Prayer and power

[elliotfc]

Big unspoken assumption here. It is impossible to put "the Lord" to the test until the existence of "the Lord" has been established.

Argh. We're speaking *as if God existed*, haven't you noticed? Why is RandFan giving me Bible verses about God? What's the point of that? Obviously we're assuming, in this discussion, that God does in fact exist.

Thanks for not being helpful at all!

Why stop there? Why not say "pray to God? You're assuming that God even exists. What's the point in discussing this?" But you didn't say that, and you have discussed this to some length. And now you're saying that we're assuming that God exists. Why did you enter this discussion in the first place if, eventually, you would have just played that card?

So your statement above has no meaning as it stands.

Nor do any of my statements, right? But this is the first time you've responded to my statements in this way.

I've got you marked down as wanting the existence of the Lord proven before we make any assumptions. Therefore, in this thread, it is pointless to talk theology with you, theology which assumes the existence of God.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

I should think so. Happens rather a lot these days. Think about it.

Yeah, I guess you're right.

Also consider that medical miracles, engineering miracles, scientific miracles bring their own proof -- evidence. Near as I can tell, there's never been a reliably documented religious miracle.

The key word being "reliably", which is dependent upon the judgment of others.

[edit] What you see as "castration" (a nicely loaded word, isn't it?)...

Hey, it's medical, and it can be reversed I hear.

And I wouldn't call it loaded, unless you mean loaded with blanks.

I see from another angle. To me, miracles that have no evidence to back them up are weak, impotent, false, if you like you could even call them castrated. I'll stay with strong miracles, thank you, the ones that can be demonstrated to work.

Yeah, maybe to you, but to the person benefitting...

Yes, of course you can stay with anything you want.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

Is god contingent upon his own will?

They are the same.

That is, having expressed his will, does he ever decide he was wrong and change his mind?

No.

(Hint: Depends on which bits of the Bible you pick and which you decide to ignore.)

I'm into the NT, Christian that I am.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

Regarding the copy-and-paste bit: None of this strikes me as the least bit convincing. It boils down to to "Yes, it's meaningless busywork, but you're to do it because daddy said so."

Yes, you can boil everything away (at least the material) until you're left with God, that's true.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

It's a miracle! Thank God that God invented and developed prosthetics! And good call.

[edit] Oh, God also invented all the medicines, therapies, instruments, and devices that those greedy scientists want to try to take credit for. Glory unto God!

You've got the form down, I'll pray that you develop some sincerity.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

I dunno. How's the pay?

Not so good, not since they stopped burning the finest meats.

I doubt that (except among our most pugnacious posters). It does, I'm afraid, make you a tad predictable.

But that's good! If I was unpredictable, you'd suspect there was no logic or reason behind what I say, right? Or, like in science, what makes scientific statements and theories useful is their *predictability*.

And that's the thing, really. Most of us here have dealt with Christians so much that there isn't too much new that they can surprise us with.

And you ought to be skeptical of things that were new...

Only the rarest of them will come flat out and say, "No, it doesn't make any sense and I don't require it to." About the closest we ever hear to that is "God works in mysterious ways".

He does, or he doesn't, or he doesn't exist. If he does, there's no reason to fret about it or chalk it up to Sir Cop-Out. Unless there is, in which case you can fret and chalk for all of eternity.

Careful, there. First of all, Cancer is not necessarily fatal, even without divine intervention. Even if it were, we all know that Christians claim God heals lots of non-fatal diseases, blindness, for example. (Actually, leprosy isn't necessarily fatal, but it severly limits your social life.)

Aye.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

By the way, I will be out of town for most of the upcoming week, so if this thread is still alive when I return, I'll try to catch up and respond late next week. In the meantime, perhaps you can drag someone else (ceo_esq?) who is more knowledgable than I on Christianity into the fray.

You out there Huntster? I'd like to tag out please. (TAG OUT not tap out you fiends)

-Elliot

 

[RandFan]

The Gospel According to RandFan.

Chapter 1

One day, out of nowhere, Jesus appeared. There were some guys standing around. Then Jesus said the following. "Anything that you pray for will be done for you. Nothing that you ask for is impossible, and all things that you ask for will be done for you."

The guys standing around were speechless for a time.

One guy asked, "Is that everything? Do you have anything else to say? Are you for real?"

Another guy asked, "So, like let's say I prayed that everything that anybody else besides me prayed for would not be allowed to happen, would you answer that prayer?"

Jesus looked at the two guys who asked those questions. He had said all that needed to be said about prayer. There was nothing else to be said about prayer. They were failing to address his stated declaration of prayer in any meaningful way.

Then Jesus made like a tree and got out of there.

Thus concludes the Gospel According to RandFan.

Sorry, this won't wash. It's a strawman argument and does not at all represent what I am saying.

 

[Meffy]

@eliottfc: I've been teasing a little, but I'm sincere in not believing that there's any self-consistent justification for prayer. I do respect your right to your position though I disagree.

On the issue of NT versus OT, even there we run into self-contradictions. Sometimes -- even in the NT -- the Bible says the OT law is eternal, then other times it becomes optional.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/otlaw.html

Likewise, there are parts of the Bible that say God can never (or does never) change his mind, and other parts that say he can/does. It's impossible to accept the whole thing as truth without believing two contradictory things simultaneously.

 

[elliotfc]

Sorry, this won't wash. It's a strawman argument and does not at all represent what I am saying.

Sorry, this statement does not address my post in any meaningful way.

