intellectual discussion on it's current course, and pick holes (of which i am sure there are many) in my logic by approaching things from my perspectives and assumptions; instead of 'humoring' me and supposing there is a God, and seeing how my post addresses the issues you raised in your previous post (about the dawg that won't hunt), you just bid a hasty retreat to your standard statement that there is no God, and any further discussion on this point is simply me pushing my delusions on to you.

Well, I've tried to approach your position in a relatively mature fashion (as much as someone like me is able!), and discuss things in a civilised manner, but i think it's come down to this:

Webshaman has raised the topic:

quote:

---

Prayer doesn't work

---

Your submission, in response to this topic, is:

quote:

---

As to prayer, just talkin' to yerself.

---

I think that's about all you can contribute to this thread. Thanks for coming. Please, go and share your thoughts in a "does God exist" thread, but i really couldn't care less whether or not my argument in this thread holds any water for you.

If webshaman raises a topic discussing the use of prayer, i think that pretty much implies that he is willing to accept that some people will base their arguments on the fact (or their theory, as i'm sure you would prefer) that God exists.



(Edited by reitsma on 04-08-2005 01:26)

Sorry old boy, but in a long life I have never heard an intellectual discussion on religion, though I have taken part in a lot of discussion and some argument on the topic.

The very concept of religion is contrary to intellect and so one wonders how such a discussion could even be said to exist any more than could your mythical god or gods.

It remains, I am afraid, for those claiming the positive to prove same, running from the field of discourse accusing the other side of doing the same seems rather an admission of one's inability to do so.

Present me with some evidence or even agrument supporting your unfounded theory and I shall be pleased to perforate same.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

I have never heard an intellectual discussion on religion

---

i may be wrong, but from what i've read on your posts so far, i'm pretty sure you think you've never considered as 'intellectual' anything that contradicts your opinions and beliefs.

happy to further discuss my unintellectual beliefs in comparison to your irrefutable, arrogant logic in another thread, at another time, time permitting.

but as i said, i think you've communicated as fully as you are able your view on prayer, and i don't see how any more of your responses that 'your logic is futile, God does not exist' will in any way contribute positively to this thread.

as for convincing you, well, the only way i know how would contradict my moral stance, and leave you with no chance to act upon your newfound belief...

*mystically appears out of thin air
*passes around glasses full of poison kool-aid
*opens a barrel of rattlesnakes

*giggles

i'm no authority, but i believe the data collected so far points toward the effectiveness of prayer as being positive

but, then again, you might just be a Satanist praying for my firey, painful demise

arggh!

hehe







couldn't resist

You could pray for me rietsma. Had a fellow try that once, decided he would pray me dead.

I feel just fine thank you. ROFLMAO

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

If webshaman raises a topic discussing the use of prayer, i think that pretty much implies that he is willing to accept that some people will base their arguments on the fact (or their theory, as i'm sure you would prefer) that God exists

---

This is a true statement. I am willing to accept that some will do just that. In fact, I was hoping that more than some would, and would be willing to expand on it.

WS, i've actually been reading thru a lot of this and will respond when i can really sit and collect my thoughts. some interesting points overall.

ehtheist, i'm not planning to nor do i feel a real need to 'prove' God to you, and you're right, i probably couldn't anyway. my personal experiences have convinced me beyond a shadow of a doubt that He is indeed real, and i'm quite sure nothing other than thata personal experience would convince you either. any proof i tried to provide of God's existence to you would be as meaningless as any proof to the contrary you had for me.

there also are many rather intelligent people who are religious despite your belief to the contrary, sorry to disappoint.

chris


KAIROSinteractive | tangent oriented

It is because a belief is not a logical thing, it is an emotional thing. I also find that saying definitively that something does not exist just because you have no evidence of it to be a bit silly.

There was no evidence of the Americas to those in Europe, but Chris found them anyways.

One of the things we do as humans, explorers and inventors is make up hypothetical situations and then try and prove or disprove them. The more foreign the situation, the farther from our understanding of reality the better the result as it has potential to turn all other preconceived ideas on their head.

I think simply saying that something can't exist because there is no evidence one way or the other is just as block headed as saying that they same definitely exists. The most intelligent religious people I know would easily tell me that of course there is the possibility that there is no god, but that they in their faith will discount this possibility, and that this possibility is a test of their faith. They were free to argue intelligently on any set of premises that you could lay down for them.

The real test of an intelligent individual is not being able to make snap judgments based on your preconceived ideas, but to be able to accept any variables give by any situation and make an intelligent response to it, those be both real and imagined. If you get bogged down to much by any of your beliefs to such a time that you can't accept the possibility of your error, or that an alternate solution might exist you have become a very stale individual. This works both ways for those with faith and those without faith.

Dan @ Code Town

I agree with your assesment WM.

I repeat a quote I heard many years ago and I believe in it fully.

"If it can be thought of in the mind, its possible" And this also refers to the scientific as well as the supernatural.

quote:

---

There was no evidence of the Americas to those in Europe, but Chris found them anyways.

---

That is not true. The Vikings knew about the Land long before ol Chris decided to try to find a Western route to India.

And the point about trying to find evidence that doesn't exist, as opposed to trying to find evidence for something that no-one has prior knowledge of are two different things. Trying to prove something with NO evidence is futile, however.

It is often mentioned, that there can be no evidence that god exists (although I don't know where this source is stated - is it in the bible?). That is a nice, completely circular, closed theory, if you will.

Take the Americas - even though most Europeans back then didn't know of them, a quick examination of Geometry tells us that the earth is round, and that the size in the Western direction to India is pretty big. That's a lot of ocean.

Chris obviously didn't take much time to measure stuff, or he would have known that he was not in India.

In any regards, having absolutely no evidence, whatsoever, to support that something exists, results in something being declared as not existing. Scientifically, no-one would even be able to form a theory, because there is no observation to form one from.

A good example are Quarks. For 1000 years ago, no-one had the slightest clue that they existed. And guess what? No one formed a theory that they existed back then, either.

It was only later (much later) that certain observations led to their prediction, which led to experiments, etc.

Obviously a lack of known evidence does not prove that something does not exist.

But again - if we're talking about proof, the burden is most definitely on those who would prove that something *does* exist.
And until such proof is offered, it can be reasonably assumed that it does not exist.

As for the original topic - the observations and questions posed by WS can easily be treated seperately from the question of whether or not god exists. The question is 'what does prayer accomplish?'

The answer from my point of view is this:

Prayer has the power to help an individual focus on his/her personal goals, to develop a positive energy, and through the concept of some sort of divine interaction, give encouragement, hope, comfort, esteem, clarity or calmness, etc to the individual.

There are many ways of doing this without throwing the idea of gods in their, but there is no doubt that such practices can be beneficial to the individual with or without the god concept.

I have seen nothing to suggest (with any actual evidence) that prayer can affect anything or anyone other than the individual, or affect the individual in any way other than what I have mentioned above.

Bottom line: prayer, like meditation and other 'self-help' type activities, can have a positive effect on the individual. And that is the extent of it.

If you didn't like my Americas example how about we try this one.

Lets then take your quark example. There is no evidence that there is any particle smaller than a quark. It is believed that quarks are the base particle. I am going to say that it is my idea contrary to the provided evidence that there are particles smaller than quarks. Noone can disprove it at this point, and noone can prove it either, but by having the idea out there people can at least think about it.

As for noone having formed a theory, they didn't have to. I am sure a lot of people 1000 years ago smoked a bunch of hashish or opium, and in the drug induced haze said "You know man, that idea of Atom, I bet there are particles, like even totally smaller than that, and then even smaller than that, forever and ever man, until, shit man, I don't even know, but pretty fucking small." Would they have called it a quark I don't know it isn't the point.

The point is that I am sure someone openned up their mind at some time to something that seemed completely illogical and contrary to the evidence of the time and came up with some pretty cool stuff. That is what exploring is all about. If people didn't do this we wouldn't advance. You do not have to have evidence of something in order to explore it. You have an idea and then you see if you can find evidence to support it, or if the evidence you find disproves it.

Having no evidence doesn't mean that something doesn't exist. Having no evidence means that if you want to prove something you have to work at coming up with evidence. Some people might see having no evidence as proving something doesn't exist, but they are closing their minds and limiting themselfs.

We have no evidence that there is life other than ourselves in the universe, none. But we still look, we still search, and we still try and find it. An intelligent person would not say, the only life in the universe is on Earth, and intelligent person would say, we haven't found life outside of earth, but we are looking into it.

Again, no evidence for something does not mean it doesn't exist, it means that if you want to prove that it exists it is your job to both interest others towards your cause and to find evidence of to prove your theory.

Evidence to the contrary of something is a completely different story, but no evidence doesn't prove a thing.

Dan @ Code Town

But that's all irrelevant.

People have been talking and thinking about god for thousands of years.
and yet still there is nothing...

The analogies you are trying to peice together don't work.

No, lack of evidence does not *prove* non-existence. But - again - we don't have to prove non-existence when there is no evidence for existence, and we cannot do such a thing - whether we are talking about quarks, particles smaller than quarks, god, or any other such issue.

In the case of quarks, simply talking about the possiblity of their existence and syaing such things as "I know they must be there" without backing it up with evidence was not enough. Their existence needed to be proven. And it has been.

Had a person talking about quarks brought the issue up, and when met with a skeptic who said they did not exist, told them to prove they did not exist, they would be completely ignored - there is no reason to disprove something that has no evidence for being true in the first place.

It really is that simple: No evidence does not disprove. But something with no evidence does not require disproving.

quote:

---

But something with no evidence does not require disproving.

---

Thank you, DL. That sums it up in a nutshell.

