The power of prayer

[Nearly Sane]

Answer the question, or your whole argument falls flat.

Somewhat ironic coming from someone who has refused to answer the question I asked you three times. But hey ho I won't let your double standards get in the way. I've studied different history course at 3 universities and contributed to courses in 2 of them , I know well about 15 lecturers covering different history subjects, including 4 professors. Less well about 40.

Just to point out if I had said higher or lower numbers it doesn't really mean the point is defeated. That is because you claimed your study of history had allowed you to evaluate the gospels and the idea of resurrection as a fact. So once again I ask you name me a recognised UK university course that isn't methodolofically naturalistic? If you want to extend it beyond the UK,if you'll indicate what your study with such an institution was.

[ippy]

Answer the question, or your whole argument falls flat.

Hi there B A I've just got back in from the garden Been fixing security locks on my new back gate weeding out the rose beds and I've read your posts about my quote.

Your post reminded me of a quote of Thomas Paine's:

"If we are to suppose a miracle to be something so entirely out of the course of what is called nature, that she must go out of that course to accomplish it; it raises the question in the mind very easily decided, which is: Is it more probable that nature should out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie?"

Anyway your posts made me wonder if you would find it interesting?

ippy

[BashfulAnthony]

Hi there B A I've just got back in from the garden Been fixing security locks on my new back gate weeding out the rose beds and I've read your posts about my quote.

Your post reminded me of a quote of Thomas Paine's:

"If we are to suppose a miracle to be something so entirely out of the course of what is called nature, that she must go out of that course to accomplish it; it raises the question in the mind very easily decided, which is: Is it more probable that nature should out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie?"

Anyway your posts made me wonder if you would find it interesting?

ippy

I always find your posts interesting, ippy, even though I almost always disagree with them!  Paine was an interesting man, but had a sad ending. 

[BashfulAnthony]

Somewhat ironic coming from someone who has refused to answer the question I asked you three times. But hey ho I won't let your double standards get in the way. I've studied different history course at 3 universities and contributed to courses in 2 of them , I know well about 15 lecturers covering different history subjects, including 4 professors. Less well about 40.

Just to point out if I had said higher or lower numbers it doesn't really mean the point is defeated. That is because you claimed your study of history had allowed you to evaluate the gospels and the idea of resurrection as a fact. So once again I ask you name me a recognised UK university course that isn't methodolofically naturalistic? If you want to extend it beyond the UK,if you'll indicate what your study with such an institution was.

To be honest, I've forgotten the original thread;  probably because  the discussion was either so blindingly dull, or just irrelevant.  Sorry about that, professor.

[Nearly Sane]

To be honest, I've forgotten the original thread;  probably because  the discussion was either so blindingly dull, or just irrelevant.  Sorry about that, professor.

Brave Sir Bash ran away!

[bluehillside Retd.]

BA,

To interject a moment here: A lot of people over the centuries haven't believed He was Son of God; many still don't.  But it happens to be true.

This reminded me of something but I couldn’t think what. Then it just came to me:

Dr. Fox: “Paedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than they do with you and me. Now that's a scientific fact: there's no real evidence for it, but it is scientific fact.”

(Brass Eye)

[Khatru]

They would be commonplace if the population of the world were around 200.
I'm afraid what you are actually saying is something you probably don't want to I.e. that resurrection is commonplace among people who have been er,ressurected.
 
 There are as well sometimes hundreds of years between cases and many are proposed within works which are mythological.

Only the NT accounts could be pointed at as reportage and of course are associated with Jesus who whether we like it or not had this 'thing' about him.

Yeah, I could have worded it a bit better than I did.

Can't help notice how you dismiss any accounts outside the NT - sounds like a bit of confirmation bias going on there.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yeah, I could have worded it a bit better than I did.

Can't help notice how you dismiss any accounts outside the NT - sounds like a bit of confirmation bias going on there.

I rather think it's the lack of firm historical context and the "epic" nature of the other accounts.

