Answered Prayers

[danieldemol]

They will then provide you with a link to the websites of some sects founded by various individuals who have claimed to succeed the Founder, Baha’u’llah, and who managed to attract a following.

This is laughable. How could they provide you with a link to Baha'i "sects" if there are none?

And 1% of 5 million people is 50,000 which is a significant number of people when you consider that Baha'u'llah had 40,000 followers in his lifetime in my view.

Finally I find the view that this is a "Baha'i bashing thread" to be laughable since a)accurate portrayals of the faith are not negative portrayals of the faith just because they are not hagiography in nature in my opinion.

And
B) you introduced some claims about the Bahai faith into this thread, now you are crying foul because of having those inaccurate views challenged as i see it.

If you dont want your views challenged dont present them on a debate forum.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Sure, but which is it? There were not any disclaimers on some those. The Bible is great, but you have to choose which verses you like when there are conflicts.

Plenty of verses in the Bible are problematic, challenging, hard to reconcile with what we think we understand. Much of life is like that, so why should religion be any different? When I was an adolescent, I expected everything to eventually make sense, but I am no longer an adolescent. As an adult I accept that I am often lost and in need of guidance; prayer and meditation are means of accessing that guidance.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Not servant, but parent. A lot of people view God as being in a parental role. That's often because of how religion presents God, as a parent who loves us all.

Add to that the hucksterism which exists among different religions competing for parishioners, then all kinds of wild promises can be made. Like Robert Tilton claiming people will get paid back many more times the amount they donate to his ministry. A lot of people might see that as sending their money to God, so if God doesn't fulfill their prayer request, they might feel cheated. This is America, where we expect to get something for our money.

God is the father and we are his children; that is the essence of Christianity to many of it’s practitioners.

Do you think hucksterism is peculiar to religion? Your whole culture - your politics, your sport, your art - is show business. Andy Warhol told you that. Why should religion be different, in the land of the free market?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Maybe that's your baggage.

No, it's the baggage of the word.
And it's disingenuous to even try and deny that.

Consider the sentence: "I pray every day and I am an atheist"
The vast majority of people, including you, will think that is a strange thing to say.
And the reason is what the word "praying" actually means and the baggage it holds.

People need help. They pray, and through the act of praying they get some help. Why is this a problem for you?

It's not a problem for me. We just agreed that it's not the aspect of "praying" that helps them. It's the aspect of self-reflection that can be accomplished by other means also. The additional stuff that makes it "praying", is of no consequence in the help.

IOW, "praying" doesn't work. Self-reflection works. Insofar as "praying" works, it's the self-reflection component that does it.

It's like sports. Tennis works to stay / become fit and healthy. But it's not the tennis component that does it. It's the physical effort that does it. You don't need to play tennis to engage in physical effort. You can also go for a jog, go to a gym, play basket ball, etc.

So while "playing tennis works" is by itself not a wrong statement, "doing sport works" is a more accurate statement.

God, the duck, who cares? The process works.

Yes. But the component of the process that makes it work is not "praying". The point. You keep missing it. Perhaps intentionally.

It's a necessary part of the process. The icon gets us out of our own way, and consulting it helps us feel that we are in control again as we have an action to engage in, so we can think more clearly. We can't get the result without following the process, and consulting the icon is an important part of the process.

Sure. But the word "praying" concerns a specific icon and in discussions such as these people will say and believe that that specific icon is a necessary requirement. Which it is not.

 

[viole]

If someone prays for something and it happens(for whatever reason) they will say/may say "See! God is real. He listened and answered my prayer".

If your prayers aren't answered what then?

Does that make god not listening? Not real? Or?

Simple. If He does not answer, that means He has a better plan for you.

Clearly, this will work also if you pray to your car.

Ciao

- viole

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Perhaps I didn’t understand what you were trying to communicate.. My apologies.

No need to apologies man.

Not really on multiple points...
1) Jesus said it, I didn't
2) We teach our children how to ask properly (or suppose to)
3) If my child would said repeatedly and incessantly “i want a dollar” he would get it. Just because to you repeat something over and over doesn’t mean you get it.

Remember… I am writing within the context of my signature. I’m just pointing out what I have learned and believed but not needful that all believe like me. If you have a better way, well “great”! Share it.