Man, that's almost like a lot of double negatives...i'm still digesting that one.

edit:
let's see
Evidence = E
Proof (proving) = P
If not E, then not not P? (there are. 2 not's in the equation)

what about If E then P - would that hold true. If so in which context?

But something with evidence does require proving?

(Edited by ZaddyDog on 04-08-2005 23:52)

E does not imply P, it just doesn't work that way.

If you are to prove something you need a mathematical proof (it all comes down to math in the end). As that is something you can prove. Most of science is based on things that have a ton of evidence, and the amount of evidence we leads to a compelling argument.

So you are correct things with evidence do require proving.

I also have to disagree with your idea that the burden of proof is only on those making a claim, but I will accept that for arguments sake that the burden is on the one making the claim. BUT! There are two claims being made in this case one by each side.

1. There is a god
2. There is no god

It is easy to see that both sides are making claims, and both side have no real scientific evidence. So by your statements, both side need to come to bear with evidence.

Now, DL is the real scientist in this debate, although I am sure he will decline that honor to be argumentative. He simply says, "I don't care." Which is a fine answer and would remove him from the entire debate. That is what most scientists would say about this debate. They would word it better something along the lines of "I have seen no evidence which would validate either claim, but I am not interested in that problem, so lets discuss the topic Z."

quote:

---

there is no reason to disprove something that has no evidence for being true in the first place.

---

Now I will go on, there is no evidence that it is possible to factor numbers in logarithm time, that this is either possible or not possible. But hundreds of thousands if not millions of man hours has gone into the pursuit of this question. There are often lots of reasons to try and disprove something that has no evidence of being true. The reasons about, because it is an interesting problem, because it can make me lots of money, because I could be famous, because it is step 3 in my plan to rule the world. You can always have a reason.

I would put that the proof or disproof of a god has to be up there as one of those problems that could result in many of the above joys happening, along with the possibility of you getting assassinated, but we all take risks. It is a huge problem, and many billions of man hours have gone into that problem, so saying there is no reason to look into the problem is just foolish.

Now you might not find the problem interesting and I am fine with that, but saying that the problem has no reason to be looked at is silly. The burden is not on the person making the claim, the burden is on anyone who finds it an interesting problem.

You are all falling into the "My dads bigger than yours argument" it goes on forever, no one wants to offer up proof because neither of you have any proof.

Back to the prayer issue. I am 100% for prayer. If you believe in it and it helps you, or you think it might help other people then by all means do it. When I have been going though a bad patch it is very nice to hear someone tell me that they are praying for me. That shows me that I am worth them talking to the most important being in their life about, and then asking that being to help me. If that is not a compliment I don't know what is. Even if pray is just a placebo then do it, because any help you can get is good help. I wouldn't knock it for the life of me.

As for all the prayers for the Pope. He died, but I bet those prayers helped a whole lot of people got though a tough time and helped them to deal with his passing. I am sure it worked to help many people. The other aspect is that the prayer brought hundreds of millions of people together for something that was not killing one another. I think that in itself is a great thing. It doesn't have to work like magic to work.

Dan @ Code Town

quote:

---

WarMage said:

E does not imply P, it just doesn't work that way.

---

WM: actually i was just kidding

Warmage - you are missing an extremely important point:

All of the examples you give are things that can be proven or disproven, simply by looing, or by mathematical formulas.

Anything that goes towards proving that there is not a god will be instantly dismissed, because god is intangible, in calcuable, etc.

The reason we cannot disprove god is because those who believe will
a) beleive regardless of evidence or lack thereof
b) simply explain that god is outside of our ability to calculate/measure/comprehend

This is not a scientific experiment, and no normal scientific analogy will hold up.

quote:

---

BUT! There are two claims being made in this case one by each side.

---

Irrelevant.

Someone is claiming something exists. Until something is offered as evidence, there is simply no sense in trying to disprove its existence.

Let me bring back your analogy to help clarify:

Someone says - "hey, I think there is a continent we've never seen off to the west"

This can be proven/disproven by simply travelling west looking for a continent. If it's there, it has been proven. If it is not, it has been disproven. The fact that calcuable, tangible qualifiers such as "to the west" were given makes such experimentation possible.

Someone says "hey there's this intangible thing that can't be seen, heard, measured, felt, or otherwise noticed"

So then what...?

Until something is offered to qualify that statement, there is no direction in which to go to prove or disprove it.

So it is quite natural, and perfectly legitimate to say "no there isn't" and leave it at that.

quote:

---

Now, DL is the real scientist in this debate

---

Not sure where you get this concept. There are many people far more educated and adept in the area of science. I rely more on logic and common sense.

quote:

---

although I am sure he will decline that honor to be argumentative

---

Ok.....whatever

quote:

---

He simply says, "I don't care."

---

From my many kb *(mb even?) worth of posts on the subject, you are quite obvisously talking out your ass when you say this...

quote:

---

Which is a fine answer and would remove him from the entire debate.

---

See above...

quote:

---

no one wants to offer up proof because neither of you have any proof.

---

What exactly should I have proof for?

Again, this is not a mathematical equation that simply needs to be worked to its conclusion. It is not a geographical problem that can be solved by traveling to the location in question.

If I have nothing to disprove, what should I disprove exactly?

^Again, DL formulates in words that which I want to say. Well done.

Dl speaks in volumes what I said in a few short lines.

Clearly, he knows some of you require more detailed explanations.

But he is irrefutable, no matter how much one may attempt to refute.

I agree prayer is more of a meditation technique than anything else and I believe we have untapped resources within which such techinques may well allow some to access and utilize.

I also believe there are several non-religious approaches which have proven the efficacy of such.

It was observed the religious may well not accept any proof which might eventually come to light disproving the existance of their god.

It has also been observed those who disbelieve in such mythology are similarly ham-strung by closed minds.

Speaking only for myself, I have looked for decades for anything which might prove the existance of any god...pick your religion. I have found only the self-serving hand of man.

But if someone is able to provide such proof, I am only too willing to consider it.

Some interesting reading, particularly the section on "Doubt"; http://patduffyhutcheon.com/humanist%20articles/asimov.htm

Also: "But the burden of proof is on the person who claims God exists. You don't believe in Santa Claus, but you can't disprove his existence. The burden of proof is upon those who maintain the claim".

From: http://www.sullivan-county.com/id3/asimov2.htm

Also some good reading.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

To me, prayer is kinda like... ' You'd better think long and hard on that young man/lady.'
And if you didn't, you 'prayed' you weren't going to get one 'up longside the head.' =)

Just kidding... my parents never laid a hand on me. Teachers?... well that's a whole different story. =)

quote:

---

People have been talking and thinking about god for thousands of years.
and yet still there is nothing...

---

"Nothing" It depends on how you view the God.


Believers do have "Something" called faith by the light of Spiritual reason. We need not see to believe, we know.

In the supernatural, for believers there is "Something" called a personal relationship with the 1st, 2nd, & third person of God, of which we cannot see, but know.
The human person who lacks the ability to feel and know them, means they never tried to sincerely develop it or they see the God relationship in a different perspective. Usually, they want to see results in the physical, like the big hand of God coming down and wiping away poverty, famine, sickness and disease. For the most part, fallen away believers experienced some hardship and maybe feel God betrayed them. Like look, "I have been a faithfull servant and look whats happened to me". How could God allow this" Or they through study of history of long ago civilizations believe the faith of religions are myths invented to scare humanity into believing. However the way you look at it, the fact remains that we do not base faith on proof. We need no signs, no parting of seas, no great miracles. We believe the great miracle of God is that we are here living in extension of the image of God and sustained in God's handiwork. We believe we are given God's gift of grace to accept freely. We are not commanded and made to accept God in the supernatural, we are given a free will. How nice of God.

Faith cannot be alive without "Prayer". The more we pray the more we know who God is. Like when I first meet someone and I shake their hand and say "Hello, how do you do, my name is Jade T and I am very happy to meet you." Then we happen to like each other. We develop a relationship and by being with this person more and more and in their presence by talking, I am able to know this person better and better till this person becomes my best loving friend. Being in this relationship, I can and decide to take on some of the attributes and mannerisms of this person I admire. Because I am in their presence so much and I value their wisdom and strength, I also begin to act and talk like them. Their ways become my ways. We have a one on one relationship and I receive joy and satisfaction with this person so I long to seek and be with this person all the time. Sounds like a marriage of minds.

I use this analogy because in the same way it is with God. Thru "Prayer" we develop this same kind but more intimate relationship with God . But also in return we receive his spirit of wisdom & grace without no words being said to us. This spiritual relationship surpasses all other physical relationships in which we can feel and touch. We believe in this way can we truly & fully be human in the way God created us for. Without God's spiritual essence, we are like a Oreo cookie without the cream in the middle.

(Edited by jade on 04-11-2005 17:05)

I just want to clairfy, for the record, that the idea of proof in this conversation was brought up by one of the 'beleivers' - that's why the topic came up, not by atheists demanding proof of god.

As for not needing proof, but just 'beleiving' - sure. Problem is, that can apply to anything. If I make myself beleive it is real, then to me it is real. But it still doesn't alter reality and make what I beleive actually real.

It's the type of thing that happens in our world all the time - kids beleive in the easter bunny, santa claus, the tooth fairy, the boogie man. People develop imaginary friends. People really go off the deep end and have interactive conversations with their dogs, or hear a dead fish talking to them, or see the 'virgin' mary in a grilled cheese sandwich and call it a miracle...

Most of these things are instantly relegated to either childish indulgences, or outright insanity.

