Do you believe God intervenes & answers prayers?

[_Jersey Girl]

Why on earth is the most important question one can ask is why God doesn't heal amputees? No, I didn't read the link.

Jersey Girl

[_Ray A]

I don't know if God intervenes or answers prayers, but someone or something does. Nothing empirical here. Just personal experience.

[_fubecabr]

I don't know if God intervenes or answers prayers, but someone or something does. Nothing empirical here. Just personal experience.

The question, "Why won't God heal amputees?" probes into a fundamental aspect of prayer and exposes it for observation. This aspect of prayer has to do with ambiguity and coincidence.

Let's look at an example. Let's imagine that you visit your doctor one day, and he tells you that you have cancer. Your doctor is optimistic, and he schedules surgery and chemotherapy to treat your disease. Meanwhile, you are terrified. You don't want to die, so you pray to God day and night for a cure. The surgery is successful, and when your doctor examines you again six months later the cancer is gone. You praise God for answering your prayers. You totally believe with all your heart that God has worked a miracle in your life.

The obvious question to ask is: What cured you? Was it the surgery/chemotherapy, or was it God? Is there any way to know whether God is playing a role or not when we pray?

When your tumor disappeared, in other words, it might simply have been a complete coincidence that you happened to pray. Your prayer may have had zero effect.

How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the cure? One way is to eliminate the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.

That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.

[_Jersey Girl]

I don't know if God intervenes or answers prayers, but someone or something does. Nothing empirical here. Just personal experience.

The question, "Why won't God heal amputees?" probes into a fundamental aspect of prayer and exposes it for observation. This aspect of prayer has to do with ambiguity and coincidence.

Let's look at an example. Let's imagine that you visit your doctor one day, and he tells you that you have cancer. Your doctor is optimistic, and he schedules surgery and chemotherapy to treat your disease. Meanwhile, you are terrified. You don't want to die, so you pray to God day and night for a cure. The surgery is successful, and when your doctor examines you again six months later the cancer is gone. You praise God for answering your prayers. You totally believe with all your heart that God has worked a miracle in your life.

The obvious question to ask is: What cured you? Was it the surgery/chemotherapy, or was it God? Is there any way to know whether God is playing a role or not when we pray?

When your tumor disappeared, in other words, it might simply have been a complete coincidence that you happened to pray. Your prayer may have had zero effect.

How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the cure? One way is to eliminate the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.

That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.

That doesn't seem like a comparable analogy to me. In the case of the amputee, you are asking God to replace a part that was removed and the site of the amputation is already healed. The leg isn't sick or diseased. It is partially or fully missing.

In the case of the cancerous tumor, you are asking God to dissolve or reabsorb something. You are asking God to make something "go away".

The more accurate analogy to the cancerous tumor would be if you asked God to remove your leg.

The more accurate analogy to the amputated leg would be if you asked God to put the cancer back.

Sorry, the analogy being used is totally flawed. It's simply an appeal to emotion and not the basis for a rational argument.




Jersey Girl

[_Ray A]

The obvious question to ask is: What cured you? Was it the surgery/chemotherapy, or was it God? Is there any way to know whether God is playing a role or not when we pray?

When your tumor disappeared, in other words, it might simply have been a complete coincidence that you happened to pray. Your prayer may have had zero effect.

How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the cure? One way is to eliminate the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.

That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.

In this area I choose to believe in whatever you want to call it, "the Force", "God", fate, destiny. My ex-wife died of cancer though she had no history of cancer in her family, was a non-smoker and very light drinker. She should have lived to at least her 80s judging by her family history. Medical science could not save her. The doctors told her to prepare to die, because there was nothing they could do. Yet, I know of cases worse than hers, and they survived. Why? Does this appeal to logic? By logic she should have survived. She had two or three malignant tumours, yet I know of one man who had over 30 malignant tumors yet survived the cancer. Sure, there may be some medical explanation, but even doctors will admit it's a lottery. They don't know why some survive cancers that should "logically" kill them. It's not all cut-and-dried. Some people have died by falling ten feet, yet others have survived ten story falls. Why? It kind of biases me to fate.

