The Religion Thread

[JTA]

"The guy said, "we're just asking people to pray"..... what exactly is it that they are supposed to pray for, and what if any outcome should they expect? Examples of an appropriate prayer following this accident would be good."

The prayer was for the families who were about to discover that a loved one has been killed. It's meant to ask God to comfort them in their grief.
You'd be surprised to know that it works....if you believe that God can and will comfort you.
.

Yeah, maybe sometimes it can be considered slacktivism like rstrong pointed out, but if someone is going through a rough patch in life just the notion that others are thinking about them may help them feel not so alone. Same reason we send birthday cards or christmas cards to people I guess. At the very least it means you acknowledge them and are mindful of their situation. If the person being prayed at (?) is also religious I can see it being a huge psychological boost to them.

Mr. B you are religious so you are probably the best one to answer this question. If you experienced some tragedy in your life like a loss of a loved one and you found out people were praying for you, how would you feel?

[Mr.B]

"Mr. B you are religious so you are probably the best one to answer this question. If you experienced some tragedy in your life like a loss of a loved one and you found out people were praying for you, how would you feel?"

That's a very good question, JTA, and I thank you for asking..... :thumbsup:

Firstly, I would be humbled, then I would thank God that there's people who loved me or cared enough about me to take their time to breathe a word of prayer on my behalf in hopes that the Lord would help me face that tumultuous chapter in my life.

God didn't promise anyone that our time on Earth would be easy, but He did promise that He would never forsake us.

[Mr.B]

"I myself have said more than once "Oh, please god....I'll never drink again." Alas, it didn't work......"

Perhaps you spoke to the wrong god.

[neoplacebo]

"I myself have said more than once "Oh, please god....I'll never drink again." Alas, it didn't work......"

Perhaps you spoke to the wrong god.

But you say there's only one; how could I go wrong?

[neoplacebo]

"Mr. B you are religious so you are probably the best one to answer this question. If you experienced some tragedy in your life like a loss of a loved one and you found out people were praying for you, how would you feel?"

That's a very good question, JTA, and I thank you for asking..... :thumbsup:

Firstly, I would be humbled, then I would thank God that there's people who loved me or cared enough about me to take their time to breathe a word of prayer on my behalf in hopes that the Lord would help me face that tumultuous chapter in my life.

God didn't promise anyone that our time on Earth would be easy, but He did promise that He would never forsake us.

It's not unusual or uncommon for others to empathize with those who suffer misfortune whether it be via prayer or just thinking of those who are suffering and wishing them better times. Whether you pray for them or wish for them to recover from the misfortune, the result is the same.....your thoughts or prayers are not going to change anything. Just like Ragin' Rebel probably prays or wishes all of us "public school propagandized" fools die out and only leave his stupid likeminded know nothings be elevated to some imaginary loftiness.......prayers and wishes have no effect other than to soothe the ones making them, and perhaps the recipients of them if they even know those prayers are being made. I suppose that's why folks say "I'm praying for you" just so they'll know that. Maybe it gives them comfort to some degree. I would appreciate empathy in times of despair as much as anyone, but I don't believe it's going to change my situation. The rich man who encounters a homeless person on the street and then goes to church and prays for that homeless person is doing that person no good; he's only imagining he's doing so by the act of prayer. I think that's the supreme act of hypocrisy. Hey, rich man, you know what will help? Money, education, housing, food. Prayer is just for yourself to assuage your own guilt.

[JTA]

"Mr. B you are religious so you are probably the best one to answer this question. If you experienced some tragedy in your life like a loss of a loved one and you found out people were praying for you, how would you feel?"

That's a very good question, JTA, and I thank you for asking..... :thumbsup:

Firstly, I would be humbled, then I would thank God that there's people who loved me or cared enough about me to take their time to breathe a word of prayer on my behalf in hopes that the Lord would help me face that tumultuous chapter in my life.

God didn't promise anyone that our time on Earth would be easy, but He did promise that He would never forsake us.

It's not unusual or uncommon for others to empathize with those who suffer misfortune whether it be via prayer or just thinking of those who are suffering and wishing them better times. Whether you pray for them or wish for them to recover from the misfortune, the result is the same.....your thoughts or prayers are not going to change anything. Just like Ragin' Rebel probably prays or wishes all of us "public school propagandized" fools die out and only leave his stupid likeminded know nothings be elevated to some imaginary loftiness.......prayers and wishes have no effect other than to soothe the ones making them, and perhaps the recipients of them if they even know those prayers are being made. I suppose that's why folks say "I'm praying for you" just so they'll know that. Maybe it gives them comfort to some degree. I would appreciate empathy in times of despair as much as anyone, but I don't believe it's going to change my situation.

It's like getting a birthday card with no money. When you're a kid you think that's a load of BS, but when you're adult and more mature you come to appreciate stuff like that. It doesn't do shit in a quantitative sense. It's just a piece of paper with some ink and serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever. I guess you could set it on fire or something, but its main purpose is a gesture of kindness, nothing more.

Now if I'm lying on the ground about to die and need someone to call 911, and they say they'll pray for me and walk away, that's a whole different matter.

[neoplacebo]

Yes, actions speak louder than prayers or thoughts. And they generally have results.