But people don't even bat an eyelash in telling you that's how it works with god - that you can't know it's there until after you beleive that it is there. You might as well say that we should all hold hands and think happy thoughts (don't forget the pixie dust!) and we'll be flying off to never-never-land =)

But anyway...that's all beside the point, really. I can say with as much certainty and authority that there is no god as you can that there is. And both statements are totally irrelevant. But until there is something more than our imagination and talking to ourselves to show that god is anything different than the tooth fairy or the easter bunny, I'll pass...

I will certainly agree that there are plenty of people who stopped beleiveing because things didn'g go their way, or they're amgry at god, or what have you.

But there are certainly plenty of other reasons.

DL, I think you just summed up everything I was trying to say in about 5 different long posts in a single very concise post. I am a bit jealous of your skills with words.

Dan @ Code Town

Well I can see your point DL and how often it can apply.

When we are childrean we are in a fairy land. We are gullible and believe anything. And for those who suffer in a delusional state most of their lives, they need a doctor, a physichrist. They are ill.


For most part of humanity who profess belief in a God, be it Buddism, Muslim, Christian, etc.. I don't think they suffer from the same kind of form of the delusional. This is not saying much for the rest of the planet. Be they below average, average or to the highly intellectual they profess faith without proof. Thats also saying Albert Einstein was delusional. He was a believer, so I think he prayed.


Sure, we can allow ourselves or fall into a delusional state everynow and then. But then for most of us, we get slapped back into reality. I can delude myself into thinking someone likes but in reality they can't stand me. But thats different from faith matters.

Faith is not a delusion for the majority of the planet. Thats saying the heart/mind/soul is out to to deceive.. For the many numbers in faith who get the same message of a loving creative God that should be proof alone.

I think I might want to jump to a different tangent a little bit, and follow this new line about Delusions.

Humans have a strong capactity to be delusional. I have taken many drugs which have put me into altered states of reality. In these states I was often able to communicate with things that were completely inanimate in what would to myself was completely meaningful.

This isn't what society wants. For some reason this gets beat out of us over time. Lets take an easy example, photographic memory. I remember reading about a study which showed children to have a higher capacity at a photographic memory than adults because you needed to accept your "delusions."

The test was performed by placing a slide with a picture in front of different groups and after removing it asking them if they could still see the image. Now if you are a bit delusional you will note that you will still have an after image that your brain will paint in front of you. You have to pay attention or you will miss it. But adults would discount this image, because they would know that it wasn't real.

I am just wondering how far this type of incident might project into other parts of life, where we all might be a bit delusional, but though our conditioning we have given up on it, and ignored it as not existing.

Delusional has a real negitive connotation to itself, but I don't think that it should be this way. I think that these delusions can be used and might be able to teach us a whole lot about ourselves and our sepecies in all their different forms. They get bad when they cause you to want to hurt yourself or other people, but like anything in the world there is the good and the bad. But for these types of things where does the good end and the bad start?

Dan @ Code Town

quote:

---

Faith is not a delusion for the majority of the planet.

---

Obviously anyone suffering from this delusion would say such things =)
But it is not any different.

quote:

---

Thats saying the heart/mind/soul is out to to deceive..

---

Of course the heart is out to deceive....that's what it does! People *want* things to be better than they are. They *want* there to be somedivine justice. They *want* there to be everlasting life after death.

So when given a chance to believe it, of course a great many people do. It proves nothing other than a common desire for life to be better.

quote:

---

For the many numbers in faith who get the same message of a loving creative God that should be proof alone.

---

It is written what you will get out of believing. It's preset. People looking for hope get hope when they create for themselves a source for that hope (substitute courage, strength, happiness, etc..).

*That* is why prayer works for the individual. It focuses the mind on the positive, and gives a feeling of having the support of something greater. This is psychology 101.

^That pretty much rings true.

Well said.

So, if prayer really only has a positive effect on the person doing so, then wouldn't meditation be a better alternative?

After all, the personal beneifits of meditation are very well documented, scientifically.

quote:

---

It is written what you will get out of believing. It's preset. People looking for hope get hope when they create for themselves a source for that hope (substitute courage, strength, happiness, etc..).

---

Well this is a perspective. Regardless if its from Psy 101. There
are no facts to base this on. Right? Just speculation. I doubt there were affirmed test to come to this conclusion?

Believers feel we get all these things from a source. In the creating from the innersef, its because the capacity do so, generates from above. Yes, God will help those who help themselves. He dosen't send a flash of lightning and its done for us. We feel God rewards us with an answer, even if its camaflouged in the working of daily life if we pray, hope and not worry. We cannot separate daily life without the thought of "God help me with this", or "Oh God, I hurt myself", or "Oh, God how beautiful" when the sun came out" or God bless you when someone sneezes, or if we are astonished about something, how many of us say "Oh, my God". How many of us even call upon God in the height of sexual tension. (best way I can say it) The fact is people use God's name everday all over the world, in every second of every minute. And believe it or not, this is a form of prayer. Anytime you call upon Gods name, he hears.

quote:

---

Well this is a perspective. Regardless if its from Psy 101. There
are no facts to base this on. Right? Just speculation. I doubt there were affirmed test to come to this conclusion?

---

There are countless studies out there on this kind of subject. So yes, there are plenty of facts and plenty of tests.

There are countless methods of achieving this kind of reinforcement. Many people use various forms of meditation to achieve a more positive mental state, involving many different techniques. Most include some sort of repetition and/or focus on positive outcomes, or a general clearing of the mind to remove negative perspectives.

In some cases such practices include rituals in which one's ancestor's or some other entity that is assumed to have onfluence over events or well being are consulted or petitioned.

Prayer falls under this category.

quote:

---

Believers feel we get all these things from a source.

---

Yep, I said that...

quote:

---

The fact is people use God's name everday all over the world

---

Yes, and people also use a lot of other sayings and statements that don't carry their original meaning any more. I say the word god fairly often. I am not calling to god....I am using a figure of speech that is ongrained in our language.

Not to mention the fact that "god" is not "God's" name. It is a generic noun that applies to countless mythical deities, and did long before this particular god's stories came about.

quote:

---

Anytime you call upon Gods name, he hears.

---

This, on the other hand, falls entirely in the category you mention:

quote:

---

There
are no facts to base this on. Right? Just speculation. I doubt there were affirmed test to come to this conclusion?

---

Wouldn't you say?

It's always rather funny how demanding you are of proof and facts and tests with my information, but never your own...



(Edited by DL-44 on 04-11-2005 21:45)

Well, I only refer to it because, you deal in facts, test, etc.. and I kinda wondered how you could perform those kind of test regarding thinking postive resulting in postive outcome.

So you use God's name quite often but don't use it in away I would. So could you give me examples on when you use it. A generic noun. I don't think that is the way its defined in dictionary, but then again we misuse lots of words. Do you use it to express disbelief?


I think prayer comes in many forms. There is a form of prayer called meditative prayer, chanting and centering prayer. All have the same effects. All use the heart, will of the mind and soul. All require continious discpline.

Are you referring this kind of positive thinking, self-help, self-empowerment without the help of a God?

http://www.gettheedge.com/index.php?acnt=GHTZZ01H

quote:

---

A generic noun. I don't think that is the way its defined in dictionary, but then again we misuse lots of words

---

Dictionary.com:

quote:

---

1. God
1. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
2. The force, effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being.
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: Money was their god.
5. A very handsome man.
6. A powerful ruler or despot.

---

quote:

---

Etymology
Earliest attestation of the Germanic word in the 6th century Codex Argenteus (Mt 5:9)
Enlarge
Earliest attestation of the Germanic word in the 6th century Codex Argenteus (Mt 5:9)

The word God continues Old English/Germanic god (guþ, gudis in Gothic, Gott in modern German). The original meaning and etymology of the Germanic word god have been hotly disputed, though most agree to a reconstructed Proto-Indo-European form *&#501;hutóm, which is a passive perfect participle from the root *&#501;hu-, which likely meant "libation", "sacrifice". Compare:-

* Vedic Sanskrit hu- = "to sacrifice".
* Greek khu-, kheu- = "to pour".
* Common Germanic strong verb geutan (Anglo-Saxon g&#275;otan) = "to pour", English in-got.

The connection between these meanings is likely via the meaning "pour a libation".

Another possible meaning of *&#501;hutóm is "invocation", related to Sanskrit h&#363;ta.

The word God was used to represent Greek theos, Latin deus in Bible translations, first in the Gothic translation of the New Testament by Ulfilas.

Also some people in the world, mainly Hindu, believe that the word God, is actually an acronym (G.O.D.). The acronym stands for Generator, Observer/Operator, Destroyer. This belief although rare, is held quite dearly by some people.

Capitalisation
KJV of 1611 (Psalms 23:1,2): Occurrence of "Lord" (and "God" in the heading)
Enlarge
KJV of 1611 (Psalms 23:1,2): Occurrence of "Lord" (and "God" in the heading)

The development of English orthography was dominated by Christian texts. Capitalised "God" was first used to refer to the Judeo-Christian concept, and may now signify any monotheistic conception of God, including the translation of the Arabic Allah.

In early English bibles, the Tetragrammaton was rendered in capitals: "IEHOUAH" in William Tyndale's version of 1525. The King James Version of 1611 renders

* YHWH as "The Lord"
* Elohim as "God"
* Adonay YHWH and Adonay Elohim as "Lord God"
* kurios ho theos as "Lord God" (in the New Testament)

The use of capitalisation, like for a proper noun, has persisted, to disambiguate the concept of a singular God from pagan deities, or, in the Christian view, false idols, for which lowercase god was continued to be applied, mirroring the use of Latin deus. Pronouns referring to God are also often capitalised, and traditionally in the masculine gender, i. e. "He", "His" etc.

