Split from Open Mic- Struggling With The Catholic Faith

[Adrestia]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1313184388' post='2286628']You have just said that answered prayer is proof.
If you don't think that it matters which god then studies should investigate whether prayer by Theists delivers results whereas the control group of Atheists don't get favourable results.[/quote]

That's not a good experimental design; there are too many confounding factors. The starting groups need to be identical, ideally all agnostic (but all theist or all atheist could also work, if the hypothesis and outcome measurements were adjusted).

Also, no religious group considers their god to be a magic genie who grants all wishes. Sometimes the answer to a prayer request is no, but that's still an answer. The outcome measurement can't be whether the request was granted; it can only be whether the prayer was answered - sometimes the person praying will be the only one to know that their prayer was answered.

[Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1313213761' post='2286861']
That would mean that you have attained knowledge that you did not have prior. That could be measured by getting a subject to guess which card is on the top of a deck of cards. The subject could pray to god for this knowledge. Traditionally knowing something like that has been called E.S.P. but i don't think it hs been attributed to a relationship with god. If this could be proven it would be a resounding break through.
[/quote]

I think this is completely the wrong way to go about it, personally. And this seems to not be faithful to most people's interractions with God. For most people God doesn't tell them of impending events or things they could not know. Rather, for most people their experience of God is that of growing in virtue and holiness or uprightness. Besides, this seems to me to simply be investigating magic tricks and not true faith. I still think the most scientific way to go about things would be to investigate effects and move to their causes (as science is wont to do). Such an investigation should include matter as such, i.e. not taking for granted particles but what are particles made of, and existence and whether by definition one necessitates the other and why or why not (though I seem to be belaboring the point I made two posts ago ).

[stevil]

[quote name='Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam' timestamp='1313218710' post='2286877']
I think this is completely the wrong way to go about it, personally.
[/quote]
Yes, well, I seem to be alone in here with regards to trying to workout a measurable method. Adrestia suggested that the scientific method could be used on the phenomona of answered prayer to prove god. I am trying to workout how to go about doing that. Obviously I am hampered with regards to my knowledge/understanding of prayer and what gets answered and what doesn't. If others tried to assist me in working out a method rather than simply criticising then I think we would get somewhere collectively as a team.

[stevil]

[quote name='Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam' timestamp='1313218710' post='2286877']
I still think the most scientific way to go about things would be to investigate effects and move to their causes (as science is wont to do). Such an investigation should include matter as such, i.e. not taking for granted particles but what are particles made of, and existence and whether by definition one necessitates the other and why or why not [/quote]
I really appreciate this suggestion at least you are looking for a path forward with regards to this discussion.
The problem with this is me, I can't see measuring matter and deriving immaterial conclusions as any more than deriving conclusions based on gaps of knowledge. In my opinion to derive meaning from gaps we need a complete and full understanding of the non gaps. But the problem is that although we know a lot about material, we have only scratched the surface with regards to having a full understanding of material.
I know you disagree with what I am saying and hence we are at logger heads on this. We are only going in circles, and I doubt that we would beable to come to a common understanding with regards to moving forward on this tack.

[stevil]

[quote name='Adrestia' timestamp='1313216817' post='2286872']
That's not a good experimental design; there are too many confounding factors. The starting groups need to be identical, ideally all agnostic (but all theist or all atheist could also work, if the hypothesis and outcome measurements were adjusted).
[/quote]

I haven't offered a full design, just a very highlevel overview. Was hoping you could assist me with some knowledge and then we could devle into the details when we are ready for that. I disagree that the starting point needs to be all agnostic or all atheist or all theist. We are trying to evaluate that we can measure answered theist prayer, with this regard we need an atheist group as a control to compare against. If there is no difference then the theist prayer has not acheived any measurable advantage with regards to prayer. The people facilitating the test need to be blind. I.e. they are not to know which person is theist or which is atheist.
Agnostic has nothing to do with whether a person believes in god or lacks a belief in god therefore agnosticism is irrelevant to this study.

[quote name='Adrestia' timestamp='1313216817' post='2286872']
Sometimes the answer to a prayer request is no, but that's still an answer.
[/quote]

Obviously we can't determine the difference between a no answer and no answer at all. We need to implore statistics and a big enough sample group to show that statistically there is an advantage as sometimes the answer will be yes.

