The Mind of the Believer and Unanswered Prayer

I want to continue a discussion I started right here and followed up on here, about a time when God blew it on national TV to answer a high profile prayer by three contestants (self described "prayer Warriors") in a reward challenge for food during an episode of CBS's Survivor.

Initially when it was admitted that God did not answer Natalie's prayer Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) explained it away by saying..
If our expectation of God is that He cannot say "no" then He is nothing more than a mere idol,created to do our bidding. God is not an idol. He doesn't give us snakes -- sometimes we unwittingly ask for what enables ppl to become conceited. If these girls had won, the cynics would have chalked it up to luck - it wouldn't have proved a thing because there have been testimony and witnesses to answered prayer and they have been rejected and scorned. Thx!
I responded by saying:
MMM do not discount the effect that an answered prayer like this would have on cynics. Besides, there are many Christians struggling with doubt out there whose faith would be confirmed if God had answered that prayer. But he chose not to help them. He was silent in the midst of their struggles. Par for the course.
Then said MMM:
Do you believe that this girl on Survivor could have made a choice to not be a part of the television program? Do you think that a God Who values human life should encourage and condone daredevil pursuits for entertainment purposes? I think that is exploitive and would be encouraging ppl in the wrong direction. This girl's suffering is consistent with the program that she enlisted in. God doesn't condemn ppl who engage in these pursuits -- He sees them as already suffering enough by engaging in a degrading lifestyle. There are plenty of challenges in caring for the ppl in our own neighborhoods that can provide for a full life story,much more engaging than a television show.
Among other things Rob R. (the answer man) said:
Just one more parting thought John, but it would've been far more productive for this contestant if she prayed that she would play the game in a way that was consistant with Christian integrity and would allow God to display his glory with wisdom according to his power, purposes that he could have for her in that situation. I just don't see winning a million dollars as an essential part of that and would see it as very likely sending the wrong message along the lines of the prosperity theology that is common in some branches of the church.
Brad Haggard seemed to discount scientific studies in these words:
Why would God feel compelled to act on a TV reality show? This doesn't even count as "evidence", especially in light of James 5.

I get the feeling that most people look at prayer as some sort of magic, cause and effect. The prayer studies look at it this way, but the praying people aren't the subjects, increasing the validity of the study, God is the singular subject (since it is His response). I think they are wrong-headed from the start.
But then Natalie won Survivor and a million dollars. Now see what MMM is saying and it's classic:
Okay, I don't watch Survivor,and I am only going by the post here and the newsflash about this Natalie girl, BUT, I was way wrong to judge that God didn't answer Natalie's prayer!

Apparently, from what I read on the posts here, Natalie prayed for one meal, but today I read that the winner of Survivor (and,apparently a way hefty paycheck!!) is Natalie!

It looks like God chose to let Natalie win the whole shmeal deal challenge so that now she has enough for wa-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-y more meals!!! That is just like Him!! I bet she's gonna share her winnings with the poor too! Yay!!! Sorry God for getting infected with doubt!

Hey John, It sounds like God heard your complaint and decided to show you how He answers prayers. You were probably expecting Him to give Natalie one lousy meal - but no!!! Now, are you convinced???
Again this is par for the course and typical of the mind of a believer in order to maintain faith! So which is it, believers? You do whatever it takes to maintain your faith, don't you? Is there any consistency here? Nothing can falsify such a faith, right? Nothing!

What Natalie prayed for was not answered as requested. And the answer demanded that the believer counts the hits and discounts the misses. This was a miss. So it was discounted. Now the believer switches sides as fast as a new wave comes to shore and claims God answered her prayer after all, when that was not what she prayed for.

Believers will claim Natalie prayed to win too, which she surely did. Plenty of these contestants prayed to win along with their families, especially Brett and his family and friends. God cannot answer hundreds of thousands of prayers simply because it would be impossible to do so with so many believers praying for the same things.

If Natalie did not win believers would still discount the misses, wouldn't they? They would do this in order to maintain their faith. Deny this if you can. God knows best, they'd say, so don't let them kid us. They'd be claiming that a million dollars would not be good for Natalie somehow, like they previously did.

