Science confirms validity of intercessory prayer

[The Reverend Bob]

FAir enough. Did you even read the detail of the studies, or just take them on faith from Stroebel's book? See my other post........

Strobel is an idiot, science can't prove or disprove these things, who knows if it is placebo or the power of suggestion or not? It is just a waste of time to try to prove it or disprove it. Like when people try to use science to disprove or prove the concept of god, it's just not a scientific subject

 

[Left Coast]

I hope for world peace but that doesn't seem realistic because I don't see a peaceful world anywhere on the horizon, the basis of faith is to hope for those things that seem unrealistic and are not seen such world peace, the cure for cancer and the end of hunger. I hope for a lot of unrealistic things because I am human.

Sure, but you are grounded enough to realize that your hopes are unrealistic, and you are essentially just whistling in the wind. What happens with religion is that people start to believe the BS and think that their woo actually does have a realistic chance of having their intended effect.

"Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only will you do what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, ‘Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,’ it will be done. Whatever you ask for in prayer with faith, you will receive.”

 

[charlie sc]

It's quite funny this has turned into a joke thread. It's also quite sad this had to turn into a joke thread. The arrogant denial of other evidence, confirmation bias and mocking element is the sad part

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Sure, but you are grounded enough to realize that your hopes are unrealistic, and you are essentially just whistling in the wind. What happens with religion is that people start to believe the BS and think that their woo actually does have a realistic chance of having their intended effect.

My hope for social justice is not mere whistling in the wind, even if I don't see what is beyond the horizon, my hope compels to work towards a more just world and it is my faith that strengthens me in that work

 

[charlie sc]

My hope for social justice is not mere whistling in the wind, even if I don't see what is beyond the horizon, my hope compels to work towards a more just world and it is my faith that strengthens me in that work

Do you prefer trolling atheists or theists?

 

[Left Coast]

My hope for social justice is not mere whistling in the wind, even if I don't see what is beyond the horizon, my hope compels to work towards a more just world and it is my faith that strengthens me in that work

Your hope is whistling in the wind if it does not become work in the real world. Your hope will not magically cause world peace to happen because you wish it so. That is the point. I'm thankful that you recognize that your dreams for social justice will not be realized by simply praying for it, but by actually doing work in the real world to make it happen.

 

[Spartan]

Why do you only list the studies that confirm what you want to believe and not list those which refute your claim?

There was a contrary study that I responded to.

Are you one of those who kicks anything 'god' to the curb?

 

[Spartan]

It's quite funny this has turned into a joke thread. It's also quite sad this had to turn into a joke thread. The arrogant denial of other evidence, confirmation bias and mocking element is the sad part

The joke's on you, charlie. Your sad commentaries are more fitting for the bottom of a bird cage.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And the contradictory results of the sum totals of these studies has proven that it is a waste of time. It is outside the magestria of science. There is no related field in science to study a metaphysical concept and practice such as prayer. Science is about studying the physical universe not the spiritual one.

So, in other words, you don't even have faith in prayer because what should have consistent positive results isn't (as improved or decreased health is tangible and measurable) and so you have to rush to its rescue and try to say its not really something science can study. It has. The results overall aren't flattering for the alleged healing lower of prayer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am not changing the goalpost I am telling you what intercessory prayer is. Ask any Christian for an example of intercessory prayer in the Bible and they will all give the same answer because there is a model of it given in the Bible

No, you are only telling us what your version of intercessory prayer is. Once again there are countless different sects of Christianity, all with their own beliefs. If you want to claim that your version is the official "right" version then the burden of proof is upon you. Until you do that (and in a different thread please) you have moved the goalposts since the OP was talking about different results from intercessory prayer than you are.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There was a contrary study that I responded to.

Are you one of those who kicks anything 'god' to the curb?

You could not even support your claims by linking and quoting the supposed study. Until you do at least that you do not even have a study.

