TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
See? Perfect example of what I was saying in the post that this quote is responding to.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Does Prayer "Work"?
- Thread starter Heyo
- Start date
-
- Tags
- #effective #prayer
See? Perfect example of what I was saying in the post that this quote is responding to.
I think it is. At least when the believer prayed to God and believed that it will happen what he prayed for.
This is what Bible teaches, and I believe it.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
It demonstrably isn't though.
I know you believe it. Along with many others. Doesn't make it correct though.
I think that cuts both ways.
If you don't believe, it doesn't mean you are right. In light of so many answered prayers, it actually favors the reality that it is we who are right.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
The difference is that I don't base it on "i believe it", but rahter on data and evidence that actuallye explains the effects talked about in the OP - and the fact that the praying is not a direct cause but just a medium through which it manifests. The actual cause is an underlying psychological principle / process, which has nothing to do with the religion or indeed the practice of prayer.
....from mutually exclusive religions.
Au contraire. The fact that this happens accross mutually exclusive religions, means that it also happens even if the religion is false. Because not all those mutuallye exclusive religions can be correct, on the grounds of them being mutually exclusive.
Add to that that the same effects can also be achieved wihtout religious prayer (with just non-religious meditation, for example) and it's the nail in the coffin of the idea that it is the praying / religion that should get the credits.
What this is, is yet another case of confusing mere correlation with causation.
And off course... also the ignoring of all failed prayers.
I know we are going in circles here, but as I said before, 1) the studies are flawed 2) Prayers are still being answered when the doctors say there is no hope (hard evidence)
And who said that God doesn't answer prayers just because one is lacking knowledge? Is His mercy so shallow? (It isn't in my book).
God even talked to Nebuchadnezzar in a dream.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
By all means, don't bother explaining how they were flawed.
1. this is not what the OP is talking about, nore is it what we are talking about
2. anecdotal + Ignoring the many more instances where that praying fails, as well as ignoring the instances where "miracle healings" occur without any praying also. Even in lab rats.
3. asserting causality instead of actually demonstrating it
4. this is claimed accross a wide array of mutually exclusive religions, so apparantly non-existing gods can also answer prayers?
In other words: "heads I win, tails you lose".
Or maybe, just maybe, he was just dreaming.
I explained it before... would be happy to do it again (if you like)
Praying fails sometimes doesn't mean any more than cancer treatment fails sometimes.
Prayer is demonstrated again and again... and I listed quite a few instances in our own church.
you didn't provide a link to a decent source, so I think it's conjecture on your part. I didn't find a useful link on page 1 of this thread either, I didn't go on looking for them on the other pages..
I continue to believe in the efficiency of prayers done by believer in the right way.
Heyo
Veteran Member
You don't accept the studies listed in the Wikipedia article, I won't accept "studies" by a non-scientific source.
What about we conduct our own study? We can agree on the methodology beforehand and set an expectation window so no interpretation or data massaging is possible. Deal?
I didn't find it in the thread (first page). The first page didn't have any articles if I remember right.
no. You already came up with the claim. Can you now deliver any substanciation for it? I'm not going to help.
If you can't, I regard your claim as your personal assumtion.
Heyo
Veteran Member
You don't. Post #9 (that's on the first page) has a link to a Wikipedia article.
But I fear with your reading ability and attitude that discussing with you will not be fruitful.
don't be so sceptical.
I didn't find it before.
Now I did.
But the wikipedia article does not cite a study about prayers by believers who also believed in the outcome to be positive while praying, if I understand right.
They are just about any intercessory prayer, as I see it.
Last edited:
Heyo
Veteran Member
They investigated the possibility that intercessory prayer works and they found no significant data to support the assumption. (Some tried to massage the numbers but were found out.)
You are proposing a different study (a.k.a. moving the goal posts).
Can we, before we move on to the new kind of study with "believers who also believed in the outcome to be positive while praying", accept that the first studies failed to show a significant correlation between prayer by random believers and health outcomes in intercessory prayer?
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Please tell us the rate of failure of both. And be sure to present documented statistics from clinical studies with a control group to compare with.
