Please don't pray for me

roymond · Post by **roymond** » Sun Apr 02, 2006 8:33 pm

DUH!

I love that someone is finally attempting to test this. Wonder what coverage this is getting on Fox. I also love the concept of a placebo prayer.

starfinger · Post by **starfinger** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 8:46 am

This seems like such a weird bastardization of prayer -- treating it more like a magic spell than communion with God. I can't imagine these results affecting the attitudes of those of us who have truly experienced the power of prayer.

-craig

jute gyte · Post by **jute gyte** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:27 am

If you define a magic spell as requesting the help of a deity to create change in accordance with your will, that's basically the standard prayer, at least from my observation. While I think your attitude towards prayer might be a more reasonable one, I don't think it's the prevalent view.

Hoblit · Post by **Hoblit** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:40 am

jute gyte wrote:If you define a magic spell as requesting the help of a deity to create change in accordance with your will, that's basically the standard prayer, at least from my observation. While I think your attitude towards prayer might be a more reasonable one, I don't think it's the prevalent view.

that is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection.

I have always thought that prayer was a more intimate thing. Not sure how a group of Christians that I don't know very well could really put in a good word for me. I'll leave this type of stuff to people closer to me.

starfinger · Post by **starfinger** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:45 am

I was thinking of a magic spell as an incantation where the power is in the words.

You are definitley right that most people view prayer as a way to tell God what they want.

-craig

roymond · Post by **roymond** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:43 am

For what it's worth, I see prayer as a way to formulate and articulate to oneself one's beliefs, wishes, hopes and strategies. It is intimate, personal and can be powerful as a means to motivate. I just don't call it prayer. I see it as something more like meditation. I suppose it's a prayer once you tell someone you've done it. "I've been praying for you" means you've had them in your thoughts. Ultimately this helps create a connection when you have that spontaneous conversation with someone you've never known but who happens to be a specialist in an area that is helpful to the situation. You get their card. You pass it on. They forward a book. Your friend gains insight. Things start turning for the better. Nothing magical. No devine intervention. But a connection that was facilitated by your having thoughts of their needs foremost in your mind.

And so, strangers praying in the dark for Hoblit will bring none of this to fruition.

Hoblit · Post by **Hoblit** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:46 pm

roymond wrote:For what it's worth, I see prayer as a way to formulate and articulate to oneself one's beliefs, wishes, hopes and strategies. It is intimate, personal and can be powerful as a means to motivate. I just don't call it prayer. I see it as something more like meditation.

And so, strangers praying in the dark for Hoblit will bring none of this to fruition.

I was actually going to relate prayer to meditation...thanks, I believe that that they can be one and the same. However recognizing that they also may not be one and the same.

Also, strangers praying in the dark should not be praying FOR me, they should be praying TO me! A boy can dream.

erik · Post by **erik** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 4:04 pm

someone reporting on a bad science experiment wrote:The patients in the study at six US hospitals included 604 who were actually prayed for after being told they might or might not be; another 597 who were not prayed for after being told they might or might not be; and a group of 601 who were prayed for and told they would be.

Too many damn variables. Maybe it's not prayer that screws people up, but the mere fact that they think that they definitely need someone to pray for them. Tell someone that you *might* pray for him, maybe it seems less serious. Tell someone that you're going to pray for them, and it starts to seem like there's a reason to pray for them. The person psyches themselves out into getting worse, because they think they're in bad shape (after all, someone is praying for them).

Where's the 600 people who got prayed for without *knowing* they were being prayed for? Then you might be able to seperate the two concepts from each other. All this does is prove nothing, and make a bunch of people look like they can't set up an experiment.

roymond · Post by **roymond** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:06 pm

Hoblit wrote:Also, strangers praying in the dark should not be praying FOR me, they should be praying TO me!

Hoblit waves to his anonymous disciples...

Märk · Post by **Märk** » Mon Apr 03, 2006 11:16 pm

I pray to the Flying Spaghetti Monster every day, and guess what I ended up having for dinner the other night? That's right, spaghetti.

Results. Although, come to think of it, I never pray that I'll have spaghetti for dinner... the lord works in mysterious ways!

mkilly · Post by **mkilly** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:52 pm

Now I'm an atheist, to the max, but it seems to me that when Christians pray for things and get their wishes answered, they attribute it to God; when they pray and don't get their wishes answered, they attribute it to God and say he works in mysterious ways or whatever. I think Nietzsche had it right here in that when people just pass the buck to God and don't take initiative in their own lives it's pretty weak of them. People should be assertive, shouldn't wait for the afterlife, etc... Bergson was a proponent of this too. And Sartre, naturally.