And even though Natalie won I have plenty of other reasons for doubting God answered her prayer. The bottom line is that scientific studies on prayer show us that prayer does not work. Why do we need scientific studies? Because no matter what happens believers will not consider the truth. Prayer does not work. It never has. It never will.

Again, we must depend on the scientific studies. Science is our best and only hope with regard to these questions, given the mind of the believer who never fails to count the hits and discount the misses.

If prayer does work then why not pray to change a tragic event in the past, but that's another topic. ;-)

40 comments:

mikespeir said...

My mailbox can say yes, no, or wait with the best gods ever dreamed up.

AndrewG said...

The old "Good things happen = God, bad things happen = Free Will" eh!! Hilarious - then again, it explains why he'd let a quarter of a million men, women, and children die overnight in tsunamis, he's far too busy watching cable...

Harlan Quinn said...

"sometimes the answer is no" or
"sometimes the answer is maybe" is an indication of "cognitive dissonance" or when the person tries to reconcile two conflicting thoughts in their mind. A theist thinks to themselves "if god answers prayer, then since this was a perfectly good prayer, he should have answered it". Kind of like all those years I prayed for peace in the middle east.

Rob R said...

no to food for a short time, yes to a million dollars. Hey, there's a theological struggle that I must suffer! Wouldn't we all like to be smote in this way!

Still John, in the grand scheme of things, I don't count her victory as worth much. She got money. Great. It will feed the prosperity theology of many (unless perhaps she was careful to articulate her position on the winnings to prevent that). I wonder what she'll do with that million. That's far more important testament to faith. Of greater importance yet is how she played the game, if she was a typical backstabber or if she played with integrity.

Rob R said...

But John, you'll come back to faith now that God answered her prayer right? That is the really really big one that from an atheists perspective effects the rest of her life and not the little one that was a temporary bump in the road.

John W. Loftus said...

Rob, what exactly don't you understand about scientific studies, or what I wrote above? You must FIRST understand an argument before you can criticize it.

Harlan Quinn said...

regarding the comments from the theists in the post,
Here's a article from sciencedaily showing how much a believers inferences about god reflects their own personality.

Believers' Inferences About God's Beliefs Are Uniquely Egocentric

Brad Haggard said...

2 things, John:

1. I didn't discount all science, just the method of that particular Harvard study. Method is what makes science powerful.

2. I would NEVER have put this survivor argument out. It is NOT a good argument for God's existence or benevolence.

BUT

You put the argument out there and now you are the one explaining it away. You can't try to turn this around as if Christians are "pushing" or "concocting" an argument like this. This shouldn't even have been an argument (can I say "I told you so"?). But this has been fun.

Anyways, have a good time this holiday season with your family! I'll hopefully be more active next year with a reduced class load.

dccomments said...

MMM said:

"If our expectation of God is that He cannot say "no" then He is nothing more than a mere idol, created to do our bidding. God is not an idol."

First, I DO think man created God. He's a figment of mans imagination.

But pretending for a moment that God is real, man isn't saying that he thinks God CAN'T say no. God has said himself that he WON'T say no. He tells us us won't say no in the Gospels:

Matthew 7:7-8? - "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened."

Matthew 21:22 - "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive."

Luke says it too in 11:9-10 - "And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

John 14:13 - "And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son."

John 15:7 - "If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you."

James 4:2 - "Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not."

1 John 3:22 - "And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight."

Yeah, there may be other verses in the Bible that contradict these verses, but that doesn't make these verses go away.

Lastly, as MMM says "God is not an idol" - but God IS to be idolized, if we're following the Merrian Webster definition of Idolize : "to worship as a god; broadly: to love or admire to excess."

Double A said...

dccomments - all of those passages say that prayers will be answered if you believe. Do you realize that true belief is more rare than an unintelligent atheist? To be saved you have to want to believe, and trust God to help you toward that belief. But to actually pray and 'believe without question' ...good luck with that. What I'm saying is, your attempt to back the word of God onto itself is a failure because you are not understanding the storyline, my friend.

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

John wrote, "Nothing can falsify such a faith, right? Nothing!"

Amen, brother! Amen! I couldn't have said it any better than that! And here is what I really love about God --- that I do not have to pretend to be 'right' all the time and try to maintain a false pretense (which I have written about before, so here is the evidence that)- I can confess my mistakes without fear of reproach from Him (which, of course, I cannot say that is the case with other ppl)! When I look back at what I wrote, I think, "Oh me, of little faith!"