Tell you what... next time we both have cancer, I'll get the medical treatment and you go and get your congregation to pray the cancer away. Who do you think will be more likely to still be here in 2 years to tell the story?
Anecdotes are not demonstrations.
I wasn't moving the goal posts.
You opened up a thread about prayer in general.
I added that prayer by believers if they believe in the outcome during prayer in particular... works, in my opinion.
The studies may still be right though...
just did it, see above
.This post was removed earlier because it was said to be stating what appeared to be opinions too "matter of factly". Once I understood that, I felt it was understandable, and happily modified my post with that feedback in mind to repost so that the issues contained in my post can still be discussed.
I have modified it to with verbage that is appropriate to point out issues that I am not trying to argue are proven true, while also modifying other verbage to make it more clear when I am giving reasons for why I believe something can be said to be true.
I must comment though:
I do find it ironic, since my experience on this forum has been that a lot of people on this forum don't know how, or aren't willing to, support their statements of what is true with valid reasons or facts.
The reason it's ironic is because the subject of my post dealt with this very issue! The fact that too many people just assert what they say is true without valid logical reasons or evidence.
But I don't mind modifying my post to fit with that standard. I just haven't seen everyone else on the forum being held to that standard. I never thought to start reporting people for doing that. Does that mean I should? It would make for far higher quality postings and debates if they were, in my opinion.
In my experience, the fallacy of assertion and repetition is the most commonly committed fallacy when the average person tries to debate. I would go so far as to say that for many people it's the only way they know how to have a debate - to simply express their opinion as fact without giving valid reasons or evidence for why it's true. And when they fails, to merely repeat it ad nauseam while ignoring any and all contradicting evidence and valid counter arguments. Their idea of a counter argument is to simply assert you're wrong and then go back to asserting their original claim (which they often also do without reasons or evidence too).
I don't know what to blame for this being so common amongst adults in western society.
Schools that don't teach logic? Some people are ignorant of what they are doing wrong but would be willing to learn how to have a real debate.
A society that doesn't value truth? They might value logic and truth more if schools taught it. But some people don't care what the truth is regardless - they just want their opinion validated by others.
In my experience, people don't value truth because they don't love truth. They don't want it more than they want their own ideas validated.
We see this idea in the Bible:
They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
-2 Thessalonians
It's obvious that you can't use logic as a pathway to finding truth if you don't actually want the truth more than you want to have your wrong ideas validated. Because using logic to find truth presupposes that you're willing to drop a wrong idea if it can be shown to be false.
I have also found in my experience that this verse is true as well:
Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.
-Proverbs 9
Those who actually value and love truth will be thankful if someone can show they are wrong, because it means they have learned something, been given the opportunity to improve themselves, and will be that much closer to the truth they seek. That is certainly how I feel when someone can teach me something or expose a flaw in my viewpoint or argument.
I have concluded based on my interactions with such people that those who don't love truth make an idol out of their own mind and it's conclusions or desires.
I call it an idol because it fits with what we Biblically see an idol is.
The fact that they aren't willing to surrender that idol when it's shown to be false is a type of worship of that idol.
Which is why they respond with attacking those who expose their idol as false.
We see this pattern in the Bible where the truth telling prophets of God are killed or persecuted by a people who don't want to be told they are wrong. No matter how much proof the prophets have for the truth of what they say, or how sound their arguments are. The people simply will not be persuaded if they aren't open to having their minds changed to more closely align with truth.
What further makes the idol an apt analogy is that people will often demand others bow down in submission to the false ideas they have erected in their mind, essentially demanding others worship and serve their false idols, under the threat of retribution if they do not. Which is also what we saw in the Bible with corrupt leaders demanding others serve their false gods and abandon the God of the Bible.
We see this throughout the last 120 years all over the world where people are killing because they don't agree with the political/social/economic ideas of the people in power, or the people trying to gain power. Religion doesn't have to have anything to do with it. People seem compelled throughout history to force others to agree with them and to modify their behavior to align with what they say is true of reality. In the western world today we have the political correct mafia that threatens to silence and cut off from society (to the extent they are able) anyone who goes against the viewpoints they have decided are acceptable. Truth and sound arguments don't carry the day - intimidation, violence, and mob justice do.
