|
Prayer is how we speak to our Father in Heaven. He is the literal father of our spirits. As he is our father, we should come to him with our concerns, thoughts, feelings, and questions. Heavenly Father will answer our prayers, typically through the feelings of our hearts and thoughts in our minds. If we pray sincerely, Heavenly Father will answer our prayers.
So yes, I pray and Heavenly Father certainly answers my prayers. I do tell my Father in Heaven all that troubles me, all that I am thankful for, and I ask him to bestow his blessings on others who are in need.
Prayer Breakfast Violates Reason and Constitutiion
We are in the middle of a
National and World Tragedy
The uncontrolled Civil War in Iraq
which Our president initiated and
bungled beyond reason.
HE RELIED on PRAYER.
To his "higher father." rather than a father who had been involved in a war in Iraq 10 years earlier.
Prayer is VERY DANGERous to our Public Policy.
And events like the National Prayer Breakfast
Normalize Prayer, pressure all politicians to say that they Pray.
I Protest National Prayer Day.
Buddhist Meditation is Far More Efficacious Than Prayer.
Whether or not there is a God, even scientists will tell us that Prayer has SOME Benefits.
But we can get all those Benefits and MORE if we
as Norrie recommends
Practice Buddhist Meditation
rather than prayer.
Study its benefits if you aren't familiar with it.
It is a 3,000 year old Spiritual Practice, the most highly developed in the world.
AND
it avoids the Supernatural Mythological dependence on God or Zeus or Allah.
IMHO, God started the Big Bang. He/She also granted the gifts of Free Will and Future to all the thinking beings in the Universe. This being the case, God is not able to alter life and requests/prayers will not be answered. Statistically, your request might come true but it is simply the result of the variabiliy/randomness of Nature.
So put down your rosaries and prayer beads and stop worshiping cows and bowing to Mecca six times a day. Instead work hard at your job, take care of aging parents, volunteer at a soup kitchen, donate to charities and the poor and continue to follow the Commandments of your religion or any good rules of living as gracious and good human beings. And lets all hope there indeed is a place called Heaven!!!
I see a great deal of value in asking the universe for guidance. But the idea of praying to an authority figure has never made sense to me. From my reading, the Old Testament describes God like an abusive, controlling parent. One does not ask such an authority figure for guidance or inspiration, since such a figure is interested only in using you to satisfy its own emotional needs. Instead, one walks on eggshells hoping not to send the authority into a mindless rage. I know that sounds extreme, but that's how I read the Sacrifice of Isaac story and the first half of the Ten Commandments.
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz?
My friends all drive Porsches, I must make amends.
Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends,
So Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz?
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a color TV ?
Dialing For Dollars is trying to find me.
I wait for delivery each day until three,
So oh Lord, won't you buy me a color TV?
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a night on the town?
I'm counting on you, Lord, please don't let me down.
Prove that you love me and buy the next round,
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a night on the town?
Everybody!
Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz?
My friends all drive Porsches, I must make amends,
Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends,
So oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz?
Janis Joplin's stong pretty sums up what I feel about prayer. I don't pray.
The best prayer is praise. It does not have to be in words. It does not have to be in a specific religious context. An atheist in awe at the beauty of the universe and feeling grateful for life is, in fact, praying.
"An atheist in awe at the beauty of the universe and feeling grateful for life is, in fact, praying."
Fern, I can appreciate that sentiment. Unfortunately, many religions insist that isn't praying since it isn't to a specific supreme being. What would be a good way to answer those religions' objections?
I often think it is silly to pray for selfish things. I once saw a post on a community board where a guy in Florida prayed that a hurricane would not hit his town. This of course was like praying that the hurricane would hit some other guy's town. It was pretty selfish, but it is not an uncommon desire when a hurricane is aiming straight for you. Anyway, I like to pray for the things that Abe Lincoln prayed for, which was ability to see what is right.
I once spent three months praying that I would lose weight.
At the end of it, I had lost...three months.
Certainly not.
Whenever I see a billboard advertising something like a day of prayer to end abortion, I always feel glad that at least they're not doing anything that will have an effect.
I'm reminded of an old Russian proverb - "Pray to God, but keep rowing to shore." Praying is all well and good, but don't expect your "Higher Power" to swoop down and give you what you want. You have to do your part, too.
I pray, but not the traditional way. I don't speak words, I pray through my heart. At least it feels that way.
FERN in her post above, sums it up well.
it was prayer that led me to islam- i pray 5 times a day at specified times- it might seem restrictive to some- but it keeps ALLAH and that connection firmly intact for me- i posted this earlier but i like it-
I am really happy to see someone talk about prayer in this forum- as a muslim- prayer is a most ever constant force in my life- my husband and i rise before sunrise every day and join in prayer- and during the day wherever he is- i know that were both praying around the same time-
one of the most beautiful things ive contemplated is the fact that when i think of the entire world as a whole- (muslims pray at strictly proscribed times)
i know that like a great flower unfolding moving across the face of the earth in a rhythm and like a great unseen dance (well seen by ALLAH) there is the pattern of the rising and prostrating of believers in some beautiful unison- like the greatest most sublime clock of adoration- and that any given second in the day or night- constantly as the sun moves in its orbit- there is someone saying the words we all say- in the same language-in a perfect harmony, with the exact same intent-worship and a giving of the heart to our god- just giving-(we do the petition part after prayer if we choose)
thanks for giving me the chance to express this.
peace and salaams
it is in this we all share a certain cohesiveness isnt it? (rhetorical not intended to insult atheists)
Considering the mischief and mayhem that seems to follow god wherever he goes, god and I have a general understanding; I don't ask him for anything, I'm one less thing on his very full plate, and therefore, he doesn't bother me at all. So far, it seems to have worked quite well.
"Tonio :
"An atheist in awe at the beauty of the universe and feeling grateful for life is, in fact, praying."
Fern, I can appreciate that sentiment. Unfortunately, many religions insist that isn't praying since it isn't to a specific supreme being. What would be a good way to answer those religions' objections?"
Tonio, I would answer that prayer is a conversation between me and the Divine, and what are they doing butting in? Besides, I cannot imagine the Divine (no matter how you name It) being insulted by praise.
NATIONAL PRAYER BREAKFAST
"On February 3, 2005 thousands of politicians, businessmen, and religious figures gathered at the Washington Hilton Hotel for the 53rd National Prayer Breakfast. Through the years, many of the attendees mistakenly believed the event has been sponsored by the White House."
The OTHER side of the story:
I don't "pray", I observe. And acknowledge. And learn.
It's called living.
On the topic of favorite quotes...
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.
Teach a man to pray and he will starve to death praying for a fish.
I pray to say I am grateful for what I have and for what I got. It keeps me rooted.
I pray to give me strenght in times of tribulations. It keeps me sober and sane to deal with the trials before me.
I pray for the well being of all members of my family and friends in every way. It reminds me to be sensitive to them and their needs.
I pray to God for all of these as a most personal and private pact.
Prayers is calming, balming, a form of meditation and times of personal spiritual and practical reflection.
You put away, put aside everything else around you when you pause to prepare for prayers and the act of praying.
The pauses to do so, and in praying, force you to interrupt your feelings and thoughts. And, after prayers, and to look at them again.
Praise be to God to remind us that we are mere beings with flaws to overcome, and free will to decide what we what to do with our life and what we want to be.
And I pray that the militancy of the Koran/Qu'ran will be deleted.
And I pray that Sunnis and Shiites will soon stop their butchering of each other.
And I pray that women will soon have equal rights in all religions.
And I pray that Democracy flourishes one day in all countries.
> Fern, I can appreciate that sentiment. Unfortunately, many religions insist that isn't
> praying since it isn't to a specific supreme being. What would be a good way to answer those
> religions' objections?
Some will not accept any answer you give them, of course. I think if someone is open to hearing a different point of view, they might be willing to think deeply about the Rumi story "Moses and the Shepherd". Since we all have our conceptions about who God is or is not, we should consider the ending of that story: "When you eventually see through the veils to how things
really are, you will keep saying again and again, This is certainly not like we thought it was!"
Moses heard a shepherd on the road praying,
"God, where are you? I want to help you, to fix your shoes and comb your
hair. I want to wash your clothes and pick the lice off. I want to bring
you milk to kiss your little hands and feet when its time for you to go to
bed..."
Moses could stand it no longer. "Who are you talking to?"
"The one who made us, and made the earth and made the sky."
"Dont talk about shoes and socks with God! And whats this with your little
hands and feet? Such blasphemous familiarity sounds like youre chatting
with your uncles... Body-and-birth language are right for us on this side
of the river, but not for addressing the origin, not for Allah."
The shepherd repented and tore his clothes and sighed and wandered out
into the desert.
A sudden revelation Came then to Moses. Gods voice: "You have separated me
from one of my own. Did you come as a Prophet to unite, or to sever? I
have given each being a separate and unique way of seeing and knowing and
saying that knowledge."
"What seems wrong to you is right for him. What is poison to one is honey
to someone else. Purity and impurity, sloth and diligence in worship,
these mean nothing to me. I am apart from all that. Ways of worshiping
are not to be ranked as better or worse than one another. Hindus do Hindu
things. The Dravidian Muslims in India do what they do. Its all praise,
and its all right."
"Its not me thats glorified in acts of worship. Its the worshipers! I dont
hear the words they say. I look inside at the humility. The broken-open
lowliness is the reality, not the language! Forget phraseology ..."
...Moses ran after the shepherd...
"I was wrong. God has revealed to me that there are no rules for worship.
Say whatever and however your loving tells you to. Your sweet blasphemy is
the truest devotion. Through you a whole world is freed. Loosen your
tongue and dont worry what comes out, Its all the light of the spirit"
The shepherd grew quiet. When you look in the mirror, you see yourself,
not the state of the mirror, The flute player puts breath into a flute,
and who makes the music? Not the flute. The flute player! Whenever you
speak praise or thanksgiving to God, its always like this dear shepherds
simplicity. When you eventually see through the veils to how things
really are, you will keep saying again and again, This is certainly not
like we thought it was!
I believe prayer is the natural way to character maturation; to wisdom, unity with other people; to gain personal strength, find and exercise personal talent; feel equal; strive to maintain peace; feel compassion; exercise and demand honesty; to find personal freedom from erroneous thought; ---to realize justice!
I pray to God, through Christ; as I feel Christ is the source of these common human ideals; the 'human spirit'; that heaven is not in some distant place; but right in our midst; just buried deep in personal thought.
I believe God is a person; a thought; a conscious existence. A consciousness without a body; a mind not requiring mechanical formation; not limited to physical perceptions; but like our deepest emotional need for love,--or our feelings. I pray that I will be able to love,--and be loved!
Buddhism over Prayer
the B man speaks the truth.
Why do we NEED to imagine an All Powerful Guiding Force 'Up there" who listens to our prayers.
Isn't it a regressive, child=like denial of the need to grow up?
Ernst Becker, in his Pulitzer winner Denial of Death, calls this mythology
"Immortality Machines"
myths to take away the necessity of accepting our mortality in a grown up way.
buddhism is the most spiritually developed way to accept our mortality in a grown up way.
Meditate, don't pray.
Meditate on human compassion
Meditate on beauty
Meditate on the flow of the universe
Meditate on the way things are and the way things flow
You get more benefit than prayer
and you lose the illusion of an omniscient God
who kills thousands in tsunamis
and sends babies to their death with childhood diseases.
As Flies to Wanton Boys
Are We to the Gods.
They kill us for their sport.
W Shakespeare
King Lear
THerein lies God's mystery.
This is how HE often answers prayers.
I am sure He has his reasons.
i pray; 'keep me from politics...bring peace to the holy land and n. ireland...that more take up the practice to raise the collective consciousness while there is still hope, for financial gain so i may help my less fortunate brother, to express in frail human terms thank you for this silent time in my day, the hour before dawn, before chaos prevails, by your grace allow me to live and breathe one more day in remission...in the name of the father...amen.'
"I cannot imagine the Divine (no matter how you name It) being insulted by praise."
I can. It may deems my praise as insufficiently obsequious or sycophantic. "I said 12 novenas, not 10, you insignificant little worm!" It may be in a foul mood that day and may decide take out its anger on me. It may be irrational and prone to fits of rage. It may play sick mind games with me, like demanding that I sacrifice my son as a test of my obedience.
I'd like to see a National Day of Reason instituted. No prayers. No partisan suppression of scientific inquiry. No false piety a.k.a. pandering to religious constituencies.
Why do religionists act like they're such a downtrodden minority that they need the government to sponsor an event for prayer? If prayer actually made a difference why haven't all their previous prayers done anything? Didn't the people who live in New Orleans pray for the levees to hold? (and the people along the Mississippi in 1993 btw)
Individual prayer is mental masturbation and group prayer is just groupthink. I don't object when it's clearly a perfunctory groupthink exercise in bonding for people who all agree on what they're groupthinking about in the first place. I do, however, object to a supposedly pluralistic democratic government instituting it as a groupthink practice. In a democracy, the government should leave religion to the religionists and get on with the business of governing.
I think 9/11 and the Iraq debacle should be sufficient proof that people who pray for guidance from imaginary supernatural entitites wind up acting on dangerous delusions.
hand made god.
the arabian bedouin at the (time of ignorance)used to make his hand made god out of dates paste,he worship his hand made god at time of ease,at the inconvinence of hunger,he eats and devour his god.the civilized humanbeing in the 21 centurey ,makes democracey his god,he worship it at the time of ease,but as soon as ,democracey, interfer with his greed,lust,or even his style,immediatly ,he eats devour and toilet his hand made god in the nearst bathroom.
the creator of this universe is worthy of all praise,worthy of all worship,he sustain and maintain this universe,he is free from need.the needy human beings always in need,always dependent,hole-y,they need air,food,water,they need their creator all the time,but when it comes to his guidance and soul nourishment,they run to their hand made god ,that, would not avail them none but misery.those who they pray to the false god,or donot pray, are exactly like those who wating at the tip of water well,spreading their tired hands and arms toward the water,wating for the water to come up to reach their thirsty babbled mouth.worship the creator not the creation.
I once heard from an Islamic Scholar that when you make a dua (prayer), it is an indication that God has answered your prayer because He gave you the tofeeq (understanding) to ask in the first place. How beautiful is that! So my advice for us when making dua is to be firm and persistent and know that God is listening and has answered your prayers. It's only a matter of time...
Example: Two weeks ago, my car got stolen from in front of my apartment. Naturally I was sad but I knew that as a believer, God is in control of all matters, both good and (outwardly) bad. So I started making my dua. I made dua to God that He not only return my car to me but to return it to me fully intact, just as I left it. Visions and thoughts, however, of my car being stripped and parted out went in and out of my head! I would always have to fight off negative thoughts (plus I only had liability insurance) and assure myself that indeed, God has power over all things, both big (like the affairs of the Universe) and super small (like my petty needs).
Yesterday, I got a call from the police department that my car had been found. I was so happy, I immediately made a prayer of thanks. When I went to the tow yard to pick up the car, visions of my car being ransacked once again appeared. But lo and behold, the car appeared just as I left it, with nothing taken - with the key in the ignition.
The funny thing is when prayers DO get answered, us humans sometimes get so shocked as If God was not listening.
Ps. One thing that is VERY important when making dua is to know that as humans our intellect and knowledge is very limited. Often times we do not know what is ultimately good for us. This is why when asking for something I add these words: "Oh God, grant me _______ if it is good for my Religion, Worldly Life, and my life in the Hereafter."
Yes Omair- we dont know what God has in mind for us and of course our prayers reflect our acceptance of his will-
still it is kind of confirming in a very real way when ALLAH's will for us and our own resonable desire coincide, isnt it?
For me prayer comes in different forms.
Over the years I have come to see prayer primarily as an ongoing relationship or conversation with God. This almost continual dialogue has become my primary way to enter into and rest in God’s presence and/or what I sometimes describe as the “mystery of life”. It is more a disposition that keeps me in relationship to God than it is anticipation or expectation that God is going to intervene to provide a solution to the travails of life.
Another important kind of prayer for me is contemplation. This is a quiet conscious emptying of my mind, with the hope and desire that my inner silence will open my heart and mind to the presence of God.
I also find that study is an important means of communing with God. Especially when reading the Bible or studying world religions, theology, philosophy and psychology, I feel a connection to the divine presence. For me this starts with a conscious disposition to open myself to the truth, to open my mind and heart to both knowledge and inspiration.
Other forms of prayer that have increasing importance for me are prayers of praise and/or blessing. I am increasingly drawn to offer praise to God. And I am also drawn to saying silent prayers of blessing for myself, those closest to me and frequently for strangers. These various ways of being in relationship to God are all manifestations of my desire to enter into, and as much as possible, to remain in constant communion with God.
Excellent views, Emm. Much appreciated. And truth IS there for those that believe and want to receive. In the resurrections to come, God will certainly give all mankind an opportunity to experience the way it should have been since Eden.
Tonio :
"I cannot imagine the Divine (no matter how you name It) being insulted by praise."
I can. It may deems my praise as insufficiently obsequious or sycophantic. "I said 12 novenas, not 10, you insignificant little worm!" It may be in a foul mood that day and may decide take out its anger on me. It may be irrational and prone to fits of rage. It may play sick mind games with me, like demanding that I sacrifice my son as a test of my obedience."
