Do we need prayer??

[Ana the Ist]

I don't go looking for coincidences to happen, they just do. Pretty simple.

Yes, that's what I meant, to believe in God you have to have faith.

Well I don't think you are necessarily looking for coincidences on a conscious level, but I'm almost certain you are subconsciously. It's not as if you pray for something, then completely forget you've prayed until the answer appears before you. On some level, you are awaiting an answer. This can't be demonstrated though, until you reveal what some of these coincidences are.

Well then we agree, belief in god takes faith. Atheists don't have any.

 

[dkbwarrior]

It does clarify, thank you. I only mentioned the person praying being at fault because that was the answer given my some responders. "THey prayed for the wrong thing" or "they prayed for selfish reasons" etc. If prayer is how we get god to help us through the troubles Satan has set before us, then how would you answer the OP? Why did god deny so many Christians in dire need and instead allow an atheist (who never prays) to prosper?

Ahhh. THE question. I apologize for not reading the entire thread.

The answer to this is that God has no authority on this planet, without an excersise of faith on the part of those that do, which are men (or women). This is because:

16The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD's: but the earth hath he given to the children of men.
-Psalm 115:16

God cannot lie. In fact, the Bible says that it is impossible for God to lie. He gave dominion (complete sovereign authority) to Adam over this earth.
26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
-Genesis 1:26-27

God will not violate that word. Man has dominion on this planet, and that has not changed.

If you are really interested in more on this subject, please see my video teaching on my u-tube channel:

God Gives Man Dominion

During this life, on this planet, we are free to choose to live however we want. Certain behaviors will bring bad results, and certain behaviors will bring good results. This is the biblical law of sowing and reaping and it applies to everyone everywhere, regardless of what one believes or does not believe. This applies beyond generational lines, and our choices can affect many generations after us, for good or ill. That is why most of the worlds population is born into great poverty, and some not. Why most live barely get by lives, and some do not. It is a combination of ones own choices, and the choices of their ancestors that brought them to whatever state they are in today. However, because sin has been let loose in the earth, none of us can escape the fact that death will come to us, no matter what the state of our life may be. After death, then comes judgement, and the life of God for eternity, or the second death, separation from God for eternity; what we call hell.

God however, in His graciousness, has provided hope for the life that now is, and the life that is to come through the avenue of faith in the promises that were purchased by the blood of Christ on the cross of calvary. Christians, by definition, no matter what stripe they are, (ie, Catholic, Protestant, Pentecostal, Charismatic, Word Of Faith, etc.), have all expressed faith in the promise of salvation by faith in the finished work of Jesus who died in our place to pay the price for our sin and release us from the grip of eternal death, the second death. We will be with God forever in the light of life.

But the promises also give us access to the intervention of God on this earth. In fact, it is this life on this earth that is supposed to teach us how to live by faith. Unfortunately, most christians, aside from trying to be 'good', never really progress beyond believing God for heaven. Therefore they continue to live much like they did before, and God is not allowed to work in their behalf. Some few put the Word of God first in all things, and they begin to believe the promises of God, and begin to defend themselves from the effects of sin that are endemic in the world around us. But this is a very small minority of the Christian community.

Hope this helps answer your question.

Peace...

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ahhh. THE question. I apologize for not reading the entire thread.

The answer to this is that God has no authority on this planet, without an excersise of faith on the part of those that do, which are men (or women). This is because:

16The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD's: but the earth hath he given to the children of men.
-Psalm 115:16

God cannot lie. In fact, the Bible says that it is impossible for God to lie. He gave dominion (complete sovereign authority) to Adam over this earth.
26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
-Genesis 1:26-27

God will not violate that word. Man has dominion on this planet, and that has not changed.

If you are really interested in more on this subject, please see my video teaching on my u-tube channel:

God Gives Man Dominion

During this life, on this planet, we are free to choose to live however we want. Certain behaviors will bring bad results, and certain behaviors will bring good results. This is the biblical law of sowing and reaping and it applies to everyone everywhere, regardless of what one believes or does not believe. This applies beyond generational lines, and our choices can affect many generations after us, for good or ill. That is why most of the worlds population is born into great poverty, and some not. Why most live barely get by lives, and some do not. It is a combination of ones own choices, and the choices of their ancestors that brought them to whatever state they are in today. However, because sin has been let loose in the earth, none of us can escape the fact that death will come to us, no matter what the state of our life may be. After death, then comes judgement, and the life of God for eternity, or the second death, separation from God for eternity; what we call hell.