To be set free from cynicism and self righteousness - That is one of the greatest gifts of all - (it's a process for me - I spent most of my life as a nonbeliever and idolator).

Take care and,
God bless!
3M

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

P.S. Oh, BTW, I am humbled that you chose to highlight my comments on a post -- wow, I am not worthy but thank you for devoting an entire post to respond to me - truly, I really never even thought you read my comments! I am honored!

Again with the blessings,
3M

Steven said...

Shambo prayed to win and didn't. I'm sure a lot of them prayed to win. In the end it was the fact that she was paired up with a guy who pissed everyone off that made her win.

She looked like a fool calling herself a prayer warrior. Prayer didn't win the game, luck did. But then I sometimes wonder if there is a difference between the two.

Rob R said...

I understand that not all science itself is falsifiable. AFter all scientific paradigms are not falsifiable by individual experiments. John, I wonder if you've ever studied Kuhn. I don't know about back in your day of schooling, but I'd be shocked if you can take a course in the philosophy of science without considering him. Theology is not a scientific theory. It is a paradigm (actually several) and not completely a scientific one (which is not clearly a problem).

But it isn't clear to me that you have done justice to the basics. If the tested hypothesis doesn't pan out, you completely scrap it right? No you don't. You alter it.

Now the idea is that it is altered for more possible scientific tests, but one of the limits of a scientific approach to theology is that unlike normal objects of scientific study which are within our ability to manipulate and directly observe, it is not so with theology. We can't manipulate God. God is a person and while psychological sciences show we can scientifically study persons, we are limited if that person does not cooperate in such studies if they have reason. Of course, you can make an argument as to why God should want to submit to scientific study such that we can scientifically come to the conclusion that he exists, your claim won't be scientifically verifiable and certainly not falsifiable.

Course we can manipulate concepts and given that, N T Wright (who knows his philosophy of science) has demonstrated how hypothosis and verification can be applied to the historical studies of Jesus with positive results for orthodoxy.

Ultimately though, that theistic claims cannot be fully submitted to scientific scrutiny is not going to impress those of us who recognize the absurdity of hard scientism and are not impressed with soft scientism. For me, coherentism is a far better epistemic path than scientific verification even though I'm not confidant to call even that the end all be all of epistemology.


Obviously 99 percent of Christians don't believe in God because all our prayers are answered yes as many prayers are answered with a no or not right away. Clearly then, you shouldn't expect us to drop our paradigm because a hypothesis which wasn't believed to begin with turns out wrong. The real challenge for believers is explaining those passages where believers are told that their requests would be granted and I have already offered my thoughts on that.

dccomments said...

Hi Double A.

Yes, I'm aware you must actually believe for it to happen. And so I'm writing on the assumption that this woman on the TV show, as well as any theist in question is actually a believer.

Rob R said...

correction,

For me, coherentism is a far better epistemic path than scientific verification

I meant it is a better path than the idea that just about all knowledge should be scientifically verified.

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Hi dccomments: You wrote this: "First, I DO think man created God. He's a figment of mans imagination."

Yes, I do believe in the practice of idolotry, that the image of 'god' or 'gods' is imbued with human traits.

But, in my experience, I have found that there is one God, who remains the same, inspite of how we misconstrue or mischaracterize Him. This is Christ - that He loves even those who do not love Him in return - He loves those who espouse atheism and contempt for Him. His love is constant, although we can be trained to view it as a contemptible weakness.

With Christ, instead of us projecting our image upon Him, He infuses us with His spirit which brings freedom.

Then this, "He tells us us won't say no in the Gospels"

Actually, dc, you're not telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. In one parable, Jesus speaks about how God knows how to give good gifts - that he doesn't give us snakes. sometimes we unwittingly ask for snakey things that promote our distance from Him.

Then you said this, "Lastly, as MMM says "God is not an idol" - but God IS to be idolized, "

I happen to agree - Jesus is the only one that I know of when I worship Him , I don't suffer the ill effects of addictive aftermath but rather, freedom. He is the One that can be entrusted with power and not abuse it.

ttyl,
3M

Piratefish said...