I don't see how this ties into what we were talking about.
You said you had objections to the how the study was conducted. I asked for clarification and you then did that.
I then asked if your objection thus is that the people in the study were "praying wrong".
I don't see how the above is an answer to my question.

I could say we have a great control group (our church and churches like us)

That's not a control group. You might want to read up what a control group is in context of a double blind study..........

- and we get great results. I would first teach them how to pray and what to pray for in each situation.

If I did… would you agree with it?

I never argue with valid evidence.
However, it would have to be a proper study. And frankly the fact that you don't even seem to know what a control group is, doesn't bode well for the setup of the experiment.

 

[PureX]

Not servant, but parent. A lot of people view God as being in a parental role.

Sure, because they want to be taken care of like a child. Instead of wanting us to all take care of each other, like spiritually mature adults. And sadly, some religions cater to this infantile desire.

That's often because of how religion presents God, as a parent who loves us all.

Sure, and in the process, we should let the religion stand in for the "parent" and speak on the "parent's" behalf.

Add to that the hucksterism which exists among different religions competing for parishioners, then all kinds of wild promises can be made.

Exactly.

Like Robert Tilton claiming people will get paid back many more times the amount they donate to his ministry. A lot of people might see that as sending their money to God, so if God doesn't fulfill their prayer request, they might feel cheated. This is America, where we expect to get something for our money.

Money IS God in the U.S.,. It gives life and takes it away. It buys us security and justice and freedom or it leaves us completely at the mercy of the wealthy. It buys us all manner of comfort and joy and distraction from sadness. Or it leaves us miserable without reprieve. It brings us opportunity and respect or it condemns us to live in slavery and shame. Money is the "hand of God" in our world and that's why we worship those who have big piles of it as if they were demigods. And it's why we have a lot of churches that worship it, too.

 

[Stevicus]

God is the father and we are his children; that is the essence of Christianity to many of it’s practitioners.

Do you think hucksterism is peculiar to religion? Your whole culture - your politics, your sport, your art - is show business. Andy Warhol told you that. Why should religion be different, in the land of the free market?

I agree, but I think it illustrates the reason why many people view God and praying in the way they do.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I agree, but I think it illustrates the reason why many people view God and praying in the way they do.

Yeah, maybe.

 

[ppp]

No there are not. Let’s explore why.

Just none that you sect recognizes.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I never pray for anything in particular, not unless I am desperate, like when my husband was dying of cancer, but even then I asked God that His Will be done; so if it was not God's Will to help him live, I would have accepted that. I did have to accept that.

That's pretty close to what this atheist would say, but without the god belief or prayer. We have to accept reality to the extent we cannot modify it, which reminds me of the so-called serenity prayer to which I just referred requesting serenity, courage, and wisdom, but also without the gods and prayers. Who doesn't wish for such powers of discernment?

That the Lord is referred to as 'the Father' does not mean that the Baha'i Faith teaches that we are God's children.
That is a Christian teaching. The Baha'i Faith does not teach that.

But Christianity is the dominant theistic ideology in the West and defines what such language means to the majority - what was referred to previously as the baggage certain language carries with it.

I (don't) wonder why this thread, which was supposed to be about Answered Prayers has now degenerated into another thread to bash the Baha'i Faith.

Why do you feel that your faith is being bashed? You were merely disagreed with twice, once when you said that the Baha'i faith doesn't teach that God is a father and once when you said that there were no sects. Even if you were correct twice there, that is not bashing your faith.

Sure, because they want to be taken care of like a child. Instead of wanting us to all take care of each other, like spiritually mature adults.

This is also pretty close to what an atheist would say, although he would probably also tell you that spiritually mature adults have rejected the notion of spirits. In atheistic humanism, spirituality is experienced as a direct emotional connection to nature absent gods. It seems that the polytheists also commune with nature, but through a pantheon of symbolic gods, whereas the Abrahamic god has no respect for nature, matter, flesh - our entire reality - and its worshipers, if they have any themselves, must find that in themselves, because their religion teaches something different.