I'm feeling a bit giddy, and best stop posting for the night. Ta. -Elliot

 

[RandFan]

You out there Huntster? I'd like to tag out please. (TAG OUT not tap out you fiends)

-Elliot

What's the matter? Obfuscation isn't all that hard. You simply misrepresent your opponents views and refuse to respond in a reasonable fashion. Trust me, you're doing fine.

 

[RandFan]

Sorry, this statement does not address my post in any meaningful way.

What is there to respond to? I've made a logical argument and you are just acting silly. You have yet to address my points or answer my questions.

I guess the world will never know what "all things" means.

 

[elliotfc]

I've been teasing a little, but I'm sincere in not believing that there's any self-consistent justification for prayer. I do respect your right to your position though I disagree.

On the issue of NT versus OT, even there we run into self-contradictions. Sometimes -- even in the NT -- the Bible says the OT law is eternal, then other times it becomes optional.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/otlaw.html

Likewise, there are parts of the Bible that say God can never (or does never) change his mind, and other parts that say he can/does. It's impossible to accept the whole thing as truth without believing two contradictory things simultaneously.

I think God changes the way in which he deals with people, meaning, if people change, the way God deals with people can change.

As usual, Christians see this in a deeper (you'd say contorted) way than do you.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

What is there to respond to? I've made a logical argument and you are just acting silly. You have yet to address my points or answer my questions.

I guess the world will never know what "all things" means.

If you're the world, I agree.

All things means all things. A baseball announcer can say that a player can do all things. In what context? In the context of the baseball diamond.

All things? In the context of Christian prayer? I understand it.

Again, I agree that you don't understand this. It's OK.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

What's the matter? Obfuscation isn't all that hard. You simply misrepresent your opponents views and refuse to respond in a reasonable fashion. Trust me, you're doing fine.

Yeah, and you think it's reasonable that God would do anything, anything we want, in the world with no qualification if we just pray for it. I've given examples of this. You've not responded. What if I prayed that only what I pray for God can do, but anything else that anybody else prayed for God must not do? Address that point! In a meaningful way! Do not refuse to respond! Keep it reasonable! Sort that one out!

You didn't have to tell me that I'm doing fine btw, I've known that for several posts now.

-Elliot

 

[RandFan]

All things means all things. A baseball announcer can say that a player can do all things. In what context? In the context of the baseball diamond.

All things? In the context of Christian prayer? I understand it.

We'll give me the context then? Why heal some people of cancer and never regrow limbs? Why help some people find lost items but never cure severly retarded children?

Again, I agree that you don't understand this. It's OK.

It has nothing to do with understanding. It has to do with simple logic.

1.) Do you believe that God is omnipotent?
2.) Do you believe that God performs miracles?
3.) Why, in contemporary times does God not perform any miracles that otherwise would be impossible?

 

[Meffy]

I think God changes the way in which he deals with people, meaning, if people change, the way God deals with people can change.

That's related to the question but off to one side. I still see inconsistencies aplenty in a book that's supposed to be 100% true.

As usual, Christians see this in a deeper (you'd say contorted) way than do you.

I might call it contorted, or distorted or inconsistent maybe. I don't think it's very deep though.

Anyway, you're bushed and I've stuff to do too. G'night.

 

[RandFan]

Yeah, and you think it's reasonable that God would do anything, anything we want, in the world with no qualification if we just pray for it.

This is not the subject of the discussion. It's just your strawman.

I would like to know why God never does that which otherwise would be impossible without God?

I've given examples of this. You've not responded. What if I prayed that only what I pray for God can do, but anything else that anybody else prayed for God must not do?

Can God create a rock to big for God to lift? You are creating a paradox that is not relevant to the discussion.

Your example is not logically possible because the promise is not just to you but all people. If god granted your prayer he would have to deny other's their prayer. Remember, the premise is that God can do what is logically possible for God to do.

You didn't have to tell me that I'm doing fine btw, I've known that for several posts now.

Yes, at obfuscating you are doing great. I'm not sure that is something to be proud of though. If it makes you happy then so be it.

 

[empeake]

Oh you are right. I made the distinction in limited ways. Again, they stopped doing the Ghost Dances. When the Christians were getting slaughtered, they didn't stop praying. They prayed even harder.

And when the the Native Americans were being slaughtered, the didn't stop praying. They prayed even harder. Unfortunately for them, the bullets of the Christian God's will were more effective than their prayers. Perhaps it was the will of the Christian God that men, women, and children be murdered in His name? Or maybe it was the will of their gods that they be reunited with their ancestors to prosper in another life?

Trying to equate the mass extermination of Native Americans with the plight of Christians in Roman times is like comparing apples and porcupines (that's how different they are). The rise of Christianity was more of a sociopolitical movement. It seems that prayers are much more effective when the poor masses lose faith in their leaders and the Christians offer the promise of a better life, like it happened III century Rome. However, the prayers of the poor Christians and Catholics were answered differently in France in 1789, in Russia in 1917, and in Germany in 1939. Could it be because there was another group that opposed the ruling powers and offered the masses a better life, and the poor decided to support them? Of course not, it was God's will.

Also, using martyrdom to illustrate the power of prayer also applies to Muslims, Jews, Shintoists, Buddhists, etc. Are you going to argue that their prayers and rituals are also "ghost dances"?

 

[Roboramma]

I would like to know why God never does that which otherwise would be impossible without God?

It seems pretty clear at this point that you're not going to get an answer to that question.