Judging from their responses on this post John, their faith is "secure" and "unmoved", or another way to put it, desperately trying to hang on to their faith despite the cognitive dissonance, as always.

Rob R said...

or another way to put it, desperately trying to hang on to their faith despite the cognitive dissonance, as always.

What cognitive dissonence. some of us are unmoved, not in the sense that we are desperately hanging on but because this was never a challenge to begin with.

If you disagree, you will have to interact with what was said. And there is no thinking here I've had to scrounge up in light of "new" information which isn't new to me at all.

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Hi PFish --- May I show you a bit of cognitive dissonance in a nonbeliever who complains about ci???

Let's see, Harlan wrote: ""sometimes the answer is no" or
"sometimes the answer is maybe" is an indication of "cognitive dissonance" or when the person tries to reconcile two conflicting thoughts in their mind."


Now, how I see it, is that Harlan is an astute observer of how God does relate to ppl on an individual basis and He does reserve the right to determine if one's request is a "snake" or an edifying and timely request that is to be honored. As ppl, we need the freedom to reserve the same right rather than automatically and immediately complying to every demand or request made of us, don't you think??

I think it a symptom of idolotry to relate to God as though He is a robot - I know He didn't answer Natalie's prayer as a robot or a mathematical equation - He answered it like a very generous Father!!!

Then, Harlan wrote, " A theist thinks to themselves "if god answers prayer, then since this was a perfectly good prayer, he should have answered it". Kind of like all those years I prayed for peace in the middle east."

I feel compelled to point this out, but per Jesus, "there will always be war".

So, it seems to me a bit dissonant to expect something that was clearly never promised in the first place. Why didn't Harlan trust what Jesus said? He claims to have been a "believer". I suspect that there will be peace in the middle east someday, but war will break out somewhere else -- so why get discouraged and give up when praying against war appears to be an eternal pursuit???

At any rate,
ttyl,
3M

zenmite said...

A few years ago my cousin, age 52, was dying of advanced breast cancer. One day she received some sort of prayer cloth in the mail. "It's a sign from God!" nearly every member of the family proclaimed. After much fervent prayer, my mother told me her whole family (mainly pentecostal) now believed strongly that Ann (my cousin) would recover fully.

I told my mom that when she does not recover, the family will then say 'it was god's will'. Naturally, she died a couple of months later. My mom called to tell me that they had all said exactly what I predicted they'd say. She seemed surprised by this.

Heads you win, tails you win. It works like astrology or the magic 8ball. Hits are counted, misses are discounted. Partial hits are counted as proof, like Natalie winning the contest even though her prayer to win the reward was not answered. Since no one is really sure if they believe strongly enough, this excuse always works too. If only you had faith as much as a grain of mustard seed you could say to this mountain, move, and it would move. We don't notice mountains moving very much. Apparently no one has ever had the faith of a mustard seed.

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Dear Zenmite: You said, "Heads you win, tails you win"

It's true, and as a former nonbeliever, I can testify that faith frustrates a base and sometimes subliminal desire to condemn or punish.

Who is to say that remaining here on this earth would have benefited your aunt? I too have had this cancer and at a very young age. A co-worker of mine, same age as me, also had this cancer. She died - I remained here. At some point, we come to a junction in our lives where our hearts are fully conformed to either life or death - I believe eternal preferences can occur at any age, but God is the One Who knows the heart of a human being thoroughly and accurately.

By faithful standards, my coworker was rewarded with heaven -- I remained and am rewarded by the shaping of inner conviction and compassion through the suffering I have undergone. Love always wins.

3M

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Zenmite - I meant to say your 'cousin' not your 'aunt'.

John W. Loftus said...

If you're as young as I think you are Rob r., I studied The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and many other philosophy of science book before you were even born. Nonetheless, I don't see how anything you wrote applies to the case in hand. Again, scientific tests on prayer show that prayer does not work. You do not need Kuhn to see this, and Kuhn may not even be correct after all. Think Karl Popper.

Rob R said...

FYI you were aproximately graduating highschool when I was born.

John, whether God answers prayer or not just isn't a question for one single testable hypothesis. It is too complex of an issue. And it isn't a falsifiable claim either given the complexity of the relationship of our lives to prayer and the complexities in scripture about prayer that you want to gloss over.

Piratefish said...

