"Being godless might be good for your health - study shows

[mentalgymnast]

Combatants on both sides in WWI included men who were also humble and devout believers in God. They no doubt also prayed in their trenches and foxholes and bravely faced the enemy with all the skill they could muster. This prayers were not answered for nearly 10 million of them who ended up dead, of for more than 10 million who were wounded. Total military and civilian casualties in WWI are estimated at ~40 million. I dare say most were God fearing Christians who no doubt also prayed for God's blessings.

What would it have looked like, either in the present tense and/or past tense if God answered all of these prayers in the affirmative?

Regards,
MG

[Lem]

It may be so for you, but it is not universal at all. You defined it as "an additional psychological asset," as though it were absolutely unique. I disagree. It does not exclusively require faith in god for everyone to engage in something that calms one down and helps one focus. It may work for some, but so do a lot of other things. This is not a rant against religion, simply a statement of fact. I am surprised that there is such an insistence that religion is so unique that there is literally nothing else in existence that can provide all of the things an individual may draw from a belief in it.

Well stated, Lem. SGT Alvin York was the most decorated American soldier of WWI. He often credited his bravery and success in battle to his belief in God and to prayer on the battlefield.

In his best known action, then Corporal York's unit was lured into an ambush and ended up effectively surrounded by flanking German machine gun positions. Under fire, York used a bolt action rifle to methodically stalk and kill or incapacitate more than two dozen German soldiers in several different machine gun nests, finally capturing the astounded German unit commanding officer who surrendered after watching every one of his well armed men fall to a single American.

York was an honorable and religious Tennessean whose application for conscious objector status had been denied. His belief in God is reflected in his following quotes:

"The fear of God makes a hero; the fear of man makes a coward."

"When you have God behind you, you can come out on top every time."

While York humbly gave the credit for his accomplishments to God, a neutral observer would note that he was raised in a large family in rural Tennessee where hunting and marksmanship were integral to his life from an early age, and he excelled at it. Pitted against German conscripts who believed that fear of their machine guns would cause a surrounded enemy force to simply surrender, someone with his unique skills had a great psychological advantage. York prayed alright. But then he fell back on his long practiced skill set of stalking and killing animals. His accomplishments may have miraculous, but they were not divine.

Combatants on both sides in WWI included men who were also humble and devout believers in God. They no doubt also prayed in their trenches and foxholes and bravely faced the enemy with all the skill they could muster. This prayers were not answered for nearly 10 million of them who ended up dead, of for more than 10 million who were wounded. Total military and civilian casualties in WWI are estimated at ~40 million. I dare say most were God fearing Christians who no doubt also prayed for God's blessings.

What a story. Thank you, DrW. I started reading your post to my husband and he immediately identified "York, of course." I asked if he still wanted to hear your post, and he said "yes, absolutely, it's a story always worth hearing."

Your point about York's accomplishments being miraculous but not divine is perfectly said.

[DrW]

Combatants on both sides in WWI included men who were also humble and devout believers in God. They no doubt also prayed in their trenches and foxholes and bravely faced the enemy with all the skill they could muster. This prayers were not answered for nearly 10 million of them who ended up dead, of for more than 10 million who were wounded. Total military and civilian casualties in WWI are estimated at ~40 million. I dare say most were God fearing Christians who no doubt also prayed for God's blessings.

What would it have looked like, either in the present tense and/or past tense if God answered all of these prayers in the affirmative?

Regards,
MG

Thinking about possible answers to such a question highlights a fatal flaw of unfounded belief as the basis of a worldview. It is an "irresistible force vs. an immovable object" question - or a nonsense question if you prefer. While the British, French and American commanders prayed for Allied victory and the German commanders prayed for victory for the German Empire, God would simply be unable to answer all the prayers in the affirmative.

No problem for religionists though, since logic, reason and reality do not count for much where unfounded belief is concerned. Since the Christian concept of God is based in fantasy, ignorance and tradition, I suppose the answer for a believer would simply be a matter of personal choice. Like everything else religious, they can simply make it up as they go along.

My own response is that the question itself is moot (or nonsense - take your pick) since the God of Christianity (and especially Mormonism) simply does not, and cannot, exist.

[IHAQ]

What would it have looked like, either in the present tense and/or past tense if God answered all of these prayers in the affirmative?

Regards,
MG

Thinking about possible answers to such a question highlights a fatal flaw of unfounded belief as the basis of a worldview. It is an "irresistible force vs. an immovable object" question - or a nonsense question if you prefer. While the British, French and American commanders prayed for Allied victory and the German commanders prayed for victory for the German Empire, God would simply be unable to answer all the prayers in the affirmative.