Tonio, dear Tonio, why would you worship such a god? Contrary to what you've been told, the Divine is not an abusive parent, who needs you to be dependent, who will hurt you if you don't love It exactly as some dogma tells you. Think of It as your Holy Mom and Dad, who love you, who laugh with you, who hold out their hands to you and say, "Come, child, come. Learn and grow, and become like us." If our earthly parents can raise us to be good, strong, and capable, can our Heavenly Parents do less?
Look at Fern's wonderful post of 1/31, 5:44 pm. Loving blasphemy is more precious than sterile dogma. So love the Divine as your heart tells you, and don’t worry, because the Divine loves you right back. Blessed Be.
"Tonio, dear Tonio, why would you worship such a god?"
I don't. That is my point. I cannot imagine a supreme being that would not resemble an abusive parent. And my other point is that much of the Old Testament describes a God who resembles exactly that.
"Think of It as your Holy Mom and Dad, who love you, who laugh with you, who hold out their hands to you and say, 'Come, child, come. Learn and grow, and become like us.' If our earthly parents can raise us to be good, strong, and capable, can our Heavenly Parents do less?"
For what it's worth, whenever I showed defiance or assertiveness as a teenager, my father would drag me to a room by my neck and choke me. I have children of my own now, and my objective is not to be that type of father.
"Loving blasphemy is more precious than sterile dogma."
I love that sentiment. Who was Rumi and where can I find that Moses story? I've never even heard of either the writer or the story. When you use the word "Divine," I suspect most people in this thread interpret it as a reference to the Christian God. Can the word also refer to reverence for the universe and nature as opposed to a divine being?
What is Prayer?
Perhaps we can distinguish between the acts of prayer and the concept of prayer.
Prayer can be conceptualized not as a communication with a 'supernatural being', as the detractors coin it, but as each individual's struggle between the inner, spiritual life and the external world of needs, exigencies, demands, and joys or the internal world of "deamons" and unwanted desires. It can take the form of struggle for leaning and discernment, or of exultation and communion, with others or with that part of each that is self-identified with God.
Prayer can also be conceptualized as the embodiment of belief, "living a prayer", as Rev Thistlewaite notes in her essay, or as the Budhists suggest, as living your life as "moving meditation".
I'm sure there are other conceptualizations.
What is the purpose of prayer?
Most people are familiar (or should be) with the "how tos" of praying in their particular tradition. (Although some seem unaware of the monastaries that use prayer very much like the Buddists use mediation. Indeed, a read or recited prayer is different than a sung prayer.)
The acts of praying can orient an individual, refreshing a perspective of what is real and what is not real, of what is first and what is not. In Islam, the day is interrupted five times - this is a powerful re-inforcement of the place of the individual in time and in the world and in relation to the daily tasks and also the daily rhythm of life.
The persistence of prayer can also be a defense, in a way. It is a readiness. Like practicing football, if you have trained your mind/body, you will know how best to react when the ball comes to you. Similarly, with prayer (and study), one can hope to develop a readiness to recognize temptations and defend against them.
Last, we were always taught these fundamental aspects of prayer, which nicely fit into the useful acronym, ACTS:
Tonio,
I use the word "Divine" to mean the divinity that is immanent in all things, the universe, nature, you and me. Understanding all the aspects of the Divine is beyond me, so I use metaphors that I am familiar with: Male and Female, the Lord and Lady, Mom and Dad, yin and yang.
Fern’s Moses story was spot on. And if your father is not a good metaphor, then think of the Divine as the father you want to be.
I do not pray. I act.
Praying to an imaginary friend based on the writings of Bronze Age tribesmen who ran around the middle-east is about as silly a behavior as human beings can perform.
Instead of relinquishing responsibility for the situation around us to this imaginary friend the world would be much better served if people actually tried to change a bad situation into a good one.
It is obvious from the situation we find ourselves in, that god(s) don't answer prayers: and Christians freely admit this by qualifying their prayers with "but your will be done in all things". If this is the case -- that god exists and our lives will evolve according to his plan -- prayer is still a waste of time.
People need to take responsibility for their lives and learn to savor the short time they have on this earth... Focusing on fairy-tales only leads to sorrow -- and a wasted life.
"Prayer can be conceptualized not as a communication with a 'supernatural being', as the detractors coin it, but as each individual's struggle between the inner, spiritual life and the external world of needs, exigencies, demands, and joys or the internal world of 'deamons' and unwanted desires."
I can appreciate that. I suspect the detractors are not slamming the entire concept of prayer, but simply how prayer is defined by many religious doctrines. When prayer is an obligation or a requirement, such in a church-run school, that may squash any desire by the individual to resolve the struggle between spiritual life and the external world.
DARLINGS BREAKFAST LUNCH OR DINNER ALL THIS PRAYER HOKUS POKUS IS A WASTE OF TIME. HELP FEED THE POOR AND HOMELESS AND YOU WILL GET INSTANT AND REAL RESULTS. RELIGION IS THE PROBLEM AND NOT THE ANSWER! MOST MINISTERS/PREACHERS ARE HOMOMPHOBIC IDIOTS JUST AFTER YOUR MONEY! START THINKING FOR YOURSELF! AT 71 I HAVE NEVER FALLEN FOR THIS SCAM AND AM A HEALTHY AND HAPPY PERSON! NO NEED FOR THIS FAIRY TALE BS! TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOURSELF!
Prayer is nothing more than another of the many ways with which the pious deceive themselves. They pray for something... it happens... "God has listened to my prayer." They pray for something... it does NOT happen... "God must not want me to have that, yet." Note, though, that when people pray for amputated limbs to be restored, and such, nothing EVER happens.
Prayer has its uses, of course. For one thing, it is a method for focusing the mind... focusing intent... making the mind more sensitive to opportunity. But so are meditation and affirmations. The key difference though, is that the pious interpret everything in terms of their faith-based belief systems. So, if they happen to notice an opportunity after they have prepared their mind to do just that... then "God did it."
Prayer is just a mechanism by which religious delusions are reinforced.
Yes, I pray and I consider prayer as an ongoing conversation with The God of all creation.
After many years of searching, questioning, and study, God opened my heart to accept His one and only Son as my way home to Him.
I also had a really hard time accepting this for many years until finally one day, I asked God to truly let me know the truth about all this, cause if I was going to continue to seek Him, I needed to know if it was any good. Long story short...He did and I have never known such peace. No matter what has happened since then, shooting, suicide, murders, fires, etc, I have the assurance of being with Him in heaven.
So I pray for my family, friends, neighbors, strangers, our leaders, and ultimately for God's will to be done in all things. True love is abandonment of self,,,,He did this for me and I daily strive with His help to do this for Him. Peace.
theres a big difference between prayer of worship and prayer of petition-
when one firmly believes they are controlling the events in their life- i call that delusion-
to continually state a concept such as that-when repeatedly proven that it is not true- seems foolishness and being a slave to ones ego-
prayer of worship requires a humility that removes the delusionof the ego- there are forces that we cant measure in the universe and dont even begin to understand- perhaps one day theyll be provable by scientific methods- but once electricity was a mystery- it doesnt mean it didnt exist-
for many of us prayer is a powerful force in our lives and no amount of skepticism will disprove what we know to be true for ourselves.
Yes. I do pray today. But spirituality came slow to me. I fought it for years. I believed that God was the problem, him and his religions. its taken me along time to overcome those old beliefs. At times I still have doubt and conflict. But today I realize that there is something bigger than me, it helps to keep me humble. I don't pray for people, things or my loved ones. I ask that only Gods will be done in all cases. And more importantly that God may provide me with the strength to accept his will. I do wish that people could realize that its not God who starts wars, and or acts of terrorism. Its people who have a distorted view of their religion.
VICTORIA-
"prayer of worship requires a humility that removes the delusionof the ego- there are forces that we cant measure in the universe and dont even begin to understand- perhaps one day theyll be provable by scientific methods- but once electricity was a mystery- it doesnt mean it didnt exist-"
Very true. Someone once said that any advanced technology would be regarded as magical by those unfamiliar with it. Perhaps we're just not advanced enough to measure God? I've got a feeling it's got something to do with quantum physics. ;-)
The hundreds of thousands of people who were swept away in the recent Asian Sunami were mostly people who prayed 5 times a day facing Mecca.
A fat lot of good that did them.
Gary,
More good points, well put. Agreed..praying for Gods will follows the model prayer outline that Jesus Christ gave us. Effectual prayer certainly goes far beyond just reciting that model prayer verbatim. And praying for Gods kingdom to be established on this earth at Christ's return is also a prayer of hope for us all. Thanks for your thoughts and insight.
"A fat lot of good that did them."
YoYo, in my view, that comment is almost as reprehensible as the claim that the tsunami and Hurricane Katrina were God's punishments for non-Christians and sinners. Deaths in natural disasters do not prove anything about anyone's religious beliefs.
God doesn't need our prayers. Being omnipresent and omniscient, He knows what we want as well as what we need. He knows what's best for each person individually and what's best for humanity as a whole. In the end, His will shall be done.
In the meantime, however, prayer is for us. It's a means to communicate, something that Jesus promised would be listened to. It's a means to focus our minds on what's most important to us, so that we can do something about it. Community prayers can help the community see where there is need to help. Prayer isn't for God's benefit; it's for ours.
It also gives us a certain peace of mind to lay matters that are beyond our ability to change in God's hands. For example, I pray every time I hear sirens, that whoever has been hurt will be taken care of. I've no proof that God then protects whomever it was--be it a policeman in a high-speed chase or a heart-attack victim in an ambulance or firemen rushing to save children from a burning home--but I feel I've done something, I've given them a chance by laying it in His lap. There's not much else I can do in those cases, so I pray. (And yes, I do more practical things like giving blood as well.)
I consider every wish I make on a star a prayer, too. I don't think God is going to just give me what I want--but I think I benefit when I pray, by distilling my desires and worries and sharing them with someone.
>Deaths in natural disasters do not prove anything about anyone's religious beliefs.<<
And yet people who "miraculously" survive these things thank god(s) for sparing their lives. Why is that?
AMY:
Because He did.
What is prayer? Do you pray? If so, to whom and for what?
This is an excellent question whether one believes in God or not precisely because it inspires a related question: What exactly is the relationship of prayer--all that comes under it, the emotional and intellectual and behavioral state, etc.--to creativity?
In fact this question and the responses to it from atheists or agnostics will be extremely telling for their cause...
I am an agnostic but I would not consider myself in the company of fellow agnostics let alone atheists. I find the position without God too often to be a wholesale rejection of the imaginative life (an extirpation of such and I would dearly like to see the results of testing for imagination and other capacities on the part of atheists and agnostics). Furthermore atheists and agnostics seem incredibly naive about morality (how exactly is the human race to go down through the ages without God--every person nothing more than a link in a chain at best--without a morality totally beyond what we today imagine? It must require a flexibility and strength of action beyond compare...). And this question of prayer is just another example of something atheists and agnostics never really think about.
No doubt an atheist or agnostic would say first there is no God and second that prayer is something of begging or something--a total waste of time in expectation of help from something which does not exist.
Unfortunately though prayer at its best is something of a sincere yearning, a straining beyond one's capacities, and that one is so often pushed to prayer out of a loss of hope in only self by no means discounts the possibility of getting results. These results might be nothing more than getting in touch with resources within one never thought one had, but this is precisely the point: Should we not keep many if not all of the aspects of prayer in place precisely because even if God does not exist prayer gets us in touch with the best of us?
I cite examples anyone can look up because they come from popular music: Take Carlos Santana and a song such as "Samba pa ti". Or Steve Vai playing "For the love of God" (with that incredible warbling at the end which sounds like a new born child). Or the mighty Led Zeppelin giving the old blues number "Jesus gonna be your dying bed maker" a workout on the album Physical Graffiti (there it's called "In my time of dying"). Or John Mclaughlin and the mighty Mahavishnu Orchestra (check out the Munich '72 bootleg where Jan Hammer gets into a deep trance on "Meeting of the Spirits").
The point is prayer is indistinguishable from the best of us emotionally and intellectually...and to slight prayer because some people wheedle and plead in unwholesome fashion or ask for the trivial is to mistake unwholesome behavior for true prayer.
The best of prayer is something of foundation for what we call creative expectation in the secular sense and is not to be mocked unless we truly get the root and branch of creativity to rise up to blossom without God.
Essentially the task for atheists and agnostics is to have people aspire without God, but how many atheists and agnostics have we heard of aspiring? Too often atheists and agnostics seem unnaturally reasonable, unemotional, unimaginative (actually many are illogical and emotional and simply in a rather adolescent recoil from religion).
I go on this extended meditation against atheism and agnosticism because with the question of prayer we have an excellent example of atheists and agnostics overlooking something about religion which not only they should take seriously, but which if overlooked will be a solid strike against their position.
I do not even have to read what atheists and agnostics have to say about prayer to anticipate their blundering with regard to this question.
Once again, prayer is valuable whether one believes in God or not--and if one would rather dispense with it along with God one had better have a clear theory and practice of creativity in all its aspects in place or be set up for a mockery which perhaps will extend to every place of God.
Daniel,
Excellent question about prayer and creativity. (I loved your reference to Steve Vai--"Passion and Warfare" is one of my favorite albums.)
"How exactly is the human race to go down through the ages without God--every person nothing more than a link in a chain at best--without a morality totally beyond what we today imagine? It must require a flexibility and strength of action beyond compare..."
Religious doctrine is not necessarily the same as morality, in my view. Doctrine makes claims about human actions that earn approval or disapprova from deity, and those claims often have little to do with those actions' effect on other people.
"Should we not keep many if not all of the aspects of prayer in place precisely because even if God does not exist prayer gets us in touch with the best of us?"
Oh, absolutely. Although I'm more of a pantheist, I think it's incorrect to describe atheism or atheists as anti-prayer. Sam Harris describes a practice in "The End of Faith" which seems to be to be a non-religious version of prayer.
As I see it, religious doctrine conflicts with the idea of individual belief. I would suggest that religious doctrine is just as hostile as atheism to the idea of creativity, if not more so. Doctrine approves of only certain types of prayer to specific entities. Some branches of Christianity actively oppose meditation. I once encountered a fundamentalist from Concerned Women for America who claimed that "guided imagery" was a euphemism for Satan worship or black magic.
man,s dimensionalityies.
1- man and his creator
2- man and himself
3-man and other
as for man and his creator lord,man humbly need to admit his creator lord,s due right by not worshiping none save his creator lord.
as for man and himself,man is apt to mistakes,short comes and sins,man need to purge and pureify his soul all the time,man certainly need supply from his creator lord.-every man is responsible for his own action no body died for nobodyies sin,adam and eve when descandant on the planet earth,they wear giving the privilge of ( repentance),the creator lord never spared no son no daughter no blood none but the repentance, mercy to man kind-
as for man and other,man need to give his fellow man his due respect and sincer advice,man would not come with better than the criteria of the creator lord who created all man kind.the only way to bust the square lock of humanism is to stay conected to the allmercyfull ,allforgiving creator lord.
Keb said it best. But I have had the chance to hear God in person. I broke my neck in 87 and was paralysed from the waist down. One day I was just on my way out the door to go to therapy and God spoke to me (in my mind) but yet just as clear as I hear through my ears, he said "don't worry Gordy let your heart be calm, everything is going to be all right". I've been in this wheelchair for almost 20 years and I thank God daily, for I know it's going to be all right.
dear gordon (above)
how can you possible write that everything is gonna be ok when you have been in a wheelchair for 20 years? and you thank god daily for that?
if there was such a thing as a god/jesus she would have giving you the perfect healthy body with all normal functions which you and all of us deserve.
all this religious stuff is just crap its all bs but perhaps if it does make you feel better stick with it but i suggest you give more credit to doctors and scientist that have shown proven results.
goodluck to you.
To Tonio from Daniel. I agree with your criticisms--I decided to exaggerate, go with a somewhat spirited reply to the question to provoke, etc. I am not against atheism and agnosticism, I just want the foundation really solid, as if religion naturally rising up into a higher understanding, and not a cutting out of religion for atheism and agnosticism which is actually a cutting off of ourselves from perhaps even elementary aspects of ourselves...Hope that is a quick and sensible reply....
Daniel,
Excellent reply. My point is that the "higher understanding" transcends religious doctrine. No doctrine or theistic model has any exclusive claim to that understanding. One doesn't have to believe in the Christian God to achieve that understanding.
From my reading of Harris and Dawkins and the atheists on this site, they appear to be criticizing the concept of God as taught by Judaism and Christianity and Islam. These religions use "God" to mean a supreme being who makes decisions for everything that happens in the universe.
HEALTH BENEFITS OF PRAYER
Preliminary findings of a research project carried out by Universiti Malaya's biomedical engineering departmenU show that the positions Muslims take during their prayers benefit the heart and spine.
The study also showed that the postures boost the capacity for memory and increase attention.
Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said the research reaffirmed the power of prayer in every Muslimأ¢â‚¬â„¢s life.
"The study investigates the physiological interactions and effects of the salat postures on the human body," said Abdullah, who likened salat postures to those practiced now in yoga.
"Since the majority of our population are Muslims, it is both of interest and importance that we not only understand the spiritual benefits of salat, but also ... its biological and medical effects," he added.
Muslims are obliged to pray five times a day; at dawn, midday, afternoon, sunset and evening. Each prayer consists of several simple positions during which Muslims recite verses from the Holy Qurأ¢â‚¬â„¢an.
Worshippers usually begin their prayers with a standing posture, followed by a deep bow and then a sitting position on the knees. The praying person then touches his/hers forehead to the ground, stands up and repeats the whole process until he/she finishes the prayer.