Money IS God in the U.S.,. It gives life and takes it away. It buys us security and justice and freedom or it leaves us completely at the mercy of the wealthy. It buys us all manner of comfort and joy and distraction from sadness. Or it leaves us miserable without reprieve. It brings us opportunity and respect or it condemns us to live in slavery and shame. Money is the "hand of God" in our world and that's why we worship those who have big piles of it as if they were demigods. And it's why we have a lot of churches that worship it, too

Yes, Americans are subjected to a consumerist ideology that teaches that happiness comes from acquisition and consumption, but one doesn't have to accede to it. It seems that you haven't. Can we assume that you didn't worship at the alters of black Friday and cyber Monday?

 

[Kenny]

Yes, but existence itself extends far beyond the obvious limits of mankind.

On another thread folks are discussing some kind of spiritual 'life force', which I think we can all acknowledge, exists. But the inference is that it must exist beyond the realm of physics and physical processes. And I keep wondering why it "must" do that?

If we were to witness Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead, directly, would we have to assume that this event "must have" transcended the realm of physics? Seems to me that we would make just the opposite presumption: that it is in fact in keeping with the realm of physics, even if t clearly transcends OUR understand of it.

Questions are always good and perhaps a never-ending search for understanding. But wouldn’t you say that the resurrection of Jesus goes “beyond the realm of physics and physical processes”? If, as they said, “He stinketh”, i gives the understanding that the natural physical process of decomposition had already started. Maybe at one point we will understand but it does give the current position that it does transcend our understanding of it.

To me, prayer is no less of a "divine interaction" just because we came to understand the psychological mechanics of it. Yet this seems to be a big bias on the part of both theists and atheists, alike (though, to opposing ends).

I will completely agree that we can understand the mechanics of it. It may include psychological mechanics, but I believe it also includes physical and spiritual understanding.

I like to use this example: if I took an hallucinogenic drug and experienced a visit with Jesus, does the fact that I took the drug negate the reality of the experience? Or did my taking the drug ENABLE a real experience with Jesus? And how could any of us possibly tell which? In fact, why should we even presume to know either way?

I suppose we will have different approaches to this subject. Viewpoints will differ and my perspective will be according to my signature. Since drug use in this capacity is listed as witchcraft, we would say that the experience WAS real and that in spite of the hallucinogenic drug, Jesus invaded his reaction to the drug. We prayed that God would do that to one of our youth and he did. But we will only be positioning ourselves, on this subject, by our perspectives and probably won’t come to know the truth until the afterlife.

If I pray for God to help me recover from a deadly disease, and the doctors come up with a miracle drug just in time to save me, does that mean God had nothing to do with it? Or did God act to heal me THROUGH the medical people? And how could I possibly determine which of these occurred? And why should I even be treating them as mutually exclusive possibilities?

Again, I completely agree.

God uses many methods for healing. I also believe that God provides healing through doctors because He still wants people healed even if they are not believers… even atheists.

I think these are the kinds of questions that can bring God INTO OUR REALITY. Instead of God just being some fantastic abstract ideal that remains forever aloof from the reality we live in.

I would respect the power of prayer even if I were an atheist. But then I could never be an atheist because I have no basis upon which to make that kind of determination. Similar to the drug-induced visit with Jesus.

So, your position of being God into our reality is not an anti-God position and has merit.

 

[Kenny]

I don't see how this ties into what we were talking about.
You said you had objections to the how the study was conducted. I asked for clarification and you then did that.
I then asked if your objection thus is that the people in the study were "praying wrong".
I don't see how the above is an answer to my question.

Let me say it differently in how studies are wrong. I have prayed wrong before. Jesus gave many example of how prayer can be done with no visible effect with vain repetitions being one of them.

If one was praying with vain repetitions, the person was being prayed for according to the study. But it was still ineffectual and would be listed as “it doesn’t work”. No, it was admistered wrong.

That's not a control group. You might want to read up what a control group is in context of a double blind study..........

A double-blind study when prayer is wrong… is still wrong.

I never argue with valid evidence.
However, it would have to be a proper study. And frankly the fact that you don't even seem to know what a control group is, doesn't bode well for the setup of the experiment.

OK… But while you wait for a proper study, people will still be reaping the benefits of a prayer of faith.

