I found this cartoon on reddit.com today and it got me thinking about why Christians bother to pray for God to heal the sick and dying. Due to the fact that I regularly surf atheist leaning sites, I see lots of ridicule for the practice - one of the best can be found at: Compare prayer to a lucky horseshoe and, of course, I have never been able to figure out why God hates amputees: Why won't God heal amputees?What I am really interested to know is why Christians bother with an exercise which is aimless in both practice and theory. I guess if they would just admit it is a Hail Mary pass with an endzone devoid of receivers, I would be o.k. with that. But just think about it. Every year, millions of people get sick - some recover and some don't. Of course, we all eventually die. If illness and death are "evil" (and that point can be debated), then the Bible tells us that this evil was created by God: Isaiah 45:7.
So I am hoping that any visitors to this site who believe in the healing power of prayer can explain a few things for me:
1. Why does God heal some and not others?
2. If prayer has the power to heal, why has there never been a double blind clinical study to show that patients who are prayed for (and are unaware of that fact) have even a microscopically better chance of recovery? Doesn't the absence of such a clinical result stand as irrefutable proof that prayer is sterile for anything other than possibly a placebo effect in those who are told they are being prayed for?
3. If a sick person has led a Christ-like life, shouldn't you be praying that they check out sooner rather than later?
4. What does God have against amputees? Surely he has the power to regenerate a few lousy limbs.
36 comments:
Um, I take it you have never experienced what people call "faith". This is not possible to put into words, therefore, you lose in trying to grasp it with your head.
If you knew what it meant to have some inner sense of connection to something larger than yourself and what that was like, you would understand why out of that connection can come a sense of being able and desiring to call forth a better scenario for a fellow human. We are active agents of love,which is God and the world has meaning.
Keep searching.
Downstream, I can understand faith as an explanation (though one I don't agree with) for belief in God, the Bible, etc. What I don't understand is why you would refer to that notion in relation to my question about the supposed power of prayer to heal. Let me use an example: assume that there is an ancient book called "The Holy Bauble" which suggests that if you pray to an orbiting teapot, natural disasters can be alleviated. Now, natural disasters are something that we have all come to take for granted. I am sure that you will agree that praying to a celestial teapot will not avert such disasters. I am also sure that you will agree that this fact could be established with scientific precision. How is relying on the Bible to believe in the healing power of prayer any different than relying on the Bauble to believe that the teapot can alleviate natural disasters. I just don't get it.
Athiest Missionary, I made the same arguement to Christian couselor many years ago when I was in college. Faith, as understood by Downstream is not merely an explanation, it is a requirement. And it is different than what you presume to be blind faith. Prayer alters the conscious state of the person praying. For a more in depth examination I will refer you to a commentary on the work of Gurdjieff. The relevant section begins on page 155, here is the link:
http://books.google.com/books?id=Rm2O5GYNXvMC&pg=result#PPA155,M1
I am very grateful to the reader on reddit who brought the following article to my attention:
http://www.g33k.infinitesecond.net/weblog/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/prayer_and_healing.pdf
Prayer has been proven to be sterile. I can set up any controlled experiment you like. Tonight. We can have every single person on the planet pray for whatever you like and it won't have any effect on the desired outcome. So my question remains: why do Christians bother with prayer for the sick and dying? Regardless of whether God exists and, if so, assuming he hears you, for some reason he does not bother answering prayers (which, I must admit, makes sense - why should those who ask be preferred over equally worthy ones who don't).
I would have more respect for those who think like Downstream if the reply to your questions was simply:
there is no proof that prayer results in healing; but some pray simply for strength and because it gives them hope, period.
The fact that the more popular response is to actually argue that prayer heals and cures is distressing.
Prayer is the means through which we appeal to God, so it in and of itself has no power nor does it heal anyone. God is the one who has the power and does the healing. The "altered state of consciousness" is simply a psychological attempt to explain prayer.
As far as having a controlled experiment to "test" prayer, the idea is silly given the transcendental nature of God. He is not subject to physical laws and therefore cannot be experimented upon. Of course, when you're living in the naturalist's box, you can't think outside of it--so such a statement doesn't surprise me.
Christians pray to God for healing because He has revealed Himself to be compassionate, loving and merciful. Medicine and medical science has its limits (I believe you'll admit that), however God is the God of all flesh and nothing is beyond His power. If He heals us, we praise Him. If He doesn't we know that He has a higher purpose for our sickness and suffering that we cannot now see, but one day will. We know Him to be good and we trust Him.
Tirian, how can you say that the Christian god is compassionate or loving? Surely under those circumstances there would be no sickness, deaths or otherwise in the world. What possible higher purpose could their be for letting a person (Hitler for example) kill millions?
