Does Prayer Work?

Author: Salixes

Posts

Read-only
Total: 304
#211
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@EtrnlVw
I entirely agree with your #209. Sorry, I did not read your #190 and will do so. I believe God allows hardship, and even innocent suffering because the worst that can happen to those who innocently suffer is their death, which is not an end, but a door. Meanwhile, our agency is left intact.
#212
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@BrotherDThomas
No, I said I was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I did not say I was a Mormon. The designation was deliberate. I do not answer to "Mormon." Get used to it. It's not my name.
As for the Book of Mormon [that's a man's name, not the name of the organization], I suggest that it be read, cover to cover. I wonder how many who espouse the Bible have read it, cover to cover. Not many, I'll wager. So, imagine your favorite book. If you have not read it completely, word-for-word, how valid is your praise of it, let alone your criticism of any other book you criticize, having not read it completely?
I will not respond to the ridicule of what I consider sacred. It merely acknowledges your scorn. Not my wheelhouse, my friend.
Does Matthew argue against his own declaration in 6:8 by what follows in 9-13? Those verses are a string of six asks. I still suggest the better course is expressing more gratitude, and less attitude.


#213
Seth
Seth's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 114
0
1
1
Seth's avatar
Seth
0
1
1
-->
@ludofl3x
It would seem that the consensus of the posters is that prayer doesn't work and here are a million reasons for that.
#214
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Seth
It would seem that the consensus of the posters is that prayer doesn't work

A consensus from an intelligent person would be that prayer is effective in some ways, and ineffective in other ways. As should be, considering all the things discussed.

and here are a million reasons for that.

This is a debate site where people discuss and give explanations lol, that's what happens. If you're not interested in explanations or reasons maybe you should get another hobby.

#215
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Seth
A consensus would indicate a general agreement and I have not seen one of those on this thread.
Topic's author
#216
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@rosends
A consensus would indicate a general agreement and I have not seen one of those on this thread.
If you care to make the effort and look, there is a consensus that does indicate a general agreement in the form of a correctly quoted comprehensive survey further back in this thread.

I suggest that you keep abreast of what is going on with a topic before making such a post. Some people may get the impression that you are lying in order to avoid an issue. And we can't have that, can we?
#217
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Salixes
Did you read what I was responding to?
The statement was that there was a "consensus of the posters." And you are now saying that there is a general agreement "in the form of a correctly quoted comprehensive survey further back in this thread"?

Please, pay attention. The claim wasn't about anything but the posters on this thread. As I am one of the posters and don't agree, and have been reading what others say, I don't see a general agreement.
#218
Seth
Seth's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 114
0
1
1
Seth's avatar
Seth
0
1
1
-->
@rosends
That's strange. You all make excuses for why prayers aren't answered, seems like a consensus to me.
#219
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Seth
I feel it might be prudent if you reread my posts (among others) again. Questions about quantifying "answers" and attempting to measure efficacy of a small subtype of prayer still abound. As the terms have yet to be agreed upon, many posters might not appreciate being characterized as making excuses for anything. I know I don't.
#220
Seth
Seth's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 114
0
1
1
Seth's avatar
Seth
0
1
1
-->
@rosends
I can't help what you don't like, I see all sorts of excuses being used to explain why prayers don't work.
#221
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Seth
You see what you are looking for, then, and miss the rest of it. Inventing a phantom consensus based on selective viewing isn't helpful.
Topic's author
#222
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@rosends
Maybe if you stop acting like a spoiled, immature brat we could all have meaningful discussions, we are all just people here why all the negativity and hate all the time? Just because someone has a different worldview and opinion than yours doesn't mean you need to relent all communication skills and sanity. 
I'm not the one making the personal attacks and being biased and off the mark. You are, and I have correctly pointed that out. I quite rightly pointed out that there is a consensus that you (deceptively) ignored and had the gall to use a consensus of biased nitwits to make an argument.

You need to take stock of yourself and stop being so dishonest and avoiding the issues that someone with a fair mind has thoroughly researched without bias and has presented.

Making personal attacks in order to divert the fact that your argument is futile and has been well and truly defeated hardly does anything for your credibility, does it?

Now, once again, I ask you to control yourself and stop the patronizing, dishonest attacks on others.
#223
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Salixes
I don't think you meant to tag me in post #222 as I never said what you quoted.
#224
Seth
Seth's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 114
0
1
1
Seth's avatar
Seth
0
1
1
-->
@rosends
All of the religionists responding are pathetically making excuses for why prayer doesn't work. Just look at the posts.
#225
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@Seth
Strictly speaking, they're making excuses for why it can't be tested and shown to be effective, and are unable to show why the experiment to which they're objecting is in fact not a scientific experiment. Even when you pre-suppose a universe building all powerful entity that purportedly answers prayers. No one is disputing that meditation (which is another word for prayers of gratitude) is effective in some way, but it doesn't effect any outcomes directly. 