Previous studies found that Muslim prayers, often directed in the direction (qibla) of the Ka'ba shrine in Mecca, can be therapeutic for the mind and the body.
According to an article on ww.islamicvoice.com, the postures of the prayers stretch various muscles and nerves, giving a constant physical therapy to all the joints of our bodies. This protects arthritis, and reduces back pains and disc problems.
Since praying provides Muslims with mental satisfaction, it can also reduce anxiety, depression, stress and tension which are also considered to be contributing factors to various diseases.
Moreover, performing ablution, which involves washing the face, mouth, nostrils, ears, and arms before praying, has great health advantages, like preventing tooth decay, and reducing bacterial infections.
-- AJP and Agencies
Vertical, two-way, communication.
Purpose; to go to the true compass and seek direction in all things.
Vertical, two-way, communication.
Purpose; to go to the only True compass and seek direction for all matters.
Victoria,
So if the Shiites and Sunnis of Iraq and Iran wash properly why do they then hate each other so?
Maybe they are using the wrong tooth brushes. I recommend Crest's new spin brush five times a day.
That is it!!! The solution to the Mideast conflict, Spin Brushes. Bravo!!!
liberated has seen to the heart of the matter-
spin brushes for everyone!!!!
ok i admit it was a cut and paste- but there really are benefits to the activity-
GORDON- ive taken care of some mean spirited quadriplegics in my life- i wish id have had a client like you-
Daniel to Tonio. Actually I wish I had not been so hasty in my reply to you (early in the morning, yawn). I do have a problem with the typical atheist/agnostic position concerning morality these days (as if morality is only a bicycle and clearly understood and we really should just take off the training wheels of religious doctrine and just ride).
I find morality far from clearly understood--in fact to understand it is to become more sophisticated in goals and actions, clearly capable of a variety of goals and actions. As for morality in a world with no deity, why that would be self-sacrifice strictly for the sake of one's fellow man and no eternal reward and that brings us to the concept of the pure survival of the human race: if there is no deity the only hope for man is his pure survival by his own hands, and if he is to survive only by his own hands then all means toward this survival are legitimate unless of course one does not believe in the pure survival of the human race...
A world without God would be a world in which we have to behave far more responsibly and imaginatively than now--in fact our lives would depend on it--and this means increased pressure from generation to generation to act in "increased life" manners and by no means is a world in which we will have an easy time. Imagine centuries upon centuries of man with the brutal responsibility inculcated in children that they are links in a chain and must act in such an such a manner and must in fact become more flexible and intelligent in behavior with each passing generation.
The atheist/agnostic position concerning morality these days strikes me as little more than an elimination of not only religious doctrine but any true examinination of morality. We do not live in a true post religion world in other words but only one in decline. I would say man is far from capable of truly accepting and acting on the belief that he makes or breaks only by his own hands. For me to be proved incorrect I would have to read a barrage of works addressing how man would have to act in a post religious doctrine world....
Thanks for your reply, Daniel.
"As for morality in a world with no deity, why that would be self-sacrifice strictly for the sake of one's fellow man and no eternal reward..."
To sacrifice one's own needs for the sake of others, believing in an eternal reward is not an absolute necessity. Obviously, it can be a powerful motivator for some people, but others have different motivations. In my view, humans are capable of resolving moral questions on their own without eternal reward. But too many people choose not to use that capability, usually for reasons of instant gratification. (My boilerplate answer is that their parents didn't teach them about the natural consequences of actions or about the natural reward of delayed gratification.) It's not about the hopelessly idealistic concept of humanity as inherently good, it more about the practical observation that humans are capable of both enormous good and enormous evil.
I mentioned this another thread...I'm trying to resolve exactly what would motivate people like the jihadists to kill others simply because they have different beliefs about deity. This motivation seems to obliterate the concept of survival, to the point of flying jetliners into buildings. Is this solely because they think they've been promised virgins in paradise, which is actually a mistranslation of the Qu'ran? Does it have to do with the sense of divine mission, meaning that if people think God has ordered them to do something, they would do anything to accomplish that order? I don't have the answer. Right now, I suspect that the idea of eternal reward is like a knife, which can be used to help or to hurt. My question is, if eternal reward is not absolutely necessary, and it also leads some people to kill, does the concept have much value? I believe it's possible to encourage morality without the bribe of heaven or the threat of hell, maybe using non-theistic Eastern religions as a model, but I don't know exactly how that would be done.
Plus, obedience to an authority, whether mortal or divine, is not the same as morality. My interpretation of morality is about which actions help or harm others. Is that the way you interpret morality? I believe that there should be a valid moral reason for having a rule, otherwise why have the rule at all? Some religions have rules that don't seem to have any connection with the moral concepts of help or harm. Examples include the Western religions' prohibition on homosexuality, or the Amish teachings about graven images.
Tonio,
Have you seen the most beautiful sunset ever? Have you seen the smile of a child? A curly tail puppy or a snow topped mountain? The sea under a full moon or the eyes of the person you love? That is the Divine.
It is the Universe and all the possibilities in it.
The DNA of the Creator is in each of It's creation. A spark of that creative force resides in each of us. We are not seperate from the Force that created us. I am a Pantheist, a Wiccan...God is in all.
We say Thou art God/Goddess...does not mean we are God or we are Goddess...but we have that divine spark in us, miniscule though. And we are co creators of this world....what man has done to harm the Earth with global warming has proven that.
Call God Sam...it's as good as any. Or Jesus, or Pan, or Allah, or Jahovah. Look around you.. the entity that was the causation of all this is not so petty as to care about a name or the face you see.
"He drew a circle to shut me out
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout
But love and I had the wit to win
We drew a circle that drew him in."
Blessed Be...
DANIEL- i dont mean this to be an excuse at all- merely trying to understand-
for instance- suicide in catholicism (as in islam is strictly forbidden and the severest ingratitude and throwing away of the experience of life weve been blessed to posess- yet some even knowing that they will be thrown into hell- their sense of frustration- despair and exposure to repeated extraordinary injustices have done just that-
the irish republican army has committed unspeakable acts of terrorism in the face of repeated and unceasing viloence against themselves and injustices imposed on them-there is no wiggle room in catholic theology at all- and yet for 101 years this has been occurring-
similarly in some desperate and despairing socities- some impoverished and powerless young have been led away on their passions and lack of any other decent influences-
we know there arent any 72 virigins- but to some hopeless youngsters in the world- driven to unconscionable acts by people(and i use the word loosely) who use and abuse them-
the profile of most terrorist suicide bombers is not the well fed well educated saudis who drove planes into the twin towers- but ususally are identified by their poverty- lack of strongmale figures- and hopeless outrage-
i do not begin to justify such actions
but i can try to understand that it is not simply "evil" and "good" people on opposite sides of the war-
and far from being religious- it is oftn politically motivated- no one could call palestine-israel a religious conflict-
just trying to see things from both sides-
as everything alsways has 2 sides and the truth is ususally in the middle---
peace and i mean peace
Morality Did NOT Originate with Religion
That is an old wives tale (pardon me ladies).
Atheists are JUST AS MORAL as believers.
Morality predates the establishment of religion and the 10 commandments by thousands of years,
and many species of apes are about as moral as the average fundamentalist. (quite an irony there)
or me for that matter.
As for the
Absurd Claim
that atheists have no values:
Most atheists are Humanists. I am.
here is a short definition of Humanism, which is in practice signifcantly more moral than Christianity has been over the centuries. No secular humanist ever started a war to convert people to rationality.
Here is ONE description (there is NO dogma)
Secular Humanism is a way of thinking and living that aims to bring out the best in people so that all people can have the best in life. Secular humanists reject supernatural and authoritarian beliefs. They affirm that we must take responsibility for our own lives and the communities and world in which we live. Secular humanism emphasizes reason and scientific inquiry, individual freedom and responsibility, human values and compassion, and the need for tolerance and cooperation.
To Tonio from Daniel. I find it astonishing how little reflection has gone into the concept of morality by atheists/agnostics. Morality in a world without God is nothing other than actions by people to guarantee the human race goes down through the ages--and this means that morality is not something fixed but the perpetual creation of actions to ensure society survives. In fact morality has always been something of individuals coordinating themselves and nothing more. There is no fixed morality that was, is and will be--in fact in a world without God that would be a disaster, a complete lack of adaptability.
In a world without God we would want rather people to be supremely flexible in action, capable of killing or committing suicide at will--capable of the widest extremes of action and capable of coordinating these actions with the widest extremes of action of others. Just go to the ballet or watch a rock concert or go into any place of business to see how imaginatively we coordinate action over our ancestors and then let your imagination roam further.
In a world without God we have to increase our imagination concerning action--and no actions are off the table. Going into a world without God and assuming we know what morality is is identical to saying we know right now how we will coordinate ourselves to survive down through the ages for millenia--and that is just plain absurd.--In fact we still do not have the answers to why civilizations rise and fall let alone the methods to ensure the human race survives without God for millenia...
We can go much further into this discussion but I have to do other things now--in fact I am writing this with someone looking over my shoulder and I am having difficulty concentrating.
These reflections should suffice for now.
Daniel
Your post does not make a lot of sense
and goes against all the evidence of human behavior and anthropology that has been amassed in the last 30 years regarding morality.
Every word you wrote is untrue, including "a" and "the." It must be because you were in a hurry with someone looking over your shoulder.
As just one aid, read the post from betty just above yours, which accurately descibes secular atheist morality in general: including this paragraph.
Secular Humanism is a way of thinking and living that aims to bring out the best in people so that all people can have the best in life. Secular humanists reject supernatural and authoritarian beliefs. They affirm that we must take responsibility for our own lives and the communities and world in which we live. Secular humanism emphasizes reason and scientific inquiry, individual freedom and responsibility, human values and compassion, and the need for tolerance and cooperation.
Terra Gazelle,
What you wrote was beautiful. That matches well with my own beliefs about the divine, which lean toward pantheism. I can't imagine the divine ordering a father to sacrifice his son as a loyalty test, or supplying virgins to people who kill in the name of the divine.
To James from Daniel. No, James, it is you that does not make sense. I could care a less about yours or Bettys or secular atheist humanism's position. I simply ask what actions will ensure the human race survives down through the ages without God--man by his own hands--and I conclude it will require supreme invention of action. I suggest James you read a book on basic medicine and learn about the very cells of your body. Thousands upon thousands of them are committing suicide right now to sustain you. Thousands upon thousands of others are heroically killing anything they perceive to be a threat (immune system). But you, Betty, dime a dozen atheists, secular humanists feel you have the method of action to sustain the human race down through the ages. Nice to know you have morality all figured out...This discussion can be carried out in greater detail....
"Morality in a world without God is nothing other than actions by people to guarantee the human race goes down through the ages..."
Daniel, I don't understand how you came up with that conclusion. Why would the lack of "God" reduce morality to the idea of societal self-preservation? Are you saying that there are actions that do not harm individuals but that may harm society? If so, what would these be?
In fact, I don't understand how you define "God." (It's tempting to assume you use the word to refer to the God of the Christian Bible.) What does the idea of God have to do with morality? When others equate God with morality, the argument usually comes down to some variation of people needing the bribe of heaven or the threat of hell to keep them in line.
"In fact morality has always been something of individuals coordinating themselves and nothing more."
If you're suggesting that each of us is responsible only for our own actions and decisions, I agree with you.
To Tonio from Daniel. I really have no way to answer your questions Tonio. Obviously you, James, Betty, etc. etc. are incapable of understanding the English language let alone basic logic. A world without God is a world of man period. We make or break by our own hands. How difficult is that to comprehend? Morality is indeed pure self-preservation--what ensures the species will survive. In fact it has always been that. With God morality amounts to actions to ensure we survive after death (what pleases God). Without God all there is is the hope of sustaining the species--and this means all actions are on the table, whatever will ensure species survival. How difficult is that to comprehend? I really wish I could go into greater detail but I have been writing now with much else to do. Just reflect for a moment. You are an atheist I presume. God does not exist. Now what? You know how the human race should behave to ensure it goes down through the ages? I hope you are not going to answer yes, but apparently that is precisely what you will do. Or is it you could care a less whether the human race goes down through the ages? If so, excuse me if I decide to believe in God because you atheists are apparently incapable of...well, forget it--just forget it. How frustrating this is! Christ! How many ways do I have to get it across!? Without God it is only us. We had better get damn imaginative about actions or else we just might find ourselves extinct. How the hell it is atheists jump from a life without God to knowing all about morality is one of those strange things I will never understand...Actually I do...Nothing more than a dislike of religious beliefs and strictures...A little bit of science, a little bit of good will...A lot of naivete...Little reading apparently (right now I am reading three books: a comparison of Mencius with Aquinas, Boorstins "the genius of American politics" and Floris Cohen's book on scientific revolutions). I have little regard for Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett--the rest of the popular whatever the hell you want to call them. We can talk further...I wish I could continue, but have to go...Look over past posts on different questions here on On faith for my thinking on things if you happen to be interested...I write a hell of a lot--have done so for years. Perhaps one day I will publish, but I am more concerned with breakthroughs. Perhaps in my old age...But I freely offer my stuff--plagiarize at will! You want morality? If you like one of my ideas plagiarize at will--the best ideas must come forth as rapidly and efficiently as possible and we should have the courage of self-sacrifice for such. I give up any claim to fame, reknown concerning ideas which are taken from me...a type of suicide for the sake of man...Are things becoming clearer? See how much further we can imagine concerning actions for the sake of man? Yes, you see, and yes it does pain me to have to give of myself totally to people that will steal from me and really in the end probably make no real use of what I have to say...But courage is everthing--the supreme virtue. I would like to hear what atheists have to say about courage. That will tell a lot about our hopes in a life without God....
reading in the book of morality.
morality is the principal which governs and guards any human relationship.where it exist,where is the textbook of morality,at what market place can humanbeing get himself a sack of morality as a supply for the year,or at what scientific lab human can go and get a highly concenterated dose of morality to last him for his entire life,how previous nations survived,what is the difference betwen religion and morality,what is micro morality and macro morality,is morality innate or train-ate,morality traced all the way to who and how and when,if humanbeings are elements minerals of this earth where do they get their refination from,who will design the matrix of anaylsis of morality,certainly you will need every single details of previous nations and nations of now and nations of after,and still you will need the reference to compare.
victoria and daniel asked some serious question,victoria asked what is the belief of an atheist,while daniel asking about the methodolgy and impelation.
To everybody from Daniel, sorry for being so rude...Obviously I have anger and pride issues to work out...Morality, what a conversation guaranteed to make a fool out of virtually anyone...A deep breath and a hope in the new day....
The comments and some stories about prayer are interesting. How does one know the story about Moses being correct? How does one relate a natural disaster and death to prayers or lack of them? How does one talk about prayers of those who do not believe in God Almighty? Is it really an admission of weakness and lowliness?
It is definitely a sign of weakness, if you pray to a creation .. in any form, shape and time.. you consider yourself weak and helpless compared to that creation. You have lost your thought and mind as well, as you stopped realizing that the particular creation was helpless as well in many a situation in his/her lifetime.
Thode who do not believe in God Almighty lose out a lot. They have none to confide into, they have none to run to in time of despair, they have none ask for help and get some time out to think and ponder, they have none to look upto.
Natural disasters, difficulties, friends and foes, and even death are part and parcel of life. Dear friends and foes think in the manner that you as a humanbeings, as best creation of God Almighty, the Most Merciful, the Most Beneficent have been created. Ponder over the fact, where were you before your mother conceived you, what were you doing at the time, you live a short earthly life and then leave this world in one form or another, where do you go? What is the difference between the chemistry, physics, physiology and pathology of man dead, alive and the one about to die?
Birth, death and dying means nothing to me and those in my shoes. Death of our loved ones means a lot only because we miss them. Life of our enemies means nothing to us, except that they will cause trouble to us and our loved ones. But that is part of life too.
Prayer off course is the admission of lacking something, lowliness and realization that there is "SOMEONE" who lacks nothing, A "HIGHER BEING" Who has evrything and Who will lose nothing by giving us something, we desire. But why should we desire any material things, that do not last except for a very short and limited time? NOT REALLY. The One who created us from nothing and takes us back to nothing, owns us and the rest of creation, knows our intentions, our strengths and weaknesses, is worthy of praise and that should be our prayers. His true and realistic praise, we cannot even comprehend. When I say He is Master of universe, I realize that I do not know His universe, even, a physical object with limitations of existence, place, person and time. How can properly praise One with no limitations of any kind! No I cannot praise Him. If I say, "He is most beneficent" do I know His extent of benifecense? Not really. His love, do I know about it..NO not at all. I know and express at my level of thought.
So my prayers go that oh God Almighty with all your praises as You know them in full, give me potential to act in your way, the best way known to You only. Let no harm come to anyone from me and do not make me a test for the evil and wicked. Let me stay with those whom you guide and they are obedient to You, and they will be in the best form, shape and existence in the hereafter..The life one will live for ever to come.
A few thoughts on “false-prayers”:
I have often heard people suggest to others that somehow their prayers were false or in some way inadequate. I have an intuitive resistance to such statements. I can’t quite imagine God dismissing ones prayers solely based on a failure to follow some particular formula or approved technique. Having said that; I’d like to propose that there may still be such things as “false” and/or unauthentic prayers.
