Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

Well, actually, as Heiko Oberman has shown, Luther (and other German members of his very small order) disliked Italians and other "swarthy" Mediterraneans. And this well before his later years, when even his wife told him to tone down the rhetoric. There's a ton of documentary evidence that he didn't like these people coming into Germany and telling good Germans what to do. A lot of the work done on this has been done by Lutheran historians.

---

Which says what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Which says what?

---

How about a different thread? That's right, it says "How about a different thread?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

How about a different thread? That's right, it says "How about a different thread?"

---

In other words, let's give this thread back to cozyk?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

In other words, let's give this thread back to cozyk?

---

This is what I'm thinking. She's been really patient with us, and we should stop abusing that patience.

And I'm sorry for being short with you earlier. There were a couple of times when I really couldn't see where you were coming from enough to sort out what you were trying to say. So let's just agree to disagree for now and quiver our arrows.

I guess I having something new to take to confession. (Yes, wondergirl, that was just for you!)

Ps: I'm pathologically incapable of using emoticons, but I think you can guess which one would have accompanied the parantheses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

Why would you say that, Joe? Wondergirl is simply questioning the doctrine. As she wrote, she was brought up without that being part of her religious upbringing. Do you expect her to jump on the Catholic bandwagon because you and others believe it?

When you offer as a proof (or support) that Mary was "full of grace" and therefore sinless, this strikes me as stretching a phrase to a place it was never intended to go. Whether Mary was or wasn't this or that strikes me as minutiae. The story of Mary is a lovely one and a big part of Christian culture but not worth getting insulting about.

My only objection to Protestants on this Mary issue is when some misrepresent Catholic belief (that she is worshipped as if she were God). After all Catholics ought to know what they believe.

---

Point well made and I’ll try to “tone” it down. However, you may be mistaking my straightforward comments as being combative. I’ve found that beating around bushes only seems to stir-up dust.

JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

This is what I'm thinking. She's been really patient with us, and we should stop abusing that patience.

And I'm sorry for being short with you earlier. There were a couple of times when I really couldn't see where you were coming from enough to sort out what you were trying to say. So let's just agree to disagree for now and quiver our arrows.

I guess I having something new to take to confession. (Yes, wondergirl, that was just for you!)

Ps: I'm pathologically incapable of using emoticons, but I think you can guess which one would have accompanied the parantheses.

---

Maybe we can somehow return this thread to its original subject? And I would be more than happy to post on a thread about Luther and the Reformation and his intentions and beliefs and very interesting supper guests. (I'll bring the dessert). I hope Athos and Joe and arcura et al. will join us.

Wondergirl,
You saidn"I think all of us (arcura, akoue, Athos, Joe, De Maria) agree on that. God loves us unconditionally, and, in turn, our response is to not only love God in return but also love others unconditionally"
I fully adree with you on that..
I think all of the Christians here also will do so.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Joe,
Yes, as you said, "I've found that beating around bushes only seems to stir-up dust".
I think it also disturbs the bush.
LOL
Fred
.

Akoue
Yes, since there are disagreements here let's agree to disagree but keep the discussion going.
I for one am learning as it goes on.
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

What continuing studies are you referring to?

---

Any number of universities around the world have and are studying the idea. The University of Florida for example has a program for it. Many medical schools are now including the idea of prayer and healing as part of their training for residents. Enough doctors have seen results that should not have happened and that they are hard pressed to explain scientifically. There are possible answers, but they can be neither proved nor disproved either.

The idea that the results are not universal, as in everyone getting healed when they pray or are prayed for, is what holds up many who don't believe there is any connection. Could it just be due to the person's own physiological response... sure. Might there be more to it... that is what has many interested enough to keep looking at the prospect.

Those who do believe understand that just because an event did not have the results they had hoped for, or prayed for, does not mean it didn't turn out how it was supposed to. This is partly where the idea of God's plan comes about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoulaLC

Any number of universities around the world have and are studying the idea. The University of Florida for example has a program for it.

The idea that the results are not universal, as in everyone getting healed when they pray or are prayed for, is what holds up many who don't believe there is any connection.


Could it just be due to the person's own physiological response.....sure.

---

The University of Florida study has nothing to do with the issue at hand. That study studied the effect of prayer on stress management for the elderly. No one denies that personal prayer for ones self can be efficacious.