[quote name='Adrestia' timestamp='1313216817' post='2286872']
The outcome measurement can't be whether the request was granted; it can only be whether the prayer was answered - sometimes the person praying will be the only one to know that their prayer was answered.
[/quote]
In this case the Scientific method cannot be used with regards to answered prayer as you previously stated.
If this is the case we need to move on to look for something else that can be measurable, and consitently recreatable.

[Amppax]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1313208327' post='2286840']
Are you saying that there is no tangible, measurable outcome with regards to prayer?
[/quote]

basically, that would have been my point.

[Adrestia]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1313221016' post='2286883']
I disagree that the starting point needs to be all agnostic or all atheist or all theist.
[/quote]

Considering that my original question was about how you could determine whether a god exists, I think it would be the most appropriate starting point.

Your statement earlier about faith is what led to this point. How would you determine for yourself whether you could have faith in a god? Have you have ever tested the possibility?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1312567635' post='2282008']
Who is to decide what is wrong and right. There is no easy answer, no clearly defined, well understood objective standard. Philosophy gives no answers, merely a bunch of hypothetical what ifs. With regards to medical procedures our law clearly understands that if a person is unable to make difficult decisions for themselves then those difficult decisions are delegated to their guardians. Other than that delegation, the law ought not to interfere. Same thing goes for Euthanasia.
In my opinion religious outfits ought not to interfere with law, fine for them to teach their followers what they think is right and wrong, but the followers ought to have the ability to excercise their free will.
[/quote]
You miss the point by being a follower of a religion you have CHOSEN to be obedient to their teachings.

[cmotherofpirl]

I would like to point out as a mod that this is a stimulating thoughtful conversation that is a pleasure to read. amesome

[Adrestia]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1313208327' post='2286840']
Are you saying that there is no tangible, measurable outcome with regards to prayer?
[/quote]

I think it necessary for each person to define their own endpoints. I can't determine how or when a god might choose to answer your prayer.

Of course, a person has to be open to the idea of a different answer in order to receive it.

Here is an example of this from Hebrew scripture.

2 Kings 5:1-14[quote]
Now Naaman was commander of the army of the king of Aram. He was a great man in the sight of his master and highly regarded, because through him the LORD had given victory to Aram. He was a valiant soldier, but he had leprosy.

Now bands of raiders from Aram had gone out and had taken captive a young girl from Israel, and she served Naaman’s wife.
She said to her mistress, “If only my master would see the prophet who is in Samaria! He would cure him of his leprosy.”

Naaman went to his master and told him what the girl from Israel had said.
“By all means, go,” the king of Aram replied. “I will send a letter to the king of Israel.” So Naaman left, taking with him ten talents of silver, six thousand shekels of gold and ten sets of clothing.

The letter that he took to the king of Israel read: “With this letter I am sending my servant Naaman to you so that you may cure him of his leprosy.”

As soon as the king of Israel read the letter, he tore his robes and said, “Am I God? Can I kill and bring back to life? Why does this fellow send someone to me to be cured of his leprosy? See how he is trying to pick a quarrel with me!”

When Elisha the man of God heard that the king of Israel had torn his robes, he sent him this message: “Why have you torn your robes? Have the man come to me and he will know that there is a prophet in Israel.”

So Naaman went with his horses and chariots and stopped at the door of Elisha’s house. Elisha sent a messenger to say to him, “Go, wash yourself seven times in the Jordan, and your flesh will be restored and you will be cleansed.”

But Naaman went away angry and said, “I thought that he would surely come out to me and stand and call on the name of the LORD his God, wave his hand over the spot and cure me of my leprosy. Are not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Couldn’t I wash in them and be cleansed?” So he turned and went off in a rage.

Naaman’s servants went to him and said, “My father, if the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more, then, when he tells you, ‘Wash and be cleansed’!”

So he went down and dipped himself in the Jordan seven times, as the man of God had told him, and his flesh was restored and became clean like that of a young boy.[/quote]

There's no need to take this literally and pick apart the details, look at the whole story to find its message. Naaman almost refused a miracle because he didn't like the package. He left in anger.