God however, in His graciousness, has provided hope for the life that now is, and the life that is to come through the avenue of faith in the promises that were purchased by the blood of Christ on the cross of calvary. Christians, by definition, no matter what stripe they are, (ie, Catholic, Protestant, Pentecostal, Charismatic, Word Of Faith, etc.), have all expressed faith in the promise of salvation by faith in the finished work of Jesus who died in our place to pay the price for our sin and release us from the grip of eternal death, the second death. We will be with God forever in the light of life.

But the promises also give us access to the intervention of God on this earth. In fact, it is this life on this earth that is supposed to teach us how to live by faith. Unfortunately, most christians, aside from trying to be 'good', never really progress beyond believing God for heaven. Therefore they continue to live much like they did before, and God is not allowed to work in their behalf. Some few put the Word of God first in all things, and they begin to believe the promises of God, and begin to defend themselves from the effects of sin that are endemic in the world around us. But this is a very small minority of the Christian community.

Hope this helps answer your question.

Peace...

It does answer the question, almost ironically. While in your previous post you claimed it isn't right to blame the "victim", in this post you appear to do just that. Are you saying the Christian men and women who prayed for this job didn't have enough faith? Are you saying that perhaps their sins or the sins of their ancestors are the reason why their prayers weren't answered? Sorry if this was addressed in the video, I post from my phone and videos push the data limits high pretty fast.

 

[dkbwarrior]

It does answer the question, almost ironically. While in your previous post you claimed it isn't right to blame the "victim", in this post you appear to do just that. Are you saying the Christian men and women who prayed for this job didn't have enough faith? Are you saying that perhaps their sins or the sins of their ancestors are the reason why their prayers weren't answered? Sorry if this was addressed in the video, I post from my phone and videos push the data limits high pretty fast.

No, I wouldn't say they didn't have enough faith. I would say you were more qualified. We do seem to be talking about two different things here. God has not made a promise to me in His Word that I will have any 'particular' job. That will be a result of the fact that this world is under the dominion of man. Nor is God a cheater or a respecter of persons. He wouldn't oust the more qualified candidate for me. Chance, hard work, motivation, perververance, education, and the positioning that your ancestry all have a part to play in the event you describe, and God has little to do with that. He could, however, lead me to become the more qualified candidate, if that was important enough to me for me to dedicate my life to it. This however, is likely something most anyone could do, regardless of a faith in God or not.

God has promised to meet our physical and financial needs. But He has not promised me a paricular job by which to do that. That will depend much upon me. If I didn't get that job, He would certainly have another for me that would adequately meet my needs, and the needs of my family. And I wouldn't begrudge you your success.

In regards to perhaps some believers who were trying to get into your field, I would say that it had nothing to do with God iether way. You were obviously a better candidate, for a myriad of reasons. I think many Christians tend to look at God much the way that your perception of Christians lends you to think, that He is some type of good luck charm, rabbits foot or genie, that can get them something better than these facts of the world would require, and in that view, I would agree with you. He/she does not exist. (The rabbits foot God-for lack of a better term).

I wouldn't concern myself with it though. That is a lesson they will have to learn. For you however, sin and its progeny of death (in whatever forms it takes in your life) will be present in some form that is uncontrollable by you in your life, as it does to all men, culminating in physical death at some point. (I wish it wasn't that way, but it is). For many in the world it is poverty, for you it may be sickness, or relationships, or lust, or addictions, or etc., ad infinitum. You may yet still find yourself needing to look somewhere outside yourself for the answers to the questions that you do not have answers too. In these, you will need to learn your own lessons.

Peace...

 

[Ana the Ist]

No, I wouldn't say they didn't have enough faith. I would say you were more qualified. We do seem to be talking about two different things here. God has not made a promise to me in His Word that I will have any 'particular' job. That will be a result of the fact that this world is under the dominion of man. Nor is God a cheater or a respecter of persons. He wouldn't oust the more qualified candidate for me. Chance, hard work, motivation, perververance, education, and the positioning that your ancestry all have a part to play in the event you describe, and God has little to do with that. He could, however, lead me to become the more qualified candidate, if that was important enough to me for me to dedicate my life to it. This however, is likely something most anyone could do, regardless of a faith in God or not.

God has promised to meet our physical and financial needs. But He has not promised me a paricular job by which to do that. That will depend much upon me. If I didn't get that job, He would certainly have another for me that would adequately meet my needs, and the needs of my family. And I wouldn't begrudge you your success.

In regards to perhaps some believers who were trying to get into your field, I would say that it had nothing to do with God iether way. You were obviously a better candidate, for a myriad of reasons. I think many Christians tend to look at God much the way that your perception of Christians lends you to think, that He is some type of good luck charm, rabbits foot or genie, that can get them something better than these facts of the world would require, and in that view, I would agree with you. He/she does not exist. (The rabbits foot God-for lack of a better term).