No problem for religionists though, since logic, reason and reality do not count for much where unfounded belief is concerned. Since the Christian concept of God is based in fantasy, ignorance and tradition, I suppose the answer for a believer would simply be a matter of personal choice. Like everything else religious, they can simply make it up as they go along.

My own response is that the question itself is moot (or nonsense - take your pick) since the God of Christianity (and especially Mormonism) simply does not, and cannot, exist.

What would it have looked like if all of those prayers during WW1 were offered by people believing in a God that didn't exist?

Generally speaking, it's easy for war victors to write history in a way that shows God was on their side. It's simply the old "drawing the target around where the arrow fell" routine.

[mentalgymnast]

While the British, French and American commanders prayed for Allied victory and the German commanders prayed for victory for the German Empire, God would simply be unable to answer all the prayers in the affirmative.

That’s my point. So at that juncture, since it is impossible, you take the path of least resistance, in my opinion, to say that there is no God. Since God isn’t able to do what WE would expect that he could/should be able to do...and doesn’t...then he either has no interest or doesn’t exist. To take an alternate path and be open to the possibility that God isn’t able to do the impossible...and live with that...is a much harder road to travel. The result is death, disease, and other ‘fallen world’ attributes that are VERY difficult to deal with from a mortal perspective (why is God allowing this or that to happen?). So again, a whole lot of folks take that other path I mentioned up front.

If I’m hearing what you’re saying correctly, you are suggesting that God, if he exists, ought to be able to fit a square peg into a round hole.

No problem for religionists though, since logic, reason and reality do not count for much where unfounded belief is concerned. Since the Christian concept of God is based in fantasy, ignorance and tradition...

That is a rather unfounded and even condescending assumption. There are a whole lot of pretty smart folks out there that would take issue with that. I’m assuming that you are referring to or relying wholly upon the Bible God and the stories contained between the covers of that book? 2 Kings 2:23-25; Joshua 10; etc.

I suppose the answer for a believer would simply be a matter of personal choice. Like everything else religious, they can simply make it up as they go along.

Again, that is your view as a secular materialist who interprets what information we have in a way that meets the expectations you have of the world. For example, you have a view towards the Anthropic Principle that allows you to continue your disbelief in a creator. Other scientists (I’m assuming this may be your profession?) would see the Anthropic Principle as evidence of a creator. Or at least opening the door to that possibility. Put both of you in the same room and you’re both going to have a reasonable discussion, yet neither one of you is going to give an inch while attempting to take a mile.

My own response is that the question itself is moot (or nonsense - take your pick) since the God of Christianity (and especially Mormonism) simply does not, and cannot, exist.

And as long as you are set in that dogmatic position and not willing to give an inch, that’s where the discussion ends, for you. Others remain open to a creator/God.

Regards,
MG

[Res Ipsa]

Oh man, it's opposite day in MG land. Playing pretend is ALWAYS the path of least resistance. Wrestling with evidence to try and figure out what's going on, even when you don't like where that leads you, that's what's hard.

MG imagines his "Creator God," which is exactly as powerful as he needs it to to be, as weak as he needs it to be, as knowledgable as he needs it to be, s ignorant as he needs it to be, as obviously beneficent as he needs it to be, and as mysterious and inscrutable as he needs it to be. All to argue that to consider the possibility that his God, whose characteristics he determines 100%, is "reasonable."

It's not hard. It's not brave. It's not even interesting.

It's trivial.

In response to any evidence that he's not living in the best of all possible worlds, he just adjusts the dials on his God.

Trivial.

Dr. Pangloss approves.

[mentalgymnast]

Oh man, it's opposite day in MG land. Playing pretend is ALWAYS the path of least resistance. Wrestling with evidence to try and figure out what's going on, even when you don't like where that leads you, that's what's hard.

MG imagines his "Creator God," which is exactly as powerful as he needs it to to be, as weak as he needs it to be, as knowledgable as he needs it to be, s ignorant as he needs it to be, as obviously beneficent as he needs it to be, and as mysterious and inscrutable as he needs it to be. All to argue that to consider the possibility that his God, whose characteristics he determines 100%, is "reasonable."

It's not hard. It's not brave. It's not even interesting.

It's trivial.

In response to any evidence that he's not living in the best of all possible worlds, he just adjusts the dials on his God.

Trivial.

Dr. Pangloss approves.

I think you’re shutting the door. And you have good reason to. From where you’re sitting anyways.

Regards,
MG

[Lem]

Oh man, it's opposite day in MG land. Playing pretend is ALWAYS the path of least resistance. Wrestling with evidence to try and figure out what's going on, even when you don't like where that leads you, that's what's hard.

MG imagines his "Creator God," which is exactly as powerful as he needs it to to be, as weak as he needs it to be, as knowledgable as he needs it to be, s ignorant as he needs it to be, as obviously beneficent as he needs it to be, and as mysterious and inscrutable as he needs it to be. All to argue that to consider the possibility that his God, whose characteristics he determines 100%, is "reasonable."