The results ARE universal. Every scientifically-controlled study has shown no effect. No exceptions.

"The person's own physiological response". You're missing the point. The question is about whether prayer works for others, not the person doing the praying. "Prayer at a distance" so to speak.

DoulaLC,
Thanks for that information.
God can and has said no to many prayers.
Fred

Athos,
Thanks for that affirmation.
Our God who heals definitely works in mysterious ways!
WG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

The University of Florida study has nothing to do with the issue at hand. That study studied the effect of prayer on stress management for the elderly. No one denies that personal prayer for ones self can be efficacious.

The results ARE universal. Every scientifically-controlled study has shown no effect. No exceptions.

"The person's own physiological response". You're missing the point. The question is about whether prayer works for others, not the person doing the praying. "Prayer at a distance" so to speak.

---

Check out some recent journals and sited works. There have been recent studies and ones that are still being done.
Yes, I agree, some studies have not found any connection... there is no doubt about that as those are well documented and published.

My statement was not that these studies do not exist, but simply that there has been more recent research since the '90's and that research continues.

DoulaLC,
Right you are.
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoulaLC

Check out some recent journals and sited works. There have been recent studies and ones that are still being done.
Yes, I agree, some studies have not found any connection....there is no doubt about that as those are well documented and published.

My statement was not that these studies do not exist, but simply that there has been more recent research since the '90's and that research continues.

---

If I'm not mistaken, both Duke and Georgetown medical schools have recently done studies on "remote prayer".

Akoue.
I'll see what I can find on that.
I hope others do.
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoulaLC

Check out some recent journals and sited works. There have been recent studies and ones that are still being done.
Yes, I agree, some studies have not found any connection.

---

You didn't cite any works. How can I check them out? Please state what these recent studies are.

To your last sentence: NO study has found ANY connection!

I don't know the journal, but this study claims to show some benefit from intercessory prayer.

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/323/7327/1450

The Duke study (1998) claims to have shown:

Quote:

---

However, those receiving alternative therapies "had lower absolute complication rates and a lower absolute incidence of post-procedural ischemia during hospitalization." Of the four alternative therapies, intercessory prayer seemed to provide the greatest therapeutic benefits.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

The Duke study (1998) claims to have shown:

---

The study you quote was acknowledged to have been flawed by all concerned. Duke did a second study with 700+ patients, several prayer groups from various religions, and rigidly controlled with accepted scientific testing methods. It was a three-year study ending in 2003.


Here is the conclusion from the Duke Medicine News and Communications publication:

By Duke Medicine News and Communications

Published: July 14, 2005



DURHAM, N.C. -- Distant prayer and the bedside use of music, imagery and touch (MIT therapy) did not have a significant effect upon the primary clinical outcome observed in patients undergoing certain heart procedures, researchers at Duke Clinical Research Institute (DCRI), Duke University Medical Center, the Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) and seven other leading academic medical institutions across the U.S. have found.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

The study you quote was acknowledged to have been flawed by all concerned. Duke did a second study with 700+ patients, several prayer groups from various religions, and rigidly controlled with accepted scientific testing methods. It was a three-year study ending in 2003.


Here is the conclusion from the Duke Medicine News and Communications publication:

By Duke Medicine News and Communications

Published: July 14, 2005



DURHAM, N.C. -- Distant prayer and the bedside use of music, imagery and touch (MIT therapy) did not have a significant effect upon the primary clinical outcome observed in patients undergoing certain heart procedures, researchers at Duke Clinical Research Institute (DCRI), Duke University Medical Center, the Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) and seven other leading academic medical institutions across the U.S. have found.

---

I'm not surprised. I didn't mean to advocate anything. I just came across it and thought you guys might like to take a look.

All:

My two cents worth as to whether science can prove the prayer or miracle phenomenon is best expressed by Chesterton.

Men can construct a science with very few instruments, or with very plain instruments; but no one on earth could construct a science with unreliable instruments. A man might work out the whole of mathematics with a handful of pebbles, but not with a handful of clay which was always falling apart into new fragments, and falling together into new combinations. A man might measure heaven and earth with a reed, but not with a growing reed. G.K. Chesterton


JoeT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

I don't know the journal, but this study claims to show some benefit from intercessory prayer.

