I pray you join my religion

[methylatedghosts]

i will start to pray for alan, that you can experience some real improvement in his behavior and stability, and that you can in time visit a church who will minister to you in a way that resembles more closely the love and compassion of Christ, which is (despite your unfortunate experiences!) real and without limit

This was posted by pyrite in response to one of Confused's posts.

And it kinda got me to think.

I have no problem whatsoever with the first part about praying for health - thats great.

My thoughts are, that Christianity is about "spreading the love of Christ".

But also is it not about allowing people to choose for themselves.

Now, is it not also a part of Christianity, that believes that prayer is powerful enough to change someones health, or even their mind.

Is it therefore right for a Christian to pray that someone join their church or religion, if we take the points "allowing people to choose for themselves" and "that prayer works" as true?

Because, wouldn't this prayer cause a change in the persons mind so that it isn't of their own choice?


(Just to be sure, pyrite, I'm not saying that this is what you are praying for, but just that this is where my thoughts came from )

[Galphanore]

redundant statement.. of course nothing that requires faith can be definitely verified! if it was definitely verified it wouldn't require faith. thats the nature of faith

That is why I prefer faithfulness or trust as it is used in the Hebrew writings.
With your lack of skepticism it is a good thing fairies didn't get to you first.

no need to insult my intelligence.. just because i believe in God doesn't mean i'm a moron!
i would simply rather call myself a critic than a sceptic, as in my view a critic has a more balanced and open-minded viewpoint.. a sceptic, like it or not, will by definition assume the worst first about religion rather than taking a neutral initial stance. why not make an assumption-free, educated choice rather than one built on a negative premise

As I said, that is the spin that religion has placed upon skepticism, not what it actually is.

no, that's what it actually is. i see it on this forum every day!

No, those are skeptical atheists. Skepticism does not require atheism, but atheism requires skepticism. What you call being a critic is what a Skeptic actually is.

[pyrite]

redundant statement.. of course nothing that requires faith can be definitely verified! if it was definitely verified it wouldn't require faith. thats the nature of faith

That is why I prefer faithfulness or trust as it is used in the Hebrew writings.
With your lack of skepticism it is a good thing fairies didn't get to you first.

no need to insult my intelligence.. just because i believe in God doesn't mean i'm a moron!
i would simply rather call myself a critic than a sceptic, as in my view a critic has a more balanced and open-minded viewpoint.. a sceptic, like it or not, will by definition assume the worst first about religion rather than taking a neutral initial stance. why not make an assumption-free, educated choice rather than one built on a negative premise

As I said, that is the spin that religion has placed upon skepticism, not what it actually is.

no, that's what it actually is. i see it on this forum every day!

No, those are skeptical atheists. Skepticism does not require atheism, but atheism requires skepticism. What you call being a critic is what a Skeptic actually is.

fair enough.
different strokes for different folks, semantics i guess

[Galphanore]

faith... is only useful in giving children the gullible attitude necessary to believe everything your parents tell you when you are young so that you can avoid danger, and religion has co-opted that to nefarious ends. If we replaced faith with critical thinking then our world would be considerably better.

if that's not a presumtuous, negative standpoint towards faith, as i defined in my last post (non-bold included!), i don't know what is

Faith is a concept, not a claim. Faith is belief without proof, skepticism is belief when evidence is provided. If, however, someone claims they have evidence for something and they believe it relies of faith to work then I will observe the evidence and see what is going on. Nothing that has ever been presented as requiring faith has yet to be shown to actually be verifiable.

redundant statement.. of course nothing that requires faith can be definitely verified! if it was definitely verified it wouldn't require faith. thats the nature of faith

If something has an effect on the real world it can be verified, therefore, by your own statement, nothing that relies of faith can effect the real world.