---

As you can clearly see, the word has origins unrelated to the judeo-christian god, and has been used by many cultures.

That should be evident from the texts of the bible itself.

Why else would "God" tell people that he is the one, true, god, and that they are not to have any gods before him, otherwise?

I use the word 'god' in daily conversation the way anyone else does "oh my god" "god damn it" "jesus! did you see that?" "oh god, that's awful" etc etc etc...
Figure of speech, just like so many others.

Those types of self-empowerment deals fall into one or more categories that I am referring to, yes.

It is worthless to argue the existence or non-existence of God based on logic or mathematical equations - as many have already remarked in this thread.

However, there is one hypothesis regarding God that I think can be proven.

The Hypothesis is the following.
God does not intervene in the life of <insert name>

For example: God does not interven in the life of ZaddyDog.
This hypothesis can be tested in several ways:

1)If there is a God, I am asking him to leave a 2005 HD Street Rod in my driveway by the time I finish writing this sentence.
brb guys <gets up to look>

Back: Ok, nothing but some oil stains. No V-Rod
Conclusion: God ignored my request (or never read it - does he frequent these boards?)

2) If there is a God, I think he's a dumb lamer asswipe and I dare him to strike me dead by the time I finish writing this sentence.
<takes pulse><takes BP>
all vitals within acceptable/normal range
Conclusion: God ignored my insults and my dare (or does not read my posts)

As you can, see God does not give a crap about me (and I reciprocate the favour).

SO HERE"S the BIG QUESTION
Why should the majority of us actually care about God since he does not intervene in our lives?

This ties back to WS's point that all those prayers for the Pope were for naught. Surely, if he had an impact on our lives he would have at least thrown us a bone.

Some of you will argue that God makes them feel good...yeah but so does Jack Daniels...
Some of you will argue that God will make the non-believers burn in hell..but hell is only a christian belief.

so why should we care about God even if he does exist? he has no impact whatsover on our lives..i.e the majority of us.

Extremely weak argument.

Though I am a complete atheist, and see most arguments/refutations by beleivers as silly, the very basic answer to your 'challenge' is - why the hell would any god pay heed to such an insignificant and, quite frankly, idiotic challenge from you?

I understand that your statement is not entirely serious...but that kind of reasoning only fuels those who do believe in god to look at the view of atheists as ridiculous...

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

I understand that your statement is not entirely serious.

---

I hope so. My arguments are weak? I don't think you even considered my premise seriously.

Restated - God does not manifest himself in any way or form in MY life. Period.

I wasn't talking about you DL, I was talking about me, and I was also making provisions for anyone who is honest enough to admit that God has never intervened positively or negatively in their lifes. Perhaps you fit that bill, perhaps you feel God does answer your prayers..i don't know, and i honestly don't care.

The fact that there isn't any intervention, any interaction, any manifestation doesn't disprove the existence of God - what it states is that if there is a God he does not get involved with in my life and i think this is pretty true for most mortals regardless of whether they believe or not.

Can anyone provide examples of how God has helped them in a tangible way such as by answering a prayer?
How many have had the personal experience of a cancer-stricken relative go into spontaneous remission (or cured) as a result of prayer?

The people who would answer yes are a minority. I f you reply that God speaks to you daily, well that's a different one, they make meds for those ppl.

On the other side of the coin, can anyone provide examples of hardship, or of unfilled wishes - examples where one prayed to God yet the prayer remain unanswered.

The fact is (yes fact) that the majority of us will never see, feel, perceive, sense, any evidence of God - evidence as it relates to his influence on our petty lives.

Jade:

quote:

---

When we are childrean we are in a fairy land. We are gullible and believe anything.

---

That's it in a nutshell. If children weren't indoctrinated I'd venture to say organized religions would pretty much vanish within a couple of generations. 3 at most I figure.

quote:

---

Can anyone provide examples of how God has helped them in a tangible way such as by answering a prayer?
How many have had the personal experience of a cancer-stricken relative go into spontaneous remission (or cured) as a result of prayer?

---

This proves my view on how there are those who want God to show up in the physical and perform in the physical. God does not work that way most of the time. And if thats what your looking for you will always be dissappointed and un-believing. God can provide this kind of show for you, but up to this point in time, God works in the work of nature and the intangible.

quote:

---

jade said:
This proves my view on how there are those who want God to show up in the physical and perform in the physical.

---

yeah, so what? i want to see physical evidence. what's wrong with that?

quote:

---

jade said:
God does not work that way most of the time.

---

Good. Now give me examples of how he does work.

quote:

---

jade said:
And if thats what your looking for you will always be dissappointed and un-believing.

---

i guess so.

quote:

---

jade said:
God can provide this kind of show for you, but up to this point in time, God works in the work of nature and the intangible.

---

when you say Nature you mean he's responsible for killing people in the Tsunami/earthquakes? Or did you mean nature more like cancer, man preying on man? and what do you mean by intangible?
by intangible did you mean without having any impact whatsoever on human misery, or the plight of animals, etc.?

quote:

---

How many have had the personal experience of a cancer-stricken relative go into spontaneous remission (or cured) as a result of prayer?

---

um, yeah. a dozen or so actually, people i know firsthand that have had that or similar disease remission.

forgive my lack of posting but i broke my arm sunday night and have surgery in the morning.

chris


KAIROSinteractive | tangent oriented

Surgery Fig? Won't god fix it for you? Try a little prayer.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

God works in the work of nature and the intangible.

---

If god works in the work of Nature, then it must follow natural laws. That means, that your god's works must be measurable. Since we haven't found any measurable evidence of this, I must caution you here to remain on the side of skepsis. It may be possible that your god is indeed influencing the laws of Nature, at a very, very small scale (one we cannot presently measure). However, at larger scales, obviously not.

And if they are intangible, then they don't really have any effect, do they?

quote:

---

a dozen or so actually, people i know firsthand that have had that or similar disease remission.

---

And the same goes for those who are either not religious, or are not christian. In fact, those who meditate, and are advanced meditators, have a higher remission rate than others.

WS, we can sit and discuss all day whether something would've happened with or without prayer...we'll never know.

ehtheist, you continue to show your true colors...appreciate the sympathy.

chris


KAIROSinteractive | tangent oriented

quote:

---

WS, we can sit and discuss all day whether something would've happened with or without prayer...we'll never know.

---

This is not true. Studies can be done (and have been done) that disprove that prayer helps the recipient (if the recipient does not know they are being prayed for). Other studies have been done, that prove that prayer is just as helpful to the recipient as a placebo, medicine man ritual, etc.

Studies have also been done, on meditation (and reciently, on deep meditation, the kind that Tibetian monks practice). Astounding stuff.

Nothing "magical", but astounding, nonetheless.

As DL has mentioned, there is a positive effect on those who do pray. However, it doesn't seem to matter to what they pray, be it a god, gods, spirits, Nature, ancestors, etc.

quote:

---

If god works in the work of Nature, then it must follow natural laws. That means, that your god's works must be measurable. Since we haven't found any measurable evidence of this, I must caution you here to remain on the side of skepsis. It may be possible that your god is indeed influencing the laws of Nature, at a very, very small scale (one we cannot presently measure). However, at larger scales, obviously not.

And if they are intangible, then they don't really have any effect, do they?

---

In all faiths God provides Miracles. In Medjourie, Yugolsavia, God provides miracles every day. There you can see the sun spin, turn different colors, see apparations in the sky. Cures of cancer and many diseases. If you need to see to believe, go there and you will not be dissappointed.

You are welcome Fig. Good thing we have medical SCIENCE huh?

You will always see my true colours. What you see is what you get.

Straight forward, non-PC, not the least bit diplomatic, no bullshit.

Try it, it is refreshing.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Prayer most certainly does not work... in the way that most people expect it to.

quote:

---

If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. --John 15:7

---

Why is it so easy to overlook the qualification on this promise? We get what we ask for only when it coincides with what God wants. The trick is to align our desires with his; then the true power of prayer becomes evident.

Prayer most certainly does work... in the way that most people do not expect it to.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

quote:

---

NoJive said:

If children weren't indoctrinated I'd venture to say organized religions would
pretty much vanish within a couple of generations.

---

I agree, but it would only be replaced with unorganized religions just as we have seen throughout human history. The "God hole" that Pascal alluded to is real, whether it points to an actual god or not is debatable of course.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

quote:

---

We get what we ask for only when it coincides with what God wants.

---

Tsk, tsk, Bugs. You know you can't seperate that from random events happening.

Both are one and the same, in end effect.

As I said, the trick is to know what God wants. I think the answer is exceedingly simple, but extremely hard to come to realize. And of course it will make absolutely zero sense to you, WS, if you apply your world view to it. As usual, I am speaking from the point of view of a xian.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

So, in other words, what god wants to happen will happen. Whether it's what we want or not...

So in other words....just leave god alone and let nature take its course.

Not quite. I'm saying that God does alter the course of nature and events on the basis of prayer. The distinction I'm drawing is on which basis he will do so. I believe God will intervene in cases where it directly involves carrying out his ultimate purpose and mission, which I believe is rooted in this, particularly the bold section:

quote:

---

I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone? for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave himself as a ransom for all men?the testimony given in its proper time. --1 Timothy 2:1-6

---

To get specific, I do not think God will cure someone's illness unless it is directly connected to helping more people to be reconciled with him. So if I find out tomorrow that I am terminally ill, I will only ask for prayers to keep me alive if there is still something I can do to further God's desire to see all people saved. Otherwise, my purpose would be complete on this planet.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

First:

quote:

---

I believe God will intervene in cases where it directly involves carrying out his ultimate purpose and mission

---

So it doesn't matter if you pray or not because He is going to do what He wants to anyway.