Effects of remote, retroactive intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients with bloodstream infection: randomised controlled trial -- Leibovici 323 (7327): 1450 -- BMJ

---

This is a fascinating study. The prayer took place 4-10 years AFTER the patients had been discharged from the hospital. Some had died. So here we have intercessory prayer working retroactively! The doctor who conducted the experiment and wrote the original article was proving a point with a tongue-in-cheek article.

Amazing what you can find on the internet.

Here's the link - norvik.com/prayer. See #6 Rabin Medical Center Israel - Retroactive Prayer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

This is a fascinating study. The prayer took place 4-10 years AFTER the patients had been discharged from the hospital. Some had died. So here we have intercessory prayer working retroactively! The doctor who conducted the experiment and wrote the original article was proving a point with a tongue-in-cheek article.

Amazing what you can find on the internet.

Here's the link - norvik.com/prayer. See #6 Rabin Medical Center Israel - Retroactive Prayer.

---

Crazy academic humor!

Did the other study turn up anything of interest?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

If I'm not mistaken, both Duke and Georgetown medical schools have recently done studies on "remote prayer".

---

The Georgetown study:


"Those hoping for confirmation of a positive therapeutic effect of distant prayer were to be disappointed. As Matthews explained, "Neither multivariate nor univariate analysis showed a statistically significant overall improvement after intervention in the 10 outcome variables for the group receiving.. . Distant intercessory prayer (n = 19) when compared with the group receiving no.. . Distant prayer (n = 21)." And the placebo effect was in evidence: "Although only.. . 48% [of patients] actually received distant prayer and individuals were blinded to distant prayer treatment status.. . 73% [believed they received] distant prayer. These patients were more likely than others to have improvement in global function.. . And reductions in pain."


Translation: Distant (intercessory) prayer did not work. Dale Mathews, MD, is an Associate Professor of Medicine at Georgetown who conducted the study.

I found this about intercessory prayer..

Scientific Evidence for Answered Prayer

Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

I found this about intercessory prayer..

Scientific Evidence for Answered Prayer

---

Case 1 - This 1983 study measured 24 variables. 18 showed no difference, 6 showed a small difference. The study author keyed on the 6 favorable variables, ignoring the other 18. These 6 variables were declared important only AFTER the study. This is NOT proper methodology. Again, AFTER the study was done, the author determined the scoring method - it is crucial to determine the scoring method PRIOR to the study. When corrected for these flaws, the study was inconclusive.

Case # 2 - More of the same - shaky scoring and shaky variables. Larry Dorsey, a supporter of remote healing, said, "This study has missed the mark. We would want to see statistically significant life-or-death effects, which simply did not occur".

Case # 3 - This is the same Israeli study I mentioned in the above post to Akoue. See that post. What is interesting is that Arcura's source makes a point of mentioning that only Christian prayer proved effective. This study presumably was carried out with Jewish prayer.

Case # 4 - This is the last study mentioned. I will only quote the study itself which should suffice. "The LACK of efficacy in this study could be due to theological problems with the study design". When a source is cited as proof of intercessory prayer, and that very source states that there was a lack of proof, I begin to wonder why such a citation was made in the first place.


I have now replied to several posts on this issue. It should be apparent that every study cited could have been carefully researched (googled) for all the pertinent facts BEFORE posting it here. I don't have the time to continue doing all the research.

Athos
Thanks for your observation.
I still believe prayer works for me.
But U must keep in mind that God answers prayer 4 ways.
1, Yes
2. No
3. Maybe
4. You've go to be kidding.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cozyk

Okay, here goes.

1. Man and Woman are created.;)
2. Woman chose to disobey God and thus committed the first sin.:eek:
3. Because of her, the rest of us have to pay.:(
4. Animals had to be sacrificed in the OT to earn acceptance from God.:(
5. In the NT, Jesus was sacrificed for our sins. (Hey, I wasn't even born yet! ) The deal was, if you believe that Jesus died for your sake as a way to pay for your sins, THEN I (GOD) will accept you into my kingdom.:cool:

Why torture Jesus that way? Looks like a source as powerful as God could come up with a better plan wouldn't you think? As a parent, you don't punish child A when child B disobeyed do you. That would just be all kinds of wrong:mad:

My love for my children is unconditional and I would never ever turn them away. And I especially would never send them somewhere to be tortured! (Hell) NEVER, no matter what. They could have disobeyed me, not accepted my sacrifice made for them, or even cursed me.
Still, I'd never turn my back on them. In MY opinion, neither would God. This story just does not add up.