In the bible it has shown that your god is a ruthless, self-centered, egotistical, megalomaniac who wants us to praise him. He gives us the freedom to choose whichever belief (or lack of) that we want, and then punishes us by forcing us to hell for eternity? It doesn't honestly make sense. Have you even read the bible? It's disgusting, full of racism, incest, homophobia, pointless murder and genocide.
Nathan,
Sickness and suffering came into the world because man rebelled against God. You and I live in a fallen world. Why would you expect that there would be no sickness or death? Did you think this was heaven?
I don't know what higher purpose God had in allowing such a person as Hitler to do what he did. I don't sit in God's chair, so I can't see from there. Hitler, and those like him, are certainly paying for it now, and will for eternity. That isn't the case in an atheistic worldview, however. God doesn't *make* people sin. I think your conception of God is way too small.
I don't know where you got your conception of God from, but it certainly wasn't the Bible. I would recommend reading it more closely and carefully, don't get the synopsis from atheist web sites.
God doesn't "force" anyone into hell. In a sense, no one goes there that doesn't want to.
Is incest a commandment in the Bible? Has God commanded racism (that's funny, since Christ died for sinners in every tribe, tongue, and nation), do you make the charge of homophobia because homosexuality is a sin againt God's created order and purpose for man and woman? Where is there *pointless murder* in the Bible? Remember, murder is taking personal vengeance againt another man or woman. If you're going to make such claims, please back them up with Scripture in context.
Take care,
"God doesn't "force" anyone into hell. In a sense, no one goes there that doesn't want to."
This is such bullshit. Christians just make such stupid assertions to get their god off the hook. No human being wants to suffer eternally. Just because a person doesn't believe that they are basically shit and deserve to burn (which is the message of xianity) doesn't mean they want to go to hell.
Try again.
Don't you see the problem, Tirian, in cherry picking good vs. evil for a god? You claim all compassion and loving for your god, but deny any responsibility from him/her/it for Hitler and the immense amount of suffering existent in the world. So your god is either a)not all powerful or b)not all benevolent. If he can't rid the world of Hitlers then he isn't all powerful, and if he can but won't, then he isn't all good. Simple as that. And if you must admit that he/she/it isn't all powerful or all good, then, really, what's the point? And if this suffering exists for some redemptive purpose, then how sick is that shit? How fair is it to little Enduku with the distended belly in Botswana that he wasn't raised in a christian household? To view the suffering of the world through a religious lens is both immature and untenable. If prayer spurs people to action, then maybe it does have some purpose, but it isn't any more effective than simply thinking and educating yourself about the world.
Andre,
You're quite mistaken, I don't have to get God off the hook. I would recommend looking up "Compatibilism" in a basic theology text book.
I never asserted unbelievers were excrement, nor did I imply it. That's nonsense. All people are made in the image of God. I engage in evangelism because I love unbelievers.
If someone knows that God commands repentence from sin, and that He has sent His Son to die on the cross for sinners, and yet they reject that offer--they are going to a place of their own choosing. Heaven is a place where God is praised and worshipped by those that love Him. Do you think you would like to go there (at least at this point in your life)? No? Then you are going where you want to, in a sense. I never said anyone wants to suffer in hell.
I would encourage you to think things through a little more carefully before expressing such indignation about matters you do not properly understand, nor fairly represent.
Take care,
Nick,
I don't cherry pick, please also see "Compatibilism" in a theological dictionary. The standard atheist objection (God is either not all powerful, or not all benevolent) has been refuted many times. Do a search over at www.triablogue.com, if you're interested.
You may *think* suffering and sickness are pointless, but you are a finite creature who cannot see all things (none of us can), nor do you know the end from the beginning (only God does). There is no gratuitous evil in the world. If you think there is you would have to mount your case, which is a problem for you because in an atheist universe, there is no evil.
Take care,
Sorry, the correct web site address per above is www.triablogue.blogspot.com, or you can try apologetics.com as well...
Tirian, once again, I want you to know that I appreciate your attempts to evangelize us heathens.
Perhaps you can help me with something that I haven't been able to figure out. If I am interpreting the Bible correctly (and let me know if I'm not), from the moment we were all born, we are damned with original sin because, no matter how good a life we lead, our actions will be insufficient to lead to our salvation. Simply put, the "saintly atheist" must go to hell. Similarly, if someone never learns about Jesus, they are damned. Some Christians (but not fundamentalists) believe in the concept of invincible ignorance by relying on John 9, line 41 where Jesus said, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains." A fundamentalist would defend missionary work by arguing that it is the only way to save the souls of the ignorant. Why anyone who believes in the doctrine of invincible ignorance would want to defeat a valid defence to the curse of eternal damnation is beyond me. Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain.
