Double-blind Prayer Efficacy Test -- Really?

[KWED]

Lol, I spend more time observing nature than about 90 percent of the population. And what it shows me is a creator.

Then you are not observing it with a view to finding out its true nature. You are simply employing confirmation bias to support your existing conclusion.
Have you not wondered why the top experts in the various natural sciences don't usually see a creator in nature?
What are they doing wrong that you have got right? And if they are all so wrong, how come all their conclusions can be shown to work, while creationists rarely make any discoveries about the natural world?

 

[PruePhillip]

And we also know of a tradition that had imaginative writings that were then *attributed* to the apostles.

We also know from internal evidence that the gospels were not written independently. That is clear from a reading of the Synoptic gospels. And then, the gospel of John clearly is the result of the expansion of the legend.

And, I should point out, I am not one that questions that there was an itinerant preacher that said many of the things attributed to Jesus in the NT. We even have other examples of the same phenomenon.

And, when we add in the *other* gospels, like that of Thomas, and others that were rejected by the orthodox bishops, we get a very different picture of what happened.

What I am saying is that the miracles are an expansion of the legend, similar to the curing of scrofula by kings.

Isn't the "Gospel" of Thomas about a naughty Jesus placing spells on other children?
When the New Testament was composed these writings were seen for what they were - parodies.
I love the 'imagination' of Jesus - he said Jerusalem would be destroyed and the Jews exiled, 'until the time of the Gentiles
is fulfilled.' ....UNTIL. In other words this exile would not be permanent. The Jews would come out of nations that were their
'graves' and take back their ruined land 'with the sword.' Incredible imagination about a people cursed of God, and given
back their land. This is biblical history written in our age.

 

[KWED]

Only I'm not a delusional person.

Pretty much everyone suffering from delusions is not aware that they are suffering from them.

To suppose that a person is logical in every other aspect of life but delusional because they experience the spiritual is showing your extreme prejudice.

I suggest you Google John Forbes Nash...

Also, I never claimed that you are "logical in every other aspect of your life". Your replies on here suggest otherwise.

 

[KWED]

I have a confirmation that they are correct.

And what independent, repeatably testable confirmation is that?

 

[KWED]

And for the Gospels we have SEVEN authors, six of whom at least claimed eye witness to Jesus (include James, his own brother)

Not this again!
None of the authors of the gospels are known to be eyewitnesses. Some are known not to be. Someone's been telling you porkies.

 

[KWED]

Only to the extent that everything we experience could be an illusion. If I'm not really here right now and I don't have a heartbeat and don't bleed when I'm cut then maybe nothing is what it seems. All we have is the evidence of our minds, souls and senses. If they are all tricking us then this conversation is just senseless babbling anyway.

Really? So either everything is a delusion, or nothing is?
That's quite the false dichotomy you have there!

 

[KWED]

What was lost at Shiloh was the Tabernacle, not the Ark.

According to whom?

The Persian and Greek times covers the Captivity through the Macabees, about 200-300 years.

DATES!!!

To write a story about Shiloh after about a thousand years you would need some strong oral-tradition or existing documents

Yes. And both are possible explanations. Really not sure where you think you are going with this.

(assuming the bible WAS written at this time, which it wasn't) So if you 'wrote the Tanakh' at this time and used existing
documents then you aren't really writing the Tanakh at all - you are just translating or copying it.

Whuh?
So if an historian writes a book on the Roman Empire, using existing sources, they didn't really write that book?

 

[KWED]

God didn't have sexual relations with Mary if that's what you mean.

Google "where do babies come from".

She could have refused BTW. She was asked for her consent and gave it.

An omnipotent god and a young, impressionable virgin is a perfect example of the power imbalance that makes such "consent" meaningless. Any court in the land would convict him.

 

[KWED]

At 100 years of age Abraham witnessed the destruction of the Jordan Valley.

According to the myth.

BTW, do you believe he lived to be 175?

 

[Polymath257]

Isn't the "Gospel" of Thomas about a naughty Jesus placing spells on other children?

No. it is a sayings gospel. It has no narrative, per se. Instead it has a collection of quotes of Jesus. There is considerable overlap with the sayings in Matthew and Mark, but also some intriguing differences.