THe one I found most confusing was "Intercessory prayer works when what you're praying for is in the plan already, so it's totally effective!" That misunderstands what intercessory means. If it's already in the plans, you're not interceding in anything. And if intercessory prayer counts as testing the christian god who apparently doesn't like to be tested and will ignore your requests out of spite if he feels that way, why bother. 
#226
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Seth
I'm a religionist and I did no such thing. I concluded that prayer's efficacy can't be measured, proven or disproven.
#227
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@ludofl3x
@Seth
No one has made an excuse for why prayers don't work. We are saying silly nonscientific experiments don't work. They cannot be used to debunk OR prove prayer.

And if prayers don't work, why would you want to test it? Hmmm? Irrational bias much?

Whether prayers work or not, a sloppy experiment not following scientific methodology will tell you nothing.

Experiments work  because scientists strictly follow scientific methodology, not because they really, really hate religion.

None of you know what the scientific method is, and other than an education, there is no remedy for that.
#228
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
And if prayers don't work, why would you want to test it? Hmmm? Irrational bias much?

People like you claim they work. If that's true, I'd like to test it. It's not that hard. 

Whether prayers work or not, a sloppy experiment not following scientific methodology will tell you nothing.
Which is why the one I designed is not sloppy and follows scientific methodology. You've yet to point out a valid departure from the methodology, which isn't shocking given your repeated displays in this topic of complete and total ignorance of the matter. 


Experiments work  because scientists strictly follow scientific methodology
Please point out specifically why this test could not work. Five people pray to five different gods for a puppy to survive literally miraculously. The puppy is thrown in the pool, escapes the sealed bag somehow and is unharmed. One of the prayers appears to have been answered. Please explain, exactly and specifically, how you somehow would COMPLETELY exclude answered prayer as a potential cause for this effect. You won't. 
#229
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@ludofl3x
People like you claim they work.
Well, that certainly makes me guilty.

I'd like to test it.
To what end? You don't believe it works. Irrational bias much?

Which is why the one I designed is not sloppy and follows scientific methodology.
It was sloppy and idiotic. 

You've yet to point out a valid departure from the methodology, which isn't shocking given your repeated displays in this topic of complete and total ignorance of the matter. 
Both Rosends and I have. Even you did. Bit as I said, the only resolution is an education that you don't currently have.

Please point out specifically why this test could not work.
I've told you several times. Rosands has told you several times. I can only tell you why the experiment is nonsense, I'm not responsible for your lack of education.

One of the prayers appears to have been answered. 
An apparently "answered" prayer doesn't mean a prayer was answered, it means you don't know what happened. Your experiment is bogus.

how you somehow would COMPLETELY exclude answered prayer as a potential cause for this effect. You won't.
I would. If all the experiment can do is find a potential cause,it's useless. God was a potential cause BEFORE you did the experiment. Your experiment told you nothing.

#230
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
OK, so no, you can't point it out, got it. At least that much is clear. You can object to it, but it's certainly scientific in nature. I'm granting you the hard part, too, that something exists outside of this dimension that listens to prayers, I think that might be what you're actually objecting to, which is weird, but you're all worked up about it and puffing out your chest as if you can actually understand the experiment.WHERE IS IT SLOPPY? Use the abbreviated version from my recent post if you have a hard time with so many other words.  You seem to be somewhere near the principle that something that's being measured knowing it's being measured affects the outcome,which can certainly be true...except in every other case we can absolutely confirm the presence of this sort of entity. It's in every one of your idiotic and non-analogous examples. No one has to guess if the girl in your pickup line experiment exists, for example, she's independently verifiable. Since you seem so frustrated with trying to prove your god exists, I even skip THIS part, because you get all sweaty about it. I simply start with "something hears prayers." That's all the experiment's hypothesis requires.

I'd like to test it.
To what end? You don't believe it works. Irrational bias much?
Huh? I'd like to test it to see if your hypothesis is correct or likely or even remotely likely. Forgive me if I don't think you know what irrational means. You see, following my experiment is totally rational. Thinking about words and hoping some magic being and thinking that somehow it'll help you find your keys or cure your child of cancer, that's irrational. 

One of the prayers appears to have been answered. 
An apparently "answered" prayer doesn't mean a prayer was answered, it means you don't know what happened. Your experiment is bogus.
Right, I don't know what happened, but what the people were praying for DID HAPPEN, so I'm going to include "maybe something heard one of their prayers and answered it" as a possibility in my subsequent experiments. 
Topic's author
#231
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@rosends
I'm a religionist and I did no such thing. I concluded that prayer's efficacy can't be measured, proven or disproven.