We often hear about the intention of some to “pray unceasingly”. I think, using a more expansive definition of prayer that most of us are in fact praying all the time. Unfortunately, our prayers are mostly prayed to “false Gods”. And regrettably they are too frequently answered. What I mean by this is that in a way, very similar to intentional prayer, our internalized “self-talk”, those endlessly repeated voices of fear, anxiety, hatred, judgment and the like, are in fact unconscious “false-prayers”. We repeat them unintentionally and often subconsciously throughout the course of our days, even our lives.
Authentic, conscious prayer is much more difficult because it must be intentional. Only through years of deliberate effort does authentic prayer become habitual, less deliberate and begin to approach being unceasing. As authentic prayer becomes habitual it eventually crowds out our old “self-talk” and replaces it with affirmations of faith, hope, love, grace, thanks and praise. And these, I believe, are our true and authentic prayers.
Prayer is an invitation to connect more deeply with the Infinite.
As a baby, I didn't pray. I just lived. What does a baby know about prayer?
As a child, I prayed to God much like I visited Santa Claus at Christmas- with a wish list of things I wanted.
I learned over time to treat prayer as a conversation. I still had my needs to give to God but I also spent time listening.
Somewhere on this prayer journey, the thought finally broke through that what the Infinite God had to offer me was far better that any blather that I had to babble. Prayer became the practice of listening.
Finally, after many years, another thought jarred me loose. The Infinite God is where I have been, where I am going, and where I am. Infinite is, after all, infinite.
Prayer has become living again.
Daniel –
It could be that for atheists, thinking of what a world would be like without God is not troubling because they don’t think there ever was a God overseeing the world. Thus, the change would be about belief in God – not the existence of God.
Regarding Atheists’ religious education, many were raised and inculcated in a religious tradition, just like believers. And by reading these posts, it’s clear that some came not to believe after long and serious study of the evidence against not only a supernatural being, but of the stories and claims of their tradition. From what I’ve read here, it’s the believers who know little about atheism – not surprising, as it’s been a pretty closed subject until recently.
I really think you owe it to yourself to check out Harris, Dennett and Dawkins – at least for some basic information on the current state of atheist thinking. Harris and Dawkins have bestsellers, but somehow I think you’ll like Dan Dennett best (“Breaking the Spell – Religion as a Natural Phenomenon”). He’s a very thoughtful philosopher, with a lot to say, and no axe to grind.
I don't mean to offend anyone because everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, but as I see it, prayer is the ultimate act of selfishness and arrogance - to believe that some supreme being would actually intervene on anyone's behalf or care about the petty affairs of man. In the context of our government, the national prayer breakfast is a violation of the Constitution and something I find to be rather embarrassing. Imagine if it were a National Voodoo Breakfast, or a National Rabbit's Foot Breakfast, or, well you get the idea. To a non-believer it's pretty much all the same.We'd be much better served if they were having a National Critical Thinking Breakfast. I just can't see the rationale for getting a bunch of adults together and asking them to cross their fingers while they scrunch up their faces in concentrated wishful thinking. But hey, at least we don't sacrifice animals anymore. I guess that's progress. Again, apologies for offending people, which I'm sure I have, but that's my honest point of view on the subject.
To everybody from Daniel--especially Tonio, James, Betty, etc. (the atheist position in other words).
The problem seems to be (going from your criticisms of me above) a question whether morality is variant or invariant. Atheists seem to want to have it both ways and whenever it suits their arguments. They take a morality is variant position when they say things like religious belief leads to such an such actions which no nonbeliever would entertain doing (in fact they often say one behaves in a morally superior fashion precisely when one is sceptical concerning religious belief), then when they are interrogated as to how exactly they propose man behave in a world without God--how exactly we are to behave to preserve ourselves for millenia and as a replacement for the salvation we once hoped for in God--they blink and say "why we will behave morally!" as if morality is invariant and to even ask such a question is ludicrous.
On one hand they rail against religious people flying planes into buildings or hating homosexuals, then on the other they say things like "one can be moral without God" as if morality is some sort of fixed thing--as if they, the atheists, are not suggesting a whole realm of new actions (and really they are not suggesting such, merely a few twists on morality which however does mean morality is not as invariant as they nor anybody else assumes).
I can tell atheists right now that if they are as scientific as they often say they are they had better get prepared to be interrogated as no men have ever been for they are suggesting to us a life without God--cutting out a hope in salvation in God and questioning all of human behavior and in fact dividing it into classes of behavior which can be summed up as either behavior for God or behavior in a world without God (and of course there are behaviors which especially today fulfill both functions, especially if we do not take the question seriously).
I find it astounding and really offensive that an atheist should presume to dispense with God of all things--for that is what all too often atheists do: merely presume. The arguments are so often ridiculously childish...
But let me once again state something of my belief. I believe man is something of a bicycle or composite of man and bicycle. Religion and man so far is akin to riding the bicycle with training wheels. The wheels do not really have to be engaged by chain in such a situation because the training wheels of God's love are there to provide salvation for our failure. In other words morality is not really thought about or formed--there is no notion of difference of behavior between riding or not riding with training wheels. But take the training wheels off and all becomes a bit clearer. Without the training wheels chain had better become engaged--and it had better be a strong chain. This is identical to the suppleness and flexibility of the human race in a world without God. With no such grasp of chain and legs willing to pump down through the centuries man falls ass over tea kettle and...there is no hope in God. There is a clear difference in behavior requirements between riding with or without the training wheels--and riding without the training wheels is by far the more difficult behavior. This is the difference between moral requirements with or without God.
Now I ask atheists "how do expect man to act to go down through the centuries without God?" Is my question so unreasonable? Are you sure morality is invariant? If morality is invariant what difference does it make if I believe or do not believe in God, for all behavior is the same (invariant)? Or does it make a difference in behavior whether I believe in God or not? If a difference in behavior, what difference and does this behavior guarantee man's survival without the salvation of God?
These questions are not that difficult. I in fact posed them with the simple metaphor of learning how to ride a bicycle. Without the training wheels of God what behavior to drive the bicycle of man? And what road lies ahead?
I can tell atheists right now they had better be prepared to be interrogated as no men have ever done, and that in itself will be a test of their good will. How can they fail to offer all of themselves to us, for they are in fact proposing not only a new kind of man, but one without the being many say is eternal, omnipotent, omniscient: the lord almighty God....
I stopped praying when I matured enough to place religious views in the realm of the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.
None-the-less, I suspect the Buddhists on on to something. It would appear to be the philosophy and action of caring for all sentient beings and their (Buddhists) meditative practices that are productive.
I do not beleive this is tanscendental in nature. Rather it is all within the body and mind of the individual.
I pray because God moves in my life, because i have a relationship with him and because without him I am nothing. Prayer does not have to be said, it can be through praise, reflecting and sitting in silence quieting yourself to hear God. He saved me, hes my greatest friend so il build my relationship anyway i can. for all those on hear i pray to that you might pass your trials and tribulations.
Daniel, did you read my message above before posting your latest message?
Atheists do not propose dispensing with God - they are saying there hasn't been a God all along. You can't get rid of something that was never there.
According to atheists, morality in an in-born trait (sicentists see it in monkeys, too) so whatever morality or immorality humans have expressed all these centuries has been without a God.
To E favorite from Daniel. I fail to understand your reasoning. The mere assumption there is no God (as you put the atheist position). Then this idea of morality being an inborn trait (if so, what difference does it make if a person believes in God or not? Why are atheists against the religious? Why not just shut the hell up because pointing out God does not exist makes no difference?). Furthermore, why even have a concept such as morality if it is inborn and it makes no difference from century to century? I really have no interest in discussing this further...I have become bored about the whole thing. But I will be interested again in the next five minutes as always.
Note concerning my last post: made some typing errors. In third paragraph in last sentence of said paragraph should have used the word "or" instead of "nor" "...morality is not as invariant as they or anybody else assumes..." Also in last sentence should have used word "been" instead of "done"...."I can tell atheists right now they had better be prepared to be interrogated as no men have ever been..."
Thank you very much....
To"DW"
From:Bobster-- Thanks for kind words You mentioned "a model prayer". Could you expand on this please. I am ignorant of it. I don't know much about the Bible, nor Jesus. I believe he existed and was a very good man.
Daniel –
Speaking for myself, and based on reading on this forum, I’d say atheists are not “against the religious” as you say, but they do want to say what’s on their minds, having “shut the hell up” as you put it, for too long. Atheists are finding their voice and believers are not used to hearing it. When this situation settles down, I think there will be a real chance for productive dialogue and understanding.
Thanks for engaging me on this topic, Daniel. We are the pioneers.
I Love to pray. I pray everyday and without ceasing. I pray in words, through heart felt thoughts and when I stand in awe of all the things God has done. He is so wonderful and awesome. To be in prayer is to be in His presence. Prayer is not about us. It’s about Him! It is a wonderful way to stay in contact. Like the Muslim, I also pray to the God of Abraham but through Jesus the Christ. God does hear our prayers. Victoria is right when she said prayer is more special when we pray in unity. God loves to hear from all of His children. I could not imagine going a day without talking to my children. How rude to take all that God has to offer and never say thank you! Take a minute today just say thanks. It won’t hurt. I promise.
Chip :
First I’d like to suggest that there are few opening phrases more disingenuous that saying “I don't mean to offend anyone”. And, of course, you confirm the disingenuousness of your opening words by closing with “Again, apologies for offending people, which I'm sure I have.” Why not just dispense with the “niceties” and get right to your point?
You say: “as I see it, prayer is the ultimate act of selfishness and arrogance”.
I’ve not previously heard this particular characterization of prayer. I must say that it is not immediately apparent to me that when I pray for world peace, or the strength to love my neighbor or my enemy that I’m engaging in an act of supreme selfishness. There likely are many who pray for things that seem selfish to you, or me for that matter, but you paint with altogether too wide a brush.
You say that the “national prayer breakfast is a violation of the Constitution”. Actually the prayer breakfast is a private gathering that happens to include many prominent politicians and members of the government. You might find this gathering an embarrassment, but it is entirely constitutional.
And perhaps I’m misreading your words but, I have the impression that you’ve somehow concluded that believers who pray are not too intelligent or well educated. Such suggestions are, I believe, inaccurate, condescending and more than a bit arrogant.
Great idea, Alaska. I'll say "thanks" every chance I get today -- to real flesh-and-blood people.
"Prayer is the little implement
Through which Men reach
Where Presence is denied them.
They fling their Speech
By means of it in God's ear---
If then He hear,
This sums the Apparatus
Comprised in Prayer."
--Emily Dickinson (1862)
---By why is the nature of prayer a suitable subject for a daily newspaper? The addition of "On Faith" to The Washington Post strikes me as coming from the same place as the sudden appearance of Christian merchandise in the NPR mail order catalog---after a Christian Conservative was appointed as head of NPR.
Spiritual faith comes from the spirit. Religious faith comes from the ego. It should be made clear that these columnists are referring to the latter.
what is prayer?
chopped ham?
Recycling an idea:
IMHO, God started the Big Bang. God also granted the gifts of Free Will and Future to all the thinking beings in the Universe. This being the case, God is not able to alter life and requests/prayers will not be answered. Statistically, your request might come true but it is simply the result of the variabiliy/randomness of Nature.
So put down your rosaries and prayer beads and stop worshiping cows and bowing to Mecca five times a day. Instead, work hard at your job, take care of aging parents, volunteer at a soup kitchen, donate to charities and the poor and continue to follow the Commandments of your religion or any good rules of living as gracious and good human beings. And lets all hope there indeed is a place called Heaven!!!
I admire and love Concerned's Recycle post,
but have a reservation about his last line.
"And lets all hope there indeed is a place called Heaven!!!"
IMHO we would all be better off if we
Get Rid of the Idea/Myth of Heaven
and turn our moral and spiritual attention to the things of this world.
As concerned notes: alleviating the suffering of otheres (like AIDS sufferers in Africa), treating our fellows with loving kindness, developing our appreciation of beauty, respecting and preserving nature, understanding the One ness of all things.
The idea of heaven OFTEN gets in the way.
If Christ is coming in 50 years, why worry about Global Warming.
If God doesn't want us to use Condoms in heaven, how do we stop aids in Africa
etc etc etc.
Daniel,
I see myself as a pantheist instead of an atheist, and I'm not arguing against all concepts of the divine. I'm simply arguing against the concept of God as an authority figure that issues commands.
"Morality is indeed pure self-preservation--what ensures the species will survive. In fact it has always been that."
I disagree. I doubt that all humans place enormous value on species preservation, at least a value that would rival the value on individual self-preservation. I don't see how Godlessness automatically leads to the former. Even if everyone valued species preservation, they would still disagree on how to achieve it.
I define morality as about right and wrong, and define right and wrong as about actions that help or harm others. In my experience, the vast majority of people who value morality use help/harm as the basic principle, even if they don't agree on classifying certain actions as helpful or harmful. I'm saying that humans are capable of moral choice based on that principle. But like most of us, I don't know how to encourage people to value that principle. I suspect there's a certain degree of empathy involved that has to be learned instead of taught.
"With God morality amounts to actions to ensure we survive after death (what pleases God)."
How can anyone say for certainty what would please God? That seems to me to be even more variable than the Godless morality that you condemn.
But more than that, what might please God is not the same as right and wrong. Pleasing God would be a simple matter of obedience, of giving up one's authority over one's own decisions, or ignoring one's ability to determine which actions might help or harm other people. There is zero guarantee that any authority's rules will conform to some concept of right and wrong.
There are many examples of people who commit horrid acts because they believe they are pleasing God or believe they will be rewarded in an afterlife. How about parents who let their children die because they believe God forbids medical treatment? How about jihadists who kill in expectation of a martyr's reward in paradise? I've alluded to the Sacrifice of Isaac story many times on this site, because it perfectly embodies my point as I see it. The story suggests that God values loyalty to him over human life or parental responsibility, and Abraham had no clue that God would step in and halt the sacrifice. A God that is defined that way does not deserve loyalty.
Tonio
I agree with just about all you write above, but when you say
"I doubt that all humans place enormous value on species preservation, at least a value that would rival the value on individual self-preservation. I don't see how Godlessness automatically leads to the former. Even if everyone valued species preservation, they would still disagree on how to achieve it."
I think of Moral Reasoning as a human ability, like Language, that has evolved over thousands of generations.
Thus, though not EVERY human is good at morality, or good at language, or interested in sex
the process of evolution has selected humans who have an innate sense of moral right or wrong that has contributed to the survival (barely) of our species over time.
Emm,
It's not disingenuousness. It is an acknowledgment that people such as yourself will find my point of view offensive. It is a simple statement of an unfortunate fact and a preemptive apology.
Prayer is still selfish even when what's being prayed for is unselfish. It's asking something outside of yourself for something that must come from within you. If you seek the strength to love your neighbor you're no more likely to find it coming form an outside agent than you are to find it by looking under your bed. If you're hoping for world peace, as I think most of us are, we can hope that others will act peaceably, but we only have the power to decide how we ourselves act. If you have these expectations of yourself and then fail to make good on them do you attribute that failure to god's inability to answer your prayer or do you more constructively pledge to do better next time through your own conviction?
I'm glad that you wish for such things, but I hope that you also act on them, as only the latter will make any difference. If you do only the former, no matter how noble a sentiment that inspired your prayer, then you're passing the responsibility to act to someone or something outside of yourself. That's a selfish act, and no matter how altruistic or noble your request, expecting that there's an all-knowing, all-seeing, master of the universe to listen and respond is arrogant. It stems from the exact same arrogance that placed the Earth at the center of the universe. If you want to be an agent of change then don't pray. Act.
Now if you'll excuse me I've got to go click my heals together three times and then spin in a circle while chanting "I wish my dishes were clean. I wish my dishes were clean..."
Jesus as human/divine/God is my favorite way of communicating with the love of my life = Jesus. Since he is also my friend, brother, confidant, I tell him EVERYTHING I think and feel although I realize He alreadys knows me like a book. LOL
I envision us walking along tbe banks of a river...calm...peaceful...accepting of each other.
His opinions/comments/guidance is felt inside me somewhere (heart/brain/gut? Don't know.
I feel at peace with myself after a session with my friend/confidant/brother who is part of the Holy Trinity regarding my tradition.
However, I NEVER ask how I should vote, how to think about homosexuals, abortion (don't do it if
it is believed the mother is a murderer and the possible doctor a murderer is my guide...that is, if it is criminal - then change the laws of the land to reflect that belief.)
Never, ever ask about whether priests should be married; women ordained; whether he and Mary Magdalene married and had a child; NOR when to pay my bills.
“[P]rayer is worship that includes all the attitudes of the human spirit in its approach to God.”
- Wood, D. R. W.: New Bible Dictionary. InterVarsity Press, 1996, c1982, c1962, S. 947
“Prayer is communication with God in worship.”
D. G. Bloesch, The Struggle of Prayer (New York, 1980); J. Bunyan, Prayer (repr. London, 1965); J. Calvin, Institutes, III. xx; F. L. Fisher, Prayer in the NT (Philadelphia, 1964); O. Hallesby, Prayer (London, 1961); J. Hastings, The Doctrine of Prayer (Edinburgh, 1915); D. M. M’Intyre, The Hidden Life of Prayer (Minneapolis, MN, 1969); B. M. Palmer, Theology of Prayer (Richmond, VA, 1984); W. R. Spear, The Theology of Prayer (Grand Rapids, MI, 1979).