I wouldn't concern myself with it though. That is a lesson they will have to learn. For you however, sin and its progeny of death (in whatever forms it takes in your life) will be present in some form that is uncontrollable by you in your life, as it does to all men, culminating in physical death at some point. (I wish it wasn't that way, but it is). For many in the world it is poverty, for you it may be sickness, or relationships, or lust, or addictions, or etc., ad infinitum. You may yet still find yourself needing to look somewhere outside yourself for the answers to the questions that you do not have answers too. In these, you will need to learn your own lessons.

Peace...

So basically what you're saying is that no amount of prayer would possibly change the outcome (a believer getting the job instead of me). You're saying that the reason for this is that god would not interfere on the behalf of a less-qualified Christian over a more qualified atheist (me). It's an interesting thought which does lead to other questions.

How does anyone know which outcomes can be affected by prayer and which cannot? Is there a guide for such things? Do you just guess for yourself? I actually read another thread requesting prayers for the OP to get a job they desperately want/need. Almost immediately several members offered prayers to that effect. Would you tell them it Is all for naught? Would you tell them that god doesn't involve himself in such things and the job is more likely to go to whomever is most qualified?

 

[dkbwarrior]

So basically what you're saying is that no amount of prayer would possibly change the outcome (a believer getting the job instead of me). You're saying that the reason for this is that god would not interfere on the behalf of a less-qualified Christian over a more qualified atheist (me). It's an interesting thought which does lead to other questions.

How does anyone know which outcomes can be affected by prayer and which cannot? Is there a guide for such things? Do you just guess for yourself? I actually read another thread requesting prayers for the OP to get a job they desperately want/need. Almost immediately several members offered prayers to that effect. Would you tell them it Is all for naught? Would you tell them that god doesn't involve himself in such things and the job is more likely to go to whomever is most qualified?

I am glad that you asked! Yes, there is a guide to such things as which outcomes can be affected by prayer, and which cannot. It is called the Bible, which contains a record of Gods covenant with mankind through Abraham and his seed Jesus. That covenant contains many provisions, such as fruitfulness, prosperity, health, long life, good relationships, favor, etc.

Prayer by itself really does little. It isn't prayer that moves God, it is faith, and faith can be released through prayer. Faith begins where the will of God is known. The will of God for most of the big questions in life can be found in the provisions of the covenant.

I wouldn't however conclude that prayer is for naught. Prayer is not only the means by which we release our faith, but even in cases where there is not a faith answer to receive, prayer, by its very nature, can affect us. Verbalization of our wants and desires can often help to motivate us.

Prayer in the case that you are mentioning is also a way to show compassion and empathy with another, even if there isn't a precise faith pattern to follow in such cases.

However, for me, it would depend how well I know or am involved with the person that I am counseling. A stranger on the internet may simply get a prayer of agreement for the job, an act of compassion to show empathy to another. One of my children, on the other hand, or a close friend, may get an explanation that a better prayer would be to ask God for the motivation and wisdom to become better qualified, as well as to give them favor with the person hiring. Both are legitimate uses of my prayer time, IMHO.

Peace...

 

[dkbwarrior]

I would like to comment on your signature however. I find it ironic, that the simple fact that one can strangle a king with the entrails of a priest is proof positive that man is already free. Free to do as he chooses. It is also proof positive that freedom for man brings nothing but death. Think of the 20 million plus dead at the hands of Stalins atheist/communist regime; 70 million + deaths attributed to the atheist/communist movement in the 20th century. More than all the religious wars of the Chistian nations over the past 2,000 years, and in 1/20th of the time.

Unfortunately, the sentiment that the quote expresses has been seriously considered to be truth by some of the most evil men of the past century. And that view has done nothing but bring destruction, death and misery. True freedom will be achieved only when people who think in such terms are separated from the rest of Gods creation, and placed in a place by themselves, where they can kill each other all they want, and the rest of us can live in peace. I think that place is called hell.

Peace...

 

[Ana the Ist]

I am glad that you asked! Yes, there is a guide to such things as which outcomes can be affected by prayer, and which cannot. It is called the Bible, which contains a record of Gods covenant with mankind through Abraham and his seed Jesus. That covenant contains many provisions, such as fruitfulness, prosperity, health, long life, good relationships, favor, etc.

Prayer by itself really does little. It isn't prayer that moves God, it is faith, and faith can be released through prayer. Faith begins where the will of God is known. The will of God for most of the big questions in life can be found in the provisions of the covenant.