Rob R, MMM>
Not calling a spade a spade, in a nutshell, is what cognitive dissonance is. If John were to delete my comment even though it's not my habit to do personal attacks, I would still say this because that's what it really is - you guys are pathetic. You'll enter these comments, forget about this issue within a couple of hours and only have them come right back at you all over again in exactly the same way, these just go on and on and on, isn't it(hint: because you can't resolve them?)? :)

Rob R said...

Kay piratefish. by your criteria, you have cognitive dissonence since you don't call a spade a spade. You don't interact with what's said, ergo, it doesn't matter what you say.

Rob R said...

Popper John? I thought you were a scientific realist.

John W. Loftus said...

Rob, ever heard of the Kuhn/Popper debate? The question was whether or not paradigms are incommensurable. Kuhn seemed to say they were whereas Popper disagreed strongly.

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Hi Piratefish: You wrote,

"Not calling a spade a spade, in a nutshell, is what cognitive dissonance is. If John were to delete my comment even though it's not my habit to do personal attacks, I would still say this because that's what it really is - you guys are pathetic."

Pirate, I am more than glad to be pathetic on your behalf - honestly , I am sincere. You're worth it.


Then you said,

" You'll enter these comments, forget about this issue within a couple of hours and only have them come right back at you all over again in exactly the same way, these just go on and on and on, isn't it"

I suppose my intention for "perseverence" doesn't count because are tempted to insist upon "pathetic"? You are welcome to project, as you deem appropriate, so as to avoid your own personal dissonance (happens all the time - I'm used to it now).

back at ya,
3M

Rob R said...

Can't say I do. Is there a reason I should be worried about it or is this one of those "go read about it in a book ya bum" moments.

Gandolf said...

Steven -->" But then I sometimes wonder if there is a difference between the two."

I agree Steven

We have luck, experience, situations and a whole heap of elements including the ramdom...And plenty of knowledge that Prayer is never really been seen or atleast proven that often to negate

Rob R ->"I meant it is a better path than the idea that just about all knowledge should be scientifically verified."

Yes Rob i do understand you think its a better path.

However i think maybe you just tried to show us how supposedly faith is not so far outside of whats considdered normal science.

Rob R --> "If the tested hypothesis doesn't pan out, you completely scrap it right? No you don't. You alter it."

In my opinion i dont think that this is quite true of what usually always genrally happens at all.I mean is there really that many folks still hunting and searcing for unicorns or pots of gold buried at the end of rainbows, having just continually altered their hypothesis?.Im almost thinking hell if Robs right maybe i should really expect to see all manner of folks literally everywhere,still searching for all manner of things having just continually altered and re altered their hypothesis time and time again.

Surely?, it must be remembered there is a very big difference (as some type of time of boundary) between hypothesis that within reasonable timeframes turns into atleast "some" factual evidence also.And a hypothesis that for the best part stays only ever a hypothesis ever since the first beginnings of it.And really, how long has this prayer hypothesis been around now?

Using logic and reason and total honesty can we even start to suggest to ourselves, maybe it just hasnt really been given a decent chance yet.

Piratefish said...

Rob R, MMM>
Oh well, I may have cognitive dissonance, I may believe in fairies, I may even think aliens have invaded and taken over my head, I may worth it or I may not, I can comment back and forth and debate all the way to #305 but what's the point? There's one thing you guys consistently get it wrong, that is even though we may be all wrong, that doesn't make you right. We may all well be mistaken and end up selling jelly beans on the streets(John included :)), but you still have to show that you are right and your faith is true, so far none of us has seen that.

I remember in college one time my physics prof propose a conjecture from relativity that was so outrageous that we all scream, shout and laugh in disbelief. Our prof told us to be quiet, turned around, and proceeded to write on the board the most detailed, fascinating and convincing derivation I've ever seen, when he was done we're all speechless, humbled but ecstatic knowing that we've just learned something real and true.

Now can you guys do that?(wink wink)

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Dear Piratefish, You demanded thusly; "but you still have to show that you are right and your faith is true, so far none of us has seen that."

You say, we still HAVE to show that we are right?? Hmmmmm....I think the main point I was trying to "prove" earlier is freedom from self righteousness. Quite humbling but also quite wonderful.

Then this, "I can comment back and forth and debate all the way to #305 but what's the point?"