Second:

quote:

---

This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

---

So we are going to believe that is true because someone named Timothy said so? How does he know? Oh, yeah, God told him personally. Hmmm... that's not what He told me. But if I told you what God revealed to me, you'd just say I was crazy. So, what is so special about Timothy?

quote:

---

briggl said:

So it doesn't matter if you pray or not because He is going to do what He wants to anyway.

---

That is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that God will do anything we ask if it is in accordance with his goals. According to the teaching in the bible, God works through his people. Xians are indwelt with God and therefore we are actually God's hands. If we choose not to yield our will to his, then his work is hindered. So I'm saying that we play an integral role in what God will do so it isn't that he will just do what he wants regardless of our requests. I hope that explains it more clearly for you.

That letter from which I quoted was written to Timothy from Paul the apostle. The reason I personally believe in its validity has been stated here multiple times. In short, I believe that the apostles who lived and knew Jesus Christ personally were telling the truth about their experiences. I also believe that the New Testament as we have it today has captured the apostles' words sufficiently for us to consider them "historically accurate".

So why is Paul so special? Actually that was something I wanted to talk about in another thread before I got busy a couple of weeks ago. He was not one of the original 12 disciples. He was a high ranking Jew who persecuted the early church. He later was confronted by Christ when he was travelling and he became a xian as a result of that encounter. He was accepted as an apostle by the original apostles. I hold him in extremely high regard, especially in how he was instrumental in bringing the gospel to the gentile world. Also, much of the New Testament consists of his writings.

It has also been stated here many times before that I will often speak from my world view in order to explain my position for others. This thread began slamming the xian point of view on prayer, so it seemed reasonable to present xian explanations for why we do what we do and why we think what we think about prayer.

If you told me that God spoke to you, I would certainly expect you to back it up. But that goes to the heart of why I accept the apostles' claims. I think the resurrection is a historical fact. When I walk through everything we know about the documents in question and the accounts found in them, I am left with the conclusion it is more likely to be true than not. I accept, and fully acknowledge, I do not know 100% that it is true and that is why they call it faith. My basis of my faith is reasoned and calculated from the evidence of history.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

quote:

---

Also, much of the New Testament consists of his writings.

---

Most scholars agree that (forgive me if I'm off on the count) 6 of the 13 works attributed to Paul are not actually written by him.

FWIW

Also, the earliest versions of the new testament that we have, containing more than just bits or pieces of a page, date to the 3rd century and later. The earliest complete versions, the 4th or 5th century.

That's a loooooooong time for things to change. Given the changes we *know* about from existing versions, the possibilities of previous changes are quite limitless...

That, for me, is far more than enough to call the "truth" into question.

again, FWIW.




(Edited by DL-44 on 04-14-2005 05:08)

Paul says he was confronted by Christ. And everyone believes him? (This was after JC was dead remember.) What about when Jesus cornered me in the men's room the other day and straightened me out about how this world is going downhill? If I tell everyone what he revealed to me then, I'll just be dismissed as a crazy fool. So why do we believe Paul just because he wrote a story?

quote:

---

If you told me that God spoke to you, I would certainly expect you to back it up.

---

What evidence did Paul provide to back up his claims, other than saying that it happened?




(Edited by briggl on 04-14-2005 06:36)

Really, in the men's room? I always believed he was gay, not that there is anything wrong with that.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:You are welcome Fig. Good thing we have medical SCIENCE huh?

---

right, because i've always said science is bad you might actually read some of the posts around here.

as much of an a$$ as you seem to be i'd still have some sympathy for you as a person if i knew you were having medical complications, surgery, etc. i suppose it's a stretch to expect the same.

for anyone who does care, i cracked my humerus in half sunday night and had it surgically repaired with a metal plate wed morning. uncomfortable but not doing too bad now.

chris


KAIROSinteractive | tangent oriented

Sorry to hear that. I hope it heals well, and you regain the full use of your arm.

I assure you Fig, I don't find your situation humourous.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

briggl said:

What evidence did Paul provide to back up his claims, other than saying that it
happened?

---

Eyewitnesses. But then again, I am just going off history written by Paul's protege, so it could be faulty, but that is the historically agreed upon answer.

Eyewitness was a big thing back then, and I believe it is still pretty good now. Of course, those 500 or so people who saw Jesus after He died were just lying through their teeth in order to promote a religion that would ultimately end in each of their deaths (some by the hands of Roman Governors). Nah, those accounts are worthless...

Paul's story was a good one, wasn't it Bugs? Pretty good evidence for the whole Christian life-changing thing, but then as Zaddy quoted, you can't convince people through reason something that they are scared of...
One little thing, though: you do know God doesn't need us to live or work, right?

You know, DL, I'm starting to get anxious, when are you going to be showing us these refutations of the New Testament books? I'm interested.

"You must unlearn what you have learned."
~Yoda

quote:

---

Eyewitnesses. But then again, I am just going off history written by Paul's protege, so it could be faulty, but that is the historically agreed upon answer.

---

What eyewitnesses?
Are you referring to Acts? The book that has been shown to be vastly inaccurate repeatedly?

"historically agreed upon"? By whom?

quote:

---

Of course, those 500 or so people who saw Jesus after He died were just lying through their teeth in order to promote a religion that would ultimately end in each of their deaths (some by the hands of Roman Governors). Nah, those accounts are worthless...

---

And I assume you can produce the testemonies of these "500 or so" people? Ah, no - that's right, we've got 4 accounts of the resurrection, written at best a couple of decades (up to several decades) after the 'event' in question, one of which was added onto 'mark' sometime significantly later after the original ending was deemed not conclusive enough by the proto-orthodox christians...

quote:

---

Paul's story was a good one, wasn't it Bugs? Pretty good evidence for the whole Christian life-changing thing,

---

It is evidence for nothing other than the fect that he changed the cause he was fighting for. He was a zealot for one cause who turned into a zealot for another cause. Not an uncommon personality trait, then or now.

quote:

---

but then as Zaddy quoted, you can't convince people through reason something that they are scared of...

---

And if you ever find something that I am "afraid of" and have some "reason" at your disposal, then we can address that issue perhaps

quote:

---

One little thing, though: you do know God doesn't need us to live or work, right?

---

The feeling is quite mutual =)

quote:

---

You know, DL, I'm starting to get anxious, when are you going to be showing us these refutations of the New Testament books? I'm interested.

---

I wouldn't necessarily call it 'refuations' of the books, but the topic I mentioned earlier, I will start a new threa for when I have the time.

http://www.etymonline.com/columns/fallacy.htm

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Well I guess if I haaaad to say a prayer.... =) The audio's out there... but can't find it right now... I luv the 'circular' something. <lol>

quote:

---

Boys In The Barroom
(Robert Hunter)

Transcribed by: William Bond


Does God look down on the boys in the barroom?
Mainly forsaken but surely not judged
Jacks, Kings, and Aces, their faces in wine
Do Lord deliver our kind?
From singin' for whiskey three strings on a fiddle
Four on the guitar and a song that I love
Many's the night we spent pickin' and singin'
In hopes it be pleasing both here and above
Jack string fiddle to my saw tooth bow
Who loves loneliness, loves it alone
I love the dim lights like some love the dew
Only thing I wonder sometimes:
Does God look down on the boys in the barroom?
Mainly forsaken but surely not judged
Jacks, Kings, and Aces, their faces in wine
Do Lord deliver our kind?

---

(Edited by NoJive on 04-15-2005 23:45)

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

I assure you Fig, I don't find your situation humourous."All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to thepolitician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, RomanPoet (94 - 55 BCE)

---

that was horrible...but somewhat funny in my current narcotic-laden state

chris


KAIROSinteractive | tangent oriented

I wonder if Gideon will ever issue a rational statemtnet in his life?

I guess we can all hope.

I remember the time the exorcist movie came out the first time and people were just scared to death of the devil and the movie drove them back to their churches. I myself, was so scared of the actual face of evil after I saw that movie. I had to sleep with my sisters that nite. And I remember asking God how he allows such scary evil entity to manifest itself to scare mankind. As I was saying this I was walking towards my bedroom. I specifically remember exaclty where I was and the day, Friday and it was nite time. That instant God audibly spoke to me in my ear. And I can remember it as if were yesterday. God said " I allow it so people can believe" This was a gift to me. And I have always understood it. I told my family the next day, because it was so unbelieving. So I know God hears everything the heart desires.

I also experienced in Bracket Station, Texas an apparation with thousands of others. It was a vision of an image that manifested itself to show different apparations to people who were looking at it and the same time but seeing different things. It was on a wall in a lumber yard, where a very holy family lived. One nite the mother noticed a glowing light and went to see what it was an there she saw different images from the same glow. She told neighbors and word got out and soon all the surrounding areas knew about it and came to visit. They had to shut down some streets.. It was on the news and newspaper how it could not be explained. Scientist and numbers of persons tried to figure it out to discredit it but couldn't.
The glow was clear in daytime on a sunny day as well as the nite time. When I went there with my family while I was in line, from a distance I could see a very peculiar blue mist. This color of blue I had never seen before. When I got to the front of the image. I saw three different images from the glow. When I stood to the left I saw an image of the virgin mary bending down looking at a cradle. Rays of light were coming from the cradle. When I moved a little to the middle I saw the whole figure of the virgin standing with a crown of lights coming from her head. These pics you could not see clearly like the features of her face. In this second image she was holding the baby Jesus. And a glow of light was coming from the face. When I was leaving the image, it metamorphisized and I saw a face with brown hair and beard covered by a brown shroud. I figured it was Jesus but I couldnt make out face. It was so unbelievable. I realized God had his reason for allowing that gift for people to see. It was a small town and maybe there were ardent pious people who lived there. Whatever the reason, God didn't have to allow this for people to believe. They believed anyway. But it makes the faith become more alive and we give thanks. Its like God is just checking in to show he is still around

Jade, I've already met such spirits, and I defeated them on the battlefields that they created WITHOUT your god.