I wouldn't however conclude that prayer is for naught. Prayer is not only the means by which we release our faith, but even in cases where there is not a faith answer to receive, prayer, by its very nature, can affect us. Verbalization of our wants and desires can often help to motivate us.

Prayer in the case that you are mentioning is also a way to show compassion and empathy with another, even if there isn't a precise faith pattern to follow in such cases.

However, for me, it would depend how well I know or am involved with the person that I am counseling. A stranger on the internet may simply get a prayer of agreement for the job, an act of compassion to show empathy to another. One of my children, on the other hand, or a close friend, may get an explanation that a better prayer would be to ask God for the motivation and wisdom to become better qualified, as well as to give them favor with the person hiring. Both are legitimate uses of my prayer time, IMHO.

Peace...

We seem to be going in circles a bit here. If "fruitfulness" and "prosperity" are things you can pray for, then why do you suppose all those Christians were denied the job? I know you've already stated that god wouldn't help someone "less qualified" succeed in place of someone "more qualified" but I don't understand the point of praying if that is the case. Generally speaking, I don't see how you can pray for prosperity without it coming at someone else's expense.

I'll admit I'm confused here because it seems in one answer you'll say that praying for a job is legitimate in the eyes of god. THen in the next answer you seem to suggest such prayer is pointless because god will simply help the person who is most qualified, whether they believe or not, whether they pray or not. Which is it??

 

[Ana the Ist]

I would like to comment on your signature however. I find it ironic, that the simple fact that one can strangle a king with the entrails of a priest is proof positive that man is already free. Free to do as he chooses. It is also proof positive that freedom for man brings nothing but death. Think of the 20 million plus dead at the hands of Stalins atheist/communist regime; 70 million + deaths attributed to the atheist/communist movement in the 20th century. More than all the religious wars of the Chistian nations over the past 2,000 years, and in 1/20th of the time.

Unfortunately, the sentiment that the quote expresses has been seriously considered to be truth by some of the most evil men of the past century. And that view has done nothing but bring destruction, death and misery. True freedom will be achieved only when people who think in such terms are separated from the rest of Gods creation, and placed in a place by themselves, where they can kill each other all they want, and the rest of us can live in peace. I think that place is called hell.

Peace...

LOL I think maybe you missed the point of the quote. It has nothing to do with freedom of actions and everything to do with freedom of thought. The king and the priest gain authority and power through ideas. The king's subjects believe he has authority and power because of his noble title, and therefore accept that they should obey his laws. The priest has followers who believe he knows how god wants people to behave, therefore they accept they should follow his morality. The idea is that both the notions of "kings" and "priests" enslave the minds of those who believe in their authority.
I think Diderot would claim that both notions exist because both kings and priests believe people need to be told how to behave and how to act lawfully.

I am going to have to disagree that atheism was responsible for all those deaths you mentioned. Atheism has only one tenet and it does not suggest the deaths or destruction of anyone. To say Stalin (or anyone for that matter) killed because of atheism is ridiculous. It would be like me saying that Christianity is at fault for all the people Jeffrey Dahmer killed because he was Christian and he killed homosexuals. There are bad atheists and bad Christians, but that doesn't make their actions a result of their atheism or Christianity.

There are however, people who kill because they believe it is what their god wants. The crusades are a great example of wars fought specifically for religious reasons. The Spanish Inquisition is an example of a genocide committed for religious reasons. Islamic leaders have waged wars for religious reasons for centuries. Religious leaders rallied for the crusades, they used scriptures to justify the inquisition, they used religion to encourage killing.

The difference is that while Stalin may have been an atheist, and he may have believed his country would be better off without religion, he couldn't use atheism itself to back up this belief. His belief that his nation would be better off without religion was a personal choice, not one that can be backed up by atheism itself. The only thing that atheism asserts is that there is no god. It doesn't claim the world is better off without religion, or that the religious should be killed if they refuse to be atheists.

The sentiment expressed in the quote is that you are free once you stop following another man's ideas of how you should act, think, and generally live your life. Once you are able to decide these things for yourself, you truly become free.

 

[LOCO]

LOL I think maybe you missed the point of the quote. It has nothing to do with freedom of actions and everything to do with freedom of thought. The king and the priest gain authority and power through ideas. The king's subjects believe he has authority and power because of his noble title, and therefore accept that they should obey his laws. The priest has followers who believe he knows how god wants people to behave, therefore they accept they should follow his morality. The idea is that both the notions of "kings" and "priests" enslave the minds of those who believe in their authority.
I think Diderot would claim that both notions exist because both kings and priests believe people need to be told how to behave and how to act lawfully.