Um anyway, not to step on toes. But it seems to me, again, that basically the only prayer is to pray for understanding, or to be more humble/passive/accepting/resigned. I pray for my sister to not die from cancer, she dies, I'm angry, I pray, I'm comforted. I pray for my sister to not die from cancer, she doesn't die, I'm comforted. Why are people so quick to say an activist God did such and such or is doing such and such. Examine causal relationships before you do that. If God's ways are unknowable then they're unknowable. If they're partially knowable and partially unknowable then all you're asking for in prayer is to understand if it's one or the other.

just some thoughts.

Hoblit · Post by **Hoblit** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:21 pm

mkilly wrote:t it seems to me that when Christians pray for things and get their wishes answered, they attribute it to God; when they pray and don't get their wishes answered, they attribute it to God and say he works in mysterious ways or whatever. I think Nietzsche had it right here in that when people just pass the buck to God and don't take initiative in their own lives it's pretty weak of them.

Why are people so quick to say an activist God did such and such or is doing such and such.
just some thoughts.

I want to jump in and say that I know exactly what you mean. I also want to jump in and mentiont that is only a generalazation as well. Alot of Christians believe in God, may believe he works in mysterious ways...but doesn't necessarily attribute every thing in their lives as devine...good or bad. Motivation is up the person, God helps INSPIRE that. God won't take the bottle of booze off your lips, you have to do that. God may inspire you to bring it to your lips less often but you still have to be the one to do it. AA is a real good example of how God is a crutch to some people. Alot of us out here don't believe that God can solve all of our problems...only that he will HELP US solve all of our problems.

roymond · Post by **roymond** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 5:21 pm

Oh, man. This wasn't the intent of this thread, but I guess it's my fault...

Sam Harris gave a rousing talk at PopTech! last October. He brought up statistics about belief and religion. I don't know what to make of some of them, since they seem so contradictory to various important elements of modern life. It will soon be available for free download from IT Conversations and I'll post the link when that happens because he is an awesome speaker. In the meantime read his books...

For instance, he mentions (and I've read elsewhere) that:
53% of Americans are creationists, who believe that man has no genetic precursor in the natural world. That Adam and Eve were created as described in the Bible and we all come from them.
22% are certain that Jesus will come down to the earth and save the day as described in the Bible (apocalypse, judgment of the dead, etc.) within 50 years,
another 22% think he probably will.

That's 44% who believe that a devine intervention will likely save the day for them within 50 years.

He asks a very interesting question: what motivation is there to preserve our world through our own actions if within 50 years nothing we do will matter much (save for being true to our loved ones and not lying too much)? Why should one care about global warming, emissions, rain forests being burned to the ground to raise cheap crops?

Carry on...

HeuristicsInc · Post by **HeuristicsInc** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 5:27 pm

roymond wrote: He asks a very interesting question: what motivation is there to preserve our world through our own actions if within 50 years nothing we do will matter much (save for being true to our loved ones and not lying too much)? Why should one care about global warming, emissions, rain forests being burned to the ground to raise cheap crops?

Well, according to the Bible God gave the world to us for stewardship, which means taking good care of it. If we ransack it we're not being good stewards, of the earth, its creatures, or ourselves. So, yeah. Even from a purely selfish standpoint, we were told to. Just staying purely within the framework of the question, the 44% opinion, and its likely believers.
-bill

roymond · Post by **roymond** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 5:47 pm

Yes, I realize that, and I like the stewardship model very much. My dad taught me to leave a campsite in better shape than I found it.

But from a motivational (and priority) point of view...actions (or inactions) that have a seemingly insignificant impact over 50 years and perhaps then are acceptable within a reasonable short-term "stewardship" model can blossom into life-threatening conditions over 150 years or less. For those of us who believe the world will last 150 years, there may be some concern. That's all.

HeuristicsInc · Post by **HeuristicsInc** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 10:11 pm

of course, we don't know the hour or the day, thief in the night, all that. some of the apostles expected the second coming within a few years; obviously it didn't happen then so there's no reason to expect or not expect it now, unless you're seeing signs from revelations or something (i haven't studied it or anything). i totally agree with you that stewardship is a long-term prospect, you have to plan for the long run whether you've got a day or a milennium.
-bill

Please don't pray for me

Please don't pray for me

Re: Please don't pray for me