Double-blind Prayer Efficacy Test -- Really?

[Subduction Zone]

There is no answer for this question then? And no it doesn’t make sense to me is correct.

There should be an answer, that is there should be an answer if your claim was true.

Your problem may be one of cognitive dissonance since part of you realizes that you should have an answer and you do not have one.

 

[ElishaElijah]

There should be an answer, that is there should be an answer if your claim was true.

Your problem may be one of cognitive dissonance since part of you realizes that you should have an answer and you do not have one.

Answer this and is different but I see it along the same line of thinking, Have you stopped beating your wife yet ? Answer yes or no

 

[Sheldon]

There is no answer for this question then? And no it doesn’t make sense to me is correct.

Of course there is, you either can explain the objective difference between what you perceive as deity answering a prayer with wait or a no, or a no deity existing to answer to a prayer. Since it was your claim to know a deity exists and answers all prayers, but some with a wait or a no.

Not sure why you can't grasp such a simple question, but it appears the answer is no anyway.

 

[Sheldon]

Answer this and is different but I see it along the same line of thinking, Have you stopped beating your wife yet ? Answer yes or no

Nope, since that question offers a false dichotomy, by implying you always were beating your wife. Whereas my question implies nothing, nor are you limited to either a yes or a no, though they are options of course, it merely asks you to explain the objective difference between a deity answering some prayers with a no, your claim, and no deity existing to answer the prayer?

 

[ElishaElijah]

Of course there is, you either can explain the objective difference between what you perceive as deity answering a prayer with wait or a no, or a no deity existing to answer to a prayer. Since it was your claim to know a deity exists and answers all prayers, but some with a wait or a no.

Not sure why you can't grasp such a simple question, but it appears the answer is no anyway.

See that’s the problem, I don’t perceive, I hear God. You’re very mistaken.

 

[Sheldon]

See that’s the problem, I don’t perceive, I hear God. You’re very mistaken.

Mistaken about what, you don't think hearing involves perception? In that case you're the one who is mistaken. You made a claim, not me, all I did was ask you to explain the objective difference between what you perceive as deity answering a prayer with wait or a no, or a no deity existing to answer to a prayer?

 

[PruePhillip]

All you're saying is you think your morals are best, again this gets a so what? Listing things you don't like is no less subjective than secular morals.

I think pro-life is best re abortion. Someone else thinks pro-choice is best.
I like what Cardinal Arinz said about all this

At the College’s graduation ceremony, the cardinal decried the situation of the modern family. “In many parts of the world, the family is under siege,” he said. “It is opposed by an anti-life mentality as is seen in contraception, abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. It is scorned and banalized by pornography, desecrated by fornication and adultery, mocked by homosexuality, sabotaged by irregular unions and cut in two by divorce.”

But these things weren't touched upon in the Gospels. It's your love of God and treatment of your fellowman that Jesus spoke of. And yes, a lot of this stuff SHOULD be objective, ie loving your neighbor as yourself. Imagine such a world.

 

[PruePhillip]

That is a straw man, as I clearly didn't say or even imply, that only secular morals are subjective.



That's a subjective choice, but it's not a child of course, if it is still a part of a woman's body and topologically connected to it, it is either an insentient blastocyst, or a developing foetus.



If you say so, he is entitle to his subjective morality, as am I.



Your subjective morals differ to those of others, and this is a problem for you, well so what?

Is love of your fellow man subjective?

 

[Sheldon]

I think pro-life is best re abortion. Someone else thinks pro-choice is best.
I like what Cardinal Arinz said about all this

At the College’s graduation ceremony, the cardinal decried the situation of the modern family. “In many parts of the world, the family is under siege,” he said. “It is opposed by an anti-life mentality as is seen in contraception, abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. It is scorned and banalized by pornography, desecrated by fornication and adultery, mocked by homosexuality, sabotaged by irregular unions and cut in two by divorce.”

But these things weren't touched upon in the Gospels. It's your love of God and treatment of your fellowman that Jesus spoke of. And yes, a lot of this stuff SHOULD be objective, ie loving your neighbor as yourself. Imagine such a world.

All you're saying is you think your morals are best, again this gets a so what? Listing things you don't like is no less subjective than secular morals.