I am going to have to disagree that atheism was responsible for all those deaths you mentioned. Atheism has only one tenet and it does not suggest the deaths or destruction of anyone. To say Stalin (or anyone for that matter) killed because of atheism is ridiculous. It would be like me saying that Christianity is at fault for all the people Jeffrey Dahmer killed because he was Christian and he killed homosexuals. There are bad atheists and bad Christians, but that doesn't make their actions a result of their atheism or Christianity.

There are however, people who kill because they believe it is what their god wants. The crusades are a great example of wars fought specifically for religious reasons. The Spanish Inquisition is an example of a genocide committed for religious reasons. Islamic leaders have waged wars for religious reasons for centuries. Religious leaders rallied for the crusades, they used scriptures to justify the inquisition, they used religion to encourage killing.

The difference is that while Stalin may have been an atheist, and he may have believed his country would be better off without religion, he couldn't use atheism itself to back up this belief. His belief that his nation would be better off without religion was a personal choice, not one that can be backed up by atheism itself. The only thing that atheism asserts is that there is no god. It doesn't claim the world is better off without religion, or that the religious should be killed if they refuse to be atheists.

The sentiment expressed in the quote is that you are free once you stop following another man's ideas of how you should act, think, and generally live your life. Once you are able to decide these things for yourself, you truly become free.

On the contrary, Pol Pot and Stalin killed for the State, a militant atheistic State, not God. When God ceases to exist the State becomes God. They killed anyone who had religious affiliations. I would argue they killed for their atheistic beliefs.

 

[Ana the Ist]

On the contrary, Pol Pot and Stalin killed for the State, a militant atheistic State, not God. When God ceases to exist the State becomes God. They killed anyone who had religious affiliations. I would argue they killed for their atheistic beliefs.

You can say whatever you like, but that doesn't make it true. Atheism is a lack of a belief in god, if the State is now god...how can you consider that state atheistic? For that matter, how can a state be atheistic at all? A state is not a conscious, thinking entity. A state cannot hold a belief or disbelief in god. A state can be secular, but it cannot be atheist.

You would argue that "they killed for their atheistic beliefs". Can you tell me what those beliefs are? The only "belief" in atheism is a disbelief in god. So where do you get the idea to kill people from that? It says nothing about killing.

 

[dkbwarrior]

We seem to be going in circles a bit here. If "fruitfulness" and "prosperity" are things you can pray for, then why do you suppose all those Christians were denied the job? I know you've already stated that god wouldn't help someone "less qualified" succeed in place of someone "more qualified" but I don't understand the point of praying if that is the case. Generally speaking, I don't see how you can pray for prosperity without it coming at someone else's expense.

I'll admit I'm confused here because it seems in one answer you'll say that praying for a job is legitimate in the eyes of god. THen in the next answer you seem to suggest such prayer is pointless because god will simply help the person who is most qualified, whether they believe or not, whether they pray or not. Which is it??

I am not talking in circles, although you might be. You are making assumptions, and then trying to draw conclusions based on those assumptions. You are assuming that the only way for God to answer the prayer is to change someone else. What if God answers the prayer by changing the one doing the praying instead? After all, the point isn't to get God to allow the less qualified person to get into a job position they are not qualified for. That would make God a cosmic Affirmitve Action Figure. Mabey the answer to my prosperity is for God to give me wisdom and motivation to become more qualified, or to become qualified in some other field? Either way, my needs will be met.

Secondly, you assume that one person can prosper only at the expense of another, and I take issue with that assumption also. As an atheist, you must pride yourself on your objective view of the universe. Do you know that there are hundreds of billions of galaxies with hundreds of billions of stars in each? There are more resources for wealth in the universe than mankind has ever imagined. And we haven't found the end of it. Every time we get more powerful telescopes, the estimates of the number of galaxies and stars increase. There is more than enough wealth for every human that has ever lived to have more than they could ever need or even measure.

Listen friend, it has been said that the man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument. Once you experience the grace of God, arguments such as yours hold absolutely no appeal.

For me, God has changed my life-completely. Fifteen years ago, I was in the hole in prison, diagnosed with a fatal disease, a long term drug addict and criminal. I had an encounter with God, and placed my life in His capable hands. Today, I am a free man, with a wife and two beautiful daughters. I am a contractor with my own business, I own my own home outright (no mortgage-how many people can say that), I am healthy, and most importantly, my children are well adjusted, healthy and productive. God has been faithful to me, even after a lifetime of being unfaithful to him, and has showed Himself strong in my behalf, after I placed my faith in the cross and made a commitment to walk fully after Him.