- Ferguson, Sinclair B.; Packer, J.I.: New Dictionary of Theology. electronic ed. Downers Grove, IL : InterVarsity Press, 2000, c1988, S. 527
i have this idea as an artist- one of my complaints is that artists who have never mastered realism often in an effort to make a living and mask the fact that they stink- skip ahead to try to abract their already inferior and unacceptable realism into abstract art-
this makes me crazy because the way they trick people into buying their'art' is by talk talk talking-
they never took the time or simply didnt have the inherent proclivity or talent to master the reality they pretend to abstract in the first place.
i find the same tendency in relgious deconstruction-
for instance your example of a rejection of an authoritarian god because abraham intended to sacrifice his firstborn (ishmael by the way read your bible they contradict on this point)
if the sacrifice had gone through and ishmael had been sacrificed- your assessment would be correct-
condemning god for what you think he might have done is as silly as condmening someone for a crime they may commit-
people can literally interpert things- which only the dumbest of the dumb actually do-
god doesnt forbid medical treatments- god is the source of medicine and all that is-
many jihadists dont (actually this is a western misnomer) more like martyrs are doing it for virgins in paradise(another fallacy) but because of unlivable and oppressive political situations created by man-
you can argue those points if you want it doesnt bear on the discussion here-
how do we know gods intentions? because he sent messengers to tell us
have non-(mono)theists come up with a superior or more subtle philosophy?
no not really- ive read the humanists affirmation and while it says beautiful things- they have all been already said in religion and been refined into sublter and more deeply defined premises of humans being good to humans-
we are not all left brained logical rational thinkers- and yet we all still have value-
there is no contradiction between science and religion because science is simply using our god given brains to observe the god given materials of our physical existence- one doesnt preclude the other-
human behavior is so much more complex than the affirmations allow for- what about a heart that is driven by suspicion of malice in everything?
what about slander and gossip?
what about greed and avarice?
or bullies?
simple examples of human behavior that is addressed in religion but not even guessed at in other philosophies-
one would have to assume that non-believers have been exempt from all the human brutalities that have been done to humans over history- but this is not the case- (in order for there to be a claim to superiority over religion)
while most non-theists blithely dismiss all religion as superstition- superstition itself is clearly against my religion-
i think non-theists were never so inclined in the first place to explore religious theory and thought and that is fine- but i dont comment on quantum physics because i havent studied it-
and i find many non-theists usually condemn religion on the basis of acts of mutant goofballs and not on the text or value of the religious doctrine itself.
i notice that within non-theists discussions there seems to be much agreement on what is rejected- but little agreement on what is proposed as alternatives- or even little thought given to it at all-
the assumption that simply attacking someones intelligence somehow confers intelligence on the attacker doesnt carry much intellectual weight with me.
simply dismissing prayer as superstitious or self serving implies that one doesnt know the nature of prayer at all-
my prayers are ones of giving and gratitude- this inclines my mentality to be one of careful appreciation and shepherding the resources of my environment responsibly and wisely-
it inclines me towards compassion and a desire to put myself in other peoples place and mentality and to understand widely divergent opinions-
it inclines me to be aware that i cannot judge others- something we are all guilty of-
there are many fine and ethereal forces at work in the world and prayer is one of them-
and liberated i would contend that the more we learn about nature- the less random it apparently is- its not the randomness of nature but out inability to see the interconnectedness of the great cosmic clock running the show-
also the big bang theory has been unravelling for a couple of years-
peace all
Chip :
First, I do not find your point of view offensive. You may or may not intend it to be offensive, but only people are offensive. Points of view stand or fall on their merits.
Regarding prayer and action, believe it or not, we are in some agreement. As I’ve posted many other times in these forums, I as a Christian am called to be loving, kind caring and Christ-like in this moment, with those in my family, with my neighbors, in my community and in the world. Christian love is not some abstract idea, but a calling to live as Christ lived. Put another way, I believe God is more verb than noun. You may disparage prayer, but for me it is a way to recharge my spiritual batteries so that I can reengage the world in a loving way.
Regarding peace, I’ll repost something from another thread:
A.J. MUSTE said: “There is no way to peace — peace is the way”
I believe this to be a profound statement of truth. We mostly live in a world of abstract ideas, ideals and ideologies. We stay “in our heads” dissociated and detached from ourselves, our families, our neighbors, and most obviously from our adversaries, opponents and enemies. We somehow believe that we can attain peace, that peace is a goal that can be secured for some future time through effort and struggle. But I believe, peace is only achieved by living peacefully now, in the midst of all the confusion, grief and violence that we face in this present moment. Peace is not an end to be achieved; it must be our way of life.
Lastly, I’ve also responded to others who share your penchant for sarcasm. Frankly, satire and sarcasm do have their place. And I’ve been accused all too often of having used them to great effect. But over the years I’ve gradually realized that my satire and sarcasm had two fatal flaws: first, they pushed people away and second, the energy behind them lay in the bubbling anger and rage that I was unable to confront within myself. Unacknowledged doubts, fears and anxieties are, I believe, at the root of our individual anger, rage, judgments and intolerance. Once I became aware of their origins, my inclination to pull these pointed barbs from my quiver was drastically reduced.
Hello, again EMM – (and you too, Chip)
I can be pretty sarcastic too and find that it can be very enjoyable. Some of my best friends are sarcastic. Still, I agree that used in the wrong circumstance, sarcasm can have a severe down side.
What I want to emphasize to Chip is my view that “individual anger, rage, judgments and intolerance” are not exclusively “rooted in “unacknowledged doubts, fears and anxieties.” Sometimes there are things to be legitimately angry about or intolerant of. I can think of a few. I bet you can too. Some are related to religion.
Are practicing Catholics allowed? (I just read and gagged on almost all of the above....sorry, I am just being truthful).
I am one. A convert during my 20's. I do pray
and believe all that the Catholic Church does teach. I pray always to God, but I ask others to help me sometimes. (Yes, like Mary, we call our Mother, and many others). I believe in Miracles, and I believe in praying in four basic ways:
A.....adoration (praise!) highest form of prayer.
C.....contrition....being sorry,
T...thanksgiving
S...and last, supplication (asking!)
I am praying for all of you today to rethink your position as far as abandoning Christ's Church. (Whether you fell away from the one He started, or another off shoot, centuries later.) I believe that God is answering all prayers, and not always right away. I give Him the timing. Also, we don't ask "aright"...as the
Mercedes poem indicates. Ask for faith, you will most certainly receive it! Some need to ask for healing! There is hate and bitterness more than a lack of knowing God exists in many of you.
There is only one name my which men may be saved,
and that name is Jesus Christ! He is All Love and All Mercy...and if you just read the Old or New Testament, you will see that God was slow to anger, and wants to see all His children back home, because of the good Father He is!
Emm,
Thank you. That quote you shared is beautiful, and I couldn't agree with it more. I think where the sentiment often falls down is in the belief so many people seem to have that the only way peace can be achieved is if everyone else could be made to think as they do. The folly of that is in endless and colorful display all over these boards.
I'll admit that my sarcasm stems partly from frustration and anger, but I believe it also stems from a healthy refusal to take anything too seriously - something that seems sorely lacking in the religious realm.
When people use ritual and imagination as a means to center themselves and draw strength and comfort which they then apply to facing the world bravely and compassionately, I see much value in it. Where my frustration comes from is that so many people instead use ritual and religion as a means of declaring tribal affiliation and an exclusionary solidarity which then gets expressed as some kind of superiority. It's not limited to religion, either. Nationalism, ethnic identity, and many other things operate on the same principles.
I cringe no less when I hear the rhetoric of American superiority than I do when confronted with religious self-righteousness. It's sometimes easy to forget that religion can inspire humility and belief in equality when so much of the public rhetoric of religion is evangelistic and intolerant. Few things make me more ashamed of my fellow man than religiously rooted drives to deny equal rights to gays, or arguments about whose god is greatest between Christians and Muslims and Jews, or some of things esteemed moderators on this board say about unbelievers that would cause an uproar if they were said about any other minority. For me, as a non-believer, I know it unfairly taints my view of all religious people. But... as E Favorite rightly points out, many religious people are deserving of those unflattering views.
When I look at the role of religion in national life in the past decade, as mega-churches and televangelists become auxiliaries of right wing authoritarian politics - as Christian nationalism based on bad history and outright revisionism becomes ever more shrill and prolific - as religious rhetoric increasingly finds its way into public political discourse - as overwhelming majorities claim persecution - and as terms like "liberal," "secular," "science," and "humanism" become ever more commonly uttered with snarling animosity as if they were curses, I find my tolerance wearing thin and my suspicion of religious ritual harder to keep in check. And I find the appropriateness of members of a representative government publicly partaking in tribalistic ritual highly suspect.
I can't help but think that if religion for most people was simply a means of centering the self and a personal meditation then there should be no need to proclaim a national day of prayer, as doing so comes off to people like myself as a declaration of tribal affiliation which makes some of us perpetual outsiders, not from our own lack of compassion or understanding, but by design.
Sure I pray every day the following:
RELIGION IS THE OPIUM OF THE MASSES
Is that a sacrilege ?
Dear Gordon,
You are one lucky person to have such a strong and solid faith. 20 years in a wheel chair! My work brings me into contact with injured and disabled people. Many are bitter and angry at their doctors and modern medicine. And then there are the very few who are disabled and carry their burden with the belief and attitude such as yourself. And no, I am not judging the bitter and angry ones, for I could very well be that way myself if I were to become disabled as them. Thanks for sharing your beliefs.
it seems that alot of people who arent believers have some misconceptions about why people pray and the results of those prayers-
prayer is not a substitute somehow for intelligent thought- it is possible to engage in prayer and still the rest of the time use our reason and faculties to problem solve and ACT-
i personally am not praying to a supreme puppeteer who i give the strings of my actions to mindlessly-
also the assumption that a life of deep contemplation will lead one away from religion has also proven false in my case- i was raised by an indifferent atheist and a mother who decided she was agnostic and believed for a minute whatever religion or philosophy i was currently studying-
there was no religious thought brinwashed into me- as a matter of fact my out of nowhere insistence on going to church as a child was an annoyance to my mom- and since my brother followed me everyhwere i went he would pull my hair allthe way and spend his collection plate money on candy-
to me prayer s a deepening awareness and connection also to my conscience-
a word i rarely hear mentioned- a differnce in religion is that there is no time when our conscience is unobserved ( i am not implying anyting about non-theists) but it is human nature to slip a little when not called to account- and religion in my life makes me accountable for every half thought and nano-second of action and inaction-
there is more to life than te survival of the species- as ive maintained women have a greater function than perpetuating the species as baby machines- i also maintain that humans have a larger purpose than the endless physical propogation of the species- and i love my species and want them to survive- but this isnt the end of the experiment- i believe i a soul that is refined in the fires of suffering and polished in the furnaces of love and compassion- an evolving souland i am not nearly at the end ofthat journey and prayer helps me to work on that process-
but its not a substitute for thinking for myself-
but does involve a humility that i am not the creator of myself and couldnt create a piece of dirt if i needed to-
the humility is the real source of my humanity-
without it i wouldnt submit to a greater power than myself but would start to think that I was the source of that power-
i used to read revelations and there is a call to 'overcome' throughout it- i interperted that to mean the need to overcome religion as a crutch-
but came to the realization that intellectual arrogance could also be a crutch and there are no really new thoughts being thunk- just new ways of putting them in action- and the bulk of our thoughts dont really center on improving sleflessly the human condition but ususally to improving our own selfish condition-
religion for me is a template of improving the whole human condition-
ok peace
Chip - Your last post was fabulous. really - I've read a lot of great stuff on this forum, by essayists and responders alike - and your sentiments and beautiful writing take the cake.
Bravo
Grandma Linda says:
I am praying for all of you today to rethink your position as far as abandoning Christ's Church."
Linda
has it occurred to you that Jews like me have much more justification of saying the same to you than vice versa?
Or that Hindus and Buddhists have NO IDEA what you are talking about.
Or that Muslims consider your christo Centrism to be imperialistic.
The Catholics, or the Mormons, or the Muslims, or the Jews
are NOT the only ones here.
Chip, Emm,and Sar Cas=EMM
Emm
your discussion modulation was appreciated, but i think that chip;s sensitive and brilliant reply shows the limits of your exhortation to drop sarcasm.
a couple of points:
I have observed that, for better or worse, there is a gender difference in the use of sarcasm.
boys consider it de riguer for their boyish back and forths, and it rolls off their backs like Duck water.
Second, as chip notes, it can be an illuminating rhetorical ploy, and often very economical.
Third, Chip, who admits a fondness for sarcasm from time to time.
just gave us a post that was as brilliant and to the point and intellectually nuanced as any we have seen on this website.
so we must assume that a taste for the barbed quip does not dull the brain. to the contrary, it appears to go hand and hand with sharpened grey matter.
I do not pray. There is nothing to pray to.
GOD ALMIGHTY NEEDS OUR PRAYER because PRAYER is GOD'S GATEWAY INTO THE EARTH.
Read the following scriptures...Amos3:7....Ezekiel 22: 30-31 and Isaiah 59: 15-17
God has delegated dominion in earth's affairs to humanity.
Man's fall altered his ability to exercise dominion, but not his mandate. God created man to work with and through man. God needs our prayer to open His gateway into the earth.
Justice and mercy are integral and complimentary sides of God's nature.
God's love for humanity wants to extend mercy, but His righteousness demands that justice be done.
Our prayer does two things:
(1) It brings mankind's delegated dominion into harmony with God's sovereign will.
(2) It causes love and mercy to embrace and kiss each other.
I believe that God will do nothing in the earth unless we pray. Jesus the Christ of God says: " Ask and you shall receive. Seek and you shall find. Knock upon the door and it shall be opened unto you." Jesus went on to say; "You have not received because you have not asked."
WE NEED PRAYER,
Our need for prayer is even greater. God chose to delegate some of His dominion to humanity, and to subject himself to that dominion. WE , ON THE OTHER HAND, HAVE NO CHOICE ABOUT OUR DEPENDENCE ON PRAYER.
I URGE YOU TO PRAY FOR all LEADERS of all NATIONS and for all mankind,..." THAT WE MAY LIVE PEACEFUL AND QUIET LIVES IN ALL GODLINESS AND HOLINESS.This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men ( and women & children) to BE SAVED and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, THE MAN CHRIST JESUS..." (1 Timothy 2: 1-5...)
When the Delusions of Answered Prayers Lead to Disaster
The problem with Prayer
is not a private one
of a believer feeling some comfort
and validation in her supposed connection to God
as she makes her personal life decisions.
The problem, and it is a MIGHTY ONE
is when people with Power
Make Life and Death decisions
Based on the lunacies of belief
that
God as affirmed their desires to
Go to War with his blessing
Persecute Gay people with his blessing
Oppose Stem Cell research with his blessing
Oppose teaching Evolution with his blessing
Deny the reality of Global Warming with his blessing
OH PLEEZEE DARLINGS ALL THIS PRAYING HOKUS POKUS MAY MAKE YOU FEEL GOOD BUT ITS A WASTE OF TIME BECAUSE GOD/JESUS SHE JUST DOESNT EXCIST. ITS A SCAM RUN BY A BUNCH OF MONEY HUNGRY HOMOPHOBIC PRIEST/MINISTERS/CLERGY. IF SHE DOES EXCIST LETS HAVE SOME PROOF AND I MEAN THE REAL STUFF AND REMEMBER OVER 90 % OF ALL SCIENTIST AGREE THAT ITS ALL BULL A SCAM! THERE IS NO THERE, THERE!
Chip,
Thanks for your thoughtful words. I feel that i could have written them myself. It seems we agree far more than we disagree about the things that really matter.
As to sarcasm, used with economy and judgment I don’t see it as a big issue. And I suppose it depends as much on the predisposition of the listener as on the intention of the speaker. Personally, I’d prefer whit and more subtle humor, but that’s perhaps the onset of middle age, who knows.
Betty :
Thanks for your thoughtful response.
I liked your distinction between the use of sarcasm by men and women. I’d not really considered that before. As a man, I’m just tired and bored with, what seems to me, the endless use satire and sarcasm to hammer home our respective points. As I mentioned to Chip, I prefer more subtle uses of whit and humor. As one who was known for the driest of sarcastic verbal assault, I’m likely overcompensating a bit, but for now its better left dormant.
man,s square lock.
it,s 4 equal sided square,no man shall escap his -fate-and no man shall escap death,every man live his fate,every man is deadlined.man,s hope exceeds and go further than his square lock,but its only -hope-sonner or later shall be termenated by one or the other whoever comes first-accidentals(like illness etc)or final and last termenation death.
one more thing also excede and go way far than man,s square lock is his connection to his creator allmighty allmercyfull alltruth allknowing allwisdoom lord.man,s connection to his lord takes him to a vast world.
on the contrary, man,s disconnection to his creator lord bring him deeper in his squre lock,man tend to shrink and fossil around himself in a multi deeper square lock of his own world.fossilism is serious phenomna.humaintarians every where are highly invited to study and kick in.
Victoria,
You continue with "wishy-wash" forgetting the horrors being committed by your brother Muslims every day, horror by the way that is supported by the crazy Sunni mullahs in Saudi Arabia who yesterday declared Shiites to be infidels:
From today's CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/03/iraq.cleric.ap/index.html
"Al-Sistani was apparently referring to Abdullah bin Jabrain, a key member of Saudi Arabia's clerical establishment, who last month joined a chorus of other senior figures from the hardline Wahhabi school of Sunni Islam that regards Shiites as infidels.
Bin Jabrain described Shiites as "the most vicious enemy of Muslims."
Please condemn this violence and those who promote it before giving anymore ideas about prayer.