AM,
Due to the fall, we are born with an innate tendency toward evil. In other words, human nature is corrupt. That doesn't mean we never do good things, never show compassion, etc. but our chief motivation is self-centered. We do nothing out of a motive to glorify God. We cannot *achieve* salvation by doing good things, salvation is not several rungs up on the ladder and if we just try hard enough we can climb there. That would summarize the rest of the world's religions, but not Christianity. Salvation is something God has freely bestowed as a gift to all those who come to Him in faith through His Son.
Christ said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father but through Me" Jn. 14:6 So, as to your other questions, in light of what Christ said, you tell me about the "saintly atheist" and the hypothetical person who never heard about Jesus. The so-called doctrine of invincible ignorance is nonsense. The only way you could even make that case is to use that one verse out of context from the rest of Scripture, which is to twist it's meaning to appease one's own sensibilities...
Tirian-
How do you define evil? Let's clarify our terms here, and please refrain from supernatural deities in your definition.
Tirian, thank-you for confirming that the "doctrine of invincible ignorance is nonsense". I agree that the Bible does not provide any support for that view. So the bush pygmy who is ignorant of the path to salvation goes to hell - correct?
Nick,
I cannot define evil without reference to God. You see, you cannot define evil otherwise because God is the very standard and definition of all that is good. Without Him, evil makes no sense. Think about it.
The atheist attempt to define evil as what brings unhappiness to the most amount of people, is as weak as a glass of beer mixed with a glass of water...
AM,
The doctrine you refer to would contradict the whole tenor of the Bible in general, and the Great Commission in Matthew 28 in particular.
You already know the answer to your question, correct?
Tirian, I have to commend you for not running away from the logical implications of what your Good Book suggests. I know the answer to my question (from the perspective of a literal reading of the Bible) but the problem is that many of your brethren shy away from the conclusion that the ignorant are damned. Doesn't this bother you in the least? I must admit that I find the conclusion ludicrously egocentric (I suppose your God is the ultimate egoist), intellectually offensive and proof positive that your God is a masochist.
AM,
Many of my brethren shy away from such implications because of the influence that the world has upon them. Also, there are many Christians who have simply not studied their Bibles thoroughly enough with any level of critical analysis. They haven't wrestled with the tough questions.
I'm not happy about anyone, ignorant or otherwise, being damned. That is why the Lord has commissioned world evangelism. However, the consequences of ignorance do not change the facts about the only way to be made right with God. If there was another way to be made right with Him, Christ would not have had to die.
AM Said:
"I must admit that I find the conclusion ludicrously egocentric (I suppose your God is the ultimate egoist)"
How could anything about God be egocentric? You are thinking in human terms.
AM, You're a much more resilient person than I, thank you for fighting the good fight.
I'm sorry to be blunt, but they need therapy, or some kind of deprogramming. Trying to convince them that they possess a delusion is like trying to talk someone out of schizophrenia.
I was trapped in it until several years ago, and the only thing that got me out was just 'stepping back' mentally to see it for what it is.
All we can do is pray for them ;)
Steven, thanks for dropping by and the kind words. I don't need to be resilient - I often feel like I'm shooting fish in a barrel. I still wonder what God has against amputees ....!
Steven,
You have indeed "stepped back" mentally if you now embrace a worldview that cannot resolve it's own internal conflicts.
Trying to convince an atheist that he cannot live according to his own worldview, that he cannot even account for non-physical entities (like love, justice, logic, morality, etc.) is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Delusion indeed!
Tirian, just so I am clear: are you saying that your non-physical entities cannot exist in isolation from the scripture? Please elaborate so that I can formulate an informed response. I know that your opinion is that athiests have nothing on which to base anything so please don't repeat that. telling me that I can't explain something doesn't allow me to understand your explanation. Thanks.
AM,
I'm saying non-physical entities cannot be accounted for in a materialist, atheist universe. All that exists is matter in motion, things which can be explained by natural means, empirically observed. You deny the supernatural, you deny that anything exists outside of what we can see and touch. That is part of your reason for not believing in God, He transcends nature.
Some atheists will "say" they would believe in the supernatural, if they could just explain it by natural means (which of course, they can't).
Regardless of what you say you *believe* about non-physical entities you still live as if there is love, justice, morality, human rights (why should humans have rights?), human dignity, laws of logic, etc...
AM, still thinking about your answer?
Tirian, non-physical entities (including love, justice, logic and morality) are all concepts that flow out of man's capacity to reason and the evolution of his brain. The non-physical entity that I find most interesting, however, is mathematics which many would argue is inseparable from logic. If all of humanity were to vanish tomorrow (or, perhaps more realistically, within the next couple of centuries due to nuclear proliferation and/or environmental catastrophies), mathematical concepts would still "exist". It might take eons for another species to evolve (either here or elsewhere in the universe) to be able to apply mathematical concepts but they certainly would not disappear. I'm not so sure whether the same can be said of your other non-physical entities.