In my life there have been numerous times when the answer to my prayer was not what (or when) I expected, but turned out to be better than what I had asked for. I can only wonder how many times my anger, pride or stubbornness caused me to miss a miracle.

[stevil]

[quote name='Adrestia' timestamp='1313511319' post='2289131']
I think it necessary for each person to define their own endpoints. I can't determine how or when a god might choose to answer your prayer.
Of course, a person has to be open to the idea of a different answer in order to receive it.
[/quote]
If we are to attempt to use the scientific method then the endpoints must be objective and measurable by the casual observer. For the results to be consistent and recreatable they should be ignorant of whether the experiment facilitator is open to, for or against the theory. If they simply want to know the truth, they carry out the experiment, observe the results and objectively assess, thinking about what may have skewed the results. If the feel the results are skewed they can carry out a modified experiment, but if this is the case then this modified experiment also needs to be carried out and assessed many times by other people.

An experiment which has a subject base of only one, being the same person that is the experiment author, the subject and the evaluator, this experiment is fatally flawed.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xNSgBkum7o"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xNSgBkum7o[/url]

[Adrestia]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1313523068' post='2289298']
If we are to attempt to use the scientific method then the endpoints must be objective and measurable by the casual observer. For the results to be consistent and recreatable they should be ignorant of whether the experiment facilitator is open to, for or against the theory. If they simply want to know the truth, they carry out the experiment, observe the results and objectively assess, thinking about what may have skewed the results. If the feel the results are skewed they can carry out a modified experiment, but if this is the case then this modified experiment also needs to be carried out and assessed many times by other people.

An experiment which has a subject base of only one, being the same person that is the experiment author, the subject and the evaluator, this experiment is fatally flawed.
[/quote]

That depends on what question is being answered.

Here's an example:
In large, case-controlled, prospective trials, dairy products are not known to cause skin blemishes. However, one of my friends gets red blemishes when he consumes dairy products. His doctor said that the dairy products could not be the cause because no clinical trial has shown that effect. My friend controlled for other possible correlative causes (he had different types of dairy products in different foods that did not have other similar ingredients) and found the same results. His doctor was wrong. Dairy products did cause [i]his[/i] blemishes even though they did not cause the same effect in a statistically significant group. He was the author, subject and evaluator. If someone else did the same experiment and found different results, it would not invalidate his conclusions.

In my opinion, for something personal, like faith in a god, individual experiences are perfectly appropriate.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

dominus pax...
A thiesm (a theoretical extremist [without proof theres no juice]), possibly to speak to an athiest about god one must first understand theoretical philosophy one good one may be phenomenology, and have firm roots grounded in our lord jesus' parables and possibly the book of proverbs and the other wisdom books, and speak to the man or women firstly with a moral discussion to plow the soil of there hearts.
God bless you all.
Jesus is LORD
O LORD creator of the heavens and earth,of all that is seen and unseen have mercy on us poor sinners help us see and feel how much you love us this day. JESUS I TRUST IN YOU, JESU CONFIDO IN TE, JESU UFAM TOBIE

[stevil]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1313448771' post='2288623']
You miss the point by being a follower of a religion you have CHOSEN to be obedient to their teachings.
[/quote]
I do get the point, I do understand.
Although it is a choice to delegate all future decisions with regards to morals, also with regards to forgiving one's self.

As an Atheist I must take a personal responsibility with regards to understanding and making my own stance on what is right and wrong for me. With this regard I must be open to discussion, open to listening and trying to understand other people's viewpoints, open to accepting that I might be wrong.
I also must take personal responsibility with regards to forgiving myself. If I have realised that my past behaviour was inappropriate e.g. bullying people at school, hunting and killing animals for fun etc... then only I can forgive myself. I cannot look to a priest or higher authority for absolution. I must forgive myself.
When I look to acheive something, something that is extremely difficult I cannot do it for god, as if I have something external that I want to impress or dedicate my efforts to. It is all too easy for a person to let themselves down and for a theist they have their belief in a higher authority or imagined loved friend that they do not want to let down. Without this support, without this delegation, it is a difficult burdon to be responsible for yourself, but for me this is the only path, it is a satisfying path and I thrive on the responsibilities.