 

[charlie sc]

The joke's on you, charlie. Your sad commentaries are more fitting for the bottom of a bird cage.

How? Everything I said was true. You've been arrogantly denying all the subsequent and previous studies not finding anything and the meta-analyses people have linked here. You've only been interested in what Lee Strobel has to say - confirmation bias. And, this has turned into a humorous mocking thread. As a peace offering to you, intercessory prayer has not been substantiated in science, however, that does not mean it does not exist. Fine, you think it exists and I don't. Let's just leave it at that: no scientific basis and based on opinion.

 

[Spartan]

How? Everything I said was true. You've been arrogantly denying all the subsequent and previous studies not finding anything and the meta-analyses people have linked here. You've only been interested in what Lee Strobel has to say - confirmation bias. And, this has turned into a humorous mocking thread. As a peace offering to you, intercessory prayer has not been substantiated in science, however, that does not mean it does not exist. Fine, you think it exists and I don't. Let's just leave it at that: no scientific basis and based on opinion.

You're wrong again. I judge each study independently and look at its methodology and other criteria. The contrary "STEP" study had a religious cult that didn't believe in intercessory prayer as it's prayer group. That group ("The Unity School of Christinity") had a Christian sounding name but it was anything but Christian.

Ron Rhodes, who has a doctorate in systematic theology and who has authored some sixty theological books, noted, "The Unity School of Christianity is definitely not Christian." Probe, a respected Christian journal, calls Unity "a classic new age cult that is not Christian in any aspect of its doctrines or teachings." Even the co-founder of the cult, Charles Fillmore, once wrote, "God never performs miracles."

So, as Dr. Brown (see the OP) noted, the studies are different because (the STEP study) "has a different inclusion” criteria. She also stated, the STEP study "is instructional on how NOT to conduct a study of Christian prayer."

So take your blinders off, Charlie.

 

[Spartan]

You could not even support your claims by linking and quoting the supposed study. Until you do at least that you do not even have a study.

It's already been linked by someone else. Get a new dog that hunts.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Do you prefer trolling atheists or theists?

Both

 

[The Reverend Bob]

So, in other words, you don't even have faith in prayer because what should have consistent positive results isn't (as improved or decreased health is tangible and measurable) and so you have to rush to its rescue and try to say its not really something science can study. It has. The results overall aren't flattering for the alleged healing lower of prayer.

They are inconclusive. And logical conclusion is that these studies are waste.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

No, you are only telling us what your version of intercessory prayer is. Once again there are countless different sects of Christianity, all with their own beliefs. If you want to claim that your version is the official "right" version then the burden of proof is upon you. Until you do that (and in a different thread please) you have moved the goalposts since the OP was talking about different results from intercessory prayer than you are.

No dude, every Christian know what intercessory is because there is a model for it called The Lord's Prayer and it what I described as intercessory prayer fit exactly inside that model. Go look it up yourself.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

How? Everything I said was true. You've been arrogantly denying all the subsequent and previous studies not finding anything and the meta-analyses people have linked here. You've only been interested in what Lee Strobel has to say - confirmation bias. And, this has turned into a humorous mocking thread. As a peace offering to you, intercessory prayer has not been substantiated in science, however, that does not mean it does not exist. Fine, you think it exists and I don't. Let's just leave it at that: no scientific basis and based on opinion.

Charlie I have to confess that I did indeed cite your thread about "uncertain believers" when I went on a rant about how the "spiritual but not religious" are a bunch of thieves

 

[charlie sc]

Charlie I have to confess that I did indeed cite your thread about "uncertain believers" when I went on a rant about how the "spiritual but not religious" are a bunch of thieves

lol

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's already been linked by someone else. Get a new dog that hunts.

You do not seem to understand the burden of proof. Why don't you link it again? Is it because you know that it is a poor study that has been refuted? If I have a valid study I have no problem linking it again and again. And are you talking about the piece of garbage that someone linked that was not a scientific study? There was not even an abstract for the one that I saw.