I know the passage. Paul did get an answer. It’s not clear if it was definitely an out loud spoken one or what, but he did get an answer. Look, if someone prayed, “God, heal my lumbago.” and then heard a booming voice say, “No, I won’t and here’s why.” that would be a whole lot better than the absolute nothing that we all get.

This shows that there is no “formula” in prayer. Yes—it says “if you ask anything in my name”—but it also has to be “according to his will”. Paul was not healed and says that it was not answered so he would learn humility.

So all that stuff about how if you ask Jesus for something, and he said he would do it, is actually “he’ll do it if he feels like it”. You can get the same result by praying to a jug of milk. It sounds like Paul was doing the same thing believers find themselves doing today. He fervently believed prayer would work, and then when it didn’t he had to come up with a rationalization for why. So he uses the lame “it was a test” or “god wanted to teach me something” or maybe the classic cop-out of “god workes in mysterious ways”. Out of all the tall tales and legends that wound up being confabulated into the bible, at least that part sounds like a real human experience. Even the founder of your religion had to deal with the problem that prayer does not work in any consistent way.

What is important to note is that Paul THOUGHT his prayers should and would be answered which he explains in 2 Corinthians 12. He says he asked “three times”. Many say this does not refer to only 3 prayers, but (3) time periods when he prayed and prayed his “problem” would go away, and it didn’t.

This shows that there is no “formula” in prayer. Yes—it says “if you ask anything in my name”—but it also has to be “according to his will”. Paul was not healed and says that it was not answered so he would learn humility.

I will be quiet now—-I just wanted to mention this because I feel it is important to consider in a discussion on prayer. Paul himself states that prayer is not “automatic”. Just wanted to point this out.

Well said. I realize I have allowed aI high degree of subjectivity into the posts I made regarding this issue. The only thing I would mention concerning Paul though is he does say in one of the books (I believe it is Galatians) that his prayers WERE NOT answered concerning some ailment he had. Many think it was an eye problem.

He says that it was “allowed” to teach him humility. So, even the “great ones” had times where they saw unanswered prayers and were frustrated. It was only afterwards that Paul says he learned a lesson from the unanswered prayer. I just wanted to add that because I think it is important to consider.

That is a valid way of testing positive thinking, and has in fact been done.

There are some who SWEAR that positive thinking has effected their lives in a massive way—-as there are those who claim prayer was answered.

There are some who swear that drinking some sugar water cured their gout/arthritis/halitosis/etc. So what? Subjective or anecdotal claims need to be tested objectively, otherwise you have no reason not to believe in every shaman who chants your direction.

One main problem is that prayer oftentimes is not immediately answered. Many things I have prayed for may see fruition some time later–in fact, there have been times when I say “my prayer did get answered, just not in the time-frame or method I would have chosen.

The prayer studies are always done with things that require a definite time frame: like surgery recovery time, or preserving life. That way you don’t have the indefinite frame problem.

There is just something about “controlled tests” regarding prayer which I find quite funny. It is as though those doing the tests think they can control God and how he answers prayers. As though prayer can be put into a “formula” which should be guaranteed by those doing the test. And when the criteria for THEIR experiment is not met, they conclude prayer is not effective.

The researchers are coming to a situation in which others have set the criteria. Believers are making the claims of efficacy. The researchers are simply putting together groups of people so they can observe to see if the claims are true.
So who is saying they can control God? Not the scientists. They’re just looking for an effect. It’s the believers who are making the claim.

So I don’t take “experiments” with prayer very seriously.

I will contend that you don’t take prayer or belief seriously. Can you see the apostle Paul, or Peter making such namby-pamby excuses for such a totally ineffective deity? Read the book. Those guys would walk into a clinic doing a prayer study and instantly heal everybody in both study groups. How do you think the researchers would react to that? I for one would love to see the paper in PNAS. Bet it would get early, online publication.

Fair enough. By the way there were numerous tests done in a closed, laboratory environment on the subject of what makes women tick—figuring out their emotions and thoughts, and trying to figure a method of probability for their reactions to certain male behavior. After several controlled tests they came to this conclusion:

Women: can’t live with them. Can’t live without them.

Those finding are actually quite remarkable.

Frankly, your “skepticsm” on the scientific method of evaluating whether prayer works or not is not surprising and reveals a little bit about how you think.

Understood. There is just something about “controlled tests” regarding prayer which I find quite funny. It is as though those doing the tests think they can control God and how he answers prayers. As though prayer can be put into a “formula” which should be guaranteed by those doing the test. And when the criteria for THEIR experiment is not met, they conclude prayer is not effective. I just find it laughable. Just my opinion though I know.

Not claiming any “superior wisdom” I just think prayer is not really something one can judge through experiments. It would be like telling a group of 30 people “think positively about everything for a period of 7 days” and then judging positive thinking based on the experiment.

There are some who SWEAR that positive thinking has effected their lives in a massive way—-as there are those who claim prayer was answered. One main problem is that prayer oftentimes is not immediately answered. Many things I have prayed for may see fruition some time later–in fact, there have been times when I say “my prayer did get answered, just not in the time-frame or method I would have chosen.

So I don’t take “experiments” with prayer very seriously.

The studies are not sifting data looking for results in someone’s favor. Studies have been done in many ways. Many well designed and controlled. The researchers have been believers, atheists, agnostics, christians, new agers, etc.

Studies have been done with groups being prayed for or not; knowing they are prayed for or not; believing in prayer or not; and so on.

And yes, it would be very easy to do a “birthday wish/blowing out the candles” lab experiment’ in a similar fashion. In fact the results would be the same too. Well actually they might be better, since blowing out candles is timed with an event guaranteed to bring you something.