Well, really, what is the point?? Ya know, when you boil it all down, the purpose of commenting here is to prepare you to be comfortable and feel at home when you arrive in heaven. I don't want you guys to run rampantly, willy -nilly outside of the Pearly Gates when you meet Jesus or the OT characters and honestly ,(and this is per Jesus whom I trust), some of the Christian folks you're debunking here might be waiting for you outside. One of those lose/lose' situations for sure!!

Then this about your wonderful physics instructor (don't you just love those guys! I sure do!) Do you think God can be reduced to a malleable lump of scholarship or mathematical deduction?? I know I couldn't be trusted commandeering God. As a matter of fact, been there, done that ---- Fail!!

But it's all good - so I'm heartened to hear that your physics instructor is a source of inspiration to you. That is awesome!

3M

Gandolf said...

MMM -->"Dear Piratefish...You say, we still HAVE to show that we are right?? Hmmmmm....I think the main point I was trying to "prove" earlier is freedom from self righteousness. Quite humbling but also quite wonderful."

Hey my friend mighty MMM ..tell please ..say what about someone like Hitler should his belief/faith come under the same type of standard agreement? ...Can we really have this utopian thought of this "freedom from self righteousness"..Was there a need Hitler should maybe have reason to bother to first prove, why killing Jews he somehow thought was a great thing?.

Naturally maybe ive misunderstood your real meaning here.If so would you mind explaining.I fully admit to my lack of ability of understanding the deciphering of faithful thoughts, i admit it often seems to me rather like its just as hard and as complicated as trying to read something on a burning piece of bush/scrub or something.

Cheers.

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

John wrote, "Hey my friend mighty MMM ..tell please ..say what about someone like Hitler should his belief/faith come under the same type of standard agreement? ...Can we really have this utopian thought of this "freedom from self righteousness"..Was there a need Hitler should maybe have reason to bother to first prove, why killing Jews he somehow thought was a great thing?."

I guess we're mutually misunderstanding one another -- the thought did occur to me today that as a nonbeliver, I do recall being unfamiliar with the language of grace -- I pretty much held such in contempt so was never able to thoroughly absorb it myself. Scorched shrubbery is not a bad analogy.

But, I am open to discussing the icon of evil, Adolf Hitler. Again, I'm not sure if I understand your question. Obviously, he was very persuasive in coopting ppl into destroying the Jewish.

I once read about Hitler and learned that at a young age, his father abused him and would beat him until he went into a coma. Now, Hitler's brother, escaped by running away, but Adolf, remained and became subjugated by and obedient to evil.

It is easy to witness and label the most obvious and sensational forms of evil as they are manifested, but where was the outrage and intervention for this boy at a young age? The seed of evil happens out of sight - in the human heart and gains its constituents in contempt for vulnerability.

At any rate, God loves ppl as sinners - this is offensive, but it is true. People do not always see and love God in return - their hearts harden and the resultant symptoms can look as apparent as Auschwitz. One can visibly witness via history and eyewitness accounts, the immeasurable terror and tyranny that Hitler housed within.

Was there grace for Hitler? Yes, there was. Did he eventually turn and receive it? Not my call - but I wonder how he would react if he were to see one single Jewish person within the walls of heaven - He would not be able to remain with murder in his heart.

So, if I got your intention wrong, I know I can count on you to reiterate.

Thx for conversing,
3M

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

oops! my bad -- I intended to address that last comment to Gandolf

the best to you!

Gandolf said...

MMM -->"The seed of evil happens out of sight - in the human heart and gains its constituents in contempt for vulnerability."

Do you think there actually is anything much that doesnt allow that this could actually be what you are missing thats actually the real problem happening with people ageeing to having faith.

MMM -->"I'm not sure if I understand your question"

Thats alright MMM...Its not always so easy for any of us, and especially me to try explaining so clearly what we actually do mean.


Basically what im trying get at is doesnt this god/faith belief really have and extremely important need of this "freedom from self righteousness" attitude applied to it too?.

I mean you often say this stuff like MMM -->"To be set free from cynicism and self righteousness - That is one of the greatest gifts of all - (it's a process for me - I spent most of my life as a nonbeliever and idolator)."