The Exorcist is just a movie. I found it to be funny.

Alien scared the living crap out of me though.

If you ever have the unpleasant experience, to experience a war first-hand, I think maybe we might have some grounds to talk on, considering what you think about your god (and how that would change your perspective of things) - in what he allows...or if he even exists. Believe me, he never "checked in" to show that he was around.

Watching a child literally disintergrate in a hail of metal before your eyes certainly blows big holes in one's faith in god.

WS: How can you argue with someone whom God speaks to?

Chris,

Nothing like a good pun to brighten the day. Not to make any cracks, but it sounds as though you currently have a lot on your plate.

Lets us all hope you soon return to full, two-handed typing functionality.

But tell me true, don't you find poor addled people like jade and gid to be a detriment to your side of the discussion?

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

you absolutely kill me jade. you kill me.

a horror movie with half-ass religious tie-ins makes you beleive...




just like "ghost" 'makes you think' about communication with the dead.


lordy lordy lordy...

what do the Superman comics make you feel? Wouldn't it be cool if Jesus could do what superman can do??

Oh DL! Doncha know? It was a documentary!

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

WS: How can you argue with someone whom God speaks to?

---

I've known alot of people who have seen and talked to god. LSD has some pretty astounding effects, and so does Peyote.

Years later, when I talk to them again, they normally chalk that up to the influence of the said drugs, and not a real experience.

For people like Jade and Gideon, it is nice to finally get them out in the open, where others can see them.

WebShaman | Asylum D & D | D & D Min Page

quote:

---

WebShaman said:
LSD has some pretty astounding effects

---

Premise: Jade can hear God speak to him and he has witnessed apparitions.
Assumptions: Jade has never done mind expanding drugs, he is not lying, and finally he is not making this up for the sake of controversy

If the premise is true, then he could be a descendant of Jesus and Mary what?s her face. If that?s the case, we should revere him, partake in group genuflection before him, or potentially face the wrath of God.

If this is false, we should consider that Jade is suffering from auditory and visual hallucinations ? signs of psychosis. If that?s the case, than rather than contempt he deserves our empathy. He is also worthy of being a member of this Asylum.

ZD, Jade is a female.

And I was not suggesting that Jade was on drugs, either.

What I am suggesting, is that which one perceives as reality, often is not, for one reason or another.

It could very well be, that Jade did have a spiritual experience. It still does not mean that she saw god. My people believe in many different spirits. It is also taught, that without proper training, one shouldn't try to contact such spirits, or have dealing with them (or at least, not without a guide).

Some of the spirits are malicious, deceiving, tricky, dishonest, and a few are really, really dangerous.

The Demon Bear, for instance, is a very dangerous spirit being. The Crow is a trickster, and often likes to play tricks on the unsuspecting.

Ah, the crow is god. He and his multiple pesonalities are sittinmg in a tree outside my place even as I write this. I'll throw god some bread crumbs.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

Ah, the crow is god.

---

I thought the chimpmunk is god.
go figure...

p.s. Who was the Walrus then?


edit: wtf is a chimpmunk?

(Edited by ZaddyDog on 04-18-2005 02:08)

I never claimed I saw God. The face was not clear, but I knew it was Jesus. But many people who were standing around me were looking in the same direction as I but were seeing a different vision. Some were seeing an animated scene.

Ok. Make fun of me. Thats ok. But I am not and have never been delusional. Or have ever been a drug user. But I have been high on life on occasion. But I knew I was going to leave myself wide open with that post. But the post is very true. In my faith, there are many spiritual manifisations to certain persons throughout all of its history. And I say it was God, cause I was asking him, but it could of been by guardian angel replying??


That movie came out around what, 1973? and I was a young teenager. Its spooked adults too and I read somewhere many persons seeked spiritual help because of it.

(Edited by jade on 04-18-2005 15:18)

Amazing! All by rote. Sure you weren't chewing some Jimson weed? Fused ganglia, no obvious sign of volitional mentation.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Yes, it 'spooked' a lot of people.

it was a 'spooky' kind of movie...

Anyone needing 'spiritual help' or 'hearing the voice of god' as a result of seeing it quite obviously had plenty of problems before hand for which they might require such help (and more likely are in need of psychological help).

That is not said to 'make fun', it is said becuase that is my honest opinion, and one that any person with an understaning of the workings of the human brain would come to as well.

quote:

---

Anyone needing 'spiritual help' or 'hearing the voice of god' as a result of seeing it quite obviously had plenty of problems before hand for which they might require such help (and more likely are in need of psychological help).

---

I don't think I need to see a psycharist. But maybe their conscience was bothering them and they don't want to go to this place:

http://web.eku.edu/flash/inferno/

(Edited by jade on 04-18-2005 19:21)

quote:

---

I don't think I need to see a psycharist.

---

Most crazy people don't think that they are crazy. They normally think that everybody else has a problem, not themselves.

Excellent diagnosis WS. Orderly! The mauve jacket please, for that lovely lady in Texas.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

jade said:
I don't think I need to see a psycharist.

---

Probably not.

Just watch out though if the voice that speaks to you suddently tells you :
"go to thee office bearing with thee an AK-47 and strafe wildy but deliberately until thee sendeth all the sinners to hell. I command thee to do my bidding. Let it be so-eth".

I got spooked when i saw Jaws. I never approached the Ocean the same way.
Hell, I don't even approach a swimming pool the same way since I saw that flick.
I just don't view sharks the same way at all.

On the flip side, I didn't, however, ever have the experience of a Great White whisper in my ear.

Similarly, if God were ever to speak to me, I think i would shit my pants.

Right then and there i would probably drop a 15 pound load....i would soil my pants so bad that not even the best dry cleaner this side of the mississippi would be able to reconstruct my undies.
yep, that would scare me pretty bad.

oh, and if you saw jesus and his face wasn't that clear....it could have been the shroud of turin that you saw.

(Edited by ZaddyDog on 04-19-2005 00:41)

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

book that has been shown to be vastly inaccurate repeatedly?

---

By whom?

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

By whom?

---

I can't remember the names, because my memory is bad, but I will find them for you when I have time.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

4 accounts of the resurrection

---

More than that...Have you read Isaiah recently?

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

after the 'event' in question, one of which was added onto 'mark' sometime
significantly later after the original ending was deemed not
conclusive enough
by the proto-orthodox christians

---

Now i'm really anxious. I'll start considering these things when you produce the source, but until then...

"You must unlearn what you have learned."
~Yoda

There are many sources to go to for that tidbit...it is very widely accepted among biblical scholars that 'Mark' originally ended when the women who went to the tomb were told that Jesus was resurrected ran off scared and told nobody. The rest was tacked on at a later date.

Two excellent sources for this kind of information:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0195141830/qid=1113878020/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/103-7484021-8515003

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385483724/qid=1113877994/sr=2-2/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_2/103-7484021-8515003

No I have not read isaiah recently.
However, as it was written before the time of jesus....I'm afraid it will a little short in providing eyewitnesses to his death...am I missing something? (and no, prophecy and other silliness does not count as 'eyewitness' account...)


{{edit - and as to acts. just a brief snippet for the moment (quoted from the 2nd book listed above, from Thomas Cahill)

quote:

---

...Luke, who, anxious to present the movement to his readers in the most favorable light, tends to smooth over all rough edges and, in highly colored presentations, to dramatize events that must originally have appeared more commonplace.

---

As any good story teller would

(Edited by DL-44 on 04-19-2005 04:55)

and as I have repeatedly pointed out. But DL, the zealot will neither see nor hear anything which might contradict the dogma.

Socialists tend towards the same sort of selective blindness.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Well, of course we've all referred to the gospels that wayn repeatedly. The point of that quote (and my point before hand) is to show that the book of Acts particularly is full of such 'smoothing over' and dramatizing, particularly when it comes to paul/peter.

In this case we can directly observe these things because we also have accounts from paul and peter which cover the same ground from time to time.

quote:

---

Excellent diagnosis WS. Orderly! The mauve jacket please, for that lovely lady in Texas.

---

Wrong diagnosis, but I am lovely.

quote:

---

and as I have repeatedly pointed out. But DL, the zealot will neither see nor hear anything which might contradict the dogma.

---

Not true, but we do see and know by the gift of divine spiriutal intelligence called "the light of wisdom". God cannot be contradicted.

"God cannot be contradicted"

But you don't know that! How could you? Are you saying that your god is unable to contradict himself? I know that god is constantly changing his/her mind in the bible, I think this might even fall inside the definition of contradicting himself. Your book shows god changing and adapting to some of the wants of his people. Keep reading, keep challenging, keep thinking, never stop.

The problem her is that you refuse to think outside the box. Even if you do it simply to humor the individual you are speaking with. But you should at least entertain the opposite viewpoints. I am of the opinion that blind faith isn't faith at all.

If you want to show real faith you will take the time to approach an argument, or a contradiction to your faith and fully explore it. When you have completely this process, and you still have your faith, you will end up having a better understanding of your faith and a firmer faith. When you do not do this you are not showing faith, you are showing a fear, by not even approaching an argument by understanding both side you are showing that you don't have the faith in your religion/god that it will maintain throughout all challenges. This refusal makes your religion weaker, and you appear weaker to those who have their faith and constantly challenge it with new thoughts and ideas.