Betty and E Favorite, Thanks! Emm, your points on sarcasm haven't fallen on deaf ears. I can't promise I'll amend my ways since it's an idiom that comes so naturally to me (laughs) but your points are well taken. You're right that we probably agree more than disagree. Perhaps that's my biggest complaint about religion - that it more often than not seems to obfuscate our commonalities rather than illuminate them. I think it's a pity that for such a large percentage of people church is their primary source of community. What a different world it might be if that source was something less divisive and more inclusive.
If, as an atheist, I do anything that might be considered prayer, it's when I go out to the country on a dark night, find a peaceful spot to lay on my back, and gaze up at the universe above. It makes me feel inspired and it reminds me how small and inconsequential we all are by comparison. It's humbling. Living near DC, I wish I didn't have to travel so far to do it. There should be laws against light pollution!
I'm confused as to why an atheist would even be interested in this site. If there is no God, why do you waste your time arguing with those of us who think there is?
JAMES- i am a muslim- and i appreciate lindas christo-centrism and dont find it imperialist-
i respect passion and faith-
actually although i am hearing praise of chips acerbic wit- i cant gelp but notice a lack of content- if the sharpened mind is used only to criticize and negate- i think it takes greater intelligence to foray into creative conjecture and put oneslef on the line for it than pander to an already appreciative audience-
i find no merit in denigrating the beliefs of another-
it is a pointless and demeaning inteleectual exercise-
id rather hear what is superior than another diatribe on what is inferior-
perhaps you take some gratification in ripping apart the delicate expressions of some believers here-
but it is shooting fish in a barrel- innately ungracious and not very brave.
liberated iv etold you repeatedly that youll get no repsonse form me with your continued bad manners-
do you really expect an intelligent response to an obviously emotionally baited question?
possibly you could come up with a more interesting song to sing
really non-theists- what possible pleasure could you get from coming to a question on prayer- and then mocking the prayerful?
i have read many many posts on non-theists panelists and i never felt compelled to play one upsmanship- because i have respect for people even if i dont agree with them-
if anyone feels offended by this then i have struck a resonance of truth in them and they should be offended-
i dont begrudge the christian their tribal ritual if thats what they want- i dont feel an outsider and dont feel i have the right to impose my philosophy any more than they do-
live and let live
honestly liberated you go on about sistani- do you have any idea who he is?
he is the voice of reason and moderation for the shia-
tis is what al-sistani said-
The Iranian-born cleric called on all Muslims to work to overcome sectarian differences and calm the passions, which serve only "those who want to dominate the Islamic country and control its resources to achieve their aims."
OVERCOME SECTARIAN DIFFERENCES AND CALM THE PASSIONS
DO YOU EVEN READ THE ARTICLES YOU POST?
THIS IS A QUOTE FROM THE ARTICLE YOU POSTED
WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD ANY MORE THAN YOU HAVE?
MERCY LIBERATED- YOU HAND ME POINTS TO CLOBBER YOU ON THE HEAD WITH!
SO YOUR POINT THEN IS THAT HE WAS REFERRING TO BIN JABRAIN TO OVERCOME SECTARIAN DIFFERENCES?????
THERES A CLARION CALL TO WAR IF I EVER HEARD ONE-
(Edited repost from another thread, excuse me!)
For the believers, choose one of the following:
1. Everything that happens happens through god’s will. Therefore everything that happens is proof of gods will. (That is the main course of the believers’ argument in all these threads.) But then, you don’t have to pray, not even believe in a particular religion (meditating for yourself is something else!), it will always be god’s will, whatever happens, whatever you do, and you have the proof of his will on top. (They call this “circular argument”.) The notion of “accountability” is completely stupid and superfluous in this thinking/believing.
2. Everything that happens happens by chance and causality. Therefore everything that happens is a proof that all happens by chance and causality. You can pray to chance and to causality, but that doesn’t change the statement No. 2. (Also circular arguing). Here, like in No. 1, your personality is excluded.
3. If you suppose you have a free will, bound into a social context, accept your accountability, since whatever happens then depends on nature and its inherent laws PLUS your freedom as a human being, but by no means on god’s will (we have excluded this with No. 1!) However, in this third case, and only in this case, you have the burden of accountability. No eternal punishment, no eternal reward outside yourself, only the Kantian a priori conscience and the starred sky, the admiration of nature (not anything like heaven, "god" forbid!).
Praying/meditating doesn’t change anything outside yourself, it only can change, focus things within yourself, which, of course, may be quite a lot, even if you don’t belief in any religion/god.
Viejita and Victoria,
There exists in public discourse a long-standing (and extremely prejudicial) social taboo against criticizing religion or religious practice that is enjoyed by no other set of ideas. It isn't rational, and is, in fact, offensive.
Imagine if this were a forum about food and the question was "Against the backdrop of national broccoli month, what's your favorite way to prepare broccoli? What do you think of when you eat your favorite broccoli dish?" I might come in and state "I dislike broccoli no matter how it's prepared, and all I think when I eat is is yuck! In fact, I think you broccoli eaters are rather odd." Would I be chased out by the broccoli faithful? Would my dislike of broccoli be cause for broccoli lovers to think I'm demeaning them? I highly doubt it. Why then, when broccoli can be proven to exist and is an important part of many people's diet, would it not elicit the same reaction as speaking in any way against a ritual behavior that revolves around something that can't even be proven to exist? Because most people are indoctrinated into prejudice against non-believers and not against non-broccoli eaters.
You may think my comparison is frivolous, but I would ask you to ponder it seriously, because the point I'm trying to make is quite serious.
Victoria,
Apparently being "wishy-washy" is not your only fault. I was noting the violence being promoted by the Sunnis in Saudia Arabia as per the article's note about Abdullah bin Jabrain who you should have condemned publically as soon as you saw the news of the day. You do read the news?
Victoria reminds me of my father: He walked an equally meandering path through all possible brands of religion, and everytime he found the new "final" truth he defended it with the zeal of the convert, trying to spread its temporary uniqueness every time he found it, just like Victoria. He didn't try Islam, because in Germany Islam was not "en vogue" then; I don't think there was a single moslem in my home town of 250.000 in my youth. In school, we learned about Islam in a similar aloof mode as we learned about Zeus, Hera, Athene, and Poseidon.
My father was a fine man from whom I learned a lot of important things for my life, only I have no inclination to follow him through this desperate labyrinth searching for the next variant of truth. I am glad he also helped me to use reason in other matters, up to physics, poetry, music and art, which in turn made me a happily reflecting "apostat" of any form of religion.
Moslems kill apostats. Things are pretty relative, aren't they?
Chip:
“If, as an atheist, I do anything that might be considered prayer, it's when I go out to the country on a dark night, find a peaceful spot to lay on my back, and gaze up at the universe above. It makes me feel inspired and it reminds me how small and inconsequential we all are by comparison. It's humbling. Living near DC, I wish I didn't have to travel so far to do it. There should be laws against light pollution!”
Again it seem we are more alike than not. I have for many years backpacked alone into the forests around the Great Lakes to reconnect myself to the earth, to meditate and pray. This practice has been invaluable to the nurturing of my soul. One of my sons, who has a strong interest in astronomy, has taught me about light pollution. And it seems to me that in Canada, north of Toronto somewhere there is a large area that has been designated a no light zone, where they hope to maintain one last bastion of real darkness for star gazers. It sounds like a place I should visit.
Chip -
FYI Bart Erhman, author of "Misquoting Jesus" is speaking at the washington national cathedral tomorrow, Tuesday Feb 6 at 7:30.
He is a well known theology professor, former fundamentalism who describes himself as a "happy agnostic."
Could be quite interesting. More info here
http://www.cathedral.org/cathedral/register/ehrman2007sp.shtml
Victoria,
For clarification, the KJV version of the Bible explicitly lists Isaac in the sacrifice story in Genesis 22.
I think you miss my point about the Sacrifice story. From my reading, God was playing a sick mind game with Abraham to test the man's loyalty. That seems to me to be incompatible with the idea of God being all-benevolent. Of course, it would have been much worse than if God actually wanted the sacrifice. Still, why jerk someone around like that? I'm a father, and when I read the story, I feel like I'm trapped in a universe controlled by a mad person. If I had been Abraham, I would have been tempted to kill myself to spare my son.
I disagree that "only the dumbest of the dumb" read scripture literally. If the intent is for readers to use allegorical or metaphorical readings, that is not obvious from scripture. Even non-literalist denominations of Christianity use a certain amount of literalism in their treatments of the Bible. And if there is some allegorical message from the Sacrifice story, it doesn't seem to be a positive one.
And in my view, debating the so-called actual meaning of scripture is pointless. When people are convinced that God wants them to do certain things, it doesn't matter whether they got the idea from scripture or from their own heads. The practical effect on themselves and others is the same.
"how do we know gods intentions? because he sent messengers to tell us"
And why should we believe someone who claims to be a messenger? Theoretically, anyone can claim that they are passing along orders from God for the human race. I have no issue with someone who claims that God wants him or her to do something, as long as the action doesn't affect me or others. But when someone claims that God wants other people to do something, then we have a right to criticize that claim.
What if religion abandoned the idea of personified deities or of afterlives? What if religion abandoned the idea of "Because God said so"? What if religion focused on the here and now, encouraging people to find or create meanings for their lives? What if religion focused on encouraging people to think about the natural consequences of their actions, about which actions help or harm other people?
Gerry :
“For the believers, choose one of the following”
I am a believer who would choose none of the above.
First I’d like to state a few opinions and/or observations. One of the strongest impulses we humans seem to have, and especially those of us in the Western cultures, is to divide the world into two or three neat packages and ask ourselves and/or others to make a choice. Certain phrases dominate our language and ways of thinking. We constantly hear such things as: ‘on the one hand or the other’, ‘you can look at this two ways’, ‘the bottom line is’, ‘things are either right or wrong’, ‘this or that is either good or bad’ etc… Most such statements are false dichotomies. The realities of our lives tell us this everyday, but for some reason we prefer to conceptualize differently. Life is just far too complicated to boil our choices down to one or two or three. I believe there are almost certainly as many intellectually defensible approaches to life as there are people willing to make their arguments.
“Everything that happens happens through god’s will.”
This statement could be true and still not prove your conclusion. If one were to define ‘God’s will’ as the setting of her creation free to evolve as it might, whatever evolved would be in accord with her will, even though she would have no knowledge of the outcome.
“Everything that happens happens by chance and causality.”
As stated in your own words, this is a circular argument. Circular arguments do not have much appeal to for me.
“If you suppose you have a free will, bound into a social context, accept your accountability, since whatever happens then depends on nature and its inherent laws PLUS your freedom as a human being, but by no means on god’s will”
As to free will, how much free will we have depends a great deal on the circumstances in which our will is being exercised. We have choices within the limits of our situation and bear some responsibility for the decisions we make. As I see it, we humans live moment to moment on a razors edge. Our consciousness places us on that edge. And we struggle with the consequences all the time. Religious doctrines, for example original sin (a doctrine I’m not enamored with), is an attempt to grapple with this issue. What, if any, responsibility do we humans have for the situation we find ourselves in? Original sin postulates that we bear absolute responsibility. This, it seems to me, is a bit like blaming the victim of a crime because he/she ‘chose’ to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. But this still leaves us to wonder what, if any, accountability we shoulder for the actions we take. My own conclusion is that we have some (more than most of us would prefer), but not in any way absolute responsibility. I would suggest that there are three primary areas that we can take the most responsibility; our thinking, our emotions and our personal actions. By taking responsibility for what we think about, we can learn and grow intellectually and emotionally, and in so doing we will likely modify our behavior as well. Sadly, most people I observe spend most of their time trying to control those things that lie outside of their control (other people mostly) and believe wrongly that they themselves are mostly victims without much control over themselves or their circumstances. As I see it, it’s exactly the opposite.
I would never attempt to speak for Christians, as I’m sure most Christians will be relieved to know. And I would likewise not claim to speak for other believers or nonbelievers. So I’ll speak only for myself. My God is not in moment to moment control of creation. In my view creation is in process and God is in process as well. God is not complete and neither is creation, both are evolving. Truth and/or universal laws/absolutes governing creation are dynamic, not fixed. I frequently use the analogy of a surfer. The surfer attempts to find the curl of a good wave and ride it for all its worth. When in the curl all is well, but the wave will come to a natural end. The truths we live in are like the curl of the wave. We can ride them as long as it works for us, but our truths, like waves come to their natural end. Our limited perspective and our unique human predicament lead us to insist upon answers that we can get our minds around, but for me they fall short. This does not mean we should not strive for answers through scientific and other means of inquiry, it just means that I’m comfortable living within the mystery of the universe I find myself in.
As to prayer, I think we are mostly in agreement. I’m not as certain as you are about how prayer "might" change things outside myself, but it is of little concern to me. I do believe that prayer changes things, even if mostly it’s because we have changed our own perspective and/or behavior as a result. Still, sending a blessing to a stranger has no downside for me. Regardless, I see prayer as a virtue.
Question from a 12 Year Old
Many of you Pray, and believe that
God hears and answers your prayers.
My Question:
Does Believing in Something PROVE
that what you believe in is true?
What if a LOT of people believe in it?
Does that make it more true?
Emm:
You said: “Original sin postulates that we bear absolute responsibility.”
I don’t quite agree: The preposterous “original sin” fable can also be used for exactly the opposite conclusion: We bear no responsibility whatsoever, since our sin is predestined – we have no means to erase it. Then, to be completely subdued to thought-terror, the only way to absolve us from this sin ("be saved"!) we have to adhere to some way of thinking prefabricated by others in order to wield power over us. It is not far from totalitarian terror at all: No freedom of thinking (dignity?) will be left. That is how totalitarian societies are generated, watch out, America! That was the mechanism which could turn a highly educated nation like Germany into an authoritarian state, without the vast majority even noticing that they have adopted the underlying way of thinking (we must substitute "patriotism" for original sin here. "Sins" were called "undeutsch", similar to "un-American" for demagoguery's sake!)!
Otherwise, I am pretty close to your perception: Life is a process, and I like your metaphor of the wave. Therefore, life must be evolution, both phylogenetically as well as ontogenetically speaking (Both in terms of mankind as in terms of the individual). The notion of “unchangeable eternal truth” absolutely contradicts this concept of life as a process. On a more pragmatic level, one could argue that "eternal" heaven, considered a little more closely, must be the epitome of boredom, therefore approaching death for lack of process and leeway for evolving. Whatever we would do in this "life" would not have any consequence anymore. Therefore “eternal life” is an oxymoron: The only “eternal” state of affairs is death. The only possible definition of life is development, dynamic change - life and death like the leaves of a tree, even if it hurts our self-pride, living in the phase of a green leaf.
Free will: Again, we are close in our concepts: You qualify it by "circumstances", I qualify it by "social context" and "law of nature". It is more or less the same.
Your last paragraph underlines my remark that as I change (maybe through meditation, call it prayer if you like), my viewpoint changes and my actions change. As my actions change, something outside of myself changes, but only on the basis of my own change. We here approach a very efficient form of "psychology of interaction".
EMM, great thoughts in with your last paragraph. Sending blessings to strangers should not be confused with "I'll pray for your soul." The first is about empathy, and the second is about judgment. Whether or not I have a soul, that soul is no one else's business.
12 Year Old, my answers are No and No. Obviously, a belief held by many people may have more of an effect on society than a belief held by a few. But the belief itself doesn't constitute empirical fact.
The subject of prayer relates directly to the subject of religions and their foundations.
And what have history, scriptural text reviews and archeology taught us about these foundations?
1. Abraham is the reported founder of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Based on all we know now, Abraham was at best a combination of three separate individuals with 1.5 million Conservative Jews no longer believing he existed at all. (ditto for all the characters in the OT).
references: National Georgraphic review on Abraham and http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0401torah.asp
2. The founders of Christianity and Islam were both illiterate. i.e. neither one proof read or approved the NT or the Koran so we are taking the word of scribes and embellishers with their own agendas.
references: NT exegetes from the last two hundred years, Karen Armstrong's reviews of Islam and http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html
3. Christianity is based on the whim of Pilate, the false prophesy of the imminent second coming, and the sword of Constantine.
references: NT exegetes and their conclusions/books from the last two hundred years
Conclusion: Jewish, Christian and Islamic prayers have very little foundation to rely on.
“On a more pragmatic level, one could argue that "eternal" heaven, considered a little more closely, must be the epitome of boredom”
Heaven is another concept that I do not find very interesting. I agree with your description of heaven as the epitome of boredom, at least if we in our mortal states make any attempt whatever to anticipate what it might be like. As you suggest the problem with even eternal bliss, is that if there is no experience of anything else, such as pain suffering and boredom, there would be no reference point to evaluate or experience the bliss that was eternally ours. A rather “un-heavenly” prospect, it would appear to me. Consequently, I focus my efforts on living in a Christ-like way in each and every present moment and I’m willing to let eternity take care of itself.
On the issue of eternity, if by eternity we would agree to mean ‘without beginning or end in time’, then there really is no past or future anyway, because eternity could not be broken into discrete separate pieces. All that is or ever was or is ever going to be would have to be included now in this moment, in this one eternal now. So perhaps we’re already in heaven or hell or someplace between, only we mostly don’t experience it that way? Just a random thought.
Thanks for your comments.
Prayer is talking to yourself. No one is listening.
Emm: I quite agree: Eternity is now! With modern concepts of n-dimensions the concept of time has changed in physics, touching the unimaginable and yet scientific. Newton was very good and necessary - but Newton was yesterday.