My God is unshakeable in my life. No argument can change what I have experienced. But even so, I am aware that most of this came about, not because God changed the circumstances and people around me, but because God changed ME, and that in turn, began to effect the world around me in which I lived. Now that is not to say that God didn't affect things around me also, but I would have to say that it was only mabey 10% miracles, and most likely about 90% changing me.

Most often the answers to our prayers are more about us, than about the circumstance. And that is a reflection of who God is, and what He does. God is in the business of changing people, conforming them to the image of His Son:

28And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
29For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
-Romans 8:28-29

I am in the process of being conformed into the image of Jesus. That is the process of the gospel, and it is how God works.

Peace...

 

[dkbwarrior]

LOL I think maybe you missed the point of the quote. It has nothing to do with freedom of actions and everything to do with freedom of thought. The king and the priest gain authority and power through ideas. The king's subjects believe he has authority and power because of his noble title, and therefore accept that they should obey his laws. The priest has followers who believe he knows how god wants people to behave, therefore they accept they should follow his morality. The idea is that both the notions of "kings" and "priests" enslave the minds of those who believe in their authority.
I think Diderot would claim that both notions exist because both kings and priests believe people need to be told how to behave and how to act lawfully.

I am going to have to disagree that atheism was responsible for all those deaths you mentioned. Atheism has only one tenet and it does not suggest the deaths or destruction of anyone. To say Stalin (or anyone for that matter) killed because of atheism is ridiculous. It would be like me saying that Christianity is at fault for all the people Jeffrey Dahmer killed because he was Christian and he killed homosexuals. There are bad atheists and bad Christians, but that doesn't make their actions a result of their atheism or Christianity.

There are however, people who kill because they believe it is what their god wants. The crusades are a great example of wars fought specifically for religious reasons. The Spanish Inquisition is an example of a genocide committed for religious reasons. Islamic leaders have waged wars for religious reasons for centuries. Religious leaders rallied for the crusades, they used scriptures to justify the inquisition, they used religion to encourage killing.

The difference is that while Stalin may have been an atheist, and he may have believed his country would be better off without religion, he couldn't use atheism itself to back up this belief. His belief that his nation would be better off without religion was a personal choice, not one that can be backed up by atheism itself. The only thing that atheism asserts is that there is no god. It doesn't claim the world is better off without religion, or that the religious should be killed if they refuse to be atheists.

The sentiment expressed in the quote is that you are free once you stop following another man's ideas of how you should act, think, and generally live your life. Once you are able to decide these things for yourself, you truly become free.

I think this answer is disengenous. You say that the atheist killed for the state, not for beliefs upon which it was founded. Then turn around and say that the crusader killed for his beliefs, not the state that was founded upon them. That is inconsistent, and illogical. Either blame the beliefs, or blame the state, but dont change the rules mid-stream.

In any case, my point wasn't to show that the atheist state was any worse than the christian state. It was to demonstrate that the athiest state is no BETTER than the christian state. What does this tell us? It tells us that the problem is not really the state at all, or its beliefs, the problem is inherent in man. If we need any more proof that mankind is born into a sinful nature, I don't know what it is.

If man is inherently evil, then we need a way to change our nature. And that way is found only through the cross of Christ.

Peace...

NOTE:
Now that I think about it more, it occurs to me that while the idea expessed in the quote was to rid oneself of kings and priests, an opposite take on this was that of Jesus, whose substitutionary death, burial, and ressurection has made us ALL kings and priests, equal at the foot of the cross:

9And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
-Revelation 5:9-10

12For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14For the body is not one member, but many.
-1 Corinthians 12:12-13

 

[Ana the Ist]

I am not talking in circles, although you might be. You are making assumptions, and then trying to draw conclusions based on those assumptions. You are assuming that the only way for God to answer the prayer is to change someone else. What if God answers the prayer by changing the one doing the praying instead? After all, the point isn't to get God to allow the less qualified person to get into a job position they are not qualified for. That would make God a cosmic Affirmitve Action Figure. Mabey the answer to my prosperity is for God to give me wisdom and motivation to become more qualified, or to become qualified in some other field? Either way, my needs will be met.

Secondly, you assume that one person can prosper only at the expense of another, and I take issue with that assumption also. As an atheist, you must pride yourself on your objective view of the universe. Do you know that there are hundreds of billions of galaxies with hundreds of billions of stars in each? There are more resources for wealth in the universe than mankind has ever imagined. And we haven't found the end of it. Every time we get more powerful telescopes, the estimates of the number of galaxies and stars increase. There is more than enough wealth for every human that has ever lived to have more than they could ever need or even measure.

Listen friend, it has been said that the man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument. Once you experience the grace of God, arguments such as yours hold absolutely no appeal.

