RE: Faith healing couple acquitted of manslaughter charges! How can this happen?
July 29, 2009 at 7:40 am
To Karatepig, Are you listening to me? I have made no comment on the baby's death, I was and am only addressing the statement that prayer has no positive value. I disagree with that statement. I have not made any comment or opinion about he baby, but I don't think prayer killed the baby. The disease did, negligence may have, but he prayer did no killing.
To Bozo,
As a personal tool for attempting to have more control (when necessary) and less control (when necessary) over you state-of-mind, prayer is quite valid. All your guys arguments so far have shown that you don't understand, not that you have disproven or proven anything.
Thank you for you time,
-Pip
To Bozo,
Quote:Praying is foolish and also dangerous.In your opinion. In mine it can be foolish and dangerous or healthy and helpful. Only humans can make inanimate tools good or bad.
Quote:The fact that in all probability nothing is listening seals it for me.Whether or not something is listening is beside the point, as I have shown. That nothing may be listening to your prayers does not make them useless. You are misunderstanding the nature of prayer.
Quote:Dawkins reports in TGD about the Templeton attempt at proving that prayer works...it didn't!Was that the effect on random number generators? That would be (like other tests he does) flawed from the start. Prayer doesn't work at affecting random numbers, because that is not what prayers function is at all. That is not what prayer is supposed to do. So the fact that dawkins 'proved' it didn't do that (or whatever he 'proved') means he also misunderstood the definition and proper use of prayer.
As a personal tool for attempting to have more control (when necessary) and less control (when necessary) over you state-of-mind, prayer is quite valid. All your guys arguments so far have shown that you don't understand, not that you have disproven or proven anything.
Thank you for you time,
-Pip