Anything that cannot be proven without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

And, anyone throwing in the old "can't be disproven" line is simply being arrogant and obnoxious.

How would that person like being told, "you can't disprove that prayer can't be disproven".....yes, you wouldn't take to that skewd piece of illogical nonsense, now, would you?

(Except for the placebo effect which can apply to any erroneous belief) we can dismiss prayer as being a load of baloney... prayer does not work.
Topic's author
#232
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@rosends
I don't think you meant to tag me in post #222 as I never said what you quoted.
Quite right, my apologies.
It was supposed to be for Eternal VW.
#233
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@ludofl3x
You've yet to point out a valid departure from the methodology,...
Both Rosends and I have. 

OK, so no, you can't point it out, got it.
Lol. OK.

You seem to be somewhere near the principle that something that's being measured knowing it's being measured affects the outcome,which can certainly be true...
Gee. Ya think?

except in every other case we can absolutely confirm the presence of this sort of entity. 
It doesn't matter whether you can or cannot confirm the presence of this sort of entity. The test results are bogus if you cannot insure a blind test.

Here is another problem you're facing. You say, "I simply start with "something hears prayers." That's all the experiment's hypothesis requires."

But that is a lie. You do not believe the God to whom your testees are praying exists, so you will NOT interpret a positive answer as God doing it. You will assume something that agrees with your current worldview.

Else you are basically telling us a magic trick is enough to change you into a theist. There are other things that also explain a living dog. Your test tells you nothing.

This is the same mistake early theists made. They saw the lightning and assumed there was no other explanation than God zapping the evil. There were other explanations, but they latched onto the one that agreed with their worldview.

Experiments are done so as to rule out other possible explanations. Otherwise, your test tells you nothing you didn't already know beforehand. Your experiment yields no valid information.

You seem to want to label the ambiguous trash coming out of your experiment a "successful answer", but whatever you call it, it remains useless trash. You know nothing more after your experiment than you did before it. Any conclusions you draw from it, for OR against God, is bogus.

Thinking about words and hoping some magic being and thinking that somehow it'll help you find your keys or cure your child of cancer, that's irrational. 
And yet its you telling us that an experiment on such irrationality is scientific. 

Right, I don't know what happened, ...
Then your experiment told you nothing.

but what the people were praying for DID HAPPEN,
But that doesn't necessarily mean that the prayer worked. There are other possiblr explanations.

so I'm going to include "maybe something heard one of their prayers and answered it" as a possibility in my subsequent experiments. 
So "maybe"..." Something" heard and answered is a "possibility". Isn't that what you were testing for in the first place?

What new information did your experiment give you? That something was a possibility? Isn't that what you were testing for in the first place?

so I'm going to include "maybe something heard one of their prayers and answered it" as a possibility in my subsequent experiments. 
It was a possibility in your first experiment too. Basically, because your first experiment tells you nothing, you want to repeat it. Repeat bogus experiments as often as you like, the data coming out will always be unusable for logical conclusions.
#234
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,621
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Salixes.  Tradesecret



Salixes wrote * Instead of operating theatres we shall have prayer rooms.
Interesting as we have a perfect platform to see if this operating "prayer room" may or may not actually  work.




Let's use Ethang 5's alleged poor little Ghanaian girl in desperate need (28 days ago) of medical surgery (according to ethang 5) as our first patient. Of course,  me not having a religious bone in my body wouldn't be able to perform a prayer operation as I don't have "faith" but I could over see the "prayer operation"  once Ethang 5 has given us all the details concerning this little sick Ghanaian child. 

Tradesecret ,  you telling us that prayer does work and your evidence for this is that you prayed for this thread to be created;


Yes prayer works. I prayed that you would start another topic demonstrating your foolishness, and God answered my prayer. 

Then can I suggest that if god cannot manage to cure this alleged Ghanaian child would it be possible for him to somehow stump up the $200 that is needed for the surgery so a very qualified and very human surgeon can do the job that he can't or won't do?




 


#235
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
I told you this a week ago, but your poor reading comprehension must have tripped you up again.

The girls operation has been paid for. She has had the operation and she is recovering. After the real Salixes lied and skipped out of helping that little girl, the God he calls imaginary stepped in and provided the funds and the doctors to do it.

So while both you and Sal were sitting on your ample backsides doing nothing but complaining about how God does nothing, that "imaginary" God came through where neither the actual Sal or the actual you could do nothing but run off at the mouth.