---

1. No issues here.
2. Still no issues, story is true.
3. Wrong. We're not suffering for Eve's choices. We suffer because of our own.
4. Sacrifices weren't for "acceptance," they were a form of worship. People used to place their hands upon a goat's head to symbolize the passing of their sin and then send the goat into the wilderness.
5. Story true, no issues.

Jesus wasn't ordered, He chose to make that sacrifice; He even prayed and asked God if there was any other way. There wasn't. Jesus is the only substitute for sin; He's perfect. What can be better than perfection?

I'm asking honestly: what do you think God should have done? What other way should there be?

The big Q for me is, why did God put the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden in the first place? He had created a perfect universe. Everyone and everything was happy and existed/lived in peace. Why that particular tree?

To show us that we have a free will. God didn't make us to be puppets; He made us to think for ourselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this8384

To show us that we have a free will. God didn't make us to be puppets; He made us to think for ourselves.

---

Adam and Eve didn't know they had free will?

Yes, they did know. God specifically told them not to eat from that tree; they chose to do it. That's free will. God could have stopped them, but that defeats the whole purpose of free will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by this8384

Yes, they did know. God specifically told them not to eat from that tree; they chose to do it. That's free will. God could have stopped them, but that defeats the whole purpose of free will.

---

I'm wondering why God put the tree there in the first place. It's like a mom setting a plate of freshly-baked chocolate chip cookies on the table, telling her children not to eat any, then going away to a different part of the house.

Adam and Eve had free will and apparently knew that. Why would God play devil's advocate and put temptation right in front of them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cozyk

Okay, here goes.

1. Man and Woman are created.;)
2. Woman chose to disobey God and thus committed the first sin.:eek:
3. Because of her, the rest of us have to pay.
4. Animals had to be sacrificed in the OT to earn acceptance from God.
5. In the NT, Jesus was sacrificed for our sins. (Hey, I wasn't even born yet! ) The deal was, if you believe that Jesus died for your sake as a way to pay for your sins, THEN I (GOD) will accept you into my kingdom.:cool:

Why torture Jesus that way? Looks like a source as powerful as God could come up with a better plan wouldn't you think? As a parent, you don't punish child A when child B disobeyed do you. That would just be all kinds of wrong:mad:

My love for my children is unconditional and I would never ever turn them away. And I especially would never send them somewhere to be tortured! (Hell) NEVER, no matter what. They could have disobeyed me, not accepted my sacrifice made for them, or even cursed me.
Still, I'd never turn my back on them. In MY opinion, neither would God. This story just does not add up.

---

this 8384, let me put it this way,

1. I personally don't believe that just two people came together to populate the world. You do realize incest was necessary to get this ball rolling, right? I know most christians would never question what the bible says , so I'm going along with this story for the sake of argument. Evolution makes more sense to me.

2. Still, just playing along.

3. :rolleyes: okay... sure

4. I don't really worship God as much as I "honor" God. I don't feel that rituals of any Kind, from touching a goats head to hanging a man on a cross is what a true God is looking for. To require "worship" from his people is to insinuate that God has an ego that needs to be fed. To honor God is to say, I'll live a life that will please God by helping, caring, sharing, and loving each other.

5. Maybe, maybe not. I wasn't there and I don't know anyone that was. I hope he didn't have to go through all that suffering because my behavior in my life is not based on that event. I would strive to be a good steward of God no matter what. There appears to be evidence that Jesus lived. If all those stories of his acts of kindness are true, then I believe God sent him to us to show us how it is done. How to live a way that is true and pure.

My last paragraph is just showing how preposterous this scenario really is.
It's a father allowing his son to be tortured and killed to provide a way for his other kids not to burn in hell for eternity since they were born of sin through no fault of their own.

And to create another hurdle, these sinful people will have to admit that they are sinners and that I did send my son to suffer a horrible death because of them. Oh, and one more thing. I gave you free will so don't screw it up. Of course, since I AM God, I could have just kept that gift of free will to myself and we could have just avoided this whole mess.

Being God and all, looks like I would have seen this coming. Darn... Hindsight IS 20/20. Yeah Sounds like a vicious circle of bad planning to me if I were the creator of all people.

