Double-blind Prayer Efficacy Test -- Really?

[mikkel_the_dane]

Which is pretty good evidence that someone has to be eternal for us to even be here. ...

Well, you can believe in that. But the regress could be eternal.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Well, you can believe in that. But the regress could be eternal.

How does that fit with what we experience? You have to go outside of science to get there.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

How does that fit with what we experience? You have to go outside of science to get there.

Well, I am not your standard atheist. The problem is that you confuse methodological and philosophical naturalism. And we are not doing science now. We are doing philosophy.
You are playing the eternal first unmoved mover and I am playing eternal infinite regress. Both are unknown.

 

[Bird123]

Thank you for your input.



Yes, it can be as simple as a thought. But as far as conditions, noticed what you said in the paragraph below, "as long as it does not interfere with your lessons or anyone else's lessons". In essence you have place "a condition".

Likewise, James put a condition " 6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. 7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord."

Of course, my context is that of a Christian that trusts the word of God.



YES!

All people are God's children. I had a post about the prodigal son being mankind with the Father being God waiting for His children to come back home.

But, regardless of whether you are a son in the house or eating with the pigs, the principles therein are still binding.



Agree totally with this point. But that isn't the subject matter that I have been sharing about



It isn't what I want God to do for me as much as it is want "Your will be done on earth as it is in Heave".

There are no conditions on the prayer, however the response to any prayer has to include the results for everyone.

Unconditional Love doesn't just give the other everything they want. Unconditional Love does what is best for the other. With the limited view so many have, it's hard to see what is the best choice. On the other hand, God's view is wide enough to be able to see what the best choice really is.

One can learn much from the results of our requests and even in the requests themselves. Time can reveal that things we want were never the best choice after all.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Polymath257]

Science isn't everything. You can't scientifically prove that science can test everything accurately. If there's a reality outside of science then science obviously can't test it. The way to test it is to do what scripture says and see the results. But sometimes it has physical aspects. When God gives you something that's highly unlikely to have been a coincidence for example. Just a couple weeks ago, God gave us a $1500 bumper for a vehicle for $60. Why do I think God was involved? Because the chance of that bumper just happening to be at the place where we went to get something else entirely was slim to none. It's a very rare part for a very rare vehicle. God just does things like that sometimes to strengthen our faith.

And such coincidences happen to *everyone*. It has nothing to do with faith or belief. Such things happen to atheists like me on a regular basis as well.

The point is that coincidences happen all the time. You interpret them as God intervening, but the fact that they happen to everyone shows that interpretation to have problems.

 

[Polymath257]

Only you don't know how it started. Or why there are physical laws at all. Or why there is something instead of nothing. And on and on and on.

For there to be an answer to 'why', there needs to be an applicable law of nature or logic. In the case of physical laws, there are neither.

So, asking about 'why there are natural laws' is making assumptions that are inconsistent. There can be no 'why' for such.

Obviously I was pointing to your lack of evidence for the start of everything that exists. Because you have none.
Uncaused causes are a problem in a atheist's universe... they can't exist.

Not only *can* they exist, we know that they *do* exist. In abundance.

That doesn't say whether or not there is a start to the universe, though. in any case, the universe is uncaused by its nature.

It certainly follows that something has to pre-exist the Big bang though. Or someone.

How does that follow? it may be the case, but it is anything but demonstrated. And if there is something before the Big Bang, there is likely to be multiple universes of which ours is only one.

Which is pretty good evidence that someone has to be eternal for us to even be here. And why it's so amusing when atheists try to appeal to aliens putting us here. As if that solves the problem.

How is that evidence that there is something eternal? There is no contradiction to an infinite regress or to a beginning of time. if there is an infinite regress, then there is likely to be some sort of multiverse which is eternal. No reason to think there is a 'someone' that has always existed.

 

[Kenny]

Are these real or imaginary spiritual laws? If you say they are real, can you show us they are real and not in your imagination?


Couldn't it just be all you?

faith without actions is dead?

 

[Kenny]

There are no conditions on the prayer, however the response to any prayer has to include the results for everyone.

Yet you gave a condition in your own post.

And are you saying James was wrong?

Unconditional Love doesn't just give the other everything they want.

I completely agree. Never said differently.

Unconditional Love does what is best for the other.

I completely agree. Never said differently

With the limited view so many have, it's hard to see what is the best choice. On the other hand, God's view is wide enough to be able to see what the best choice really is.

There are some things that aren't a choice. Prayer for forgiveness is for all and is demanded from all.