On the other hand as I told Bluehillside I don't fully discount the possibility of extra biblical resurrections.

[ippy]

"The power of prayer": it's all in the imagination, if it makes anyone feel better talking to themselves and calling it praying, fine, enjoy.

ippy

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

I have given the questioners here ample opportunity to show how their commitment to a naturalistic philosophy is falsifiable. None has been forthcoming. If they could demonstrate that all causes/effects have natural explanations, there would be no need for religious belief of any kind, but hey, I'm shifting the burden of proof again

Here it is a again: try taking the lift to the ground floor, then try jumping out of the window and relying on an angel to carry you down. Now tell me whether the statement "the naturalistic lift options is probabilistically more likely to deliver you safely to the ground than the non-naturalistic angel option" is true or not.

Which has the same error as all of those arguments based on Bertrand Russell’s parable of the Celestial Teapot! It fails to make the distinction between faith and blind faith. All you have done is come up with a scenario that requires blind faith and compared it with something else, as if the two are comparable. In doing so, you are assuming the conclusion to try and demonstrate the conclusion.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sword,

Which has the same error as all of those arguments based on Bertrand Russell’s parable of the Celestial Teapot! It fails to make the distinction between faith and blind faith. All you have done is come up with a scenario that requires blind faith and compared it with something else, as if the two are comparable. In doing so, you are assuming the conclusion to try and demonstrate the conclusion.

Which is the same error that you've made since you joined here: you propose no method of any kind to explain why religious faith isn't "blind". Why therefore would anyone treat your faith in "God" any differently from someone else's faith in a celestial teapot, of for that matter in anything else that takes their fancy? What's actually happening here is that you are assuming your conclusion - ie, that religious faith isn't blind faith.

Incidentally, you've missed the point of Russell's celestial teapot in any case - it's merely a demonstration of the negative proof fallacy. "You can't disprove it, therefore it's true" is a bad argument for the teapot and for "God" alike.   

[floo]

Which has the same error as all of those arguments based on Bertrand Russell’s parable of the Celestial Teapot! It fails to make the distinction between faith and blind faith. All you have done is come up with a scenario that requires blind faith and compared it with something else, as if the two are comparable. In doing so, you are assuming the conclusion to try and demonstrate the conclusion.

Faith is blind if it hasn't any evidence to support it.

[Alan Burns]

Faith is blind if it hasn't any evidence to support it.

I agree

[NicholasMarks]

I agree

The power of prayer is wonderful...Those that don't pray cannot possibly know about prayer or the change in lifestyle associated with it can deliver. We are living in an age when we are often led into prayer by false prophets else we are encouraged to ignore it so that we can grab the merchandise at knock-down prices...so what hope have non-believers got in learning about the power of prayer...but the power of prayer delivers to a sincere prayer a 'living water' that soothes the parts no other quencher of thirsts can't reach.

Try it...but read the Gospels first so that you aren't ignorant in the Biblical things you condemn.

[Maeght]

Incidentally, you've missed the point of Russell's celestial teapot in any case - it's merely a demonstration of the negative proof fallacy. "You can't disprove it, therefore it's true" is a bad argument for the teapot and for "God" alike.

I was glad someone pointed that out.

[Khatru]

The power of prayer is wonderful...Those that don't pray cannot possibly know about prayer or the change in lifestyle associated with it can deliver. We are living in an age when we are often led into prayer by false prophets else we are encouraged to ignore it so that we can grab the merchandise at knock-down prices...so what hope have non-believers got in learning about the power of prayer...but the power of prayer delivers to a sincere prayer a 'living water' that soothes the parts no other quencher of thirsts can't reach.

Try it...but read the Gospels first so that you aren't ignorant in the Biblical things you condemn.

Looks like the Bible god missed a trick.

https://www.cs.montana.edu/courses/esof522/handouts_papers/IntercessoryPrayer.pdf

The above publication shows the results of a study of cardiac patients who were being prayed for.  It would have been a truly excellent time for your god of choice to reveal himself.  Just think, he could have saved every patient that was prayed for and left the rest to die. Can you imagine having that data to proselytise with?  Man, you wouldn't need to do anything - it would sell itself without any effort on your behalf.