It's not hard. It's not brave. It's not even interesting.

It's trivial.

In response to any evidence that he's not living in the best of all possible worlds, he just adjusts the dials on his God.

Trivial.

Dr. Pangloss approves.

That fits in quite nicely with what's been pointed out on another thread, that Smith's plates only add to the Mormon story as long as they are not found. In other words, the plates must remain imaginary in order to maintain the Book of Mormon myth. The minute they become real by being 'found' the whole story falls apart, kind of like the Book of Abraham's fate after the papyri turned up. Or the Kinderhook plates. I would imagine the Loch Ness monster, Sasquatch and UFO tourist industries would suffer the same fate if actual 'evidence' of their respective myths became fully available for examination.

It's the human imagination that remains superior in all of these stories, which takes us full circle back to DrW's explanation for religion: the human, non-supernatural brain. However, in this case, the imagination is not being fully used. As you pointed out, Res Ipsa, simply imagining that every (conflicting) thing is possible simply by saying it is, is a pretty trivial use of the human imagination.

[Res Ipsa]

Oh man, it's opposite day in MG land. Playing pretend is ALWAYS the path of least resistance. Wrestling with evidence to try and figure out what's going on, even when you don't like where that leads you, that's what's hard.

MG imagines his "Creator God," which is exactly as powerful as he needs it to to be, as weak as he needs it to be, as knowledgable as he needs it to be, s ignorant as he needs it to be, as obviously beneficent as he needs it to be, and as mysterious and inscrutable as he needs it to be. All to argue that to consider the possibility that his God, whose characteristics he determines 100%, is "reasonable."

It's not hard. It's not brave. It's not even interesting.

It's trivial.

In response to any evidence that he's not living in the best of all possible worlds, he just adjusts the dials on his God.

Trivial.

Dr. Pangloss approves.

I think you’re shutting the door. And you have good reason to. From where you’re sitting anyways.

Regards,
MG

I think you've repeatedly demonstrated that you have no idea where I'm sitting. It is unreasonable for you to expect me to spend two seconds thinking about the God you've imagined. The God whose characteristics you make up on the fly depending on what you need them to be in any given argument. It is 100% unreasonable for you to claim that reason somehow demands that I give serious consideration to whether the being you imagine actually exists.

In the beginning, MG made up a God. The God was whatever MG wanted it to be. MG read some books, and declared "My God is so powerful, he determine the very fundamental constants that allow the universe to exist. But my God also also so weak that he could not create a planet without earthquakes. And there were deadly plagues, and MG declared "My God is so powerful, he saved millions from suffering and death but so weak that he could not have prevented the plague itself. And behold, MG continually created his God, not in his own image, or in any image at all, but as a chimera -- having only the form MG needed to argue that it was reasonable to consider the possibility that his made up God could possibly, maybe, be real.

And the people yawned, made some oatmeal, and poured themselves another cup of coffee.

So, yes, my door is shut on your made up, trivial flavor of God. What else should one do with bad arguments after reading them time after time after time after time after time after time?

[mentalgymnast]

I think you’re shutting the door. And you have good reason to. From where you’re sitting anyways.

Regards,
MG

I think you've repeatedly demonstrated that you have no idea where I'm sitting. It is unreasonable for you to expect me to spend two seconds thinking about the God you've imagined. The God whose characteristics you make up on the fly depending on what you need them to be in any given argument. It is 100% unreasonable for you to claim that reason somehow demands that I give serious consideration to whether the being you imagine actually exists.

In the beginning, MG made up a God. The God was whatever MG wanted it to be. MG read some books, and declared "My God is so powerful, he determine the very fundamental constants that allow the universe to exist. But my God also also so weak that he could not create a planet without earthquakes. And there were deadly plagues, and MG declared "My God is so powerful, he saved millions from suffering and death but so weak that he could not have prevented the plague itself. And behold, MG continually created his God, not in his own image, or in any image at all, but as a chimera -- having only the form MG needed to argue that it was reasonable to consider the possibility that his made up God could possibly, maybe, be real.

And the people yawned, made some oatmeal, and poured themselves another cup of coffee.

So, yes, my door is shut on your made up, trivial flavor of God. What else should one do with bad arguments after reading them time after time after time after time after time after time?

That’s quite a load to put on me there Rep Ipsa.

In case God is listening in... “I’m not trying to make you into something you’re not...but I will always try to better understand you within the confines of my limited understanding. I will not disbelieve in you SIMPLY because you don’t fit within the confines of my required expectations and demands. Thanks for a sunny day outside, by the way.”

Regards,
MG