One can learn much from the results of our requests and even in the requests themselves. Time can reveal that things we want were never the best choice after all.

that is true. Not sure what we are exactly disagreeing on... we are pretty much on the same track IMO

 

[Sheldon]

Obviously I was pointing to your lack of evidence for the start of everything that exists. Because you have none.
Uncaused causes are a problem in a atheist's universe... they can't exist.

I never claimed to have evidence for "the start of everything", and none of that evidences any deity, let alone using inexplicable magic, that is just an appeal to mystery, The simple fact is, that as an atheist the phrase "I don't know" doesn't terrify me, the way it seems to terrify many theists, who insist on filling gaps in our knowledge with unevidenced superstition. Nothing we understand about the workings of the universe or its origins, requires magic or a deity, in every instance natural phenomena explain them.

 

[Sheldon]

It certainly follows that something has to pre-exist the Big bang though. Or someone.

No it doesn't, that's an assumption, not knowing is not knowing, and making assumptions about what existed before the physical universe we now observe, based on what we know about how things function within that physical universe, doesn't sound like sound reasoning to me, it sounds like wishful thinking.

 

[dybmh]

how many of those can you do with the spiritual realm?

Hi Polymath, You asked for proof that the spiritual realm exists. It's really a matter of definitions. If one defines the material realm as consisting of items and attributes which can be measured, deteriorates over time, and whose behavior is predictable; the spiritual realm is the opposite of this. It consists of items and attributes which cannot be measured, do not deteriorate over time, and whose behavior is unpredictable. It's that simple.

Using this definition there's a whole host of spiritual phenomena. The most obvious examples exist as emotions. Love is not measurable, not predictable, and doesn't degrade reliably over time. The same is true of trust, mercy, injustice. The same is true of an individual's relationships with their parents. The relationship exists spiritually. The relationshi cannot be measured; it's impact cannot be predicted, and it doesn't degrade over time. Even something abstract such as an individual's name can have unpredictable, immeasurable, and non-degrading impact on their life. These are all spiritual phenomena and exist in the spiritual realm.

 

[dybmh]

love is an emotion, for example, not anything spiritual

• Can love be measured? Are we able to receive 50 ccs of love?
• Is love predictable? Are we able to determine who falls into love, or falls out of love? What about unrequited love? Is it predictable how the subject of unrequited love will react?
• Does love degrade over time? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It certainly doesn't degrade like brake pads on a car. The axiom "Absence makes the heart grow fonder" comes to mind, because sometimes it's true.

 

[Wildswanderer]

The point is that coincidences happen all the time.

Not ones that are wildly improbable...if they do, pay attention, God is trying to get your attention.

 

[Wildswanderer]

That doesn't say whether or not there is a start to the universe, though. in any case, the universe is uncaused by its nature.

What? How in the world did you come to that conclusion? Not through observation of the universe.

 

[Wildswanderer]

How does that follow? it may be the case, but it is anything but demonstrated. And if there is something before the Big Bang, there is likely to be multiple universes of which ours is only one.

Likely? You say "likely" with no evidence whatsoever? Are you sure you aren't just having faith in something that no one has been able to demonstrate happening?

 

[Wildswanderer]

then there is likely to be some sort of multiverse which is eternal

Facepalm! Eternal matter, because apparently anything is better than an eternal God.

 

[Wildswanderer]

No it doesn't, that's an assumption, not knowing is not knowing, and making assumptions about what existed before the physical universe we now observe, based on what we know about how things function within that physical universe, doesn't sound like sound reasoning to me, it sounds like wishful thinking.

Like the multi verse is?
So called science does that quite often.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Nothing we understand about the workings of the universe or its origins, requires magic or a deity, in every instance natural phenomena explain them.

Only that doesn't apply to the universe itself.

 

[Sheldon]

Like the multi verse is?
So called science does that quite often.

Assumptions might form part of that process at the start, but no accepted scientific facts are based merely on assumptions, though again this is the rankest whataboutism. You haven't addressed your use of pure assumption at all, merely hurled a counter accusation, as if this is a defence.

 

[Sheldon]

I never claimed to have evidence for "the start of everything", and none of that evidences any deity, let alone using inexplicable magic, that is just an appeal to mystery, The simple fact is, that as an atheist the phrase "I don't know" doesn't terrify me, the way it seems to terrify many theists, who insist on filling gaps in our knowledge with unevidenced superstition. Nothing we understand about the workings of the universe or its origins, requires magic or a deity, in every instance natural phenomena explain them.

Only that doesn't apply to the universe itself.

What? Hand waving evasion at best, and flatly wrong as well.