We didn't pray

schrafinatorI am curious as to the converse situation in which one prays for everything to go alright and depite this the outcome is a shambles.
Is the prayer to blame? Is it that you weren't sincere enough? Perhaps God was vexed, or you prayed for personal help rather than for anothers and were thus refused? God answers all prayers sometimes the answer is no?How can anyone consider this to be reasonable in terms of knowing whether a prayer is answered or not? What are the criteria for considering a prayer answered other than personal post hoc assumption?
I think perhaps it is a more likely scenario that humans fool tthemselves into believing that prayer was answered or not based on a mindset that allows for either outcome to be acceptable without refuting the basic premise.

truthlover I have noticed here that you gave us examples where the outcome was in favour of the people you prayed for. Now can you list the number of times that you prayed and it did not result in a favourable outcome?This message has been edited by sidelined, Thu, 2006-03-09 08:08 AM

truthloverThe reason I was inquiring is that it is a error that occurs in human thinking in which we count the hits and ignore the misses.
In other words,you remember well the times when you prayed and the person got better because this is significant in your life and supports your beliefs . But, as you show here, you do not keep tabs on the times when it does not happen so there is no way we can judge these events to be relevant to the prayer.

veiledvirtue I think you presume more than you can validate VV since your reply here. does not answer either coragyps or Legends rebuttals.You are, of course, free to disengage from further debate but I think this is a personal cop-out of having to defend and explain your POV.

veiledvirtue You have not established that "to be guided" makes things easier. Where do you get the idea that people who are unguided have a harder time of things? I am an atheist through a personal decision based on lack of credible evidence to sway me otherwise. Am I somehow at a disadvantage in life any more than a believer?
A drunk man is happier than a sober one. Does this not also make it easier to cope or does it merely gloss over the human part and present a happy face over a hollow core?This message has been edited by sidelined, Fri, 2006-03-10 09:13 AM

veiledvirtue I am no more aware of you being arrogant than you are of whether I am disadvantaged or not. I do not understand by what you define as completeness. I am sitting here watching the snowfall out my window and remember days of being happy beyond description at the powder snow I was buried in to my hips in while before me lay a pristine slope full of thrills.
I can remember the miracle of the births of my daughters, the deaths of my parents, heartbreakers and heartmakers of one life lesson or another and of all these I cannot ever remember feeling incomplete. To the contrary if one is not complete in and of themselves then they have not taken a good look IMHO.
Being atheist I can give up on hope and concentrate on help. I have no reward to strive for nor punishment to avoid. I can accept people for themselves including the blemishes and know that any direction they have gone I could just as easily have gone myself. If that is all you will say then I shall not ask what makes you think that life is somehow tougher for those who do not share your point of view.

veiledvirtueThe state of being complete and entire; having everything that is needed. You do not make the case for being at greater advantage here since you are not explaining how your position that being "guided by the spirit" actually makes decisions you take or your life itself more or less confused.
In the above quote of yours you are being obtuse. You do not make definitive statements that you can thereby argue to bolster you position but,rather, make vague insertions like"I think" {an unguided personal opinion} together with the statement "some people" {which is in contradiction of your position of universality of guided versus unguided} to the definitive adjective of "false" applied to a person's discernment of their lives.The relative completeness you describe is just that. Having everything needed that allows the individual to be completed. It does not logically follow that what completes you need also complete me. I think that this is also the source of your arrogance.That belief in a guide allows you to be comfortable in your decisions does not validate the belief as an absolute requirement for all others in the world.It is my impression that my statement is an accurate portrayal of the position of people who believe in a god.
However, this is my opinion only as applies to some and is not a hard an fast rule of all believers. I cannot know which,as a matter of course, you or anyone is nor would I presume to.In the same way your previous statement is opinion only and if you wish to promote it as valid you must come up with better arguements.

---

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
Douglas Adams