Dan @ Code Town

quote:

---

I am of the opinion that blind faith isn't faith at all.

---

Warmarge

What makes you think I have never challenged & tested my faith? You have never walked in my shoes. You do not know my life stories, falls, tragedies, etc. I do not live in seclusion and have been affected by doubts. Only when we doubt and are uncertain do we look for meaning and hope and rise above. The thoughts and ideas and views the faith has are so full of truth. I don't have all the pieces to the great big puzzle of life but I am on the right tract. I am absolute and sure that Jesus is the son of the living God and partook in humanity to be one with us as God/Human to redeem us in order to pave to way for us. He will not have us suffer, what God himself did not suffer.

Since you do not know for sure the background of a believer, how would you know and come to a conclusion that they are blind without research. I do explore and read and research for myself. I understand my faith very well. My faith is firm. No weakeness today. Just because a person is a religious believer, doesn't mean they suffer from low intelligence without having thought out why they believe in Jesus. How would you propose they go about getting opposite viewpoints? We, are opposed on a daily basis. You just have to look into the real world and give into weakness of why there is no God? I and many other believers are challenged every day and still we profess faith. Why? Its not because we are narrow minded and clueless. Here at work, I work with 21 district attorneys, all prosecutors, all college educated and beyond. All are Christian. I am sure they took course in phy 1, philoposhies, theology, etc. Here, I see they & myself are exposed to all kinds of evil acts performed against the innocent. Sexual abuse of minors, rape, murder, and all kinds of criminal activity and to boot we have to see pics of the crime scenes. We have one case where 4 teens boys gang raped two young girls, 14 & 16. The horrible way they brutalized these thru testimony was animalistic. The crime pictures were so horrible I wanted to vomit. And I think "Oh my God, how can you allow this" So, I do ask, but then I think and know God is a kind and loving God and this act does not come from God. He is appalled and broken hearted like me, but in a much more deeper way. But, the will of a person overtakes the will of God in this mortal world. I remain focused that this is not his way. I don't take the easy way out and say there is no God. And they, the attorneys, can become bitter, disillusioned and Godless, but they too remain faithful Christians. And this is not out of blindness, this is out of the grace of faith.

<<sigh>> I know it is a mindless exercise, but; if one does all that challenging and study and investigation with the seeds of the illness (religion) within one, one requires a strong mind and an active intellect in order to overcome the decades of brainwashing one has received at the hands of one parents and community.

I intend to offer you no insult in observing that, to my mind, you have not displayed much of either on these threads.

Rather, you portray yourself as many here have described you in a variety of words...a dedicated "zealot". I add to that definition the word "fundamentalist".

I encourage you to look up both words in any good dictionary (not the "Catholic's Approved Definitions" version.

If they do not flatter you, then you may actually be thinking about and challengin the precepts and mythf of your faith.

If you are flattered...my comment about no 'obvious signs of volitional mentation' holds true.

This means you are a puppett.

The poope pulls your strings.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

The poope pulls your strings.

---

Don't know about the poope, but I would love to have the new Pope pull my finger.

he would, but you would have to stretch your arm behind your back...while touching your toes.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

You are correct, I have never walked in your shoes. However, with each post here you add to the portrait that is your personality on these boards. I base my information on this. So what makes me think that you do not challenge and test your faith is the words you write here. When you write something like "God can not be contradicted," that shows a gross ignorance, when you make statements that you would let your child a person who assisted child molestation (even though later recanted), with your tirades against pornography, and ideas that casual use of taboo material constitutes addiction. All of these things contribute to my statement.

I also have to point out that I am not trying to attack you. If I am able to read your posts and get these ideas about you, and you feel that they are wrong ideas I feel that you should tell me why I am wrong and attempt to correct my misunderstanding of you. Again, I don't think anyone here is trying to directly attack you, we are all here to help one another, but it is the culture of this place to go after every small thing in order to improve it.

Also, the lawyers at your firm are not here to discuss things with us, I don't particularly care for them at this point. You are the one who is visiting these boards so you are the one who gets my attention. You witness horrible things, but I do not look at these events as trials of your faith. There are many reasons one can come up with to justify any of the atrocities one might come in contact with. Now these events might put you at odds with your god, but I can not picture then challenging your faith.

The things I feel that challenge faith are ideas. You do not appear to even think about any of the ideas counter to your way of thinking. You appear to simply throw them aside with a quote from your book, or a rage against Satan. It doesn't appear that thoughts of your own entered the discussion.

If I were the only one to look at you in this way I might see that it is a fault of mine in observing you. But others express a similar view, so I think that it must be the way in which you are projecting your ideas towards us. I am not trying to attack you here, but I am trying to help so that the words that are passed between all of us have more meaning.

Dan @ Code Town

WM

I don't take post personal and as attacks. I am what I am. I make no excuses. How I am perceived on this post depends on ones views life, culture, religion, etc. Everyone has an opinion based on what point they are at in life. In matters of faith I cannot formulate my own opinion. I cannot vote what I choose or choose not to believe. My faith is not a democracy. I am directed by faith wholeheartly. I am servant first, submissive to will of the master, Jesus. This you cannot understand because you are not a person of the Christan faith. This faith calls us to be submissive to Christ in all ways. If its seems Christans are puppetized or have their strings pulled its because we are believers. I take this as a compliment. Yes, I want God to pull my strings. For me there is a much more larger greater force in the grand picture of things than a non-believers opinion of me.

Man is the contridictor, God isn't. You base your opinions on the writings of man in scripture, who try to have you see who God is. In this way you are confused. The God of our fathers is the supreme intellect who knows all things beyond what your mind can percieve. God left us on this planet to see how we come to know him, if at all thur persons. Man is not an island, he needs people and how we relate to each other determines how Christlike we are. Thats the bottom line. Per scripure we are to serve rather than be served. That makes us servants & puppets who do the will of God. I am Ok with it.

(Edited by jade on 04-20-2005 15:28)

Wront post

(Edited by jade on 04-20-2005 16:03)

That is a ton of bullshit, and I find it hard to believe that you would even believe that.

As for the walking in an others shoes, I think you might then take your own advise.

I was born a catholic, raises as a Catholic, went to Catholic School, studied the same St. James that you have. I have debated it for hours on end with many different Priests. These men, who I am sure spend more of their time in the service of god, more time reading their bible and debating the scripture than any of us here do. They still had doubts, they still had questions, and they still worked at learning and understanding while maintaining their faith. In matters of faith there are lots of ways to interpret things, and you must come up with your own decision based on many different ideas. Do you decide not to murder, or do you stone homosexuals, adulterers and witches? Again a small example.

Man wrote the scripture! No! By your own beliefs, the words in that book are words from god (Holy Spirit) through man. They are not simply the writings of man.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html

As for god changing his mind:

"And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people."
Exodus 32:14

"At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it;
If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it;
If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them."
Jeremiah 18:7-10

These are just two small examples, when the change is seen in a small section. If you wish to have even grander portions pointed out to you it can be done. You will probably argue that god didn't change his mind at all, this was just stages in his plan. However, it is written that the LORD wanted to do some, and then decided not to do it, that is a change.

Line by line your arguments fall flat against these scriptures you follow so feverently, yet when quoted against your faulty set of beliefs you claim them false, or flawed.

You claim to understand god, and me confused, when you can not know god. When it suffices you, you will claim to know gods plan, but later when it suits your purpose claim you can not know gods plan you just follow and are a servant. It is not I that am confused, it is you who try to confuse. God gave you free will, he didn't set you down here without the ability to reason for yourself. Claiming you are just a puppet goes against his stated purpose.

Your flippant discarding of my ideas do to me being a "non-believer" is again, like others have said your ducking and weaving, and passing your in ability to actually comprehend the issues onto something that you see as a flaw in me. If pass off so many aspects of what that grand picture you (in the above post) are intertwined with, how do you ever expect to see it.

Dan @ Code Town

In simple terms jade, your every post is and excuse and your style of response is exactly as WM defined.

But, like your blind faith, you cannot see the error of your ways.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

quote:

---

I was born a catholic, raises as a Catholic, went to Catholic School, studied the same St. James that you have. I have debated it for hours on end with many different Priests. These men, who I am sure spend more of their time in the service of god, more time reading their bible and debating the scripture than any of us here do. They still had doubts, they still had questions, and they still worked at learning and understanding while maintaining their faith. In matters of faith there are lots of ways to interpret things, and you must come up with your own decision based on many different ideas. Do you decide not to murder, or do you stone homosexuals, adulterers and witches? Again a small example.

---

Its difficult for you to understand me because my walk is different from yours. I come from a practicing family which prayed all the time. Rosaries, mass attendence, helping in the workings of the church was a regular. My Father is not a learned man, nor my mother, but they raised 10 children with much hardship sending all of us the Catholic private school as well highschool. I saw the dedication, love and discipline towards the Catholic faith. I saw thru many trials, submission. Most of all there was much, much prayer. Do you really think that God ONLY wants great theologians who can reason him into existance by debate and study. I don't think he does. We are not all called to the same path. Some of us are called to be great teachers and thinkers. Some not. I believe the man who lives simply and believes is endowed with a greater gift of grace than one who has to reason Gods ways. The gift of grace has many levels. A man can go thru his whole life with never opening a bible, but hearing the word of God by going to church and living the a good life. He doesn't have to attend theology classes and debate with anyone regarding why or why not he believes. Does this make him a puppet?

quote:

---

Man wrote the scripture! No! By your own beliefs, the words in that book are words from god (Holy Spirit) through man. They are not simply the writings of man.