[pyrite]

faith... is only useful in giving children the gullible attitude necessary to believe everything your parents tell you when you are young so that you can avoid danger, and religion has co-opted that to nefarious ends. If we replaced faith with critical thinking then our world would be considerably better.

if that's not a presumtuous, negative standpoint towards faith, as i defined in my last post (non-bold included!), i don't know what is

Faith is a concept, not a claim. Faith is belief without proof, skepticism is belief when evidence is provided. If, however, someone claims they have evidence for something and they believe it relies of faith to work then I will observe the evidence and see what is going on. Nothing that has ever been presented as requiring faith has yet to be shown to actually be verifiable.

redundant statement.. of course nothing that requires faith can be definitely verified! if it was definitely verified it wouldn't require faith. thats the nature of faith

If something has an effect on the real world it can be verified, therefore, by your own statement, nothing that relies of faith can effect the real world.

incorrect.. you're assuming by 'verified' we mean 'can be seen, smelt, felt or touched'.
can you not verify something's existence by its effects rather than some apparent, undeniable presence?

[pyrite]

claiming that God 'has no effect' on the real world assumes you cant verify effects by experience. how, with countless experiences of the love and nature of God, can you claim with such certainty that he has no effect?

[Galphanore]

faith... is only useful in giving children the gullible attitude necessary to believe everything your parents tell you when you are young so that you can avoid danger, and religion has co-opted that to nefarious ends. If we replaced faith with critical thinking then our world would be considerably better.

if that's not a presumtuous, negative standpoint towards faith, as i defined in my last post (non-bold included!), i don't know what is

Faith is a concept, not a claim. Faith is belief without proof, skepticism is belief when evidence is provided. If, however, someone claims they have evidence for something and they believe it relies of faith to work then I will observe the evidence and see what is going on. Nothing that has ever been presented as requiring faith has yet to be shown to actually be verifiable.

redundant statement.. of course nothing that requires faith can be definitely verified! if it was definitely verified it wouldn't require faith. thats the nature of faith

If something has an effect on the real world it can be verified, therefore, by your own statement, nothing that relies of faith can effect the real world.

incorrect.. you're assuming by 'verified' we mean 'can be seen, smelt, felt or touched'.
can you not verify something's existence by its effects rather than some apparent, undeniable presence?

No, actually, I mean verified as in it's effects can be verified to have done something.

claiming that God 'has no effect' on the real world assumes you cant verify effects by experience. how, with countless experiences of the love and nature of God, can you claim with such certainty that he has no effect?

Because they have not be verified to have done anything more then a placebo effect does.

[pyrite]

faith... is only useful in giving children the gullible attitude necessary to believe everything your parents tell you when you are young so that you can avoid danger, and religion has co-opted that to nefarious ends. If we replaced faith with critical thinking then our world would be considerably better.

if that's not a presumtuous, negative standpoint towards faith, as i defined in my last post (non-bold included!), i don't know what is

Faith is a concept, not a claim. Faith is belief without proof, skepticism is belief when evidence is provided. If, however, someone claims they have evidence for something and they believe it relies of faith to work then I will observe the evidence and see what is going on. Nothing that has ever been presented as requiring faith has yet to be shown to actually be verifiable.

redundant statement.. of course nothing that requires faith can be definitely verified! if it was definitely verified it wouldn't require faith. thats the nature of faith

If something has an effect on the real world it can be verified, therefore, by your own statement, nothing that relies of faith can effect the real world.

incorrect.. you're assuming by 'verified' we mean 'can be seen, smelt, felt or touched'.
can you not verify something's existence by its effects rather than some apparent, undeniable presence?

No, actually, I mean verified as in it's effects can be verified to have done something.

claiming that God 'has no effect' on the real world assumes you cant verify effects by experience. how, with countless experiences of the love and nature of God, can you claim with such certainty that he has no effect?

Because they have not be verified to have done anything more then a placebo effect does.

the placebo effect can't heal a broken heart. i've seen this happen to countless christians at the moment of their salvation. is this not an effect?