[rstrong]

Because atheists are for self only. They don't give a damn that the world turns into a perverted cesspool.

One could far more credibly say that the religious are for self only, or at least for their personal sect only.

They often use their religion to forgo ethics and compassion, in favor of cherry-picked quotes from the Bible to self-endorse their phobias, hatreds and bigotries. If you deny this, you should probably look in a mirror. Others often do it on a larger scale, using it to justify misogyny, slavery, racism, wars of conquest, flying passenger jetliners into buildings and more. And of course there's prayer as slacktivism.

The non-religious deal with the world as it is, letting ethics and compassion and reason guide them rather than, well, the Biblical verses you've personally used here to endorse everything from homophobia to slavery.

Atheist groups jump on any notion of religion to abolish it from the face of this earth. You know this.

Few non-religious people are interested in abolishing religion. They just don't want to be pushed around any more by the religious.

[Mr.B]

"Maybe we can all make an exception and pray that Mr.B finds the path out of his hateful bigotry. Then, he can tell us if prayer works or not."

"The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much."

You lose.

[Mr.B]

"I see, not being hateful bigots like you makes us all unrighteous."

No.....being hateful like you makes you unrighteous.

There you go again, speaking for everyone. Strange how you favor "us" and "we" to justify your rants.

Bigot: one who will not bow down and conform because it's wildly popular, and "everyone else is doing it".
Homophobe: one who will not bow down and conform to a lifestyle contrary to one's Biblical beliefs because "everyone else is doing it".

[O Really]

"Maybe we can all make an exception and pray that Mr.B finds the path out of his hateful bigotry. Then, he can tell us if prayer works or not."

"The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much."

You lose.

You wouldn't happen to have a definition of "righteous", would you? Since Merriam Webster nor Oxford was around when that was written, I'm guessing their definitions are probably lacking? M-W and Oxford refer to "moral" or "religious" laws, but no particular religion is specified. Hopefully you'll have a cite that excludes the Spaghetti-ites from any expectation of righteousness. I'm reasonably sure we can agree that there is only one "real" God, who has been called many different names, and for whom humans have created many rituals and beliefs, some of which may be contradictory among sects. But limiting to the Bible, the origin of the quote, exactly what is the definition of "righteous" which, not being so, would disqualify and prayers from availeth-ing even if fervent?

[rstrong]

You wouldn't happen to have a definition of "righteous", would you? Since Merriam Webster nor Oxford was around when that was written, I'm guessing their definitions are probably lacking?

A man can sell his daughter as a sex slave to another man (Exodus 21:7). (When referring to female slaves, some translations substitute the polite terms "handmaiden" or "servant" for "concubine.") If that second man then beats her to death with a rod, as long as she lingers for a day or two before dying, that's peachy-keen. (Exodus 21:21)

Both men are still righteous Christians.

[O Really]

Probably not official Christians.
Those are Old Testament references, before there were any Christians. Plus, as you know, all Old Testament writings can be cited or ignored at will by the modern Christians.

[rstrong]

Probably not official Christians.
Those are Old Testament references, before there were any Christians. Plus, as you know, all Old Testament writings can be cited or ignored at will by the modern Christians.

New Testament writings can be cited or ignored at will by the modern Christians. Mr.B for example routinely does this. See any sect that allows women to speak in church.

One could argue that even New Testament references are from before there were Christians. Christ and Friends were a Jewish doomsday cult, but still absolutely Jewish. His following gradually evolved into a separate religion in the century after his death.

Even when Christians claim that the old Mosaic Covenant is no longer in effect or even that Old Testament isn't part of Christianity, they routinely quote Old Testament commandments to justify their claims. Again, see Mr.B for details. Despite their hypocrisy, it's obviously very much part of their religion.

[bannination]

[neoplacebo]

I suppose if Mormons smoked and drinked, I'd be one of them.......not sure.

[indago]

Journalist Laurie Goodstein wrote for The New York Times 6 December 2014:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office. But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses. Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

article

[neoplacebo]

Journalist Laurie Goodstein wrote for The New York Times 6 December 2014:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A bookkeeper named Roy Torcaso, who happened to be an atheist, refused to declare that he believed in God in order to serve as a notary public in Maryland. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in 1961 the court ruled unanimously for Mr. Torcaso, saying states could not have a “religious test” for public office. But 53 years later, Maryland and six other states still have articles in their constitutions saying people who do not believe in God are not eligible to hold public office. Maryland’s Constitution still says belief in God is a requirement even for jurors and witnesses. Now a coalition of nonbelievers says it is time to get rid of the atheist bans because they are discriminatory, offensive and unconstitutional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

article

The citizens of MD haven't changed this probably because it's such a big deal to amend the Constitution; plus I suspect all the state politicians would fall over themselves to not be associated with disassociating themselves from "religion" or "God" or whatever you want to call it. I'll bet the state Constitution isn't changed for at least 20 more years if at all.

[rstrong]

I'd bet it would happen sooner, if a lawyer tries to get a conviction thrown out because a juror or witness was non-religious.

[neoplacebo]

I'd bet it would happen sooner, if a lawyer tries to get a conviction thrown out because a juror or witness was non-religious.

Possibly, but there again, there is somewhat of a stigma associated with anyone who would mount an effort to do so. I'll stick with 20 years.