My preacher uncle explained the “why do I need to pray or praise God if he’s omniscient?” conundrum in this way (paraphased): “I told my wife once that I loved her. She knows this, so I don’t need to tell her ever again.”
You have this perfectly correct. We need, ultimately, only to serve God and mankind. That is the only need. Everything else is just gravy.
I should probably take this particular time to point out that I believe that many things we complain about: natural disasters, hardship, even death - are all gifts from God. I must admit, most bad things that happen in our lives aren’t bad at all - it’s jsut that we’re too stupid to think about using them properly, or to avoid them in the first place. It’s not because our raw intelligence is insufficient; we just like to pretend the problem doesn’t exist until it gets too big to ignore.
Hardships and loss can also be very good things, but talking about that would require a much longer post that I’m willing to get into right now.
The holocaust was a good thing? The Tsunami? 9/11? Katrina? Bird flu? Childhood leukemia?
I can only hope that God doesn’t decide to send any bad things.
The link now leads to a story about Condoleeza Rice. What did your story say?
I don’t do it, haven’t done it in years, and see absolutely no reason to start. But I think prayer basically boils down to being an activity that can weaken the grip of the ego. That’s pretty much what Buddhist meditation is about, and I do do that.
Praying for something to happen/not happen, well, that can be a release of sorts, I guess. Or it could just be idiocy.
One thing I have to confess that I lack is the ability to express gratefulness or appreciation for just being alive in this world. I feel that appreciation, but I don’t believe in anyone/anything to express that feeling to. So I guess that’s something believers in a deity have that I don’t.
Right. In fact, I would have seen a statistically significant positive result as evidence against the traditional Judeo-Christian God. If prayers such as those described in the study could be scientifically proven effective, that effect would have to be either through some unexplained impersonal force linking the prayer to the person prayed for, or through the action of a God who could be mechanically manipulated by praying, regardless of the faith or sincerity of the prayer, the relationship between the pray-er and the person prayed for, etc.
And Tris nails it in one.
I don’t know. These are pithy responses, but unsatisfying.
Moms and spouses are not supreme beings (your mileage may vary, of course 
), and it feels weird to think that God derives the same benefits from such reassurance that people do.
Presumeably, you express love to those close to you mostly because you know it makes them feel good to hear it – and you know that because you like to hear those things too. After all, we humans are social animals and that kind of emotional reciprocity is crucial to our success as a species. So cultivating human relationships with kind words/thoughts is normal: we desire regular ego-strokes and reassurance.
Extending the above analogies to God makes sense if we’re created so much in his image that he might literally “want to hear from me” via prayer or appreciate hearing the “I love you.” But that desire, which seems to normal in a human, strikes me as a needy or unbecoming in a supreme being.
Of course, others have posited the notion that prayer is less a direct and personal hotline to God than it is a contemplative state (for atonement, self-examination, etc)-- and that God is not the one whose needs are being met in prayer.
Assuming you’re on board with prayer to begin with, I think that’s a far better rationale for it.
Cite, please? Where exactly did he pray that “all be one”?
Did smiling bandit say that God ONLY sends things that are purely good? No? I didn’t think so.
In fact, God may sometimes allow unpleasant things to happen for a higher purpose. Now, Diogenes has previously said that the so-called “problem of evil” is utterly fatal to the case for God, but that does not reflect what modern philosophy says. In fact, even skeptical philosophers understand that there is no inherent, logical inconsistency between the existence of evil and the existence of God.
I’ve debunked Plantinga’s Free will defense before. It’s not a solution and it’s not true that “modern philosphy” accepts Plantinga’s defense as valid.
Previous discussion of the Problem of Evil and my own response to the Free Will Defense starts here.
The quote comes from several verses in John 17, though Christ was referring not to all men, but his followers:
It’s also important to remember that Christ was expressing His desire that His followers be one, but, as in anything else involving free moral choice, He would not force them to do so.