When the New Testament was composed these writings were seen for what they were - parodies.

Actually, other Christian traditions had different sacred texts and competing councils. Even early church fathers used books that are not currently in the canon.

I love the 'imagination' of Jesus - he said Jerusalem would be destroyed and the Jews exiled, 'until the time of the Gentiles
is fulfilled.' ....UNTIL. In other words this exile would not be permanent. The Jews would come out of nations that were their
'graves' and take back their ruined land 'with the sword.' Incredible imagination about a people cursed of God, and given
back their land. This is biblical history written in our age.

And given their traditions and history (with, say, the Persians), that wasn't an unreasonable thing to say, was it?

 

[Polymath257]

Only to the extent that everything we experience could be an illusion. If I'm not really here right now and I don't have a heartbeat and don't bleed when I'm cut then maybe nothing is what it seems. All we have is the evidence of our minds, souls and senses. If they are all tricking us then this conversation is just senseless babbling anyway.

Our senses *do* trick us in many ways. We see faces in clouds. We see optical illusions saying things are moving when nothing is. We fail to see infrared or ultraviolet.

But they don't *always* trick us. And we can learn when they are reliable and when they are not. Again, this is often clear by just a bit of investigation.

I believe you had an experience. You had a perception. But that does not mean you *interpreted* that experience and perception correctly.

But yes, I think your experience was an illusion based on stress, hope, and confirmation bias. Unless you can give evidence to show otherwise, that seems to be the most reasonable explanation, yes?

 

[Polymath257]

And most of the time they are still wrong..

But they are self-correcting over time. Unlike those based on faith and previously decided conclusions.

 

[metis]

Lol, I spend more time observing nature than about 90 percent of the population.

That's quite a bizarre statement.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Pretty much everyone suffering from delusions is not aware that they are suffering from them.

Well that points right back at you also.

 

[Wildswanderer]

That's quite a bizarre statement.

I spend more time out in nature than most people. You like that better? Im guessing at the 90 percent, but if you include city people I think it's close.

 

[Kenny]

1) You must believe that you receive when you prayer (Mark 11:23)

But most people don't. How can you believe it when you know it isn't true?

That certainly is contrapositive. It is interesting how one person believes it isn't true and yet others do. Why the difference? Don't know.

Maybe you are wrong?

But, in answer, you are correct. You believe what you want to believe and can't believe two opposites at the same time.

2) You must forgive when you prayer (Mark 11:24) because faith works through love Gal. 5:6

Forgive whom, for what?

In essence, everybody including yourself and for everything. Of course, forgiveness doesn't mean be a rug mat to be stepped on again.

3) You must pray according to scriptural promises 1 John 5:14-16

How and why?

Think of it this way. If you have a promise that there is $1,000 at Truist Bank, you can't go to PNC Bank to take it out.

In other words, you can't ask for something where you have no authority to ask for it.

Unlike a contract (though it is much more than a contract) - you can't go beyond what is written.

What are those "scriptural promises"?

Who decided on these laws, and how?

Depends on what you are believing for. The first and foremost is a relationship that God wants with mankind.

And God, the Creator of all that is seen and unseen

 

[Wildswanderer]

But they are self-correcting over time. Unlike those based on faith and previously decided conclusions.

That just makes me trust faith more. It's more solid ground, then man's theories.

 

[Wildswanderer]

But yes, I think your experience was an illusion based on stress, hope, and confirmation bias. Unless you can give evidence to show otherwise, that seems to be the most reasonable explanation, yes?

No... and it's not one experience...it's a lifetime of confirmations.
I could say that you only think your wife likes you because of confirmation bias also. I don't see a difference.

 

[Kenny]

The simple fact is that we generally do not simply accept things on faith the way you claim.

that is obvious And it is the nature of individuality.

But back to the OP

 

[Wildswanderer]

An omnipotent god and a young, impressionable virgin is a perfect example of the power imbalance that makes such "consent" meaningless. Any court in the land would convict him.

What an absurd conclusion. You have an obvious bias against religion, and can't be objective.