[_fubecabr]

I don't know if God intervenes or answers prayers, but someone or something does. Nothing empirical here. Just personal experience.

The question, "Why won't God heal amputees?" probes into a fundamental aspect of prayer and exposes it for observation. This aspect of prayer has to do with ambiguity and coincidence.

Let's look at an example. Let's imagine that you visit your doctor one day, and he tells you that you have cancer. Your doctor is optimistic, and he schedules surgery and chemotherapy to treat your disease. Meanwhile, you are terrified. You don't want to die, so you pray to God day and night for a cure. The surgery is successful, and when your doctor examines you again six months later the cancer is gone. You praise God for answering your prayers. You totally believe with all your heart that God has worked a miracle in your life.

The obvious question to ask is: What cured you? Was it the surgery/chemotherapy, or was it God? Is there any way to know whether God is playing a role or not when we pray?

When your tumor disappeared, in other words, it might simply have been a complete coincidence that you happened to pray. Your prayer may have had zero effect.

How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the cure? One way is to eliminate the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.

That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.

That doesn't seem like a comparable analogy to me. In the case of the amputee, you are asking God to replace a part that was removed and the site of the amputation is already healed. The leg isn't sick or diseased. It is partially or fully missing.

In the case of the cancerous tumor, you are asking God to dissolve or reabsorb something. You are asking God to make something "go away".

The more accurate analogy to the cancerous tumor would be if you asked God to remove your leg.

The more accurate analogy to the amputated leg would be if you asked God to put the cancer back.

Sorry, the analogy being used is totally flawed. It's simply an appeal to emotion and not the basis for a rational argument.




Jersey Girl

If God is all-powerful and all-loving and can heal cancer patients, why couldn't he restore someone's leg?

It's not a flawed analogy at all. It removes that ambiguity. I have a big scar on my arm that I've had since I was a kid. Why can't god remove the scar tissue and replace it with normal tissue?

Why is it that there is NO empirical evidence for God or the effectiveness of prayer? All "answered prayers" can be explained by statistics. If you have 10 people that have a certain form of cancer with a 90% mortality rate. Odds are that one person will survive. If that person prayed to God and then survives, then he/she proclaims that God answered the prayer. But you don't hear about the 9 others that died because God didn't answer their prayers.

The belief in prayer is a superstition. If there was a God and if he really did answer prayers, there would be empirical evidence for it.

[_fubecabr]

The obvious question to ask is: What cured you? Was it the surgery/chemotherapy, or was it God? Is there any way to know whether God is playing a role or not when we pray?

When your tumor disappeared, in other words, it might simply have been a complete coincidence that you happened to pray. Your prayer may have had zero effect.

How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the cure? One way is to eliminate the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.

That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.

In this area I choose to believe in whatever you want to call it, "the Force", "God", fate, destiny. My ex-wife died of cancer though she had no history of cancer in her family, was a non-smoker and very light drinker. She should have lived to at least her 80s judging by her family history. Medical science could not save her. The doctors told her to prepare to die, because there was nothing they could do. Yet, I know of cases worse than hers, and they survived. Why? Does this appeal to logic? By logic she should have survived. She had two or three malignant tumours, yet I know of one man who had over 30 malignant tumors yet survived the cancer. Sure, there may be some medical explanation, but even doctors will admit it's a lottery. They don't know why some survive cancers that should "logically" kill them. It's not all cut-and-dried. Some people have died by falling ten feet, yet others have survived ten story falls. Why? It kind of biases me to fate.

I leave open the possibility of a creator. But there is no personal God.

Your late wife's case can be explained by logic and science. Each person is unique. Perhaps your wife's DNA had defects in it. Or she was exposed to some carcinogen. There's some people that smoke like a chimney and never get lung cancer. Though this is a rare exception rather than the rule. Some people get lung cancer even though they don't smoke or are exposed to 2nd hand smoke.

[_Ray A]

I leave open the possibility of a creator. But there is no personal God.

Your late wife's case can be explained by logic and science. Each person is unique. Perhaps your wife's DNA had defects in it. Or she was exposed to some carcinogen. There's some people that smoke like a chimney and never get lung cancer. Though this is a rare exception rather than the rule. Some people get lung cancer even though they don't smoke or are exposed to 2nd hand smoke.