And with the way things are going in the USA right now, the leftwing anarchist/marxist types are becoming increasingly emboldened and enabled to use violence to try to get their way, rather than other types of more socially acceptable intimidation that they've been using up to this point.
So why do people do this?
I believe we see the answer all the way back in Genesis with the fall of man.
We see in the Bible that Adam and Eve weren't content to be just like God and have access to everything that was His - they wanted to be gods unto themselves, independent of God (which we see Biblically is impossible, and a deception leading to death).
Why is this connected? Because those who erect an idol out of their own mind and reject that which is shown to be truth are acting out on a small scale what the Bible says led to the fall of man originally: Rejecting God's truth in favor of their own ideas.
So whenever someone is rejecting what they should know to be true in favor of their own ideas we can say Biblically that they are not only engaging in just a type of idolatry but are also making themselves out to be a god unto themselves. Because the Bible tells us there is only one truth, and God is what defines truth by Who He is. So therefore, Biblically, anyone who wants to reject any kind of truth would have to ultimately be rejecting God and setting themselves up as their own god in their own mind. Which is is said satan tries to do and what the anti-christ is said to do in the future.
This is the repeating theme throughout history. We see it in non-Biblical contexts where dictators throughout history have often tried to deify themselves. Hitler did it, demanding his picture be put up in the churches and people swear loyalty to him over God. The North Korean leaders are still doing it, in an even more overt way, even though they are suppose to be communist.
And it doesn't surprise you why it would be a repeating them throughout history if the Bible is true: Because in that case we're all subject to the original sin Adam committed, all vulnerable to wanting to repeat that sin, and satan is always trying to get people to repeat that sin.
People that make themselves to be god, deciding merely by their own decree what is true and what isn't regardless of what reality shows, is a profoundly destructive delusion for society because they are not humble or receptive to being told they are wrong. I think that idea is self evident, that those who can't be told they are wrong are inherently dangerous to others if they gain power over others.
Objective truth can't sway them because they think they determine what is true by what they think is true.
I have modified it to with verbage that is appropriate to point out issues that I am not trying to argue are proven true, while also modifying other verbage to make it more clear when I am giving reasons for why I believe something can be said to be true.
I must comment though:
I do find it ironic, since my experience on this forum has been that a lot of people on this forum don't know how, or aren't willing to, support their statements of what is true with valid reasons or facts.
The reason it's ironic is because the subject of my post dealt with this very issue! The fact that too many people just assert what they say is true without valid logical reasons or evidence.
But I don't mind modifying my post to fit with that standard. I just haven't seen everyone else on the forum being held to that standard. I never thought to start reporting people for doing that. Does that mean I should? It would make for far higher quality postings and debates if they were, in my opinion.
In my experience, the fallacy of assertion and repetition is the most commonly committed fallacy when the average person tries to debate. I would go so far as to say that for many people it's the only way they know how to have a debate - to simply express their opinion as fact without giving valid reasons or evidence for why it's true. And when they fails, to merely repeat it ad nauseam while ignoring any and all contradicting evidence and valid counter arguments. Their idea of a counter argument is to simply assert you're wrong and then go back to asserting their original claim (which they often also do without reasons or evidence too).
I don't know what to blame for this being so common amongst adults in western society.
Schools that don't teach logic? Some people are ignorant of what they are doing wrong but would be willing to learn how to have a real debate.
A society that doesn't value truth? They might value logic and truth more if schools taught it. But some people don't care what the truth is regardless - they just want their opinion validated by others.
In my experience, people don't value truth because they don't love truth. They don't want it more than they want their own ideas validated.
We see this idea in the Bible:
They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
-2 Thessalonians
It's obvious that you can't use logic as a pathway to finding truth if you don't actually want the truth more than you want to have your wrong ideas validated. Because using logic to find truth presupposes that you're willing to drop a wrong idea if it can be shown to be false.
I have also found in my experience that this verse is true as well:
Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.