Hypocrite much?
#236
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Salixes
Anything that cannot be proven without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
I don't disagree but the claim was that

"You all make excuses for why prayers aren't answered"

which I pointed out that I had not done and that there is a 

"consensus of the posters is that prayer doesn't work"

which there isn't.




#237
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
I made that comment in the context of the opening post which was clearly designed to encourage hatred and derision towards those who do pray or believe that prayer is necessary. 

willows - salenco or whatever his name is - has one intention on this forum which is why mostly I ignore him. Sometimes I fail to do so  - this was one of those occasions.  

For the record however, prayer is simply another word for talk. Humans talk to God. He answers prayers in accordance with his own will - which may be to say "yes, I will assist you with your request", or it might be "no I wont assist you with that request" or it might be "ok, that is a good request, but your timing might be better, so we will wait". God answers prayers from his people. 

Now that last statement - "from his own people" is intentional. God has no obligation to answer anyone's prayers. He answers or responds as he chooses. But not everyone has a right to just ask God and expect he will answer them. And this is something we know just from living here on earth with anyone who has authority and power to respond to ordinary requests by humans. Governments, kings, gee even billionaries and other wealthy people don't simply respond to every request by any person. As a lawyer, in our courts - not every person has a right to talk or expect a judge to answer them. In fact even as a lawyer, I still have to dress appropriately to be "heard" or "seen" by the judge. 

For any human to expect that God would drop everything for them to answer their request without any proper consideration of what they are actually doing is absurd - and yet we do it. And sometimes God answers these prayers. 

My prayers - generally follow the prayer Jesus prayed - the Lord's Prayer. It generally starts with praise and worship and thankfulness to God for all that he has done, not just for me, but for everyone - and for this world. This generally places my communication into a place of humility before God - it is a little like a person entering the courtroom, bowing their heads, in order to make submissions to the judge. It really is ensuring my attitude is not demanding, or has false expectations, or is selfish, or greedy or all about me. It is an acknowledgment that I am totally dependant upon God for everything. 

My prayers are not shopping lists or wish lists. They are generally about asking God to help me to love him better and to love others better. They are about asking God to change my attitudes to be more like Jesus. Yes, I ask God to comfort people in their grief and I ask God to make me a better parent and husband by helping  me not to be so selfish or arrogant. I ask God to bring world peace - or to stop the Corona Virus. I pray that God will stop wars - even though I know that people wont change without first knowing God and with the assistance of the Holy Spirit. 

But when people mock prayers because two people are asking for football teams to win or whatever, this really only shows me that they don't have a clue about prayer or more importantly about the person they allege they are praying too. Christians don't ask for their football teams to win. We pray that God's will will be done - and we pray that whatever this is - it will bring glory to God's name. We pray for sick people - yes, that they might get well, but we also pray that whether God answers this prayer or not - so long as they are drawn closer to God, their illness is secondary. 

Prayer is not a shopping or a wish list. It is not asking God to do absurd things. It is not something that we have an automatic right to do. Yet Christians are commanded to pray - because Jesus is their high priest. We pray because of what Jesus has done for us. Without the forgiveness of sins and without his righteousness being accredited to us - giving us the proper clothing, we could not enter God's presence. 

Yet, people like the opening poster want to mock prayer - but he has no clue about what is - and why we pray. We pray because we acknowledge that without God we can do nothing. and while many people in this world do lots of things and they think they do so without God, they are the ignorant ones. This is why Christians generally give thanks before eating food. Everything comes from God - we don't even have the capacity to breath without God giving us the breathe and the desire to keep on breathing. For Christians it is natural to pray and give thanks to God. Naturally, then we see answers to our prayers all of the time. For those who don't know God, how would they expect to have a prayer answered? Ironically it is the very brain God gave them, that they are using to fight against God that will inevitably be their witness against them. 


#238
Seth
Seth's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 114
0
1
1
Seth's avatar
Seth
0
1
1
-->
@Tradesecret
And let's face it if you don't pray you won't get to heaven.
Topic's author
#239
Salixes
Salixes's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 494
1
1
4
Salixes's avatar
Salixes
1
1
4
-->
@Seth
I made that comment in the context of the opening post which was clearly designed to encourage hatred and derision towards those who do pray or believe that prayer is necessary. 

There is absolutely nothing at all clear about the opening post being designed to encourage hatred and derision. 
The post is clearly illustrating the fact that prayer doesn't work.

The hatred and derision are already there among those who take it upon themselves to deride and show utter contempt towards modern, conventional medicine and who encourage others to believe that prayer and quackery actually work.

Is exposing the hatred and derision of others hatred and derision itself?

No, it is not.


#240
Seth
Seth's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 114
0
1
1
Seth's avatar
Seth
0
1
1
-->
@Salixes
That wasn't me dude. lol