---

Man wrote scripture guided by the Holy Spirit. They are human words written to describe history of the faith and the gosples of Jesus. It is one of the foundations of our church. But not all. But that is not all there is to faith according to Catholic belief. The bible is a tool. It will not get you to heaven if you don't live a good life. Per scripture in the NT, if two are in disagreement with the interpretation of bible scripture, who does scripture tell you to consult? Its the Church who is the "pillar and foundation of truth" and untimate authority. Who is the church, which is made up of millions? Do you go ask each one? No. That is not the way the Church interprets this. So all one has to do is consult with his Catholic study bible guide or ask his priest. Now thru the grace and study of the faith, and thanks to Pope John Paul we now have the "Catechism of the Catholic Church" which is very reader friendly.

(Edited by jade on 04-20-2005 17:29)

Just remember everyone, it's not superstition, it's religion....
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/04/20/mary.underpass.ap/index.html

I'm unclear on the difference at this point

Years ago I saw something similar in a concrete urinal. If I'd only known. =)

If you believe yourself to be a simple puppet following all of these self prescribe rules of your religion, why do you come here into a forum clearly designed for political, ideological and theological debates?

Dan @ Code Town

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

stretch your arm behind your back...while touching your toes.

---

LMAO@Ehtheist

quote:

---

NoJive said:

Years ago I saw something similar in a concrete urinal.

---

I know this might be slightly off topic, but have you ever gone inside a stall , you flush to get a nice clean bowl before hanging a rat tail, and then you notice this huge floater just swaying in the current?
With no hint of TP anywhere in the bowl?

What's up with that? Did the perp think "Wow, what a work of art. I got to share this with the world. I won't wipe my butt for fear of covering this master-piece-of-shit with TP" .

Did the SOB just walk out with an ass bedecked in shit just so we could marvel at his progeny?

THe arrogance of some people.

sorry for the distraction, please continue wiht the thread

I'm playing a bit of "catch up" here, bear with me.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

Most scholars agree that (forgive me if I'm off on the count) 6 of the 13 works attributed to Paul are not actually written by him.

---

You are quite correct that several of the books traditionally ascribed to Paul are not accepted by many scholars today. I take back my statement that most of the NT was written by Paul. I do take a traditional view of the authorship of those 13 books and I'm even inclined to believe Paul wrote Hebrews but that still amounts to just half of the total 27.

quote:

---

Also, the earliest versions of the new testament that we have, containing more than just bits or pieces of a page, date to the 3rd century and later. The earliest complete versions, the 4th or 5th century.

That's a loooooooong time for things to change. Given the changes we *know* about from existing versions, the possibilities of previous changes are quite limitless...

---

Agreed that the earliest fragment that I've read about dates to about 150CE. But one thing that is critical to point out is that all of the docuements we do have point to source material a couple of decades after the events in question and well within the life spans of the eye witnesses, namely the apostles. I don't see how this affords a situation where limitless modifications could occur.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

quote:

---

Bugimus said:

Most scholars agree that (forgive me if I'm off on the count) 6 of the 13 works attributed to Paul are not actually written by him.

---

I think Paul's stuff was generally better than John's - in fact most of John's stuff was sub-par. When Paul and John collaborated - well that's a differnet story - there was good synery. George wrote some decent stuff. But the one without any talent was Ringo.

edit: the synery was good, but the synergy was even more synergistic

(Edited by ZaddyDog on 04-21-2005 01:34)

quote:

---

briggl said:

What evidence did Paul provide to back up his claims, other than saying that it happened?

---

and

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

It is evidence for nothing other than the fect that he changed the cause he was fighting for. He was a zealot for one cause who turned into a zealot for another cause.

---

If all we knew about Paul was what DL says here, then there wouldn't be much to back up his claims. But the reason I add far more weight to his writings than that is because the original apostles accepted him as did the first churches. Their acceptance lends credibility to his conversion story since I accept the original apostles words as "gospel" truth

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

So......because they accepted his story, it's true?

They would be exceedingly eager for someone in Paul's position to take up their cause. Suspicious, certainly, and most likely concerned over his strong-headedness....but still...
I was also under the impression that they *didn't* really buy it...

It was as big a boon as to christianity as Constantine's conversion. Do you buy his story about his vision of christ?

Zaddy - you've made it abundantly clear you have nothing to contribute. If the topic bores you so, feel free to go elsewhere =)

quote:

---

Zaddy - you've made it abundantly clear you have nothing to contribute. If the topic bores you so, feel free to go elsewhere =)

---

Exactly.

Consider this a friendly warning.

On with the thread!

quote:

---

WebShaman said:
Consider this a friendly warning.

---

As opposed to an unfriendly warning?

This forum is called Philosophy and other silliness.
I haven't seen much philosophy in this thread, i've seen bullying though..i've seen intolerance towards other - particularly aimed at Jade and Gideon.

If you want to Ban me - I guess you can - be my guest.
and if you want to censor me, then you should rewrite the TOS.
you should also be conscious of how your bullying and intolerance borders on hate crimes.

i'm sure Doc would be very proud - no wonder so many veterans have left the asylum.

i know i'm not always funny, i guess you saw this as disruptive...but ppl who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

i'll stay out of this thread - i wouldn't want to desecrate it.

on with YOUR thread.

Nobody said anything about banning, jackass.

You have consistently jumped into discussions with nothing whatsoever to contibute to the discussion.

It gets old.

Quick.

Like a hyper active 3 year old.

*sigh*

quote:

---

If you want to Ban me - I guess you can - be my guest.
and if you want to censor me, then you should rewrite the TOS.
you should also be conscious of how your bullying and intolerance borders on hate crimes.

---

First of all, I never said anything about banning. I have never banned anyone on these boards. And I never will. I'm not even sure if I can - I think only Finglongers can...but I could be wrong on that.
I never said anything about censoring you, either.
My "bullying"? My "intolerance"? Bordering on hate crimes?
I give you a friendly warning, and you jump out with remarks on banning, censorship, and bullying and intolerance bording on hate crimes.

Lordy, you need to cut down on the caffeine.

Basically, it means if you have something to contribue to the thread topic, then do so. If you just want to shoot your mouth off, and post inane remarks, then start your own thread, please.

Sometimes, I lock threads. Sometimes, I admonish others, yes. Occasionally, I put my foot down firmly, when most other techniques have been exhausted. Most of these types of occurances are rare, coming from me.

Back to your comments in this thread - show me what your comments have to do with the topic of the thread and the question that I posed, please.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:
Nobody said anything about banning, jackass.

---

You shouldn't make it personal DL-44.
You shouldn't insult someone in a thread unless you were ready to do it face to face as well.
Asswipe.

ZD, is this really how you wish things to go for you here on these boards?

I suggest that you take a few long breaths before posting such again.

quote:

---

You shouldn't insult someone in a thread unless you were ready to do it face to face as well.

---

I can't speak for DL, but I can for myself. Yes, when I say something here, I woud also say it in RL, to someone directly. I'm not really sure what you mean by this directly, so I will take it as it reads. The inuendos, however, suggest violence. Is that really how you wish to be interpreted?

If you feel that you need to express something personally, take it to mail.

Now, if you are not up to answering my questions, and still have the urge to fill this thread with inane statements not related, please leave it, and start your own.

Got that?

quote:

---

WebShaman said:
The inuendos, however, suggest violence

---

Not suggesting violence. Not at all.

My point, which was pretty clear, was that if he doesn't insult ppl personally in RL then he shouldn't do it here either. And my original comment was for you , not him, does he need to gang up on me?

Look WS...let's leave it at that. OK?
I was going to leave this thread but did not care for his insult - his childish parting shot.

I'm leaving it now...so he can insult me and then gloat that he had the last word.

peace

I speak here like I speak anywhere. I call 'em like I see 'em. More than happy to move on...

Good heavens to murgatroyd. After all the high-minded discourse here all of a sudden we are down to the kindergarten sand box?

Grow up you guys.

If you feel insulted then it is bcause you want to be.

Anyone who allows anything posted on an anonymous board to be considered an insult is either horribly insecure or desperatly seeking insults.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

Desperately Seeking Insults... wasn't that a really lame movie from the 80s?

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

quote:

---

Ehtheist said:

Good heavens to murgatroyd.

---

Honestly, I always that it was spelled "mergatroid." Weird.

Oh, and I've met DL face to face, and I can honestly tell you I feared for my life the entire time. Think Clint Eastwood crossed with Ahnold Governator crossed with Chuck Norris crossed with a really pissed off scorpion.

On the other hand, he's a really good cook, and he's got good taste in beer.

Oh yeah, nice thread, by the way. I've been kind of following along, but I didn't want to post until things stooped down to my level (and, in the end, they always do). Carry on.

___________________________
Suho: www.liminality.org | Cell 270 | Sig Rotator | the Fellowship of Sup | "Hooray for linguistic idiots and yak milk!"

I kinda like your spelling, seems 'current', trendy.

I am a passable cook myself...for a heathen, but very fussy about beer (say, we off topic?). Won't drink anything pasturized or chemically aged or preserved.

Hang around, we may drag this down a little further.

"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher." -- Lucretius, Roman Poet (94 - 55 BCE)

"Let us talk about prayer"

I pray the bullshit is over.

Good way to really tear down a thread and then turn it back to something useful. I get more and more pleased all the time.

On to further notes. The size of this thread is really massive, time consuming to post to due to lag. So I am going to do something that hasn't been done with this new forum to my knowledge. I am going to close this thread and start up a number 2.

If any of you other MS out there don't like this, just call me dumb and re open it.

Dan @ Code Town