The more I engage in this debate, the more I am convinced that the effluxion of time will eventually spell the demise of Christianity as you and I know it, unless humanity becomes extinct first. Because you presumably believe in the second coming, you don't have to worry about that. However, I regret to inform you that you are in for a long wait. In the meantime, if you find comfort using your Bible as a moral compass, I don't have a problem with that as long as you and your brethren don't attempt to impose your views on me or the society I live in. I remain of the view that you are "living a lie" but it is your choice how to live your life as long as you don't unduly interfere with the lives of others.
AM, thanks, I think that is really big of you to allow such ignorant peons to co-exist in this meaningless life with you. I appreciate it.
So, just to be sure I understand you, such non-physical entities as love, justice, etc. don't *really* exist--they are just the products of our evolved brains, correct?
Tirian, I could not respond any better than Rabhimself just did in the thread following the post at: http://www.atheistmissionary.com/2009/03/why-wont-christians-and-jews-admit.html
I am particularly looking forward to your answer to his question: Could you give me a brief run down as to why, despite the vast majority of the world population not being christians, your religion, your bible and your god are right and all others are wrong?
As far as me allowing "ignorant peons to co-exist in this meangless life" with me, I would respond as follows:
1. Ignorance is a relative term. I am probably smarter than the majority of the general population (in IQ terms) but, compared to intellectuals like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens or Ed Witten, I am dumb as a post. As I have stated in the past, I consider it to be one of my life's greatest tragedies that I do not have time to learn more and comprehend complex abstracts such as quantum mechanics and superstring theory.
2. Life has as much, or as little, meaning as a person gives it. I do not require the existence of an external moral compass or supernatural deity to give my life meaning. Apparently, you do.
Finally, I repeat that I do not believe that what you refer to as non-physical entities such as love, justice and morality exist outside the evolved brains that perceive those entities. I do believe that mathematics exists in a realm that does not require our perception (in fact, I am quite certain of that fact). I do not require the presupposition of a higher being or supernatural power to explain any of this. It was well be that there are realities, dimensions and concepts which are simply beyond our comprehension (i.e. to use my favorite analogy, maybe it would be like trying to explain NFL rules to an ant). If you want to call what you don't understand "God", that is your right. I just don't see how it furthers the inquiry. I certainly don't see how any of this requires a belief in your Judeo-Christian God and the mythology that belief system is grounded on.
AM, don't sell yourself short. I think you're a lot smarter than Hitchens, Dawkins, or Ed Witten...
I have responded to Rabhimself's question on the other thread you referenced above.
Believe in God, and have faith. My grandfather had a brain tumer that they said would kill him, my family prayed so much for him, the next time he went to the doctor he was fine, you can argue with those results. If you dont believe then thats not my problem but you will see in due time, God is real and when your judgement day comes and you are before Him i hope you remember all this, i hope you get saved.
p.s. if you dont have fun in hell:)
hutchingswilliam, it's nice to hear that God healed Grandpa. I guess God doesn't care as much about those 10,000,000 children under the age of 5 who die each year due to preventable causes related to poverty. It's all part of God's plan .....
if 'preventable causes' are responsible for all those deaths and as you say God is not----then according to your pure mathematical eternal logic the responsible party has to be the ones that could have prevented but choose not to which i would assume, since you did not elaborate, are human beings----which of course according to your view must not have evolved enough yet to be filled with any sense of moral obligation or love or compassion or whatever selflessness would be necessary to participate in the 'preventing' as you referred to the cause as being. To be or not to be really then is the question-----and of course as our or any language so accurately states-----we are creatures which dare i say very forcefully implies a Creator----daaaaa Sorry---did not mean to denigrate the oblivious brilliance of so many believers in non god. And of course to believe as you all are aware means that you no longer are open to thinking about whatever it is that you believe in----isn't that sweet----what a perfect caged, trance reality prison -----headed for the sizzle palace i quess unless some being breaks those gates down---hopefully a few will escape when that happens----door to your soul has only half a knob and it exists only on your side of the shaded realm.
jcigan, one of the big misunderstanding about atheist is that they believe these things. its not that we believe these things, its that we dont believe those things. maybe you assume that not believing in god automatically means you believe he doest but it isnt a belief at all its a poitn of view. you might not be able to imagine what not believing in something is because youve never done it and probably never will. i also love the passive aggresive tone to youre message i suppose thats the understanding and compassion youre god teaches you coming through, and if you think im beign passive aggresive im not, im only pointing out facts about things wrote. youre telling me im gonna burn in hell and are enjoying the idea, real touching
Post a Comment