Countless Claims to "Answered" Prayer(s)

[POI]

We have countless claims, from Christians, to God/Jesus answering prayers for healing to human affliction(s). And by 'answered' prayer, I mean God/Jesus states -- (yes, I will grant you this prayer request to remove the human affliction).

For Debate:

1. Does God "answer" any of these prayer requests? If not, why?
2. If so, why does God/Jesus perpetually skip the following afflictions (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebral palsy, dementia, diabetes mellites 1, amputation, muscular dystrophy, hunington's disease, epilepsy, parkinson's disease, paget's disease, motor neuron disease, and so on)?

[POI]

...
Please explain how we can definitively tell that any outcome is the result of prayer actually working.

I don't think anything can be definitely told, because person can always think some other explanation is better.

Yes, it can be 'definitely told.'. When it comes to anyone asking for answered prayer(s) to all the listed conditions from the OP, your believed upon God definitely will NOT answer them. Most likely because this God is not even there to answer.

[TRANSPONDER]

...
Please explain how we can definitively tell that any outcome is the result of prayer actually working.

I don't think anything can be definitely told, because person can always think some other explanation is better.

The perfect Faithbased response. Essentially, it conceded that there is no good evidence that prayer is actually working, or is answered by any god. You faithbase it so it means 'it actually does work, but the faithless can always explain the results away' which can also mean: 'There is no real evidence that prayer works, but the Faithful can always find excuses to dismiss that evidence'. The logic is, if the evidence For is not compelling, you disbelieve the claim until the evidence IS compelling'. But the believers operate on Faith, not evidence. But we have known that from the start.

[brunumb]

...
Please explain how we can definitively tell that any outcome is the result of prayer actually working.

I don't think anything can be definitely told, because person can always think some other explanation is better.

Saying that someone can think of a better explanation is just brushing aside the question. What you are really saying is that there is no way to definitively tell that any outcome is the result of prayer actually working. Thank you.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to brunumb in post #43]

That looks like a Gocha to me.

[1213]

...
Please explain how we can definitively tell that any outcome is the result of prayer actually working.

I don't think anything can be definitely told, because person can always think some other explanation is better.

The perfect Faithbased response. Essentially, it conceded that there is no good evidence that prayer is actually working, or is answered by any god. You faithbase it so it means 'it actually does work, but the faithless can always explain the results away' which can also mean: 'There is no real evidence that prayer works, but the Faithful can always find excuses to dismiss that evidence'. The logic is, if the evidence For is not compelling, you disbelieve the claim until the evidence IS compelling'. But the believers operate on Faith, not evidence. But we have known that from the start.

Isn't that true in everything? Can you give some claim that is not based on faith in something? Or do you have some knowledge that is definitely so and can't be rejected as faith based though?

[1213]

Oh, but I did address your question. You asked:

How do you know i don't have any of those because of prayer?

And I answered:

None of the above are deemed curable, prayer or no prayer.
...

Sorry, that does not answer the question, how do you know it. You just give a statement and expect everyone to believe it.

[POI]

Sorry, that does not answer the question, how do you know it. You just give a statement and expect everyone to believe it.

I did no such thing. You know the answer is sound and you are attempting to wiggle your way out. Requests to remove amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebral palsy, dementia, diabetes mellites 1, amputation, muscular dystrophy, hunington's disease, epilepsy, parkinson's disease, paget's disease, motor neuron disease, and so on, are perpetually skipped. This is because God is not there to answer prayer requests. The people born with, or later who develop these conditions/afflictions, will also die with these conditions/afflictions, unremoved. Why? Because God is not there to resolved these requests.

[POI]

[Replying to brunumb in post #43]

That looks like a Gocha to me.

The entire thread is essentially a 'gotcha'. This is why theists avoid this thread like the plague.

[TRANSPONDER]

...
Please explain how we can definitively tell that any outcome is the result of prayer actually working.

I don't think anything can be definitely told, because person can always think some other explanation is better.

The perfect Faithbased response. Essentially, it conceded that there is no good evidence that prayer is actually working, or is answered by any god. You faithbase it so it means 'it actually does work, but the faithless can always explain the results away' which can also mean: 'There is no real evidence that prayer works, but the Faithful can always find excuses to dismiss that evidence'. The logic is, if the evidence For is not compelling, you disbelieve the claim until the evidence IS compelling'. But the believers operate on Faith, not evidence. But we have known that from the start.

Isn't that true in everything? Can you give some claim that is not based on faith in something? Or do you have some knowledge that is definitely so and can't be rejected as faith based though?

Sorry, you are doing the habitual theist fallacy - confusing Faith with evidence. Do I need to explain?I suppose i do.

Our database of knowledge, information and facts is the best model we can make that fits what we see of reality, present, past and anticipated future. We can predict an eclipse 1000 years in the future. This is not 1000% certain; a giant comet may smash into the sun and render all predictions moot. We can suppose our car will start and our house will not fall down. This is not Faith, but understanding how things work, and that we know mechanics keep employed makes nonsense of 'Faith' your car will start' argument.

Similarly, we try to create models of the past, interpreting Caesar's records, the Battle of Kadesh and even Sumerian stories as best we can in hopes that we aren't being fed too much political spin.

This is not Faith. Faith is (or should be) used for crediting claims without sufficient evidential and logical reason, never mind asserting as life - changing beliefs despite sound counter - evidence.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to brunumb in post #43]

That looks like a Gocha to me.

The entire thread is essentially a 'gotcha'. This is why theists avoid this thread like the plague.

Our pal 1213 however, has persistence that should earn reword, but I doubt that it will

Oh, but I did address your question. You asked:

How do you know i don't have any of those because of prayer?

And I answered:

None of the above are deemed curable, prayer or no prayer.
...

Sorry, that does not answer the question, how do you know it. You just give a statement and expect everyone to believe it.

Because no credible evidence has been presented to show that any such serious physical problems can be cured by prayer.If that were so, all armies, industrial companies and hospitals would have teams of Christians praying over accident victims. They don't, because they know (as Christians do) that it doesn't really work.

Matthew 6.27.And who of you by worrying and being anxious can add one unit of measure (cubit) to his stature or to the span of his life? It isn't by praying that one could do it, but that the idea isn't considered (other than it might have occasioned the last bit later on(1),suggests that Christians then as now, know that prayer doesn't do things other than sometimes happens normally and naturally.

(1) and I had to check Luke 12 25 And which of you with taking thought can add to his stature one cubit? which being Q sayings is Sermon material but later on after Jesus departs for Jerusalem. I predict it isn't in Mark.