No, you’ve attacked it, which is not the same as debunking it. Even atheist critics such as J.L. Mackie now acknowledge that there is not inherent, logical inconsistency between evil in the world and God’s existence.
Of couse, there are some dilettantes and armchair philosophers who still insist that the problem of evil is fatal to God’s existence; however, this viewpoint is no longer reflected in modern philosophy. As philosopher Michael Peterson said in the text, A Companion to the Philosopher on Religion, “The outcome of these and other debates has been so favorable to theists that it is reasonable to say that the logical problem has been laid to rest.” Or, as contemporary philospher Alvin Plantinga observed in his survey of the modern literature,
“Now, as opposed to twenty or twenty-five years ago, most atheologians have conceded that in fact there isn’t any inconsistency between the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and wholly good God and the existence of the evil the world contains . . . . It is heartening to see that the atheologians are giving up the incompatibility thesis and are now prepared to concede that there is no contradiction here: that’s progress .” (Alvin Plantinga, “Tooley and Evil: A Reply,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 60 [1981]: 74)
Exactly my point. He was NOT referring to all of mankind, but a small subset thereof. For that reason, it’s unfair to say that “Jesus’s prayers were not answered,he prayed that all be one even as he and the father were,it didn’t happen!” (sic).
So has the subset filled that requirement*? Sounds like your setting yourself up for a True Scotsman argument.
*Personally I don’t think that this proves or disproves the existance of God either way. I, like DtC, can’t get past the all powerful / all knowing / allows suffering conundrum.
Now that’s a lark, philosophers declaring that some problem has been settled, and JThunder encouraging us to actually take this claim seriously! Ah, all the solutions and answers philosophy has come up with! Surely we are not still debating with equal vigor all the same questions and dilemnas as cultures thousands of year old! But wait… we are.
Taking Plantinga’s arguments seriously means embracing the incoherent (free will), and ignoring evil and suffering that has no particular relevance to free agents: i.e. natural disasters. Even worse are cases where human beings are habitually evil by their very intrinsic nature: as in the worst cases of sociopathy. Here we have agents that God is supposedly responsible for creating that are neither good NOR really free in the same way that most other people are. You’d have to have really, really sick sense of humor to create people who lack the ability to empathize with others: a key element in any agents moral behavior.
It was about Condoleeza Rice and how she thinks studying prayer is a waste of time.
Nothing about God is the same as something about you or me, except that love is the greatest of all things for us, and for God. Prayer benefits that love.
Yes, our relationship with God is needy and unbecoming. Pretty much every aspect of our relationship to Him is demeaning to Him. In our greatest aspirations to goodness we are unfit to stand in His presence. Yet God is willing to participate in that relationship. It’s a miracle!
Others speak for themselves. When I pray, I speak to someone. I may find myself facing things within myself that my intellectual conceit permit me to hide from my own examination, but I know that nothing is hidden from Him. And I know He loves me. That makes my love for Him stronger. It gives me strength, it gives me courage. It gives Him my love. It is not an equal exchange.
No doubt you are right. But, for me, and from me, faith, hope, and love are not rational things. They are beyond reason, foolish, incorrect, and stupid. But I don’t pray to prove myself reasonable, wise, or correct, or smart. I pray to know the undying infinite love of God, and my Lord Jesus. And that is all I get from it. It’s a miracle.
Tris
“Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength; loving someone deeply gives you courage.” ~ Lao-Tzu ~
Some quotes about prayer from my personal collection might be in order:
The creator who could put a cancer in a believer’s stomach is above being interfered with by prayers.
– Bret Harte
Prayer is self-delusion. The “miracles” that Jesus performed in the New Testament are no more believable than the “miracles” credited to [a] mummified Argentine baby.
– Robert Sherrill
Whatever a man prays for, he prays for a miracle. Every prayer reduces
itself to this: “Great God, grant that twice two be not four.”
– Ivan Turgenev
PRAYER: To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled on behalf of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy.
– Ambrose Bierce