The Pointlessness of Prayer

[xSilverPhinx]

It could be a result of natural cognitive biases such as the availability heuristic, where because X makes you think of Y, you 'consciously reason' that there is some strong association there, when in fact the association between X and Y really was made through unconscious processes in the first place. When the idea is already in your head, you start to find more 'evidence' that fits that schema (incidentally, human beings do have a confirmation bias).

This is particularly interesting. Explains so well why some believers say that their gods are "self evident". That is a perception that is alien to me and I find it puzzling. They seem to be equally puzzled by anyone saying that a conscious and intelligent creator is not self evident...

How far would you say the scientific community is from figuring out what the underlying processes are exactly with a good amount of evidence and relatively high degree of certainty?

[Synapse]

How far would you say the scientific community is from figuring out what the underlying processes are exactly with a good amount of evidence and relatively high degree of certainty?

Short answer is: I have no idea. Long answer:

It's quite unlikely that it's the same processes for everyone who is religious, I think, especially considering the individual differences. Although if there is anything that should be studied, it should be the indoctrination process that starts off at a young age. People tend not to keep track of why they think something is one way and not the other. You can be convinced of something by a lie, and later still be convinced even if you forgot what the actual lie that convinced you was. So you only 'feel' it to be true. And then the confirmation bias can kick in. And that feeling compounds and compounds. I imagine going through that process since childhood is going to inoculate a person's beliefs against reason pretty well and it takes a certain amount of willpower to overcome that. That's kind of the reason why I respect people who give up their religion so much.

I do wonder what goes on in the mind of of individuals who only find religion when they are adults though. Peer pressure? The comfort in thinking some hardship is all God's plan?

[xSilverPhinx]

I do wonder what goes on in the mind of of individuals who only find religion when they are adults though. Peer pressure? The comfort in thinking some hardship is all God's plan?

Like Francis Collins, whose conversion to theism has always sparked my curiosity.

Frome Wiki:

Collins has described his parents as "only nominally Christian" and by graduate school he considered himself an atheist. However, dealing with dying patients led him to question his religious views, and he investigated various faiths. He familiarized himself with the evidence for and against God in cosmology, and used Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis[40] as a foundation to re-examine his religious view. He eventually came to a conclusion, and became an Evangelical Christian during a hike on a fall afternoon. He has described himself as a "serious Christian".

He says that he saw a frozen waterfall on that hike and from that point on decided to call himself a true believer. I don't know what else went on, but that is all very strange.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Like Francis Collins, whose conversion to theism has always sparked my curiosity.

From Wiki:

Collins has described his parents as "only nominally Christian" and by graduate school he considered himself an atheist. However, dealing with dying patients led him to question his religious views, and he investigated various faiths. He familiarized himself with the evidence for and against God in cosmology, and used Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis[40] as a foundation to re-examine his religious view. He eventually came to a conclusion, and became an Evangelical Christian during a hike on a fall afternoon. He has described himself as a "serious Christian".

He says that he saw a frozen waterfall on that hike and from that point on decided to call himself a true believer. I don't know what else went on, but that is all very strange.

The "frozen waterfall" is just another term for "subjective experience."  Such experiences can have the effect of connecting the dots in a way that pure, unadulterated reason cannot do at times.  They give an over-arching meaning to any evidence-based approach.  Like the apostle Paul on the Damascus Road, such events can be so intense that they are life-changing.

[xSilverPhinx]

Like Francis Collins, whose conversion to theism has always sparked my curiosity.

From Wiki:

Collins has described his parents as "only nominally Christian" and by graduate school he considered himself an atheist. However, dealing with dying patients led him to question his religious views, and he investigated various faiths. He familiarized himself with the evidence for and against God in cosmology, and used Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis[40] as a foundation to re-examine his religious view. He eventually came to a conclusion, and became an Evangelical Christian during a hike on a fall afternoon. He has described himself as a "serious Christian".

He says that he saw a frozen waterfall on that hike and from that point on decided to call himself a true believer. I don't know what else went on, but that is all very strange.

