The existence of God and the efficacy of prayer

It seems to me that much of modern theology consists of carefully defining god so that his existence is exactly the same as his non-existence, and his actions and responses are exactly the same as a lack of action or response.

You can define god like that if you like, of course, and maybe god is even actually like that. But I honestly don't see the point of such a belief.
 
blue triangle said:
Not only can God 'tweet' very effectively, he personalises His 'tweets' for everyone who receives one. But to get one, you have to join up.
Click to expand...

How do you square that with people who have tried their hardest to join up and not gotten any of these tweets?
 
blue triangle said:
We all received what we needed at the time, that's all.
Click to expand...
What a Mormon questioning the validity of his gospel needs is to know, with absolute certainty, that a clumsy fraud is indeed the true word of God, so he should not look for better guidance elsewhere?

What a 12-year-old girl praying that her father will stop sexually abusing her needs is to know, with absolute certainty, that there is nothing out there listening to her?

I don't think so.
 
turingtest said:
This is beautiful, just beautiful... I don't think I've ever seen someone claim, in answer to "how do you distinguish between the results from prayer and not-prayer?" that even not-prayer is evidence that prayer works and that god listens.
Click to expand...
| Good stuff happened | Bad stuff happened You had prayed about it: | Prayer worked! | You can't expect God to do everything by your whim; he's not a vending machine and this isn't a magic wand.
You hadn't prayed about it: | Prayer is so awesome it works even if you don't try it! | Should've prayed
 
Last edited:
blue triangle said:
Not only can God 'tweet' very effectively, he personalises His 'tweets' for everyone who receives one. But to get one, you have to join up.
Click to expand...

This would be a great response if it weren't for the fact that it is blatantly false. If what you are saying was true, then there would never be a theological disagreement. There are so many questions that could be easily resolved. Do the unrepentant go to hell, or are they merely annihilated from existence? Is the Catholic Church the true church of Jesus, or are they the spawn of Satan? Gather up some Christians that disagree on the matter, and ask God. There is no voice from the heavens. There is no objective verification offered. All you've got is Believer A and Believer B comparing the feelings in their tummies.
 
In trying to register for god's tweets all I receive is, "No route to heavenly host."

God's server is down.
 
Delvo said:
| Good stuff happened | Bad stuff happened You had prayed about it: | Prayer worked! | You can't expect God to do everything by your whim; he's not a vending machine and this isn't a magic wand.
You hadn't prayed about it: | Prayer is so awesome it works even if you don't try it! | Should've prayed
Click to expand...

I was thinking along the lines of that table, just wasn't sure I could make one (this laptop is giving me fits as it is). The last box is the home run, where the faithful end up where they started, the home base of believing that god's in charge of the whole shooting match anyway, and it doesn't really matter that much what you do. Pray for something, and if you get it, the prayer was answered; even if you don't, it was still answered, just with a heavenly "no." Don't pray, and if you get what you need, it was because you would have gotten it if you had; and if you don't pray, and don't get what you would have prayed for, "god works in mysterious ways," and there's always heaven. All the bases are covered by a belief that never ran them.

My understanding is that prayer is not necessarily supplication, that sometimes it's just sending up a "thinking of you" to the big guy instead of wanting something from him. That's all well and good, but it kind of undercuts the whole basis for claiming the efficacy of prayer if you disavow the only basis for proving it.

I have no problem with folks believing what they want, and I normally wouldn't even comment. What got me was BT's post a page or so back, with its smug condescension toward atheists- that what he believes gives his life meaning, and that the poor benighted atheists who don't share the belief must, by definition, lead meaningless lives. My guess is that he is a perfectly nice person who may not have any intent to impose his beliefs, or what may follow from them. But I know plenty of people just like him (my wife's parents, for example) who are also perfectly nice people, with the same beliefs, who think those beliefs are a justified basis for denying gay people equal treatment under the law (among other things). It's the same direction, even if the paths diverge; and it all begins with the idea that your beliefs confer superiority, and the rights of righteousness.
 
turingtest said:
...snip...

My understanding is that prayer is not necessarily supplication, that sometimes it's just sending up a "thinking of you" to the big guy instead of wanting something from him. That's all well and good, but it kind of undercuts the whole basis for claiming the efficacy of prayer if you disavow the only basis for proving it.


...snip...
Click to expand...

There's a bit of schizophrenia in how the various christian denominations view prayer. Some are absolutely convinced you can ask for material "prosperity" and some are absolutely convinced that prayer is not for asking for anything, and then there are a myriad of other views that spread across the spectrum between the 2 absolutes.
 
Darat said:
There's a bit of schizophrenia in how the various christian denominations view prayer. Some are absolutely convinced you can ask for material "prosperity" and some are absolutely convinced that prayer is not for asking for anything, and then there are a myriad of other views that spread across the spectrum between the 2 absolutes.
Click to expand...

I'm probably the last person in the world who should speak on this, since I'm simply not wired for religious faith (even as a Catholic altar boy, I was following cultural form more than anything else), but...it seems to me that, even not asking for anything, simply sending up the "thinking of you" has an undertone of supplication, an unspoken "are you thinking of me too?"
 
turingtest said:
I'm probably the last person in the world who should speak on this, since I'm simply not wired for religious faith (even as a Catholic altar boy, I was following cultural form more than anything else), but...it seems to me that, even not asking for anything, simply sending up the "thinking of you" has an undertone of supplication, an unspoken "are you thinking of me too?"
Click to expand...

Considering in the RCC and other major denominations it is doctrine to pray to other christian deities to ask for intercession I'd agree.
 
Darat said:
Considering in the RCC and other major denominations it is doctrine to pray to other christian deities to ask for intercession I'd agree.
Click to expand...

Right, the saints, the lesser deities- I'd forgotten about them. These guys are the agents, the buffers put in place so you don't demean both yourself and god by demanding directly of him "show me the money!"
 
MikeG said:
So, someone found a file they were looking for, and you liked someone you bumped into in a public office.....therefore god. Is that about right?
Click to expand...


The frequency and pattern of the "coincidences" is what makes me feel that it might work. When it stays much better than a 50/50 coin toss, I will stick with my way of going about life. Of course I do not ask unless I really need a solution. I also do not expect miracles. And no, I do not know what the exact formulae or rules are as to why some prayers get answered and some do not.

If the individual experiences of most people on this site are not what I have experienced (or seen others experience) that does not falsify mine.
 
PartSkeptic said:
"Coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous." - Albert Einstein.

And he was serious.
Click to expand...


https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100503141027AAcvfa8

The 2006 edition of "The World As I See It" includes a number of unsourced quotations that were not in the 1949 edition, some of which are certainly not by Einstein. This is one of those. The quote has also been attributed to Doris Lessing and Robert Frost:
http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=42258

It's not the last time that a hokey bumper-sticker saying will get falsely attributed to Einstein, who talked a lot less about God than comments on Goodreads would have you believe.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom