A case for religion, and against AA.

[ThinClient]

If you aren't sure you understand my thinking then you have no basis for claiming that a mistake was made. In other words, you're just making it up. You're bearing false witness.

Interpretation at work in PtJ's, mind, you see :awe:

 

[dphantom]

Oh, so god answers prayers, but only when he wants to or when it suits him?

So he is capricious and malevolent?

Okay.

No, God is not. He answers prayers as He sees appropriate, not necessarily how you would want them to be answered.

 

[Retro Rob]

Oh, so god answers prayers, but only when he wants to or when it suits him?

So he is capricious and malevolent?

Okay.

How can anything "suit" God. He's God.

And secondly, he's the one being petitioned so why shouldn't he have the option?

You're a "former pastor", so why should God answer every prayer someone offers?

 

[ThinClient]

No, God is not. He answers prayers as He sees appropriate, not necessarily how you would want them to be answered.

Are you sure about that? God's plan is already decided, right, and will come to pass no matter what, right? So you pray for something that's part of god's plan and it comes to pass but not because you prayed for it, so why pray? So you pray for something that's not part of god's plan and it doesn't come to fruition even though you prayed for it, so why pray?

Prayer is one of the biggest jokes in religion.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

Oh, so god answers prayers, but only when he wants to or when it suits him?

So he is capricious and malevolent?

Okay.

What are you rambling about? Show the connection.

 

[ThinClient]

How can anything "suit" God. He's God.

And secondly, he's the one being petitioned so why shouldn't he have the option?

You're a "former pastor", so why should God answer every prayer someone offers?

The Bible says that any two christians praying in his name will be answered. Get two religiotards together and pray all you want with no effect.

Let's use cancer and death as an example. Someone's in a hospital bed, dying of cancer, buncha their friends are standing around praying. Without those friends praying, the fellow's two options are to beat the cancer or die from it. With those friends praying, the fellow's two options are to beat the cancer or die from it.

Christians use this intellectual dishonesty no matter how the situation unfolds. If the guy's body is able to overcome the cancer, IT'S A MIRACLE AND GOD HEARD OUR PRAYERS BECAUSE HE IS NO LONGER SUFFERING! If the guy's body fails and he dies, IT'S A MIRACLE AND GOD HEARD OUR PRAYERS BECAUSE HE IS NO LONGER SUFFERING!

Interpretation is a bitch and it only ever fools the weak-minded.

 

[ThinClient]

What are you rambling about? Show the connection.

What are YOU rambling about? Show evidence that the Bible is the infallible word of god, that Christ was divine, that god exists, that you have a soul, that heaven and hell exist, that angels exist, that demons exist, and all that other bullshit you claim is true from that rancid book.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

Are you sure about that? God's plan is already decided, right, and will come to pass no matter what, right? So you pray for something that's part of god's plan and it comes to pass but not because you prayed for it, so why pray? So you pray for something that's not part of god's plan and it doesn't come to fruition even though you prayed for it, so why pray?

Prayer is one of the biggest jokes in religion.

God tells Christians to pray so we pray. What God wants God gets. God is in charge. That's known as the doctrine of providence.

Prayer is part of God's plan. He uses it as a means.

 

[Exophase]

The response to prayer must be in some kind of state of superposition. Try to observe it and it collapses to nothing. Like a dream that you completely forget once you try to remember it.

There is simply no statistically relevant report of prayer working. That translates more into "prayer doesn't work" than "prayer may or may not work." Could God be so deliberately elusive as to ignore prayer when he knows he'll be watched for it later? Does God want us to be convinced that he isn't actually doing anything? I could actually fathom a God that would prefer that, but not the Biblical God who wants us to acknowledge and love him.

 

[ThinClient]

God tells Christians to pray so we pray. What God wants God gets. God is in charge. That's known as the doctrine of providence.

Prayer is part of God's plan. He uses it as a means.

Someone wrote some bullshit full of contradictions and logical fallacies (like the entire concept of prayer) and you believe it to be true.

It's sad, really.

 

[ThinClient]

The response to prayer must be in some kind of state of superposition. Try to observe it and it collapses to nothing. Like a dream that you completely forget once you try to remember it.

There is simply no statistically relevant report of prayer working. That translates more into "prayer doesn't work" than "prayer may or may not work." Could God be so deliberately elusive as to ignore prayer when he knows he'll be watched for it later? Does God want us to be convinced that he isn't actually doing anything? I could actually fathom a God that would prefer that, but not the Biblical God who wants us to acknowledge and love him.

:bowdown:

 

[soulcougher73]

Well, God isn't obligated to answer all prayers no more than you're obligated to fulfill every request made of you, and her father is the blame for her suffering, not God not answering prayers.

Prayers are answered in various ways, not through acts of "deliverance" all of the time. Sometimes you're given strength to deal with situations, other times you're delivered. It up to God how he answers prayers, not how you think they should be answered.

But if god is all knowing and powerful than he already knew before these people even existed that they would be held in a basement and tortured etc. So is he is all knowing then we have no free will and he has predetermined that this girl be punished this way. He sounds like an ass..oh wait..he knew id think he was an ass already. He is making me type this..grr.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

What are YOU rambling about? Show evidence that the Bible is the infallible word of god, that Christ was divine, that god exists, that you have a soul, that heaven and hell exist, that angels exist, that demons exist, and all that other bullshit you claim is true from that rancid book.

God compels people to believe in Him. He also shows mercy on whom he pleases.

God compels me to Jesus. In addition, I trust in the authority of the apostles. I believe and trust in their testimony of events regarding Jesus.


The Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The authors wrote about their experiences with God.

 

[Retro Rob]

The Bible says that any two christians praying in his name will be answered. Get two religiotards together and pray all you want with no effect.

Let's use cancer and death as an example. Someone's in a hospital bed, dying of cancer, buncha their friends are standing around praying. Without those friends praying, the fellow's two options are to beat the cancer or die from it. With those friends praying, the fellow's two options are to beat the cancer or die from it.

Christians use this intellectual dishonesty no matter how the situation unfolds. If the guy's body is able to overcome the cancer, IT'S A MIRACLE AND GOD HEARD OUR PRAYERS BECAUSE HE IS NO LONGER SUFFERING! If the guy's body fails and he dies, IT'S A MIRACLE AND GOD HEARD OUR PRAYERS BECAUSE HE IS NO LONGER SUFFERING!

Interpretation is a bitch and it only ever fools the weak-minded.

Ok, so why should God answers all prayers? Why?

Paul asked God to remove a "thorn in his flesh", and God said no because forgiveness was sufficient enough. We're no better than he was, so God is sole arbiter of whether or not prayers are answered.

Regardless of what you say, all prayers will not be answered. Likely, if someone was cured of cancer, he was already undergoing treatment, so that's why he was cured. If he died, then he either wasn't taking treatment, or it failed.

 

[ThinClient]

I'll let God do the convincing.

I trust in the authority of the apostles and trust their testimony of events regarding Jesus.

He's so convincing that only the weak-minded are able to believe in someone who has zero evidence that he exists, let alone any evidence that he's responsible for literally anything.

 

[ThinClient]

Ok, so why should God answers all prayers? Why?

Paul asked God to remove a "thorn in his flesh", and God said no because forgiveness was sufficient enough. We're no better than he was, so God is sole arbiter of whether or not prayers are answered.

Regardless of what you say, all prayers will not be answered. Likely, if someone was cured of cancer, he was already undergoing treatment, so that's why he was cured. If he died, then he either wasn't taking treatment, or it failed.

Of course all prayers will not be answered because praying is pointless. Whether you pray or not, god's will should occur, right? If it's god's will that you suffer, because he is a malevolent and capricious god, then you'll suffer whether you pray or not. If it's god's will that you don't suffer, you won't, whether you pray or not.

So, tell me, what the fuck is the point of prayer?

 

[crashtestdummy]

We interpret many works to gain an understanding of what the author was trying to get at.

In the various books of the Bible, Jesus and others use allegory or parables to describe lessons. Other authors often do the same in their written works. George Orwell's Animal Farm is an allegory for example.

You're totally right. The difference is that we don't call what George Orwell writes the word of God, nor do we proclaim it infallible. Furthermore, there is no hard line of demarcation in the Bible between what is considered parable and what is considered literal. What is chosen as literal, then, seems to be selected by the reader and their own personal biases.

On a slightly separate topic, I think it's worthwhile to separate a notion of Truth (with a capital T) from science. It will always be possible to superimpose a supernatural model on whatever you are able to observe. I don't think even the most ardent atheists in this forum would object to that suggestion.

Whether that assertion that God can exist is a useful point of discussion then becomes the primary question. There are an infinite number of things that might be true that I have no way of confirming. God could be wonderful and benevolent. There could be a cabal of Gods that created life just so they would have something to torment. There could be no God at all. To differentiate between these equally viable models, I would need to have a falsifiable experiment that would have different outcomes for each of those possibilities outlined above. Without such an experiment, there is no effective difference between them and the notion of God is not a useful one for me. Furthermore, an inability to measurably distinguish between the existence and nonexistence of something, under any other circumstances, would lead a person to assume non-existence. Again, this would not be a proclamation of absolute Truth, but rather a practical consideration that life is complicated enough without worrying about things that are inherently unverifiable.

Which brings me to:

Well, God isn't obligated to answer all prayers no more than you're obligated to fulfill every request made of you, and her father is the blame for her suffering, not God not answering prayers.

Prayers are answered in various ways, not through acts of "deliverance" all of the time. Sometimes you're given strength to deal with situations, other times you're delivered. It up to God how he answers prayers, not how you think they should be answered.

If you want to convince me that prayer is worthwhile, though, there needs to be some persistently measurable metric. Perhaps a double-blind trial where one group of patients have people in another room praying for their recovery, and another has a room of people praying for donuts? Such an experiment would be relatively easy to set up, and should provide easily discernible results.

The problem, when you suggest that prayers are "answered in many ways" is that it then provides me no tangible benefit to prayer. If I am unable to actually demonstrate that it does me any good, then why bother with it? Saying that you "just know" that you are being helped reeks of confirmation bias.

 

[dphantom]

But if god is all knowing and powerful than he already knew before these people even existed that they would be held in a basement and tortured etc. So is he is all knowing then we have no free will and he has predetermined that this girl be punished this way. He sounds like an ass..oh wait..he knew id think he was an ass already. He is making me type this..grr.

No, that is your free will acting outside of God's plan for you. God has a plan for everyone. Not all of us choose to follow His plan.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

But if god is all knowing and powerful than he already knew before these people even existed that they would be held in a basement and tortured etc. So is he is all knowing then we have no free will and he has predetermined that this girl be punished this way. He sounds like an ass..oh wait..he knew id think he was an ass already. He is making me type this..grr.

He didn't make the man do evil. Learn more about free will:


http://www.ligonier.org/learn/serie...WatchShareFree&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ET

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

You're definitely wrong.

This is your completely baseless assertion about reasoning you admitted you not understand.

I just want to see how you think stuff through.

And I want you to defend your claim that there was a mistake, or admit you don't know that there was one.

 

[ThinClient]

No, that is your free will acting outside of God's plan for you. God has a plan for everyone. Not all of us choose to follow His plan.

What plan? How do you know that there's a plan when you can't even confirm that god exists in the first place? This is you buying into the bullshit that was blatantly fabricated by those who wrote the books of the bible.

 

[ThinClient]

Naw he allows it. He didn't make the man do evil.

Actually, he did. He created man with a sinful nature. He created man without the ability to be pure or perfect. Man cannot avoid sinning. God created man with an uncontrollable urge to sin.

We have no control over it. We were created to be sinners.

Right?

 

[Pray To Jesus]

He's so convincing that only the weak-minded are able to believe in someone who has zero evidence that he exists, let alone any evidence that he's responsible for literally anything.

You have no basis to make your claims. Your fictional claims won't get you anywhere because I know you got nothing to support it. You do it a lot too.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

What plan? How do you know that there's a plan when you can't even confirm that god exists in the first place? This is you buying into the bullshit that was blatantly fabricated by those who wrote the books of the bible.

You can't prove anything you say. Geez man stop making stuff up. It gets old fast. It's boring to see fictional truth claims that are pretty much similar to saying "all atheists believe in God."

 

[Retro Rob]

You're totally right. The difference is that we don't call what George Orwell writes the word of God, nor do we proclaim it infallible. Furthermore, there is no hard line of demarcation in the Bible between what is considered parable and what is considered literal. What is chosen as literal, then, seems to be selected by the reader and their own personal biases.

On a slightly separate topic, I think it's worthwhile to separate a notion of Truth (with a capital T) from science. It will always be possible to superimpose a supernatural model on whatever you are able to observe. I don't think even the most ardent atheists in this forum would object to that suggestion.

Whether that assertion that God can exist is a useful point of discussion then becomes the primary question. There are an infinite number of things that might be true that I have no way of confirming. God could be wonderful and benevolent. There could be a cabal of Gods that created life just so they would have something to torment. There could be no God at all. To differentiate between these equally viable models, I would need to have a falsifiable experiment that would have different outcomes for each of those possibilities outlined above. Without such an experiment, there is no effective difference between them and the notion of God is not a useful one for me. Furthermore, an inability to measurably distinguish between the existence and nonexistence of something, under any other circumstances, would lead a person to assume non-existence. Again, this would not be a proclamation of absolute Truth, but rather a practical consideration that life is complicated enough without worrying about things that are inherently unverifiable.

Which brings me to:



If you want to convince me that prayer is worthwhile, though, there needs to be some persistently measurable metric. Perhaps a double-blind trial where one group of patients have people in another room praying for their recovery, and another has a room of people praying for donuts? Such an experiment would be relatively easy to set up, and should provide easily discernible results.

The problem, when you suggest that prayers are "answered in many ways" is that it then provides me no tangible benefit to prayer. If I am unable to actually demonstrate that it does me any good, then why bother with it? Saying that you "just know" that you are being helped reeks of confirmation bias.

Firstly, I don't want to convince you prayer works (as I cannot), but you firstly have to believe God exists and that he answers prayers.

If you're an atheist, and deep down deny the power of prayer, then you have no point on praying as it won't be sincere. The Bible points to two prerequisites: you must believe God exists and that he answers. That's basically it.

Prayer has done me plenty good. I've gotten jobs, money to pay my rent when I was short....all in part due to praying for it.

...but you'll likely posit that those were coming anyway, so you've removed the measurable metric. Then, how can you know that? You see?

So then it becomes pointless in even saying something about it. So believe what you want, and I will believe what I have evidence in support of.