The "frozen waterfall" is just another term for "subjective experience."  Such experiences can have the effect of connecting the dots in a way that pure, unadulterated reason cannot do at times.  They give an over-arching meaning to any evidence-based approach.  Like the apostle Paul on the Damascus Road, such events can be so intense that they are life-changing.

Though I couldn't possibly know what he was thinking when he saw a frozen waterfall and somehow connected it to a god, I like to wonder. Something to do with ordered molecules, perhaps?

Thing is, how do you know that your brain has connected the dots well? Especially knowing that perception can be so faulty at times. It's how I treat my intuition at times, sometimes to my benefit and other times, not. I wouldn't consider intuition to be reason, but it can be a good tool.

[Crow]

The "frozen waterfall" is just another term for "subjective experience."  Such experiences can have the effect of connecting the dots in a way that pure, unadulterated reason cannot do at times.  They give an over-arching meaning to any evidence-based approach.  Like the apostle Paul on the Damascus Road, such events can be so intense that they are life-changing.

Yup and Paul the Apostle was well wrong about a lot of things, its good for Christianity (also bad as well as it might have been more accepting of women) that a lot of his documentation was left out otherwise it might have become like the book of Enoch. Sorry I have no respect for Paul.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Yup and Paul the Apostle was well wrong about a lot of things, its good for Christianity (also bad as well as it might have been more accepting of women) that a lot of his documentation was left out otherwise it might have become like the book of Enoch. Sorry I have no respect for Paul.

So, your position is that you don't like Paul's position on women and some other things, so he must be wrong about everything?

[Crow]

Yup and Paul the Apostle was well wrong about a lot of things, its good for Christianity (also bad as well as it might have been more accepting of women) that a lot of his documentation was left out otherwise it might have become like the book of Enoch. Sorry I have no respect for Paul.

So, your position is that you don't like Paul's position on women and some other things, so he must be wrong about everything?

No I liked the approach to women he had in his additional texts. I was talking about that he thought the world was going to end in his immediate lifetime because he was told this by Jesus. If you haven't read them have a look they paint a far more interesting story, one that doesn't exactly preach the same thing that is found in the Christian bible.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

No I liked the approach to women he had in his additional texts. I was talking about that he thought the world was going to end in his immediate lifetime because he was told this by Jesus. If you haven't read them have a look they paint a far more interesting story, one that doesn't exactly preach the same thing that is found in the Christian bible.

I'm not familiar with Paul's additional texts. What are they?

[Crow]

No I liked the approach to women he had in his additional texts. I was talking about that he thought the world was going to end in his immediate lifetime because he was told this by Jesus. If you haven't read them have a look they paint a far more interesting story, one that doesn't exactly preach the same thing that is found in the Christian bible.

I'm not familiar with Paul's additional texts. What are they?

They aren't exactly accepted by most biblical scholars but are by a lot (usually the left leaning ones) so take that as you will but they do have mainstream acceptance, maybe they are bullshit maybe not but they exist and when only 7 out of 14 of Pauls epistles are undisputed its worth looking at the others as they have about equal relevance, and some are letters addressed to the man, and some aren't epistles but are texts by/addressed/about him. But

Just a quick rundown of those I noted down (I think its all of them): Epistle to the Alexandrians, Acts of Peter and Paul, Apocalypse of Paul, Epistle of the Corinthians to Paul, Third Epistle to the Corinthians, Epistle to the Laodiceans, Acts of Paul and Thecla, Coptic Apocalypse of Paul, Prayer of the Apostle Paul, Epistle to Seneca the Younger.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

No I liked the approach to women he had in his additional texts. I was talking about that he thought the world was going to end in his immediate lifetime because he was told this by Jesus. If you haven't read them have a look they paint a far more interesting story, one that doesn't exactly preach the same thing that is found in the Christian bible.

I'm not familiar with Paul's additional texts. What are they?

