The power of prayer "proved"

Nitcentral's Bulletin Brash Reflections: Religious Musings: Specific Debate Topics: Philosophical Debates: The power of prayer "proved"
By Blue Berry on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 3:14 am:

No "proof" can actually be conclusive since coincidences happen. That is why the quotes.

My "proof", and they admit it might be reflecting any of many other circumstances comes from a BBC report from "Reporting Religion". A small prayer group of police officers in London started praying for a decrease in robberies. Robberies went down. It was only one month and the idea that a third group can affect the actions of the robber and the robbie is absurd. They are the first to admit that it could've been caused by anything.

Oh, before civil libertarians get all worked up, no one is advocating a tax payer funded "prayer police". (Although the Natural Law Party comes close.)

(The National Law party tried something similar with meditators flying around Washington D.C. but did not affect a measurable statistic. I'd say that was absurd, but I'm already banned from PM for that.:) [Oh, in D.C. crime rates went up but they claimed the overall level of violence went down.])


By ScottN on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 9:01 am:

A small prayer group of police officers in London started praying for a decrease in robberies. Robberies went down.

Repeat after me. "Correlelation is not Causation".

N.B. Yes, Blue, I know they cops disclaimed any direct causation.


By Brian Webber on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 12:36 pm:

(Although the Natural Law Party comes close.)

Uh, no, more like strees reducing techniques for the police. And I've been pushing the idea of better benefits for cops so we don't have a bunch of cops taking up side-jobs working for crooks just so they can afford nice food and clothes for their kids. It won't get rid of dirty cops, I'm not naieve or $tup!d, but it'll certainly help.


By Blue Berry on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 6:03 pm:

1% of the population of any city or country practises Transcendental Meditation, or when the square root of 1% practises Yogic Flying in a group, there are dramatic improvements in the whole society

If I pay ScottN to pray (or meditate!) I really doubt it will affect Brian Webber. Let me go further. It will not affect him.

If it there is an effect then the prayer was like chicken soup for a broken leg. ("It can't hurt.":)) As for the praying no one is asking me to pay for the Chicken soup. (Yet.)


By Mark Morgan on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 9:50 pm:

God agreed to these tests? They asked Him?


By Anonenough on Monday, January 19, 2004 - 11:22 pm:

Dont you mean her?


By Blue Berry on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 3:13 am:

They never mentioned if they asked GOD "please prove your existence". They asked, "Dear God, please reduce the number of robberies." (Yes, they would admit it was like asking, "Dear God, please change the laws of physics," or "Dear God please alter your eternal plan.":))

Whether he (convenient pronoun, MJ) did so via a cold snap that made robbers stay indoors or something or if he did not hear because he doesn't exist and random weather patterns affected a random statisic, mortal men may never know.:)


By MikeC on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 8:32 am:

What's the point of this thread? To mock prayer groups? Oh my gosh, we can't have people praying!


By Anonbelieverinreligion on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 9:39 am:

Um I amnot MJ I am myself and I choose the anon-(insert strangeness) for two reason 1: It lets me personalize for the most part my responses 2: It is different slightly than what is usually used and 3: I just dont feel like coming up with some neat screen name or using my real name. I just thought you should know so ya didnt get the wrong person yelled at as I am not a very religious person. I am a secular humanist and proud of it.


By Blue Berry on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 3:02 pm:

MikeC,

Complain about the darkness? You know where the candles are.:)

Anonbeliever,

Anonenough complained about pronoun selection. If 99% of the time a divine entity is referred to as "He" I'm not going to take the time to type out "A divine entity who may or may not exist and is probably beyond our concept of 'gender' if said being actually does exist" every time instead of "He". I know MJ has a female God. I sincerely doubt JWB52Z is upset by pronoun usage, and I don't care if it was Morgan instead.

Anonenough could've complained about what I say, but instead attacked accepted pronoun usage.:)


By Mark Morgan on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 5:17 pm:

Actually, Anon* was making a valid point. How could you test God without knowing which God was the one that exists? How do you, scientifically speaking, know which supernatural entity you've contacted?

Say we all pray for rain and it doesn't rain. How do you tell between these explanations:

1. There is no God.
2. You were praying to the wrong god.
3. God is offended by your test and refuses to be a part of it.
4. Another, more holy group of people was praying for sun and their prayer won out.