-Proverbs 9
Those who actually value and love truth will be thankful if someone can show they are wrong, because it means they have learned something, been given the opportunity to improve themselves, and will be that much closer to the truth they seek. That is certainly how I feel when someone can teach me something or expose a flaw in my viewpoint or argument.
I have concluded based on my interactions with such people that those who don't love truth make an idol out of their own mind and it's conclusions or desires.
I call it an idol because it fits with what we Biblically see an idol is.
The fact that they aren't willing to surrender that idol when it's shown to be false is a type of worship of that idol.
Which is why they respond with attacking those who expose their idol as false.
We see this pattern in the Bible where the truth telling prophets of God are killed or persecuted by a people who don't want to be told they are wrong. No matter how much proof the prophets have for the truth of what they say, or how sound their arguments are. The people simply will not be persuaded if they aren't open to having their minds changed to more closely align with truth.
What further makes the idol an apt analogy is that people will often demand others bow down in submission to the false ideas they have erected in their mind, essentially demanding others worship and serve their false idols, under the threat of retribution if they do not. Which is also what we saw in the Bible with corrupt leaders demanding others serve their false gods and abandon the God of the Bible.
We see this throughout the last 120 years all over the world where people are killing because they don't agree with the political/social/economic ideas of the people in power, or the people trying to gain power. Religion doesn't have to have anything to do with it. People seem compelled throughout history to force others to agree with them and to modify their behavior to align with what they say is true of reality. In the western world today we have the political correct mafia that threatens to silence and cut off from society (to the extent they are able) anyone who goes against the viewpoints they have decided are acceptable. Truth and sound arguments don't carry the day - intimidation, violence, and mob justice do.
And with the way things are going in the USA right now, the leftwing anarchist/marxist types are becoming increasingly emboldened and enabled to use violence to try to get their way, rather than other types of more socially acceptable intimidation that they've been using up to this point.
So why do people do this?
I believe we see the answer all the way back in Genesis with the fall of man.
We see in the Bible that Adam and Eve weren't content to be just like God and have access to everything that was His - they wanted to be gods unto themselves, independent of God (which we see Biblically is impossible, and a deception leading to death).
Why is this connected? Because those who erect an idol out of their own mind and reject that which is shown to be truth are acting out on a small scale what the Bible says led to the fall of man originally: Rejecting God's truth in favor of their own ideas.
So whenever someone is rejecting what they should know to be true in favor of their own ideas we can say Biblically that they are not only engaging in just a type of idolatry but are also making themselves out to be a god unto themselves. Because the Bible tells us there is only one truth, and God is what defines truth by Who He is. So therefore, Biblically, anyone who wants to reject any kind of truth would have to ultimately be rejecting God and setting themselves up as their own god in their own mind. Which is is said satan tries to do and what the anti-christ is said to do in the future.
This is the repeating theme throughout history. We see it in non-Biblical contexts where dictators throughout history have often tried to deify themselves. Hitler did it, demanding his picture be put up in the churches and people swear loyalty to him over God. The North Korean leaders are still doing it, in an even more overt way, even though they are suppose to be communist.
And it doesn't surprise you why it would be a repeating them throughout history if the Bible is true: Because in that case we're all subject to the original sin Adam committed, all vulnerable to wanting to repeat that sin, and satan is always trying to get people to repeat that sin.
People that make themselves to be god, deciding merely by their own decree what is true and what isn't regardless of what reality shows, is a profoundly destructive delusion for society because they are not humble or receptive to being told they are wrong. I think that idea is self evident, that those who can't be told they are wrong are inherently dangerous to others if they gain power over others.
Objective truth can't sway them because they think they determine what is true by what they think is true.
Last edited:
@thomas t is another poster that you end up denigrating. This continues to be you modus of operandi which demonstrates, quite frankly, that it is you that does not make discussion fruitful.
Heyo
Veteran Member
Well, yes, there seemed to be a team of science deniers, all with the same inability of accurate reading and the same dedication to not be swayed by evidence. Turned out, @thomas t was not on that team. I still owe him a discussion on an enhanced experiment that I wasn't able to formulate to my satisfaction, yet.
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
Ever heard of Maharishi effect?