They aren't exactly accepted by most biblical scholars but are by a lot (usually the left leaning ones) so take that as you will but they do have mainstream acceptance, maybe they are bullshit maybe not but they exist and when only 7 out of 14 of Pauls epistles are undisputed its worth looking at the others as they have about equal relevance, and some are letters addressed to the man, and some aren't epistles but are texts by/addressed/about him. But

Just a quick rundown of those I noted down (I think its all of them): Epistle to the Alexandrians, Acts of Peter and Paul, Apocalypse of Paul, Epistle of the Corinthians to Paul, Third Epistle to the Corinthians, Epistle to the Laodiceans, Acts of Paul and Thecla, Coptic Apocalypse of Paul, Prayer of the Apostle Paul, Epistle to Seneca the Younger.

These I'm familiar with, but they are all spurious and pseudepigraphical.  I thought you had discovered some actual writings.  The 7 undisputed ones in the NT are enough to understand what the actual historical Paul thought.

[Crow]

These I'm familiar with, but they are all spurious and pseudepigraphical.  I thought you had discovered some actual writings.  The 7 undisputed ones in the NT are enough to understand what the actual historical Paul thought.

Then do you not put any weight with First and Second Timothy, Titus, Ephesians, Colossians, Second Thessalonians. As they are all also considered to be pseudepigraphic and spurious by the mainstream. Many of those I mentioned in the prior post are part of the New Testament Apocrypha so they certainly had enough weight to be properly considered, again they are accepted by the mainstream scholars and is quite a large following (mainstream followers for clarification) that think the texts aren't pseudepigraphic or fakes it's not like Hebrews where nearly all scholars are in agreement that it wasn't the works of Paul. To outright deny the possibilities that they may be of genuine authorship unless you happen to be a scholar and done extensive studies is a bit arrogant don't you think? My opinion of Paul the Apostle isn't made up just from those texts but rather they ferment my opinion that was developed from the texts featured in the NT, I think he was either crazy or a liar, mainly crazy as he went too far for a liar in my opinion but its still a possibility.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

These I'm familiar with, but they are all spurious and pseudepigraphical.  I thought you had discovered some actual writings.  The 7 undisputed ones in the NT are enough to understand what the actual historical Paul thought.

Then do you not put any weight with First and Second Timothy, Titus, Ephesians, Colossians, Second Thessalonians. As they are all also considered to be pseudepigraphic and spurious by the mainstream. Many of those I mentioned in the prior post are part of the New Testament Apocrypha so they certainly had enough weight to be properly considered, again they are accepted by the mainstream scholars and is quite a large following (mainstream followers for clarification) that think the texts aren't pseudepigraphic or fakes it's not like Hebrews where nearly all scholars are in agreement that it wasn't the works of Paul. To outright deny the possibilities that they may be of genuine authorship unless you happen to be a scholar and done extensive studies is a bit arrogant don't you think? My opinion of Paul the Apostle isn't made up just from those texts but rather they ferment my opinion that was developed from the texts featured in the NT, I think he was either crazy or a liar, mainly crazy as he went too far for a liar in my opinion but its still a possibility.

Appeals to authority ("scholars") aren't very persuasive, as biblical scholars are a dime a dozen.  I have a Master of Divinity degree, for what it's worth (not much), so I've studied the texts in their original language and the history.  I'm fine with just accepting the 7 undisputed works of Paul and calling it a day.  The ones you are rely on are not Pauline.

[Crow]

Appeals to authority ("scholars") aren't very persuasive, as biblical scholars are a dime a dozen.  I have a Master of Divinity degree, for what it's worth (not much), so I've studied the texts in their original language and the history.  I'm fine with just accepting the 7 undisputed works of Paul and calling it a day.  The ones you are rely on are not Pauline.

Fair enough.

[OldGit]

Genuine fantasies by Paul.  Fantasies by other people pretending to be Paul.   Fantasies by other people who didn't pretend to be Paul, but pretended the fantasies were by Paul.  Fantasies which didn't claim to be by Paul, but which later people thought were by Paul.  Fantasies by other people who really were called Paul.

Biblical scholarship may in time dig up even more categories.