Personally, I don't even need a Christ-like way to live a full life abounding in experience, information and curiosity.
Prayer is the soul's sincere desire,
Uttered or unexpressed,
The motion of a hidden fire
That trembles in the breast.
Prayer is the burden of a sigh,
The falling of a tear,
The upward glancing of an eye
When none but God is near.
Prayer is the simplest form of speech
That infant lips can try;
Prayer the sublimest strains that reach
The majesty on high.
Prayer is the contrite sinner's voice
Returning from his ways,
While angels in their songs rejoice,
And cry: Behold he prays!
Prayer is the Christian's vital breath,
The Christian's native air,
His watchword at the gates of death;
He enters heaven with prayer.
O Thou by whom we come to God,
The life, the Truth, the way!
The path of prayer Thyself hast trod;
Lord! teach us how to pray.
--James Montgomery
Emm, it's a small world indeed. My favorite spot for sky watching was floating around on a raft on a small lake in Michigan, about 45 miles from the big lake. I've not seen skies like that since I was a kid. Leave it to Canada to come up with enlightened policy (no pun intended).
E, thanks for the tip. That sounds like it'll be a fascinating lecture. Depending on my schedule tomorrow I might try and make it.
CHIP - I'll be wearing a down coat like everyone else, but hopefully will be the only one with a black and orange scarf.
Dear 12 year Old:
Prayer is soliloquy. Mad people always talk to themselves. Some people who wear their religion on their sleeves, let their religion do all the talking and their brains are pre-programmed to go asleep.
Blind faith is the basis (almost in all cases) of prayer. For you must be conscious that your faith in an unseen deity (God) is prompting you into a chant - regardless if that makes sense or not. Regardless if God exists and is listening or not. But, all humans are imperfect. So, at some special times of the day most humans pray, because they are mentally/spiritually weak and have to keep faith in their existence. Thus, they pray, and there is nothing wrong with that, so long as the prayee is aware that the prayers may not be answered.
But, a visible category of people are out there who argue about prayer (and hence blind faith). These culties/groupies exhibit intolerance and are mentally instable. If you don't agree with them they will turn the moon into green cheese. What they don't understand, they despise. What they despise needs to be destroyed. The Talibans destroyed the majestic examples from the Gandhara school of art (Bamiyan Buddha statues made out of sandstone). The reason was that the Talibans said that they cannot pray to their monochromatic deity, Allah, if such majestic idols exist in Afghanistan. Allah is more majestic than idols - the Talibans argued, though, ironically the Talibans have never claimed to have seen Allah. Therefore, do we really want the Talibans (and some like them) to pray at all ?
Such examples of prayers are depressing signs of a world in which the younger generation has to live in.
I am sorry for you, kid for the type of world that we are leaving to you as our legacy.
tonio- well theres a difference that is marked- people from their own understanding of judeo-chrisitanity paradigm project some of its elements onto islam- one of the major ones is that muslims worship a personified god-
we do not-
and while you are disgusted with the stroy of abraham and the sacrifice it seems that it never occurred to you that God- being omniscient and all- really knew the outcome beforehand- and wasnt exactly surprised by the outcome-
do you think its possible that it took place as an example to the rest of us?
an example of obedience which even you as a parent expect from your child especially in their infant years? (as indeed it was the infancy of judaism-christianity-islam)
and do you really imagine what your own reaction would be if you were actually being spoken to and led by god?
just a thought- also there are over 200 translations and versions of the bible-kjv is one of them-
as far as claims of messengers many have come falsely claiming messengership- the difference is the strenghth and wisdom we are still gleaning 1470-2000 years later- time has told the value of their messages- for me- and i only need to prove it for me-
FRED- i would disagree with your quick analysis of my personality and comparison to your father- i havent meandered through religion but have made a conscious and painstakingly careful analysis and study of religions and didnt feel compelled to be zealous until i was sure of what i found-
also i became muslim in a town that didnt contain one muslim and so my journey wasnt influenced by societal approval or disapproval
There is no belief in islam, of original sin- this is an aberrant and apparently destructive philosophy-
muslims believe EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BORN- is born in a state of original grace- which really gives quite a different mentality-
CHIP- sorry if i came down hard on you- the broccoli analogy is kind of frivilous- it doesnt really generate any deep emtooinal response- but i wasnt pointing out that people should censor commonplace rants against religion- just that after the observations and reactions AGAINST religion and what is perceived as being silenced-
there seems to be little positive discussion of what people do believe in- and i maintain and consistently will continue to that it takes little intelligence to destroy an idea but a great deal of creativity and energy to construct interesting and compelling ideas-
thats what im interested in hearing about but thats just me-
i like to hear what people think about things-
peace and salaams
To Tonio from Daniel.
The problem with our attempt to communicate with each other Tonio is not so much a problem of difference of intellect as a question of bravery.
Be brave Tonio and listen.
Morality has always been associated with species preservation--what will guarantee a society will survive (early form of species). That this has so often taken the form of individual self-preservation (personal selfishness) does not exclude the former. People quite simply have always been struggling to determine how to ensure a society propagates, and in its early form this always meant simply survive. The concept of God was a combination of actions guaranteed to assure survival and the direction in which survival was determined to be. Society was necessarily strongly authoritarian to provide cohesion and to direct actions toward survival ends. That so many ends were irrational by no means proves this wrong. That so many people were selfish and concerned with only their personal self-preservation by no means discounts the attempt of society to assure its immortality.
Now if you remove the concept of God this means that society must only struggle harder to increase the concept of species preservation over the concept of what individuals in particular want. The elimination of God must go hand in hand with the elimination of pure individual self-preservation and must result in pure species preservation over the individual or we will have a chaos which is somewhere inbetween morality (actions) aligned with the old concept of God and the future of the human race engaged in pure species preservation grounded in evolutionary theory etc.
Your particular error Tonio is you are thinking that the elimination of God and actions which have closely been aligned with religion will naturally result in something of man's life being easier, a lack of authoritarianism, etc.
But the truth is without God man must become totally engaged toward pure species preservation over the individual or risk species failure and with no hope in God.
Where we are today is in something of a position of drift, people against God and railing against "religious morality" without however putting the slightest bit of thought toward how man will have to act to ensure the species propogates itself without God.
The crux Tonio: I am simply asking what actions will guarantee the human race survives down through the ages without God--and the simple formulation of the question itself--a question really which could not be understood without the advent of modern science and evolution--calls into question our belief in the individual over the good of society.
Prior to evolution theory and modern science in general religion and morality, etc. although for species preservation were indeed at a lower level of such and inextricable from individual self-preservation (as you correctly grasp). But what now that we can make this distinction? What now that all too many no longer believe in God? How can we fail to recognize that this means the individual must subordinate himself to not only the good of society but what will assure species survival? And if we cannot agree on this (as you also pointed out) how does this not mean the abject failure of the human race to decide for itself without God?
Whatever you feel about the words written above Tonio--and I wish they had been clearer (today is not my finest day)--the fact remains that without God and the authoritarian morality you and atheists despise, a new way of action must occur to guarantee species survival or quite simply we have your empty pantheism or an atheistic nihilism, or--
I am deeply troubled that so many intelligent people talk about not believing in God on one hand but then seem totally incapable of grasping that a life without God will not be easier...A life without God will be no easier than the life of a boy thrown out of his father's house at the age of fourteen...To be on one's own calls for a whole repertoire of actions never even conceived of when living at home...
The human race without God is on its own and self-sacrifice and a whole repertoire of new actions must come into existence or quite simply the human race is in danger of going extinct.
I fully understand your reservations against religion--especially developments these days-in fact I am agnostic--but I dearly wish my fellow agnostics, atheists, and yes, pantheists such as you, would really look over the whole situation.
This is all I am asking--and yes it is a considerable request.
Morality is the perpetual formation of actions for species survival. In the days of old-time religion this meant what was good for society, and yes, I agree that this often meant a pure selfishness of individual self-preservation over the good of society and often an absurd hope in life after death (and many absurd rituals, superstitions, etc.). But without religion we have to question actions as never before, and this by no means is an easier life than a life of religious belief of the past.
I hope I have been relatively clear with these words. If I have to add something more, I would just add that a belief in the theory of evolution over religion means that the human race is forced to act in such a way that evolution is taken into its own hands, but all too often those against religion and for evolution believe in socialism or something (all sorts of beliefs really) as if evolution has been heading toward precisely conditions of today and nothing more...
I say that a life without God means a severe questioning of the direction of the human race--a questioning such has never existed before--or we have simply proven religious people correct: that we have simply degenerated and are farther than ever from the life of God.
OH JESUS PLEEZEE DARLINGS WITH OVER 6 BIILION PERSONS ON THE WONDERFULL EARTH DO YOU THINK THAT GOD/JESUS HAS TIME TO LISTEN TO THEM ALL?? THIS PRAYING HOKUS POKUS MAY MAKE YOU FEEL GOOD BUT ITS A WASTE OF TIME BECAUSE GOD/JESUS SHE JUST DOESNT EXIST. ITS A SCAM RUN BY A BUNCH OF MONEY HUNGRY HOMOPHOBIC PRIEST/MINISTERS/CLERGY. IF SHE DOES EXCIST LETS HAVE SOME PROOF AND I MEAN THE REAL STUFF AND REMEMBER OVER 90 % OF ALL SCIENTIST AGREE THAT ITS ALL BULL A SCAM! THERE IS JUST NO THERE, THERE!
Victoria,
What we want to hear is your condemnation of the Koran's militancy against non-believers and women. Until that happens your comments don't mean much.
The National Prayer Breakfast is an Abomination
It Turns Prayer over to the Money Changers
If jesus were alive, he would be rolling over in his grave at the thought of this hypocritical, morally reprehensible National Prayer Breakfast exploitation of religion by Politicians.
If Jesus was about ANYTHING
he was about Peace.
Bush, our still controlling politician, is about hateful fearful war.
He would have us
Pray for success in war.
A sacrilege of the highest order.
Over 300,ooo humans dead in this sacrilege.
Where is the courage of others,
esp Jon Meacham
who kow tows to this moral outrage
by honoring the National Prayer Breakfast.
I started to pray 3 years ago. We need God to stop our insane President'
from a clot!yet man doesnot belive in his dependancey.
Quran.
read in the name of your lord,who has created all that exist,he created man from a clot.
read!and your lord is the most generous who has taught by the pen.has taught man which he knew not.verily,man does transgress all bounds,he consider him self sufficent.verily to your lord is the return.
1-man is not on his own,from the mudy state to the cloty state to a fullgrowing man to old age to the ground grave to resurrection,returning back to his creator,who will escap this cycle?certainly none.
2-the (self sufficencey ) of man doesnot exist,its a delusion and illusion.
3-people are highly urgent to use their eyes ,ears,and heart.and read in the name of your creator lord.not in the name of your self,not in the name of the satan.
LIBERATED YOU ARE SIMPLY UNINFORMED AND WRONG IN WHAT YOU ASSUME- THESE ARE LONG AND DEEP SUBJECTS AND YOU KNOW IVE ALREADY COMPLETELY COVERED THEM REPLETE WITH ACCOMPANYING PROOFS- SO STOP BEING SNEAKY AND ASKING THE SAME THINGS OVER AND OVER AGAIN-
IF YOU DIDNT READ IT 3 WEEKS AGO WHEN I ANSWERED AD NAUSEUM- THATS NOT MY FAULT STOP HARRASSING ME
Victoria,
I may be wrong about the official doctrine of any of the Islam factions - but the original sin concept stems from the Old Testament (Eve, apple, snake, and God's curses as punishment), not from the Christian NT. Glad you find it as "aberrant and destructive" as I do - but doesn't the Old Testament represent the basis for Islam too? Or has your prophet changed some details?
Having found the final "truth", nobody has reason to learn more, to change, to develop anymore. So, I was not attacking your meandering which I admire (I admired my father), but the stopping of it by the eternal truth, the "zeal" factor, the main cause for most wars in history.
It reminds me of the story of the wife of a bass player, who asked him why he plays only one note and doesn't move his fingers up and down like all the other bass players. "They are still searching, I have found", was his answer. (And where is the music?)
If I look what is going on in Iraq at the moment between Moslems, I have difficulty in seeing the "EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BORN- is born in a state of original grace-" version you mention of Moslems. To me, Islam presently runs through a historical phase Christianity passed about 500 years ago: Wars about interpreting details down to the letter of more or less historical documents. The so utterly "Christian" US presently has to watch out not to fall back into that phase, btw!
Victoria,
"do you think its possible that it took place as an example to the rest of us? an example of obedience which even you as a parent expect from your child especially in their infant years?"
That is exactly my point. I object to any religious doctrine that treats adults like children. Emotionally mature adults should help others and avoid causing harm to others because they care about others, not because of any punishment or reward. Morality for its own sake, if you will. Obviously, this depends greatly on parents doing their jobs properly. There is never going to be a time when all adults are emotionally mature. Still, I see that that definition of emotional maturity as a model to inspire all of us.
"the difference is the strenghth and wisdom we are still gleaning 1470-2000 years later- time has told the value of their messages- for me- and i only need to prove it for me-"
The value of their messages is not the issue. The issue is that their claim that they are God's messengers. One has nothing to do with the other. The messages of Jesus may have great value, but that would be the same whether Jesus was mortal or divine.
Daniel,
"Morality has always been associated with species preservation--what will guarantee a society will survive (early form of species)."
I ask so many questions about your posts because the concept of "species preservation" sounds very nebulous to me. Your posts imply, at least to me, that there may be a difference between species preservation and simply valuing human life. Is that your intended meaning? I can imagine instances where the two ideas might be in conflict. In such instances, I suspect rational people might have different ideas for resolving the conflict.
Certainly you're right that individual self-preservation wouldn't exclude species preservation. But I can imagine instances where these would conflict as well.
"The concept of God was a combination of actions guaranteed to assure survival and the direction in which survival was determined to be."
According to my interpretation of your sentence, "God" was a concept created by humans to embody survival goals. Is that your meaning? Or are you claiming that God actually exists and humans turn away from him at the cost of species survival? If it's the former, that would be astounding to me, since I don't know of any religion that would accept such an idea.
Whatever your meaning, my point is that many of the commands attributed to God have nothing to do with species preservation. Some of them seem to embody authoritarianism for its own sake. Examining Christianity, much of the Old Testament seems focused on tribal self-preservation at the expense of both human life and species preservation. Both Noah's Ark and Revelations seem to treat the end of the world as a good thing, placing little value on either human life or species preservation. Both stories suggest that a human life has value only when the human obeys.
"A life without God will be no easier than the life of a boy thrown out of his father's house at the age of fourteen...To be on one's own calls for a whole repertoire of actions never even conceived of when living at home..."
I disagree. See my reply to Victoria above.
My idea of the divine is the universe and nature in general. I think it's healthy to recognize that there is something greater than one's self, that one has very little control over the universe. Certainly, that may reinforce the value of human life, recognizing life's fragility. But when I criticize the concept of "God," I criticize the concept in Western religions of divinity as an temperamental authority figure. Such an authority seems to have no interest in people learning the natural consequences of their actions, or in people learning to value human life, or in people learning to have empathy for others. Such an authority seems to require obedience for its own sake.
Prayer is power.Through prayer I cast my burden upon Jesus.I referesh spirtualy.Prayer is the Hot Line between me and God.God answers to my prayer at right time.
Prayer is power.Through prayer I cast my burden upon Jesus.I referesh spirtualy.Prayer is the Hot Line between me and God.God answers to my prayer at right time.
Victoria,
I have read all your "wishy-wash" and your condemnation of the militant aspects is just that, "wishy-wash". Simply state:
"The militant aspects of the Koran should be deleted. The Prophet was illiterate and was unable to proof-read the Koran. The scribes and the later embellishers of the Koran added passages to fit their militant ways. This has caused and still causes great misery in the world."
Victoria - "CHIP- sorry if i came down hard on you- the broccoli analogy is kind of frivilous- it doesnt really generate any deep emtooinal response- but i wasnt pointing out that people should censor commonplace rants against religion- just that after the observations and reactions AGAINST religion and what is perceived as being silenced-
there seems to be little positive discussion of what people do believe in- and i maintain and consistently will continue to that it takes little intelligence to destroy an idea but a great deal of creativity and energy to construct interesting and compelling ideas-"
It's quite alright, Victoria, but I disagree with your premise. All discussion is good, valid, and important, even when (and perhaps especially when) it challenges your beliefs.
The point I was making with my comparison is that no set of ideas should be free of challenge, most especially those that purport to represent universal truth, demand acquiescence through threat, replace self-worth with subservience and self-righteousness, and offer only vague promises in return, with no tangible proof supporting the efficacy of submitting to them. People who challenge such claims have been silenced throughout our history, not just by demagogues and zealots, but by the average person who's been systematically taught to see them as bad people, and their challenges as uncouth.
You seek to know what people believe, and I'm attempting to share my own beliefs, and what I believe both relates to and stands in opposition to what religion teaches. Does that make it less valid? If you do, I think you need to ask yourself why that is - Examine it deeply. Is it grounded in rationality or have you been taught to automatically see one as superior and one as lesser? I use "you" there somewhat figuratively, since you strike me as a reasonable person, but I disagree strongly that it takes little intelligence to tear down an idea. Religion represents a kind of intellectual tyranny to which most of humanity has been in bondage throughout recorded history.
