tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4307187040250193857.post340641013150656107..comments2024-03-20T03:33:22.357-07:00Comments on Skeptophilia: A question about intercessory prayerGordon Bonnethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06003472005971594466noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4307187040250193857.post-13704613328279969442013-02-20T15:23:04.556-08:002013-02-20T15:23:04.556-08:00One solution to the "failed tests problem&quo...One solution to the "failed tests problem" is... illusions, Matrix-style. God <i>did</i> cure more (or even all) of the test group. He just messed with the numbers so that anyone looking for results wouldn't see them.<br /><br />Of course, this makes him problematically deceitful,but almost any "hidden God" has to be; similar problems arise from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphalos_hypothesis" rel="nofollow">Omphalos hypothesis</a> whereby God created the universe 6000 years ago, including signs of age and starlight from non-existent stars.Lenoxushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10809085020841868387noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4307187040250193857.post-9873563251709435842013-01-21T07:10:42.678-08:002013-01-21T07:10:42.678-08:00I'm not a believer, but I can sort of see some...I'm not a believer, but I can sort of see some reason to it. Based on the Bible, God clearly reacts to people's behavior -- smiting the Sodomites, for instance, which He wouldn't have bothered to do if they weren't being wicked. In other cases, He answers people who question him, apparently agrees to people's requests (as when he promises Noah not to have another giant flood -- though I note he didn't guarantee not to use other forms of mass destruction if he again becomes disappointed with us). Whether these are consistent with the concept of "changelessness" is something one could debate -- but according to the Bible they happened, and for many people that -- not some abstract concept of God's attributes -- is the last word on the subject.<br /><br />So, the narrative makes it clear that God does make decisions based on people's behavior. Praying is also a behavior, so it's reasonable to suppose that God might react to that somehow also, perhaps consider a person more worthy because they're praying.<br /><br />Plus, people <i>really want</i> prayer to work, and there's a natural human tendency to find reasons to believe what you really want to -- or even to not bother to think about reasons.<br /><br />Even retroactive prayer (e.g. "Let it not be cancer" when obviously it already is what it is and it's only the petitioner's state of knowledge that makes it seem not yet real) makes sense if you think that God has foreknowledge and so would know in advance that the prayer would occur. ("Oh, okay, he's a decent guy. I'll make it not be cancer -- but I'll still give him a little scare.")<br /><br />So the idea of intercessory prayer isn't inherently contradictory with those other beliefs. What gives theologists problems is the evident lack of results. The "no testing" clause helps with that a little bit... but it seems a bit hard for God to punish the patients in the test, who weren't the ones doing the testing and didn't have any choice in the matter. Of course, the religious must be accustomed to that sort of seeming arbitrariness.Tyler Torkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11460706772136362593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4307187040250193857.post-73759705141699756892011-05-12T05:55:43.703-07:002011-05-12T05:55:43.703-07:00bet you would like Laura Hillenbrand's Unbroke...bet you would like Laura Hillenbrand's <i>Unbroken</i> . . .Jim Tantillohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12520467623399679472noreply@blogger.com