Of course, reality got in the way and it wasn't to be.  When studied, the results showed that prayer failed. If you read the study you will see that there were three groups of people:

1.  Those who weren't prayed for.
2.  Those who were prayed for but weren't told about it.
3.  Those who were prayed for and were told about it.

The fact is that from the results, it's plain that people in the third group died faster than those in the other two groups.

With publicity like that, how on earth are you supposed to convince people that prayer to your god of choice works?

Oh, you aren't.

[NicholasMarks]

Looks like the Bible god missed a trick.

https://www.cs.montana.edu/courses/esof522/handouts_papers/IntercessoryPrayer.pdf

The above publication shows the results of a study of cardiac patients who were being prayed for.  It would have been a truly excellent time for your god of choice to reveal himself.  Just think, he could have saved every patient that was prayed for and left the rest to die. Can you imagine having that data to proselytise with?  Man, you wouldn't need to do anything - it would sell itself without any effort on your behalf.

Of course, reality got in the way and it wasn't to be.  When studied, the results showed that prayer failed. If you read the study you will see that there were three groups of people:

1.  Those who weren't prayed for.
2.  Those who were prayed for but weren't told about it.
3.  Those who were prayed for and were told about it.

The fact is that from the results, it's plain that people in the third group died faster than those in the other two groups.

With publicity like that, how on earth are you supposed to convince people that prayer to your god of choice works?

Oh, you aren't.

Jesus taught us how to pray. He said find a quiet place out of earshot of others then he showed us how to structure our prayers. You want to design your own terms and conditions Khatru then slam God because he doesn't meet those terms and conditions.

My experience is somewhat different...by following the proper t & c's we find that every prayer is answered. Not by riches or splendour, not by repair to injuries or health problems which have been in the destructive process for many years...but by delivering the one property that will repair all ills...God's mighty strength...his living water...that is absorbed into our being and offers us everything Jesus said it would...the strength to cope with all our problems. The key one being that if we die we will be resurrected, providing we are sincere in upbuilding a righteous spirit.


 

[Sassy]

Assertions, useless arguments and nothing which gives any credence to the beliefs of atheists about God and Jesus Christ.

The truth is that the bible tells every man how to find God. It even says that " If you seek God with all your heart you will find him".
So those atheist on the thread who have never sought God with all their heart are not in a position to claim Christ or God to be none existent.
You can choose not to believe, you state " I do not believe" but what you cannot do is dismiss the truth when you have never done as the bible tells you to do to know them.

The evidence and even the truth shows that you do not want to believe. That is different from those who want to know God and Christ are real and so seek the truth with all their heart and find them.

For all the useless arguments.... If you never try you can never say the way isn't true or failed. Because you require more faith to believe in something you purposely avoid the truth about.  There has been no arguments by atheists that actually change the fact they are atheist by choice.  Men have to love truth and want the truth to be able find and know God.
No atheist here fits that bill., They choose to be atheist and have no heart to seek the truth.

[NicholasMarks]

Assertions, useless arguments and nothing which gives any credence to the beliefs of atheists about God and Jesus Christ.

The truth is that the bible tells every man how to find God. It even says that " If you seek God with all your heart you will find him".
So those atheist on the thread who have never sought God with all their heart are not in a position to claim Christ or God to be none existent.
You can choose not to believe, you state " I do not believe" but what you cannot do is dismiss the truth when you have never done as the bible tells you to do to know them.

The evidence and even the truth shows that you do not want to believe. That is different from those who want to know God and Christ are real and so seek the truth with all their heart and find them.

For all the useless arguments.... If you never try you can never say the way isn't true or failed. Because you require more faith to believe in something you purposely avoid the truth about.  There has been no arguments by atheists that actually change the fact they are atheist by choice.  Men have to love truth and want the truth to be able find and know God.
No atheist here fits that bill., They choose to be atheist and have no heart to seek the truth.