That is quite possible, and there may be an explanation. And some will think I'm being superstitious by believing in fate. But whatever the case, I do believe in sychronicity and fate. I'm just one of those awfully benighted and superstitious people who thinks that there is a "guiding hand" in our lives, for better or worse, and my intuition and experience play a morbid role in this silly belief. I should really get every thought and impression I have "lab tested". That way I'll know for sure whether it measures up to "empirical science".

[_fubecabr]

I leave open the possibility of a creator. But there is no personal God.

Your late wife's case can be explained by logic and science. Each person is unique. Perhaps your wife's DNA had defects in it. Or she was exposed to some carcinogen. There's some people that smoke like a chimney and never get lung cancer. Though this is a rare exception rather than the rule. Some people get lung cancer even though they don't smoke or are exposed to 2nd hand smoke.

That is quite possible, and there may be an explanation. And some will think I'm being superstitious by believing in fate. But whatever the case, I do believe in sychronicity and fate. I'm just one of those awfully benighted and superstitious people who thinks that there is a "guiding hand" in our lives, for better or worse, and my intuition and experience play a morbid role in this silly belief. I should really get every thought and impression I have "lab tested". That way I'll know for sure whether it measures up to "empirical science".

There may be a guiding hand, but there certainly is no justification for prayer. Prayer seems to have no effect on events that can't be explained by statistics. It's kinda silly anyways to think that a all-knowing god doesn't know our thoughts or that he couldn't make his will manifest to us without it.

What's truly ridiculous and dangerous are people that believe that god helps them find their car keys. But God didn't lift a finger to help 10M jews under Hitler, 50M russians under Stalin, or 5M cambodians under Pol Pot. We are more powerful than God, since we try to do something about the evil in this world.

[_fubecabr]

I don't know if God intervenes or answers prayers, but someone or something does. Nothing empirical here. Just personal experience.

The question, "Why won't God heal amputees?" probes into a fundamental aspect of prayer and exposes it for observation. This aspect of prayer has to do with ambiguity and coincidence.

Let's look at an example. Let's imagine that you visit your doctor one day, and he tells you that you have cancer. Your doctor is optimistic, and he schedules surgery and chemotherapy to treat your disease. Meanwhile, you are terrified. You don't want to die, so you pray to God day and night for a cure. The surgery is successful, and when your doctor examines you again six months later the cancer is gone. You praise God for answering your prayers. You totally believe with all your heart that God has worked a miracle in your life.

The obvious question to ask is: What cured you? Was it the surgery/chemotherapy, or was it God? Is there any way to know whether God is playing a role or not when we pray?

When your tumor disappeared, in other words, it might simply have been a complete coincidence that you happened to pray. Your prayer may have had zero effect.

How can we determine whether it is God or coincidence that worked the cure? One way is to eliminate the ambiguity. In a non-ambiguous situation, there is no potential for coincidence. Because there is no ambiguity, we can actually know whether God is answering the prayer or not.

That is what we are doing when we look at amputees.

That doesn't seem like a comparable analogy to me. In the case of the amputee, you are asking God to replace a part that was removed and the site of the amputation is already healed. The leg isn't sick or diseased. It is partially or fully missing.

In the case of the cancerous tumor, you are asking God to dissolve or reabsorb something. You are asking God to make something "go away".

The more accurate analogy to the cancerous tumor would be if you asked God to remove your leg.

The more accurate analogy to the amputated leg would be if you asked God to put the cancer back.

Sorry, the analogy being used is totally flawed. It's simply an appeal to emotion and not the basis for a rational argument.

Jersey Girl

Here's some more:


* If someone severs their spinal cord in an accident, that person is paralyzed for life. No amount of prayer is going to help.

* If someone is born with a congenital defect like a cleft palate, God will not repair it through prayer. Surgery is the only option.

* A genetic disease like Down Syndrome is the same way -- no amount of prayer is going to fix the problem.

Again, if God can cure cancer, why can't he cure Cerebral palsy, Parkinsons, Atrial Septal defects, Spina bifida, or Alzheimers?