[Galphanore]

faith... is only useful in giving children the gullible attitude necessary to believe everything your parents tell you when you are young so that you can avoid danger, and religion has co-opted that to nefarious ends. If we replaced faith with critical thinking then our world would be considerably better.

if that's not a presumtuous, negative standpoint towards faith, as i defined in my last post (non-bold included!), i don't know what is

Faith is a concept, not a claim. Faith is belief without proof, skepticism is belief when evidence is provided. If, however, someone claims they have evidence for something and they believe it relies of faith to work then I will observe the evidence and see what is going on. Nothing that has ever been presented as requiring faith has yet to be shown to actually be verifiable.

redundant statement.. of course nothing that requires faith can be definitely verified! if it was definitely verified it wouldn't require faith. thats the nature of faith

If something has an effect on the real world it can be verified, therefore, by your own statement, nothing that relies of faith can effect the real world.

incorrect.. you're assuming by 'verified' we mean 'can be seen, smelt, felt or touched'.
can you not verify something's existence by its effects rather than some apparent, undeniable presence?

No, actually, I mean verified as in it's effects can be verified to have done something.

claiming that God 'has no effect' on the real world assumes you cant verify effects by experience. how, with countless experiences of the love and nature of God, can you claim with such certainty that he has no effect?

Because they have not be verified to have done anything more then a placebo effect does.

the placebo effect can't heal a broken heart. i've seen this happen to countless christians at the moment of their salvation. is this not an effect?

Faith in anything from your god to believing in yourself can heal a broken heart, it's effects do not require the accuracy of the belief, only an acceptance of something bigger then the hurt you suffered. People get over broken hearts without god every single day, so yes, the placebo effect most certainly can heal a broken heart.

[pyrite]

faith... is only useful in giving children the gullible attitude necessary to believe everything your parents tell you when you are young so that you can avoid danger, and religion has co-opted that to nefarious ends. If we replaced faith with critical thinking then our world would be considerably better.

if that's not a presumtuous, negative standpoint towards faith, as i defined in my last post (non-bold included!), i don't know what is

Faith is a concept, not a claim. Faith is belief without proof, skepticism is belief when evidence is provided. If, however, someone claims they have evidence for something and they believe it relies of faith to work then I will observe the evidence and see what is going on. Nothing that has ever been presented as requiring faith has yet to be shown to actually be verifiable.

redundant statement.. of course nothing that requires faith can be definitely verified! if it was definitely verified it wouldn't require faith. thats the nature of faith

If something has an effect on the real world it can be verified, therefore, by your own statement, nothing that relies of faith can effect the real world.

incorrect.. you're assuming by 'verified' we mean 'can be seen, smelt, felt or touched'.
can you not verify something's existence by its effects rather than some apparent, undeniable presence?

No, actually, I mean verified as in it's effects can be verified to have done something.

claiming that God 'has no effect' on the real world assumes you cant verify effects by experience. how, with countless experiences of the love and nature of God, can you claim with such certainty that he has no effect?

Because they have not be verified to have done anything more then a placebo effect does.

the placebo effect can't heal a broken heart. i've seen this happen to countless christians at the moment of their salvation. is this not an effect?

Faith in anything from your god to believing in yourself can heal a broken heart, it's effects do not require the accuracy of the belief, only an acceptance of something bigger then the hurt you suffered. People get over broken hearts without god every single day, so yes, the placebo effect most certainly can heal a broken heart.

you're giving placebo way more credit than it derserves.. certainly has considerable power over the mind, but i've seen people thrown 4-5 metres across a room during prayer against demonic opression/posession. what i saw was impossible, people physically thrown by an invisible force.. does placebo explain this? they were actually prayed for against their will, they didn't think they needed to be prayed for, or expect anything at all to happen. placebo relies on expectation, which clearly wasn't present

[Galphanore]

you're giving placebo way more credit than it derserves.. certainly has considerable power over the mind, but i've seen people thrown 4-5 metres across a room during prayer against demonic opression/posession. what i saw was impossible, people physically thrown by an invisible force.. does placebo explain this? they were actually prayed for against their will, they didn't think they needed to be prayed for, or expect anything at all to happen. placebo relies on expectation, which clearly wasn't present

If you can actually prove that this happened with anything more then anecdotal evidence then you would have precisely what I requested, now wouldn't you?