For me, God has changed my life-completely. Fifteen years ago, I was in the hole in prison, diagnosed with a fatal disease, a long term drug addict and criminal. I had an encounter with God, and placed my life in His capable hands. Today, I am a free man, with a wife and two beautiful daughters. I am a contractor with my own business, I own my own home outright (no mortgage-how many people can say that), I am healthy, and most importantly, my children are well adjusted, healthy and productive. God has been faithful to me, even after a lifetime of being unfaithful to him, and has showed Himself strong in my behalf, after I placed my faith in the cross and made a commitment to walk fully after Him.

My God is unshakeable in my life. No argument can change what I have experienced. But even so, I am aware that most of this came about, not because God changed the circumstances and people around me, but because God changed ME, and that in turn, began to effect the world around me in which I lived. Now that is not to say that God didn't affect things around me also, but I would have to say that it was only mabey 10% miracles, and most likely about 90% changing me.

Most often the answers to our prayers are more about us, than about the circumstance. And that is a reflection of who God is, and what He does. God is in the business of changing people, conforming them to the image of His Son:

28And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
29For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
-Romans 8:28-29

I am in the process of being conformed into the image of Jesus. That is the process of the gospel, and it is how God works.

Peace...

I'm certainly not trying to change your beliefs, I'm sure that whatever reasons you have for holding them are enough for you. However, your argument about "experience" is a two way street. I could just as easily say that once you experience the freedom of atheism, The arguments you've made will appear just as illogical to you as they do to me. Of course, I'm not actually saying that as its probably against forum rules somewhere and I'd rather not be reported for the 10th time in as many days.

As for my statement about prosperity, and your reply, you're still wrong. All those seemingly unlimited resources are not within the current reach of mankind. Maybe they will be at some point, maybe they won't. All I can account for (all you can account for too) is our present situation. The reality of that situation is this, resources are finite. We are limited to what is on this planet. Anybody's use of a resource is ultimately denying that resource to someone else. This is getting beside the point.

The question was a look at the reality of prayer. To me, it seems to have no effect on any outcomes whatsoever. Most of the answers I received here seemed to validate that belief. If you look back at your own answers, you may notice that you had to keep changing the outcome of prayer to fit the new question that your answer left me with. Do you realize how a non-believer might look at this and think you simply kept changing your answers to fit the new problem that reality presented? Or do you think this current answer that god is fulfilling prayers, just not in the way the person praying asked, is finally a "good" answer and doesn't still create more logical problems?

If you like, I think I can reduce the core of the problem at hand to a math equation if that would help you understand.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I think this answer is disengenous. You say that the atheist killed for the state, not for beliefs upon which it was founded. Then turn around and say that the crusader killed for his beliefs, not the state that was founded upon them. That is inconsistent, and illogical. Either blame the beliefs, or blame the state, but dont change the rules mid-stream.

In any case, my point wasn't to show that the atheist state was any worse than the christian state. It was to demonstrate that the athiest state is no BETTER than the christian state. What does this tell us? It tells us that the problem is not really the state at all, or its beliefs, the problem is inherent in man. If we need any more proof that mankind is born into a sinful nature, I don't know what it is.

If man is inherently evil, then we need a way to change our nature. And that way is found only through the cross of Christ.

Peace...


NOTE:
Now that I think about it more, it occurs to me that while the idea expessed in the quote was to rid oneself of kings and priests, an opposite take on this was that of Jesus, whose substitutionary death, burial, and ressurection has made us ALL kings and priests, equal at the foot of the cross:

9And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
-Revelation 5:9-10

12For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14For the body is not one member, but many.
-1 Corinthians 12:12-13

Actually, I said that the atheists in your examples killed for personal reasons that aren't part of atheism. The discussion was always about killing for beliefs. I was saying that while many have killed in the name of their god, you cannot really kill in the name of atheism. ATheism has no doctrines which can be twisted to get followers to murder. ATheism actually doesn't even have a set of beliefs. It's just a word used to describe someone who doesn't believe in god. We don't have to have anything else in common other than that. So it's completely illogical to compare someone who killed another because he thought he was doing the will of god to someone who kills another because he doesnt like religion. If Stalin were a Buddhist (hypothetically) would you claim he killed all those people in the name of Buddhism? (BUddhists don't believe its ok to kill anything....even a bug in case you didn't know)

The point here is that atheism makes no statements about what actions are right or wrong. So to say that someone did ANYTHING because they are atheist is absurd.

 

[dkbwarrior]

Actually, I said that the atheists in your examples killed for personal reasons that aren't part of atheism. The discussion was always about killing for beliefs. I was saying that while many have killed in the name of their god, you cannot really kill in the name of atheism. ATheism has no doctrines which can be twisted to get followers to murder. ATheism actually doesn't even have a set of beliefs. It's just a word used to describe someone who doesn't believe in god. We don't have to have anything else in common other than that. So it's completely illogical to compare someone who killed another because he thought he was doing the will of god to someone who kills another because he doesnt like religion. If Stalin were a Buddhist (hypothetically) would you claim he killed all those people in the name of Buddhism? (BUddhists don't believe its ok to kill anything....even a bug in case you didn't know)

The point here is that atheism makes no statements about what actions are right or wrong. So to say that someone did ANYTHING because they are atheist is absurd.

No more abusrd than saying that people do things because of a belief in God. Deism doesn't have a set of positions either. Yet many religions are based upon deism. Deism, like pantheism, or atheism-is a category, not a religion. However, in the same way that many belief systems are based upon deism, so also many belief systems are based upon atheism. Communism is a type of atheist belief system, much like Christianity is a type of Deistic belief system. So too with Evolution, and mother earth conservation belief systems.

My point was never that people killed because they were atheists. My point was that people kill because they are, well, people, and poeple are evil by nature.

That neccesitates a transformative process, unless we are content to stay that way. I have found that process in Christ.

Peace...

 

[dkbwarrior]

I'm certainly not trying to change your beliefs, I'm sure that whatever reasons you have for holding them are enough for you. However, your argument about "experience" is a two way street. I could just as easily say that once you experience the freedom of atheism, The arguments you've made will appear just as illogical to you as they do to me. Of course, I'm not actually saying that as its probably against forum rules somewhere and I'd rather not be reported for the 10th time in as many days.

As for my statement about prosperity, and your reply, you're still wrong. All those seemingly unlimited resources are not within the current reach of mankind. Maybe they will be at some point, maybe they won't. All I can account for (all you can account for too) is our present situation. The reality of that situation is this, resources are finite. We are limited to what is on this planet. Anybody's use of a resource is ultimately denying that resource to someone else. This is getting beside the point.

The question was a look at the reality of prayer. To me, it seems to have no effect on any outcomes whatsoever. Most of the answers I received here seemed to validate that belief. If you look back at your own answers, you may notice that you had to keep changing the outcome of prayer to fit the new question that your answer left me with. Do you realize how a non-believer might look at this and think you simply kept changing your answers to fit the new problem that reality presented? Or do you think this current answer that god is fulfilling prayers, just not in the way the person praying asked, is finally a "good" answer and doesn't still create more logical problems?

If you like, I think I can reduce the core of the problem at hand to a math equation if that would help you understand.

Ahh, but if you do that, you wind up with the end result of mathematical probablilities, which is intelligent design; and then where does your atheism land you?

Peace...

 

[Ana the Ist]

No more abusrd than saying that people do things because of a belief in God. Deism doesn't have a set of positions either. Yet many religions are based upon deism. Deism, like pantheism, or atheism-is a category, not a religion. However, in the same way that many belief systems are based upon deism, so also many belief systems are based upon atheism. Communism is a type of atheist belief system, much like Christianity is a type of Deistic belief system. So too with Evolution, and mother earth conservation belief systems.

My point was never that people killed because they were atheists. My point was that people kill because they are, well, people, and poeple are evil by nature.

That neccesitates a transformative process, unless we are content to stay that way. I have found that process in Christ.

Peace...

PEople do all sorts of things because they believe in god, prayer for instance. I'm aware deism doesn't hold any specific beliefs outside of god existing, but we weren't discussing deism, we were comparing the damage atheism and religion has caused. Communism isn't a type of atheism, It's a political system. It also doesn't advocate destroying religion. Evolution has absolutely nothing to do with atheism.

If you want to change your point to "people are evil" now, that's fine. If you're claiming that was your point all along...you have a funny way of saying it.
"Think of the 20 million plus dead at the hands of Stalins atheist/communist regime; 70 million + deaths attributed to the atheist/communist movement in the 20th century. More than all the religious wars of the Chistian nations over the past 2,000 years, and in 1/20th of the time."
Seemed to me like you were making a comparison.

As for your new point, I disagree. I don't believe in a traditional concept of "good" and "evil". I think for the most part people are the same and have the same capacity to do good and evil.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ahh, but if you do that, you wind up with the end result of mathematical probablilities, which is intelligent design; and then where does your atheism land you?

Peace...

Huh? LOL all I would end up with is a simple equation that shows that when it comes to prayer, the outcomes appear the same whether there is a god in the equation or there isn't.