Cynicism meaning quote dictionary --> "especially a general distrust of the integrity or professed motives of others:"

Surely it could be? suggested you faithful folk are still often simply so totally far to self righteous and full of "cynicism" of non believers. When you simply seem to easily (JUDGE) non believers non belief, and feelings of there being a "moral reason" and need of "justice" for some "decent evidence" first to be found!. Before they simply agree to having faith ...you often seem to suggest there feelings of this "reasonable need" as maybe more simply just being about something "evil" or maybe "conceited" etc etc.

What about the possibility of it actually being you and your faithful pals who are actually the ones being "conceited" or ignorantly simply having superstitious faith in what might actually be the real "evil" thing/problem here thats been effecting our humanity the most.

After all humans do have far more proof for evidence of lack of gods,than you faithful do have evidence for presence of gods....So how come then we simply are judged to be the conceited cynics being gained here etc ?

Might it not also just happen to be that your superstitious faith could actually be whats "gaining you" as one of its "constituents in contempt" for your own "vulnerability", born from your agreement to seem to simply accept faith belief by faith?.By not understanding there is maybe simply some very very good important reasons why humans have such need of good evidence for decent proof before simply having to much faith in so many things in our world.

After all it can be shown that our own human safety and survival so very very often even in our own earthly lives can be seen its so very very important we stick to these very well proven guidelines.

MMM i understand the name calling is sometimes hard to take,maybe even for both sides.But surely one needs to first look at the evidence first, before simply letting the dragging lip sydrome creep in .When christians call me as a non believer as maybe ignorant or idiotic or whatever,i first look at all the evidence and ask myself does the evidence maybe suggest that its possible that maybe i am.

If not i have no need to let this make my lip start dragging.If its at all true, then maybe they are just speaking some "hard cold facts" and just maybe my lip dragging is more about me seeing they have a point! but me feeling a feeling of not really wanting to hear or even honestly address it.

MMM we have to understand some times folks have very good need to be very totally honest,even if being honest sometimes actually happens to cause shock.Sometime some shock treatment!, can be a very important need also!.


The best to you too MMM.

Gandolf said...

MMM also, in the earlier thread you had said.

MMM --> " you will be comfortable in heaven when you arrive there and you won't be offended by God or all the ppl you'll see there. The Outsider test is manufactured by man, not God, so be prepared! (of course, you are welcome to adhere to your preference)."

Its really a great sermon MMM,you know the type thats often thrown from the pulpit that gets everybody feeling all fluffy and nice.Love bombed and very inclined to be indoctrinated.

But hey what about this.Does it honestly take into serrious considderation enough, whether there is actual evidence and proof of this heaven?.Does it serriously conssider if maybe infact these superstitions and faith could be merely what actually been manufactured by man ?.Does it take into serrious considderation and account for folks who suffer and even die some even getting acid poured down their throats due to the superstition and faith,and maybe also even pay for other folks ignorant worthless superstitious dreams of salvation?.

What happen if there is no "comfortable in heaven" and many folk on earth in this life are simply actually (paying in blood and abuse),simply for the pipe dreams of some superstitious ignorant people?

Just wondering.

And PS ...i myself was born into a abusive faith belief ..i payed ..but not nearly as bad as those African kids did ...But still please explain how folks like us are supposed to feel happy in this heaven...Standing around with all other folks of faith whos superstitions and faith ...we personally some how got lumped with a need to pay a EXTRA price also for in our own earthly lives?.

Seems kinda weird.Cant say it seems like my thought of what some supposed heaven might be like.Hey gandolf you had one life full of ignorant bigoted folks of superstition and faith,guess what ! you get to do it all again.

MMM this is your idea of some heaven?

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Dear Gandolf, I would love to be able to converse with you, but I think we've reached an impasse - I'm not sure I get what you are trying to say and you don't get what I am trying to say. I'm just trying to impress that God is good - has no ulterior motive to hurt ppl but rescue us from abusiveness and all the ways that manifests itsself. I'm sorry you had abusive religious experiences -- Jesus says those ppl are the sons of hell. I had an abusive image of authority and god imposed upon me outside of an institutionalized church setting. So I can empathize. The biggest overcoming for me was to trust in a power that doesn't abuse. Pretty huge.

At any rate, Gandolf, I enjoy talking with you, but I've run out of time today.

Take care,
3M