Too many variables, and the presence of a supernatural entity completely eliminates the validity of the test.

Mike, I don't know why this board was created. There's nothing wrong with prayer groups, but scientifically testing a supernatural entity is like trying to make water dry.


By Blue Berry on Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 6:18 pm:

Mark,

Which anon* were you speaking of? ("Anonenough or "Anonbeliever"?)

If you point to something in front of a man and a dog the man will look where you are pointing. The dog will stare your finger.

If the dog could talk he'd argue pronoun gender.:)

Oh you forgot the obvious reason it doesn't rain. God (Goddess, the gods, nothingness, everything, the collective unconscious will, whatever:)) said "No." (And maybe formed himself/herself/itself/themselves/the grand nothingness/whatever into a whirlwind.:))


By Anoncoincidencer on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 1:02 am:

Ummm actually both anonenough and anonbeliever are both me. I thought i had made that clear enough. And in the first enough post I was trying to make a joke. I guess thats the way things go sometimes,I made a point without even trying. But looking back at it I have to agree with Mark Morgan and say that applying the scientific method to something as personal and elusive as relgion which does not depend on science but faith is about as futile as bailing the Titanic. no matter what you do peoples are going to be arguing the results. Coincideinces do happen, if it makes a person feel better to pray then let them we let kids have teddy bears and security blankets dont we?


By Blue Berry on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 - 2:49 pm:

My first quibble with you anon* and Morgan is the word "scientific." You and Morgan first used that word. Before you claim anyone was claiming scientific proof notice the sentence explaining why "proof" is in quotation marks.

As for "testing" God, what do you think a bunch of London cops pray about? I doubt they pray to affect the weather in East Timor. If you found a bunch of oil ultrafilterers and we met when I was Catholic (Tuesdays at 10:50am-3:55pm:)) we'd pray to not spill and get oils to reach level 25 on the first try. ("Dear God, please alter your cosmic plan for my convenience" is a fairly standard prayer.)

What God? I don't know. Why can't a praying person say he's got the right one? Whether it is Yaweh, Jehova, Allah, Buddha, Odin, Harvey the Wonder Hamster, or Morgan Freeman, who cares?

Reread MikeC's post. I'm an evil nonbeleiver, but I don't refuse to respect praying persons opinions. (Before anyone claims I posited the effectiveness of prayer as "scientific fact" reread my first post. If you think it was the praying cops who said it was scientific fact, reread my first post.:))

The purpose of this board (Besides upsetting Morgan, Anon*, and MikeC :)) was for post like:

My Aunt prayed to have he non-cancerous lymphoma clear up. God cleared it up.

follow this link to remission rates for non-cancerous lymphoma.

Thanks. I should say it proved it FOR ME.

A forum to state success stories that "prove it to me" seemed warranted. That's why the disclaimer it isn't proof in the first post.


By Machiko Jenkins (Mjenkins) on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 2:59 am:

Clearly, MY prayers have worked.

I have managed to start a string of "Is MJ or is MJ not paying attention?" posts without having to post in the thread first!

How's THAT for proof? :P


By Blue Berry on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 3:13 am:

MJ,

Are you saying that Anon* and I are instruments of the Goddess?:) (I'll take that as a compliment, but I can't speak for Anon*.)


By Anonvirgo on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 11:48 am:

Hey I dont mind being used by goddesses especially if they are fertility or pleasure ones. ;-)


By Blue Berry on Thursday, January 22, 2004 - 5:44 pm:

Llolvitar.:)


By Nove Rockhoomer on Sunday, May 01, 2005 - 8:42 pm:

I'm not sure if this is the right board for this, so it can be moved. In the story about the "runaway bride" who faked her kidnapping because she had doubts about marriage, I noticed this:

"Sure, we were all disappointed, maybe a little embarrassed, but you know what, if you remember all the interviews yesterday we were praying, 'At this point let her be a runaway bride,'" said the Rev. Alan Jones, who was to perform the wedding. "So God was faithful. Jennifer's alive and we're all thankful for that."

She was already a runaway bride from the beginning. The reverend just didn't know it. So can you say God answered the prayer if what you prayed for was already the case?