 

[PureX]

Questions are always good and perhaps a never-ending search for understanding. But wouldn’t you say that the resurrection of Jesus goes “beyond the realm of physics and physical processes”? If, as they said, “He stinketh”, i gives the understanding that the natural physical process of decomposition had already started. Maybe at one point we will understand but it does give the current position that it does transcend our understanding of it.



I will completely agree that we can understand the mechanics of it. It may include psychological mechanics, but I believe it also includes physical and spiritual understanding.


I suppose we will have different approaches to this subject. Viewpoints will differ and my perspective will be according to my signature. Since drug use in this capacity is listed as witchcraft, we would say that the experience WAS real and that in spite of the hallucinogenic drug, Jesus invaded his reaction to the drug. We prayed that God would do that to one of our youth and he did. But we will only be positioning ourselves, on this subject, by our perspectives and probably won’t come to know the truth until the afterlife.


Again, I completely agree.

God uses many methods for healing. I also believe that God provides healing through doctors because He still wants people healed even if they are not believers… even atheists.


So, your position of being God into our reality is not an anti-God position and has merit.

I guess I'm saying that we don't need unbelievable miracles to make God real to us, we nead practical real life solutions. I think prayer is one of those. So is philanthropy. Forgiveness, kindness, generosity, humans helping humans.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

On another thread folks are discussing some kind of spiritual 'life force', which I think we can all acknowledge, exists.

Spiritual energy was the term used, but what's the difference, really? It's just poetry (metaphor), unless one is positing a literal force or energy distinct from the known forces and forms of energy, as when one posits life begins when a soul enters inanimate organic matter and then leaves it again after to death.

But the inference is that it must exist beyond the realm of physics and physical processes. And I keep wondering why it "must" do that?

I agree. Why posit unseen realities when nature seems to be up to the task?

If we were to witness Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead, directly, would we have to assume that this event "must have" transcended the realm of physics? Seems to me that we would make just the opposite presumption: that it is in fact in keeping with the realm of physics, even if t clearly transcends OUR understand of it.

It's interesting how naturalistic your views are given your objections to "materialist" thought and "scientism"

To me, prayer is no less of a "divine interaction" just because we came to understand the psychological mechanics of it.

I don't see what this god concept does for you. You don't use it to explain the reality you observe. Your views resemble this atheistic humanist's except that they are peppered with reference to gods and divinity. Yes, the energy that powers life is natural. If we saw a dead body - even one already decomposing - revivify, we don't need to invoke unseen realities. Yes, any effects of prayer are explicable in naturalistic terms, too.

I like to use this example: if I took an hallucinogenic drug and experienced a visit with Jesus, does the fact that I took the drug negate the reality of the experience? Or did my taking the drug ENABLE a real experience with Jesus?

Neither. The experience was real, but not the hallucinated Jesus.

If I pray for God to help me recover from a deadly disease, and the doctors come up with a miracle drug just in time to save me, does that mean God had nothing to do with it? Or did God act to heal me THROUGH the medical people? And how could I possibly determine which of these occurred? And why should I even be treating them as mutually exclusive possibilities?

Once again, what does the inclusion of a god concept add to understanding? Nothing as far as I can see. Somehow, this meme gives some kind of comfort to many.

I think these are the kinds of questions that can bring God INTO OUR REALITY. Instead of God just being some fantastic abstract ideal that remains forever aloof from the reality we live in.

It looks like you're removing your god from your reality every time it moves closer to an atheistic view. Look at how much of what you've written most Christians would disagree with. On the spectrum ranging from @Kenny to me, your beliefs more closely resemble mine, although you borrow heavily from his religious lexicon using words like God, prayer, and divinity. I suppose I could do that as well, but I find it off-putting and prefer a more earth and nature-oriented spiritual orientation. Words like spirituality and sacred describe that without supernaturalism.

I could never be an atheist because I have no basis upon which to make that kind of determination.

I could never be a theist because I have no basis for a god belief, which makes agnostic atheism the only rational position. But then again, you've never indicated an understanding of what atheism actually is. You define it as the positive statement that gods don't exist.

 

[Stevicus]

Sure, because they want to be taken care of like a child. Instead of wanting us to all take care of each other, like spiritually mature adults. And sadly, some religions cater to this infantile desire.

Sure, and in the process, we should let the religion stand in for the "parent" and speak on the "parent's" behalf.