I think it takes less intelligence and less courage to simply accept than to challenge such a force, especially when most people have been taught to dismiss any challenges with little thought. A parallel to that dismissal that's perhaps easier to see is when people who challenge a government and it's policies are labeled as unpatriotic, or as traitors. The right wing in this country has used that tactic to great effect in recent years. It's exactly the same type of dismissal that's been used throughout history against the unbeliever, and which you yourself, perhaps unwittingly, are perpetuating here. And it's the same tactic which underlies the reasoning behind such things as the national prayer breakfast, and the use of religion in politics.
The following relates both to the above, and to Daniel and Tonio's discussion -
People are taught that morality has its source outside of the reasoning mind, in some mysterious outside force, and that to be truly moral you must bind yourself to a tribe through indoctrination and ritual. That notion is the most dangerous thing ever conceived by man. It's caused more death, destruction, and misery, than the atomic bomb.
I believe that people have an innate moral sense which predisposes them to act peaceably and to cooperate for mutual benefit. Babies aren't born with beliefs, prejudices, or enemies. They are taught those things to serve the ambitions of tribes and governments, and their innate morality can make them resistant - and that resistance will increase with age if they're not indoctrinated young, unless they become downtrodden and in need in which case offering them compassion and aid, for which they will be grateful, offers another opportunity to indoctrinate. Therein lies the great danger of teaching that morality comes from someplace other than within ourselves, and that it isn't born of reason, common sense, and natural inclination, but is granted by favor in return for submission.
If I want to subvert your innate qualities, and undermine your free will, in order to bend you to my own ambitions, how might I best go about it? I would teach you that your identity and worth are not your own, but belong instead to tribe, nation, and god. If I wish you to act in ways that go against your innate moral sense in opposition to a different tribe, nation, or god, I will teach you that morality is also not your own, that you are, in fact, worthless, corrupt, and evil without your submission to a force outside of yourself, and I will claim that I possess it and can teach it to you, for a price.
Warren wrote: "I pray because God moves in my life, because i have a relationship with him and because without him I am nothing."
I hear sentiments like that and I don't think that the speaker has been given something wonderful. I instead think that what's wonderful has been taken away from him - been undermined, subverted, and replaced by blind obedience, making him a perfect tool to be manipulated and bent to political ends. He no longer belongs to himself but to his tribe.
So, Victoria, I reject your notion that it takes no intelligence or thought to tear down a belief or an idea. On the contrary, I think it often takes great courage, and I'm sorry that someone has taught you to mistrust me, with little thought about what I have to say. And Daniel, I reject your notion that we require some authoritarian force to ensure our survival and our morality.
Since I've wandered somewhat far afield I'll bring this back around to the original topic. As I said earlier while responding to Emm, I see great value in personal meditation when it's used to reach within yourself to find your innate morality, compassion, ability, and strength - but when that becomes subverted through indoctrinated ritual and turned in to an act of submission to something outside of yourself, I see something else entirely: Something ugly, cynical, and infinitely dangerous.
Chip, your post is excellent!
I'm not prepared to conclude that people have an innate moral sense, because I am not an expert on the human mind. I do believe that there is a global ethical principle about not causing harm to others. Is that principle innate, or do people learn it through experience? If it's the former, then morality would be a matter of encouraging people to listen to their moral sense. If it's the latter, then morality would be a matter of encouraging people to acquire moral lessons from their experiences. Either way, it's about the capacity for moral choice. When we submit to "something outside ourselves," we become laboratory rats stripped of our humanity.
Chip
Stop reading my mind...;-)
On second though, don't stop, you're expressing a lot of the things I think a lot better than I could.
Thanks
A Hermit
Tonio, I'm guilty of the same oversimplification as Daniel for the sake of clarity. Certainly the issue is far more complicated than I've painted it, so evaluate it philosophically and not on scientific merit, haha. Somewhere along the way that childhood innocence and lack of prejudice will inevitably be replaced by something else. I agree with you completely that it's about capacity for moral choice - so it's much better to have it replaced by a morality based on reason rather than submission.
(and as a sidenote, I really wish this forum let us edit our posts. I can't seem to make it through a long one without botching a sentence or three!)
Inate Morality: A Chip off the Old Block
Responding to Chip's brilliant and humane post, and Tonio's comment about Morality:
a couple of books if you are interested in more info
Hardwired Behavior by Tancredi
Moral Minds by Marc Hauser, Harvard scientist
The Science of Good and Evil
and an On line reference for an article by Hauser and Ethicist Peter Singer that is excellent and SHORT
www.wjh.harvard.edu/~mnkylab/publications/ recent/HauserSingerMoralRelig05.pdf
Of course not.
“Nothing fails like prayer!” Meaning more explicitly; of all the uses of a human’s time
this might be the Earth’s historically greatest waste of time and effort. Prayer is the single
greatest failure on Earth. It is the single greatest wasted effort that any one person could
participate in.
Of all the trillions of occasions of some person calling up to “a god for help,” the few who get
an answer, get only what seems to them to be an answer, because they prayed for an outcome
that they knew was probable anyway. For example: Your husband is in surgery, the doctor tells
you its touch and go. So in the waiting room you start praying, even bargaining with a god. You
offer it your car, your volunteer time, you’ll become a monk, or a nun, you’ll give away all your
worldly possessions. Two hours later the doctor comes to you. Your husband will live.
“Oh praise be!” You say. “You answered my prayer lord, thank you!” This "miracle" is no
more or less likely than a gambler’s favor with the same god in asking for “36 red baby! C’mon
lord, I deserve this one lord, c’mon!” Odds were 36-1 in favor of this gambler’s number
occurring, but does he become a monk, does he enter seminary school? Of course not. He
knows in his conscience that it’s a game of chance, a game of probability, winning on his own
was a far far greater probability than a god having answered his call at the casino. As the
probability of the surgeon's skills would be a crucial factor to her husband's survival.to the
anxiously waiting wife in the hospital waiting room.
Fools are we who see the invisible, who talk to the deaf, who behave for the blind. For God
is Just Pretend, and pretend is for children.
To which of the two, three, or four Christian "Gods" did Chuck Colson address his prayers?
He quotes Paul's admonition to "present your request to God" and describes prayer as "an honest, heart-felt conversation with God." But he then relates how he intercede[s] before the Lord daily [for] the President and government leaders," that "Christ came into my life," and describe repentance as "recognizing Jesus as the Son of God."
For Paul, Jesus was not God; he was Lord. His usage is quite consistent, and it is clear that for Paul, Jesus achieved his semidivine status only after his death. He certainly never regarded Jesus as the "Son of God" in the literal sense, and would have been astonished to learn that he had been divine from birth, a claim first advanced decades after Paul's death, in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (and nowhere else in the New Testament).
It was only when the post-apostolic generation of Christians, in their enthusiasm, decided to promote Jesus from Messiah (anointed one) to a full-fledged deity that the faithful began to refer to both as "God"; thereby violating the First Commmandment. It was this awkward impasse that eventually led the Church, in the fourth century, to invent a third God, by promoting the shadowy Holy Spirit to a co-equal divinity, and then proclaiming all three to be one and the same; thereby inventing a fourth God, the Holy Trinity.
Reverend Jerry Falwell (and others) periodically proclaim the need to "put God back into Christmas." Which of the four Christian Gods does he have in mind? Is he claiming that the Holy spirit was also born on December 25th? The forth Christian God was born in October of 381, when it was enacted by imperial of the emperor Theodosius.
E Favorite - "CHIP - I'll be wearing a down coat like everyone else, but hopefully will be the only one with a black and orange scarf."
Doesn't look like I'm going to make it there due to an impending deadline. I really wish I could attend! I swear, it's like those clients think they pay my bills or something! Let me know how it was.
To Chip and Tonio from Daniel. I will try one more time, although you two seem incapable of basic reflection. The human race through modern science and basic reflection is in the process of dispensing with God--arriving, if you will, at people like you. People like you are against religion for a variety of reasons. Many of those reasons concern irrationality of belief, the authoritarianism of religion. But precisely at the time all this has been occuring has been occuring an increased time sense on the part of humans and the birth of the theory of evolution, etc. Essentially we are more and more in the position of grasping the human race as an isolated and evolving species in a Godless world. Now I simply ask you how you arrive with all these developments at the conclusion that life for people will not become more strenuous, that we will not have to contemplate morality as never before, and that essentially for all development of the individual over the good of society (freedom versus authoritarianism if you will) without question by the very scientific consciousness evident above (that we are an evolving species in a Godless world) we have no choice but to subordinate our individuality to whatever will guarantee species survival...You Chip and Tonio in this developing situation seem to have a concept of morality which has nothing really to do with the developing conceptual scheme and essentially your morality is nothing more than a relaxing of religious stricture (something of an amorphous love and respect for one another detached from our drastically increasing consciousness of being merely a species and having to assure our survival by our own hands). Essentially you sound like a couple typical liberals and nothing more (and no, I have never voted Republican). I submit that we will have to contemplate morality (all possible actions really) as never before. You think authoritarianism is finished? Perhaps. But whether it is or not, no matter how much the individual is prized, we all will have to have something of a tyranny over ourselves which is dictated by our pure consciousness of knowing we are only a species evolving in a Godless world, and either we as a species make by our own hands or we break in this Godless world...That should be relatively clear. I await your answer.
Yes, I believe in Prayer! I am a born Again Christian, Evengelcal Right Winger! I believe that prayer need to get back in schools. and other involment in this country. It a shame that the Lift Wing Liberal don't allow it!
One aspect of prayer that I’ve not heard discussed thus far on this forum, is that prayer is very frequently offered by and for those who are expecting a prayer to be prayed on their behalf. Many people who pray pray for their loved ones, who they know believe in the power of prayer. For an injured relative or sick friend or a soldier in the quagmire of Iraq, the knowledge that there are others praying for them is likely a source of great comfort and encouragement. It may even be the thread they hold onto, and that ultimately gets them through their time of tribulation. In these instances the efficacy of the prayers offered are fulfilled in the believers knowing that prayers are being said on their behalf.
Please indulge a short story;
When I was working for a large office equipment manufacturer many years ago, I spent endless hours driving in city traffic. I became so frustrated with the poor driving skills of my fellow travelers that it nearly drove me (pardon the pun) crazy. And this was especially true for those drivers that were driving too slow or were indecisive to the point of seeming dangerous. I eventually chose another line of work that required very little travel by car. But one thing I came to realize through the frustration of driving with those of ‘lesser skills’ was that, despite my predisposition to want to make them go faster or make up their minds more quickly, these folks were probably driving as best they could with the skills they had. And I finally decided that if this were the case, that I was likely better off with their taking their time and doing their best, than in forcing them to drive outside the range of their capabilities. However much I’d prefer that they were better drivers, the safety of all was probably enhanced by their just driving the way they were. Outside of some empirical edict I doubt that there was then or is now a way to force folks to either drive to a set standard, or relinquish there licenses altogether.
Why do I tell you this story? I do so as a way of suggesting to those of you that are so dismissive of religion and the ethical norms they espouse, that you consider what it might be like to live in a world where people, with far less developed thinking skills than you possess, are set free to make up their own rules as they go along. My intuition is that things could be a lot worse than they currently are. This is in no way to suggest that the underlying justification of religious, ethical and moral norms ought not be questioned and/or revised. But that a go slow approach is perhaps wiser than a wholesale rejection of religion and the morals codes that guide those not as steeped in the intellectual incongruities that philosophers and theologians consider at some depth. There is an old saying ‘be careful of what you wish for, you just might get it’. In the no doubt long interval, between the time the average person is ready to find their own way in the gray zone of ethics and morality, perhaps it would be better to presume a superiority of intellect and wisdom and let others go their own ways. If, as Marx proffered, religion is the opiate of the masses, what I’m suggesting is that a cold turkey withdrawal might not be our best way forward.
"prayer of worship requires a humility that removes the delusionof the ego- there are forces that we cant measure in the universe and dont even begin to understand- perhaps one day theyll be provable by scientific methods- but once electricity was a mystery- it doesnt mean it didnt exist-"
I understand the sentiment behind this quote, but it does little as an argument for the probability of God. It may be desirable or comforting to think that there must be a god, but that don't change the likelyhood of it. We are given a concept of a god with no boundries or limits- who can see everything, hear everything, who knows our thoughts and very desires. God even listens to prayers, or has a personal relationship with people. As our understanding of our world and cosmos becomes deeper, the extent to which people redifine and retool the concept of god, to me, becomes a curious excersise in invention. Given the flurry of outstanding knowlege that humanity has discovered over the past century, I would like to see us take some of our more serious questions (e.g. our beginnings, our purpose and meaning) out of the realm of ancient thought, gut feeling, and wishful thinking. Science and reason cannot answer everything, but to subscribe things to which we have an incomplete understanding instead to a god, betrays our simple want for an answer. I imagine that if there is a creative intent behind life, it is so vastly complex, or simple, as to make any conjecture laughable.
My problem with prayer is that no matter how altruistic the approach, it is inherently anthropocentric, and arrogantly so. Praying to a god, even to clear your heart and mind, supposes a relationship in which a god lends an ear, so to speak, so that people can praise, unburden their heart, or otherwise beseech for an understanding to our chaotic, violent lives. To me an objective look at nature reveals a world and cosmos that is morally neutral. Earthquakes happen, galaxies collide, the food chain exists, and there is nothing we can do to suspend this or the things that happen to us. This may sound nihilistic, but for me it's a lot easier to swallow than a god who does or doesn't answer prayers of the oppressed, the suffering, or the dispondent. Theologians might tell me that I've missed the point of prayer. This is where I maintain that the more we discover of our world, the more the theist must revise and reconstitute god into an esoteric concoction of intents and designs that speaks more of our fears and insecurities than any universal truth.
Daniel, I don't know where to start with your last post, and I almost stopped reading at "you two seem incapable of basic reflection," so I'll just say that I think it's simply wrong from beginning to end. Sorry. People like me are not a new phenomenon. Morality is not a religious concept at its root. Religion didn't invent morality and it in no way requires god. It never has. The very existence of people such as myself, whose morality is in no way dependent on god or authoritarianism stands as proof that you're incorrect. Your inability to conceive of morality without god or other authoritarian model is your own problem which you are projecting onto everyone else.
Daniel,
You mischaracterize my position on religion. I'm not "against religion," That would imply that I oppose freedom of religion for the individual, which is most definitely not the case. I have issues with the teachings of most organized religions, but that is not the same thing as opposing religion in general.
Also, I think it's a mistake to suggest that science, or specifically evolution, is dispensing with God. True, evolution contradicts literal readings of many religions' creation stories, but that doesn't make evolution anti-religion or anti-God.
"Essentially we are more and more in the position of grasping the human race as an isolated and evolving species in a Godless world."
Just because we realize that we are "merely a species," doesn't mean that we can't value what is special about our species. We are special because we have awareness of death and we have moral choice. Moral choice has always been hard work. Humans have probably known that since we left the caves, and that knowledge probably predates religion. You're right that moral choice is more critical than ever, given the proliferation of atomic weapons. Belief in God won't stop people from using those weapons. Belief in God won't guarantee the survival of our species. In a way, our survival has always been in our hands - it has only been within the last few decades that we have become aware of this.
And knowing that we are "merely a species" doesn't inherently negate the idea of the divine, although it may negate the teachings of many religions. Awareness of being "merely a species" may seem like Godlessness if one using a specific religion's teachings as a reference point. I suspect that as we become more knowledgeable as a species, our idea of the divine might grow and change along with us, and religious teachings might evolve to fit our new awareness of our place in the universe. As much as I dislike Original Sin and Revelation, I admit that the teachings of Jesus were a major step forward from the genocidal terror of the Old Testament.
Emm says:
"consider what it might be like to live in a world where people, with far less developed thinking skills than you possess, are set free to make up their own rules as they go along."
Seems to me that's more or less how it works anyway; people tend to choose their religion, and their interpretation of religion, in a way that fits their predispositions. It's not like there's one clear set of religious moral principles, even within Christianity. My pacifist Mennonite forefathers haven't much in common with warmongering clerics like Jerry Falwell or James Dobson, but they would equally claim that their version of morality came from God. People already make up their own rules; they just like to be able to claim that their rules are God's rules.
Rather than perpetuating the "divine command" version of morality, which gives judgemental hatemongers like the above-mentioned radical clerics the ability to claim God's blessing on their own prejudices I think it would be preferable if we all recognized the very human nature and origin of ethical behaviour, and sought common human goals.
Regards
A Hermit
Philippians 2:10
so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth.
Jesus wins...all others lose. Doesn't matter whether you believe it or not. Truth still remains truth. Every knee is going to bow.
CHIP - I'll report back - and hope, (if not pray) that you will have a burst of creativity for your client, half as good as the ones you've had here, that will give you the time to dash off to the cathedral.
I pray,
I meditate,
I act,
I live.
But most of all, I pray
...and God knows it.
I pray,
I meditate,
I act,
I live.
But most of all, I pray
...and God knows it.
As a Buddhist practicioner, I pray for the benefit of all living beings, offering to these beings whatever merit (gains) I have achieved through my practice to aid them in their desire for an end to suffering. From the Sutta Nipata, my prayer is thus:
"By the power and the truth of this practice,
may all beings have happiness, and the causes of happiness.
May all be free from sorrow, and the causes of sorrow.
May all never be separated from the sacred happiness
which is sorrowless.
And may all live in equanimity,
without too much attachment and too much aversion,
And live believing in the equality of all that lives."
I do not pray "to" a particular god or deity, but instead pray "for" all other sentient beings.
January 31, 2007 11:16 AM