 

[Sheldon]

Is love of your fellow man subjective?

How can it be otherwise?

 

[ElishaElijah]

Mistaken about what, you don't think hearing involves perception? In that case you're the one who is mistaken. You made a claim, not me, all I did was ask you to explain the objective difference between what you perceive as deity answering a prayer with wait or a no, or a no deity existing to answer to a prayer?

Which I did but you didn’t like my answer

 

[PruePhillip]

How can it be otherwise?

So there ARE objective moral standards.

 

[ppp]

So there ARE objective moral standards.

That sentence does not follow from his question/

 

[PruePhillip]

That sentence does not follow from his question/

Me - Is love of your fellow man subjective?
Him/Her - How can it be otherwise?

Yes, you are right.
Love of your fellow man is OBJECTIVE to biblical Christianity.
Even if thy are nailing you to a cross you must still love your fellow man.

 

[ppp]

Yes, you are right.
Love of your fellow man is OBJECTIVE to biblical Christianity.

And accepting Biblical Christianity is arbitrary. Furthermore, what you call Biblical Christianity is an arbitrary designation.

 

[PruePhillip]

And accepting Biblical Christianity is arbitrary. Furthermore, what you call Biblical Christianity is an arbitrary designation.

So if you have no absolute moral standards then you get two people hating each other because the other is 'bad'
One is pro-life
The other is pro-choice.

Who is right, who is wrong? Both are passionate about their sense of right.

Just now the story about a Ukrainian pastor who left his church and took up a gun to fight Russians.
Understandable, but biblical Christianity (the Gospels, the Acts and the Epistles) are quite absolute about this - you don't fight. Nothing arbitary about the Gospels. Certainly how people chose to INTERPRET the Gospels is quite arbitary.

Putin DEMANDS Israel Hand Over Jerusalem Church; Meet Ukraine’s Warrior Pastor | Watchman Newscast - YouTube

 

[ppp]

So if you have no absolute moral standards then you get two people hating each other because the other is 'bad'
One is pro-life
The other is pro-choice.

Who is right, who is wrong? Both are passionate about their sense of right.

That is the wrong question. The question is, How do you coexist? Even if one group were to go to utterly insane extremes to wipe the other out, the extinguished group would resurge in two or three generations.

 

[ppp]

So if you have no absolute moral standards then you get two people hating each other because the other is 'bad'
One is pro-life
The other is pro-choice.

Who is right, who is wrong? Both are passionate about their sense of right.

Just now the story about a Ukrainian pastor who left his church and took up a gun to fight Russians.
Understandable, but biblical Christianity (the Gospels, the Acts and the Epistles) are quite absolute about this - you don't fight. Nothing arbitary about the Gospels. Certainly how people chose to INTERPRET the Gospels is quite arbitary.

Putin DEMANDS Israel Hand Over Jerusalem Church; Meet Ukraine’s Warrior Pastor | Watchman Newscast - YouTube

“The world is ashes and the gods are a horror. Tell me, Learned, what other place is there for me to go?”
― Lois McMaster Bujold, Paladin of Souls

 

[PruePhillip]

That is the wrong question. The question is, How do you coexist? Even if one group were to go to utterly insane extremes to wipe the other out, the extinguished group would resurge in two or three generations.

Diametrically opposed POV's.
I don't want to be involved in abortion issues - other than making it harder and harder for an abortion as the child comes to term. And it shouldn't be publicly funded because of how many people feel.
But there ARE 'truths' and there IS a 'Truth' that offends religous people in particular. And when we don't respect that in religion our society doesn't respect it elsewhere either. We are living with the smell of an empty vase as someone put it concerning Christianity.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Diametrically opposed POV's.
I don't want to be involved in abortion issues - other than making it harder and harder for an abortion as the child comes to term. And it shouldn't be publicly funded because of how many people feel.
But there ARE 'truths' and there IS a 'Truth' that offends religous people in particular. And when we don't respect that in religion our society doesn't respect it elsewhere either. We are living with the smell of an empty vase as someone put it concerning Christianity.

I think that you have it backwards. It should be publicly funded because of how many people support safe and legal abortions.

Perhaps you are unaware of the statistics.