Exactly.

Money IS God in the U.S.,. It gives life and takes it away. It buys us security and justice and freedom or it leaves us completely at the mercy of the wealthy. It buys us all manner of comfort and joy and distraction from sadness. Or it leaves us miserable without reprieve. It brings us opportunity and respect or it condemns us to live in slavery and shame. Money is the "hand of God" in our world and that's why we worship those who have big piles of it as if they were demigods. And it's why we have a lot of churches that worship it, too.

Sometimes, I consider the idea that, if there is any actual outside force or sentient entity (or entities) involved in any of this, it could just as easily be something analogous to a scientist - not a parent or a king or a mischievous child playing with toys.

However, I'm not sure if there are any religions which believe that we humans are just lab rats in an experiment. It could even be less glamorous where our existence is the result of some discarded residue from a previous experiment. The Earth could be just one giant trash can. But I can't imagine anyone believing in a religion like that.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Let me say it differently in how studies are wrong. I have prayed wrong before. Jesus gave many example of how prayer can be done with no visible effect with vain repetitions being one of them.

If one was praying with vain repetitions, the person was being prayed for according to the study. But it was still ineffectual and would be listed as “it doesn’t work”. No, it was admistered wrong.

Right, so your objection to the study indeed is "they were praying wrong"?
In other words, they should redo the study and hire you as a consultant to tell those people "how to pray correctly" and then you are confident there would a statisitical difference?

I'ld love to read the resulting report of that study.

A double-blind study when prayer is wrong… is still wrong.

Right, right. Your species of no-true scotsman is noted.

Go ahead. Set it up. Repeat the study and be a consultant for the people praying so you can make sure they pray "correctly" (read: pray in a way that you personally approve of).

I for one expect the exact same result. Prove me wrong. I'ld love to be proven wrong. But I don't think it's gonna happen.

OK… But while you wait for a proper study, people will still be reaping the benefits of a prayer of faith.

Or so they believe. Just like the millions of people who believe to be reaping the benefits of paying fortune tellers, tarrot card readers, sceance readers, astrologists, voodoo shamans, crystal healings, homeopaths, etc.

All people who's default response to the many many studies showing it has no statistical outcome different from random occurence by the way, is "they are doing it wrong".

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I guess I'm saying that we don't need unbelievable miracles to make God real to us, we nead practical real life solutions. I think prayer is one of those.

Then why did you agree with me that insofar as praying works, it has nothing to do with the "praying" aspect of it?
You know... when you acknowledged you can achieve the same effect when talking to a rubber duck?

So is philanthropy. Forgiveness, kindness, generosity, humans helping humans.

I can do, and in fact do, all those things (insofar as I am able to, off course) and don't require any gods for it.
So how does that make god "real" to us?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Sometimes, I consider the idea that, if there is any actual outside force or sentient entity (or entities) involved in any of this, it could just as easily be something analogous to a scientist - not a parent or a king or a mischievous child playing with toys.

However, I'm not sure if there are any religions which believe that we humans are just lab rats in an experiment. It could even be less glamorous where our existence is the result of some discarded residue from a previous experiment. The Earth could be just one giant trash can. But I can't imagine anyone believing in a religion like that.

Haha...

Kind of like an alien species that came here 4 billion years ago and started a terraforming project and then went extinct themselves before seeing the end result of their efforts? Or they lost track of the planet and don't remember where it is. Or the group that was responsible for this sector of the universe crashed somewhere and never got to report back to their superiors.

Perhaps that's what the whole Great Oxidation event was really all about...
And since no aliens were there to come here and populate the "fresh" oxidized planet, the microbes responsible for it just continued to evolve.

Sounds like a great plot for movie.

 

[MikeF]

Haha...

Kind of like an alien species that came here 4 billion years ago and started a terraforming project and then went extinct themselves before seeing the end result of their efforts? Or they lost track of the planet and don't remember where it is. Or the group that was responsible for this sector of the universe crashed somewhere and never got to report back to their superiors.

Perhaps that's what the whole Great Oxidation event was really all about...
And since no aliens were there to come here and populate the "fresh" oxidized planet, the microbes responsible for it just continued to evolve.

Sounds like a great plot for movie.

More likely explanation is they lost funding.