"Free will", is the christians way of saying... hey, it's not God's fault you are in the predicament you are in. He did you a FAVOR when he gave you free will. It's a GIFT. Yeah, that's it! :rolleyes:Yeah, the gift that keeps on giving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Athos

You didn't cite any works. How can I check them out? Please state what these recent studies are.

To your last sentence: NO study has found ANY connection!

---

Here are a few that show studies have been done since the 1990's... enough interest has been shown on the topic that many studies have been done and, while some have found them to be conclusive, others have not and feel further study should be done. This is just a small sampling from the US alone:


Can Prayer Heal?


Howstuffworks


Researchers Look at Prayer and Healing


Praying for the sick – can science prove it helps?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cozyk

this 8384, let me put it this way,

1. I personally don't believe that just two people came together to populate the world. You do realize incest was necessary to get this ball rolling, right? I know most christians would never question what the bible says , so I'm going along with this story for the sake of argument. Evolution makes more sense to me.

2. Still, just playing along.

3. :rolleyes: okay...sure

4. I don't really worship God as much as I "honor" God. I don't feel that rituals of any Kind, from touching a goats head to hanging a man on a cross is what a true God is looking for. To require "worship" from his people is to insinuate that God has an ego that needs to be fed. To honor God is to say, I'll live a life that will please God by helping, caring, sharing, and loving each other.

5. Maybe, maybe not. I wasn't there and I don't know anyone that was. I hope he didn't have to go through all that suffering because my behavior in my life is not based on that event. I would strive to be a good steward of God no matter what. There appears to be evidence that Jesus lived. If all those stories of his acts of kindness are true, then I believe God sent him to us to show us how it is done. How to live a way that is true and pure.

My last paragraph is just showing how preposterous this scenario really is.
It's a father allowing his son to be tortured and killed to provide a way for his other kids not to burn in hell for eternity since they were born of sin through no fault of their own.

And to create another hurdle, these sinful people will have to admit that they are sinners and that I did send my son to suffer a horrible death because of them. Oh, and one more thing. I gave you free will so don't screw it up. Of course, since I AM God, I could have just kept that gift of free will to myself and we could have just avoided this whole mess.

Being God and all, looks like I would have seen this coming. Darn...Hindsight IS 20/20. yeag Sounds like a vicious circle of bad planning to me if I were the creator of all people.

"Free will", is the christians way of saying...hey, it's not God's fault you are in the predicament you are in. He did you a FAVOR when he gave you free will. It's a GIFT. Yeah, that's it! :rolleyes:Yeah, the gift that keeps on giving.

---

1. Actually, Adam & Eve didn't have children until after they had sinned. Maybe they were meant to be the only ones, who knows?

2. Going along...

3. Not sure what you mean by that comment.

4. Worshipping God is honoring Him. If He is so powerful that He created everything, why shouldn't he be praised?

5. That's good that you try to be the best person you can. Unfortunately, not everyone does and that lands us into the world we live in now. People are selfish and evil. They don't care who they hurt or destroy, as long as they get what they want.

Christ didn't die for us simply because we were born into sin; Christ died because we all sin on a daily basis. Even my pastor sins, and he admits it in front of the entire congregation. The importance is acknowledging that you screwed up and trying to not repeat the same mistake(s).

Yes, free will IS exactly that. For example, let's say an attractive woman works with your husband. For him to have an affair with her would be his free will decision; would you believe him if he said, "Well, that's not really my fault. The temptation was put there by God, so too bad for you and our marriage"? I'm going to be presumptuous and say no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Adam and Eve didn't know they had free will?

---

Interestingly, according to one old Jewish traditon, they didn't. It was the serpent who disclosed this to them. Prior to that, they were so thoroughly in harmony with God that they were unaware of possessing a will separate from his.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akoue

Interestingly, according to one old Jewish traditon, they didn't. It was the serpent who disclosed this to them. Prior to that, they were so thoroughly in harmony with God that they were unaware of possessing a will separate from his.

---

So why did God plunk those delicious-smelling, warm and fresh chocolate chip cookies in front of them? He's omniscent. He knew what would happen. He knew they would grab a cookie and eat it. He knew they would sin. He knew they would need a Savior. Why start the ball rolling with the plate of cookies?