This is a related thing I wonder about: often, people thank God for sparing them from a tornado, a fire, etc. What about the people that died? If God gets the credit for saving people, shouldn't he get some blame when he doesn't save them? Some would say God has an overall plan and that's why he saves some people and not others. If that's true, why attribute it to prayer? He didn't help you because you prayed, but because it furthered his plan. He would have done it anyway. Or do you think God rearranged his perfect plan for the world just to help you out?


By TomM, RM Moderator (Tom_M) on Sunday, May 01, 2005 - 10:34 pm:

Nove-

I moved the question to this thread so you could see what others have written here on similar questions.

The writer C S Lewis considered the question as well. In an essay entitled "Work and Prayer," included in his collection God in the Dock, he wrote:

The case against prayer (I mean the 'low' or old-fashioned kind) is this. The thing you ask for is either good - for you and for the world in general- or else it is not. If it is, then a good and wise God will do it anyway. If it is not, then He won't. In neither case can your prayer make any difference. But if this argument is sound, surely it is an argument not only against praying, but against doing anything whatever?

In every action, just as in every prayer, you are trying to bring about a certain result; and this result must be good or bad. Why, then, do we not argue as the opponents of prayer argue, and say that if the intended result is good God will bring it to pass without your interference, and that if it is bad He will prevent it happening whatever you do? Why wash your hands? If God intends them to be clean, they'll come clean without your washing them. If He doesn't, they'll remain dirty (as Lady Macbeth found) however much soap you use. Why ask for the salt? Why put on your boots? Why do anything?

We know that we can act and that our actions produce results. Everyone who believes in God must therefore admit (quite apart from the question of prayer) that God has not chosen to write the whole of history with His own hand. Most of the events that go on in the universe are indeed out of our control, but not all. It is like a play in which the scene and the general outline of the story is fixed by the author, but certain minor details are left for the actors to improvise.

It may be a mystery why He should have allowed us to cause real events at all; but it is no odder that He should allow us to cause them by praying than by any other method.

........

Prayers are not always - in the crude, factual sense of the word - 'granted'. This is not because prayer is a weaker kind of causality, but because it is a stronger kind. When it 'works' at all it works unlimited by space and time. That is why God has retained a discretionary power of granting or refusing it; except on that condition prayer would destroy us. It is not unreasonable for a headmaster to say, 'Such and such things you may do according to the fixed rules of this school. But such and such other things are too dangerous to be left to general rules. If you want to do them you must come and make a request and talk over the whole matter with me in my study. And then-we'll see.'


By Ryan Whitney on Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - 3:26 pm:

No "proof" can actually be conclusive since coincidences happen. That is why the quotes.

My "proof", and they admit it might be reflecting any of many other circumstances comes from a BBC report from "Reporting Religion". A small prayer group of police officers in London started praying for a decrease in robberies. Robberies went down. It was only one month and the idea that a third group can affect the actions of the robber and the robbie is absurd. They are the first to admit that it could've been caused by anything.


In related news, a large group of Bostonians prayed to God last February that the New England Patriots would defeat the Philadelphia Eagles in the Super Bowl. And it happened! Further proof that The Almighty exists! Not enough proof? We'll, every night, I say the following prayer, "Dear Lord, I pray that you allow Earth another day without being struck by a 'Global Killer' asteroid. Amen." And my prayer has been answered for 7,000 consecutive days! That's no coincidence! J


By Jeff Winters (Jeff1980) on Wednesday, December 06, 2023 - 10:20 am:

Early in November 2023
a Christian woman on Fox News, Channel 44 in New York City said
"The Power of Prayer is Real"


By ScottN (Scottn) on Wednesday, December 06, 2023 - 12:22 pm:

That’s nice, what evidence does she have?


By Rodney Hrvatin (Rhrvatin) on Wednesday, December 06, 2023 - 4:42 pm:

Oh Scott- you should know better than to ask Jeff for that annoying thing called “evidence “……


By Tim McCree (Tim_m) on Thursday, December 07, 2023 - 5:10 am:

So Winters, you just believe because some random woman says it, without one shred of evidence to back up her claim.

If she had said that the Earth was flat, would you also have believed?


Add a Message


This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Username:  
Password: