Cialis drug. Cialis….

Thanks very much for your sentiments above. It was a hard time, but God totally turned it around. I am sad to hear that your mother has MS, and I’m sure that is a heavy burden indeed for your entire family.

I can understand your unwillingness to accept a second hand report, which is why I moved on quickly from that account and onto my personal experience.

It’s not just skeptics like you that wonder why prayer–specifically healings–happen sometimes and other times not. Even in the gospels, Jesus is the only one with a 1.000 batting average. The disciples come to him frustrated at one point that they have been unable to cast out a particular demon. Jesus tells them, “this kind only comes out with fasting and prayer.” He promptly then exorcised the demon, but my point is that we definitely do not understand everything we’re dealing with, and finding the handles can be tough. [I'm equating casting out of demons with healing, which is not unfounded Biblically, but the connection I make here is our interaction with the supernatural/miraculous]

Those struggling with disappointment over seeming lack of answers to prayer ask many of the kinds of questions you listed above. If anything, the struggle can be more intense when one is in a setting where others are clearly being healed. How does this work? I think that those issues you raised are important, but they miss the elephant in the room, which is the amazing reality of miracles actually taking place.

I give God the credit in this particular case based on the following: I was praying the moment it happened, specifically telling this illness to leave in Jesus’ name. There was an immediate, visible physical change in my daughter’s body. Furthermore, our doctor assured us that this condition is one which never, ever reverses course on its own–it’s not medically possible, according to her. So I don’t think it’s irrational to give credit to God in this instance, in fact I think it’s the only reasonable conclusion one can make.

TexasDan on March 17, 2007 at 8:39 PM

I really am sorry to hear about your daughter’s serious medical complications. I can imagine it was a horrible time for your family, and I’m very glad to know that her situation reversed course. I really do mean that. My mother has MS and it has been a hard financial and emotional burden on our family, so I can greatly sympathize with your daughter’s case.

I guess a skeptic like me though would just ask questions like; why didn’t the praying work the first night or the second night? Or why your prayers worked and why don’t others when faced with similar situations with similar “faith”? My only problem is that when an illness like that unexpectedly turns around, we as a society often simply give “God” the credit, instead of just saying, “I don’t know. Our current medical knowledge just can’t explain it at this time”. Please understand that I’m not trying to be insensitive to your daughter’s illness, those are just the thoughts that go through my mind.

I know someone who watched a deformed (too short) leg grow to match the other leg. Right in front of them.

As for that. That type of hearsay does not qualify as evidence in my book or any scientist’s book. Was it documented? When? Where? Who else witnessed it? How many inches did it have to grow? What was the type of device used to measure it? I’m sorry, I really would like to believe you, as I was a Christian for a long time, but that sort of “evidence” just isn’t enough to convince me of the power of prayer anymore.

. Does anyone know of someone who’s had a limb mysteriously grow back? Or cancer being cured without any form of modern day medicine to help treat it?

I know someone who watched a deformed (too short) leg grow to match the other leg. Right in front of them.

My personal experience: my daughter began to go through puberty when she was 5 years old. Her breasts budded, and we took her to the docs. Bloodwork confirmed the onset of puberty, and the course of treatment was to be monthly hormone shots to hold things in stasis until she was old enough to allow puberty to commence. Without the shots, she would not grow any more, but would develop breasts, etc., and would be essentially misshapen and stunted physically.

We were devestated. It also meant we could not move overseas as we had planned, since the treatment would be unavailable in the place to which we were moving.

For two or three consecutive nights my wife and I went in and prayed for our daughter when she was asleep. We wanted to lay hands on her, and a)she wouldn’t sit still for it when she was awake and b) it felt awkward since we wanted to actually lay hands on her chest, and, well, you can imagine.

On that last night as we were praying we felt the breast buds melt away under our hands. We returned to the doctor who did more tests and confirmed that there was no longer any concern or hormone therapy necesary. That was 5 years ago.

Because, if that were the case, the whole medical industry and profession would be vastly over-hauled and junked and we could do away with doctors and hospitals, and replace them with pastors and churches

It’s funny that even in the face of evidence to the contrary, we don’t like to accept the possibility of the miraculous happening right in front of us. It’s intimidating. It’s disconcerting. It means that pretty much everything we’ve been believing up until that moment is now up for grabs. That can be shattering. So otherwise rational, intelligent people often choose to ignore the evidence before them, because it’s simply less upsetting. You can argue that people would behave rationally if presented with such evidence, but my experience has been that the opposite is more often the case.

As for the interesting abstract AP posted, at first glance it seems provocative. However, any meta-analysis is only as good as the methodology and research design implemented into each individual study. So depending on what controls were used (e.g. double blind, random, etc.), sample size, sample demographic, statistical methods used (how statistically “powerful” they are, which leads to how strong of an inference can be made on results), and many more research concerns; you could end up with anything turning up in a meta-analysis. So no matter what theory is being studied, “junk in=junk out”. The only study that I’ve read that tried to exercise stringent standards, that could even begin to make it possible to make causal inferences instead of merely correlations, was the Harris et al. (1999)(Arch Intern Med, Vol. 159 Oct.25) study. And they intercessory prayer had no effect, and actually the 3rd, “placebo”, group who had knowledge that they were being prayed for, actually had a slight decline in health (strange, I know). And these guys were even funded by the Templeton Foundations, haha.

In the end, the placebo effect does have minimal benefits, just as any cognitive-behavioral scientist readily admits and supports. But there have been absolutely no proven, medical reports of miracles taking place that go beyond scientific explanation. Does anyone know of someone who’s had a limb mysteriously grow back? Or cancer being cured without any form of modern day medicine to help treat it? Or countless other miracles regarding numerous other forms of illness that are independent of positive thinking (e.g. Down Syndrome, Parkinson’s, Huntington’s, MS, etc.)? No, you don’t. Because, if that were the case, the whole medical industry and profession would be vastly over-hauled and junked and we could do away with doctors and hospitals, and replace them with pastors and churches. If someone truly believes in the power of prayer, they should have no problem systematically rejecting any form of modern medicine, because “prayer does work”!

I can assure you that many people prayed during the “bubonic plagues” in Europe of medieval times, but still died horrible deaths at young ages from that awful illness. What was God’s reasoning for that? Ahh, the people just didn’t know how to pray right? Is that it? They didn’t have enough faith? They happened to belong to the “wrong” church? None of those explanations make sense, and I’m pretty sure the Christians of those times were just as (most likely way more) devout as most Christians of present day. Prayer is like trying to explain any other “supernatural” phenomenon, utterly useless; because you can never “pin it down” with objective standards. Instead of erring on Pascal’s side of the fence, I feel quite comfortable “erring” on the side of science.

Let us now speak according to natural lights…Let us then examine this point, and say, “God is, or He is not.” But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up… Which will you choose then? Let us see. Since you must choose, let us see which interests you least. You have two things to lose, the true and the good; and two things to stake, your reason and your will, your knowledge and your happiness; and your nature has two things to shun, error and misery. Your reason is no more shocked in choosing one rather than the other, since you must of necessity choose. This is one point settled. But your happiness? Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is.

I think it’s helpful to remember that God can answer prayer a number of ways, one of which is “NO.” Jesus wasn’t exactly ecstatic about the idea of being cruxified and He told his Father He’d rather not, but He said that He would do the Father’s will. If the Father tells Jesus “no” then we certainly shouldn’t expect to get everything we ask for.

It does strike me that AP seems more hostile to my faith than I am to his atheism.

Buck Turgidson on March 17, 2007 at 12:45 AM

Hmm. I don’t think it’s meant to be hostile. It’s also true that Bryan is an evangelical; I think if there were — issues, we’d see evidence of it.

You have to talk about something, if you’re going to talk, and these threads always do get long…and usually seem to end up being discussions of theology between believers, don’t they?

As far as atheism goes, there are the militant ones who reject organized or theist religions, then cast around for something else to believe in. And then there are the other kind, who were born without the religion gene, who don’t seem to need anything to take the place of a church — and who therefore don’t get too worked up about it either way.

If you’re expecting the first kind, then a little teasing by the second kind might seem harsher than was meant?

(Also — remember that poll from a week or two that ranked atheists as Less Likely To Be Voted For than practically anybody? I think it was AP who posted that. Grinning ruefully, it seemed to me.) (Lovely internets. Leave so much to the imagination. :) )

And then there’s another element, which is the relationship to God, lifestyle, faith level, personal issues, etc. of the persons being prayed for. I’m not saying God won’t heal people if they “don’t have enough faith” — I’m just saying that God isn’t a laboratory animal we can place under a microscope and study. Sometimes there are very good reasons why someone is actually unable to receive healing in their lives.

There’s also an additional element of specificity. Misc. people praying for other people they don’t know and never met is something I find highly dubious. If God answered prayer that way, we should all just start praying that all sick people everywhere in the world should be healed right now. It doesn’t work that way. It’s best to have direct communication with the person you’re praying for. This is about love, sacrifice, and humility in caring for one another. Direct communication doesn’t necessarily have to be laying on of hands — I know one person who was healed by prayer via Internet chat! Cell phones are also an interesting medium for prayer.

Bottom line: God is indeed a miracle God, but He’s not a spiritual ATM machine, and He’s not a micro-managing dictator. We have to give him permission to operate in our lives, and that is a lot more involved than simply folding our hands together and saying please. This is a very complex and serious topic, and scientific studies that treat prayer like it’s some kind of drug whose results can be analyzed completely ignore how it works, why it works, and where it works.

Quite a subject you brought up here, AP. Nothing like going for the controversial. :)

Just last Friday I saw a guy get healed of a chocolate allergy. If I was making this up, I’d have him grow a limb back, you know? But that’s what happened. And yeah, we tested it out on him (chocolate), and his normally violent allergic reaction: not a peep.

I’ve seen other much more dramatic things, too, and experienced healing myself. Not every time, not all the time, not even most of the time. But prayer in the name of Jesus can indeed result in miraculous healing.

The methodology of this guy’s study is a cross reference of a hash of other studies, if I read the abstract correctly. I’ve not taken the time to dig down into it, but simply studying “intercessory prayer” is humungously broad. It’s not like all Christians intercede for healing in the same way–or even all believe that God still heals. Lots of Christians “intercede”, but they’re asking God to comfort, “do His will”, etc. Not prayer that specifically asks for healing at all, but it would fall under the umbrella of “intercession.” I don’t really dispute the relative success rate he reports, but when it happens, I would have to say it’s a lot better than just a “favorable trend.”

I think specific case studies on people who claim to have been healed in this fashion would be way more demonstrative of whether or not something is going on or not.

Buck: there don’t have to be any critical stories; the comments take care of that end of thing.kate q on March 17, 2007 at 12:28 AM

I respectfully disagree kate. I hear many well informed defenses of the various forms of christianity. Yet no one is openly hostile to the non-believing be they commentor or blogmaster. It’s not that I think religion is above criticism, it’s not. It does strike me that AP seems more hostile to my faith than I am to his atheism.

Yet somehow AllahP doesn’t take offense. :)

I knew that Iraq post would be a bust comment-wise. The thousand or so we’ll get for this one should balance it out.

Do bloggers get annoyed with their comment sections? You spend time and effort building a voice, and you end up with commenters you don’t really find congenial, who don’t go in the directions you sort of wish they would.

Or do you write more for other bloggers?

I knew that Iraq post would be a bust comment-wise. The thousand or so we’ll get for this one should balance it out.

Sorry we’re boring you.But hey,its the count that counts right? ;-)

That is a very diffent take on it then believing that God causes things to happen in our everyday life. These types of studies are specifically looking for that.

Don’t you mean “specifically finding that”?

In the best possible light these studies show what? A 5% benefit from prayer?

Where did you get that number? Maybe you should read it before you argue why it’s wrong.

Lawrence on March 16, 2007 at 8:29 PM

I have no problem with that. Everyone is free to believe in an abstract creator or supernatural benefactor as they wish. That is a very diffent take on it then believing that God causes things to happen in our everyday life. These types of studies are specifically looking for that.

Look at it this way. Socialism prevents people from taking control of thier own lives. I see people praying for intervention in exactly the same boat.

helplessness and despair

This is the folly of highly “religious” people. They attribute normal things in life which have other explanations to a higher power.

Resolute on March 16, 2007 at 8:03 PM

Except we really attribute all things in life (normal or otherwise) to a higher power. What we see as folly is picking and choosing what is or is not attributed to our creator.

He might as well not be there if he has irrational, inconsistent responses at human intervention that have less effect then an aspirin. (sorry if that sounds hostile)

The common misunderstanding is that prayer is all about asking God to do something. When praying really has more to do with thanking God for what He already has done for us and what He will do for us in the future.

If everything is attributed to God then aspirin is also something God provides. So when you get a headache don’t just pray that God make the headache go away, pray thankfully that God provides aspirin to ease our pain.

If prayer does nothing else it provides comfort, a positive attitude, and more importantly it provides hope.

To me, faith and prayer helping recovery when you’re sick is a no-brainer. You let go of your stress, have faith that you’ll be OK whatever happens–or at least, whatever happens is “meant to be so.” It’s why so many cancer (and other serious disease) survivors say “cancer made me a better person.” You learn to stop worrying/stressing out about things you CAN NOT control, and take control of those things you can. I really don’t see how an atheist can “just know” they’ll be okay (like I did) when it doesn’t look quite that way. It seems to me like that’d be an obvious impediment to recovery and healing. Everyone knows a positive attitude makes a huge difference, and letting go of stress is a big part of it.
bamapachyderm on March 16, 2007 at 6:19 PM

I dont get into religious discussions much because there ussually isn’t much point. Everyone can believe whatever they want as long as it doesnt affect me (like them wanting to bomb me). This is why public “Athiests” build up so much ill will, they go out on limbs to tell other people what to believe.

What I want to say about your quote thier is simply what has that got to do with a higher power or creator? I see no logical connection. This is the folly of highly “religous” people. They attibue normal things in life which have other explanations to a higher power. You can easily see this objectively as these thing change over time and from 1 religion to the next. Surely an omnipotent being would keep these things that you can look to him for constant!

In the best possible light these studies show what? A 5% benefit from prayer? He might as well not be there if he has irrational, inconsistent responses at human intervention that have less effect then an aspirin. (sorry if that sounds hostile)

Here’s the cool part…

The patients had been hospitalized 4-10 years prior to the start of the study. It was designed to test retroactive prayer on the assumption that God is not confined by time and, as I said, it worked.

Explain that one away as an “expectancy effect” Mr. Silverman.

Do atheists pray to themselves?

Hening on March 16, 2007 at 6:45 PM

No, but they do worship themselves…

To me, faith and prayer helping recovery when you’re sick is a no-brainer. You let go of your stress, have faith that you’ll be OK whatever happens–or at least, whatever happens is “meant to be so.” It’s why so many cancer (and other serious disease) survivors say “cancer made me a better person.” You learn to stop worrying/stressing out about things you CAN NOT control, and take control of those things you can. I really don’t see how an atheist can “just know” they’ll be okay (like I did) when it doesn’t look quite that way. It seems to me like that’d be an obvious impediment to recovery and healing. Everyone knows a positive attitude makes a huge difference, and letting go of stress is a big part of it.

“The dog is a gentleman; I hope to go to his heaven, not man’s”

- – Mark Twain

AP and Professor, you are gifted and need to be sent gifts.

“The Religious Right hates to admit they are wrong, and they hate to admit when it comes right down to it: Prayer does nothing,” Silverman said.

Then Silverman says

Some of the research Hodge examined is flawed because the patients knew people were praying for them. That can have a placebo effect, or a positive outcome due to the patient’s expectations, he said.

So, regardless of reason, what exactly do you have against a positive outcome Mr. Silverman?

Seems in your infinite wisdom and circular logic, you disproves your own argument.