I wouldn't and couldn't dispute a single point you make there Sassy.

[Maeght]

How though can you seek God 'with all their heart' if you have no belief in God? How could that process start? You can't do something 'with all your heart' if you have no belief can you? I genuinely don't understand how this could work.

[torridon]

The evidence and even the truth shows that you do not want to believe. That is different from those who want to know God and Christ are real and so seek the truth with all their heart and find them.

For all the useless arguments.... If you never try you can never say the way isn't true or failed. Because you require more faith to believe in something you purposely avoid the truth about.  There has been no arguments by atheists that actually change the fact they are atheist by choice.  Men have to love truth and want the truth to be able find and know God.
No atheist here fits that bill., They choose to be atheist and have no heart to seek the truth.

Oh, what nonsense.  Nobody chooses what to believe Sass, this has been pointed out to you already so many times.  At least no honest person does so.  We can be persuaded, or not, by evidence and reason.  'Being persuaded' is a passive thing, not an active choice. I can no more choose to be persuaded by something unconvincing than I can choose to see the sky as purple.  It is not within the power of an honest person.

[Khatru]

Jesus taught us how to pray. He said find a quiet place out of earshot of others then he showed us how to structure our prayers. You want to design your own terms and conditions Khatru then slam God because he doesn't meet those terms and conditions.

The scientific test was about the outcome of prayer and not the method.  Those people followed Jesus' instructions to the letter - it made no difference whatsoever.

My experience is somewhat different...by following the proper t & c's we find that every prayer is answered. Not by riches or splendour, not by repair to injuries or health problems which have been in the destructive process for many years...but by delivering the one property that will repair all ills...God's mighty strength...his living water...that is absorbed into our being and offers us everything Jesus said it would...the strength to cope with all our problems. The key one being that if we die we will be resurrected, providing we are sincere in upbuilding a righteous spirit.

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


"Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours."
Mark 11:24

The key word in the above quotes is "whatever".  There are no caveats, no if's and but's, no conditions.  Whatever you ask will be done.

That's what the man said.

[NicholasMarks]

The scientific test was about the outcome of prayer and not the method.  Those people followed Jesus' instructions to the letter - it made no difference whatsoever.




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


"Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours."
Mark 11:24

The key word in the above quotes is "whatever".  There are no caveats, no if's and but's, no conditions.  Whatever you ask will be done.

That's what the man said.

A lot of what I say Khatru is based upon my own personal experience. What Jesus promises is that God will provide exactly what we need according to the prayer we make. This is providing we are trying to be righteous and providing we stick to the regulations regarding prayer that Jesus taught us. The most endearing thing I found from prayer is the strength to cope with all my problems...simply by trusting in God and following Jesus as he taught us, time passed the problems passed and I was richer because I had trusted in Jesus and he had kept his word.

I hear of many times when this advice would be beneficial. The Samaritans will tell you the amount of people who hit crisis point...they can't go on any longer...their problems are too great. Winning time is the only useful way out of these problems so that the unhappy person can upbuild their own strength to cope with their own problems, and perhaps some guidance in where they are going wrong...but no...all Khatru can see is if we want to win on the lottery it is God's duty to listen and pay up.

[Sebastian Toe]

The Samaritans will tell you the amount of people who hit crisis point...they can't go on any longer...their problems are too great.

Don't the Samaritans advise using God's spiritual waters as a solution when people call them?

[NicholasMarks]

Don't the Samaritans advise using God's spiritual waters as a solution when people call them?

No Seb...what they do, if I'm understanding them correctly...is listen.

Remeber Jesus Christ, he taught us to tell our problems to God so that he could listen...we could then often resolve our problems with lessons from his word.

Note the word 'Samaritans Seb'...a Biblical expression to identify where they get their strength from to help...but I'm not going down one of God's caring but sensitive routes with you when you have plainly shown that you have no righteous interest.