SOUL and SUBSTANCE: Answers to Prayer

Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this blog is four-fold:
(1) to recognize that every person functions within a basic paradigm, which affects how all information is processed;
(2) to understand the paradigms of others;
(3) to discuss, in particular, paradigms which are related to science, religion, and philosophy.
(4) to reveal the paradigm shifts in my own life, a process that has completely changed the direction and purpose of my existence.

The purpose of this blog is NOT to convince anyone that their paradigms or beliefs are correct or incorrect. I am hoping for an honest dialog, but the discussions must remain respectful of others, even if there is profound disagreement. If any comments are not respectful, they will be removed.
(Revised 1/13/09)

Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Answers to Prayer

One of the cornerstones of the Christian faith is the strong belief that God answers prayer. Although there is abundant evidence in the Bible that God has always answered prayers of the faithful, modern Christians also believe in the efficacy of prayer.

Confess your trespasses to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much. James 5:16 [NKJV]

What many fail to realize is that an anwer to prayer can be "No," or "Not now," in addition to "Yes." The absence of quick results can make it easy to get discouraged.

Why do I bring this up now, in this forum?--Because I am curious to hear how those in non-Christian religions view prayer. I would like to hear about the experiences of others.

12 comments:

Alexander M Zoltai said...: I was raised by two Christian ministers, mom and dad, and had my two sisters become clergy, as well.

After much struggle and search, I bacame a Baha'i.

One of my absolute favorite quotes is from one of our prayers:

"Reveal then Thyself, O Lord, by Thy merciful utterance and the mystery of Thy divine being, that the holy ecstasy of prayer may fill our souls -- a prayer that shall rise above words and letters and transcend the murmur of syllables and sounds -- that all things may be merged into nothingness before the revelation of Thy splendor."

Compilations, Baha'i Prayers, p. 69

~ Alex; May 6, 2008 at 8:13 PM
LucyS said...: Thank you for your contribution. I was wondering if you could share some personal experience with answers to prayer.; May 6, 2008 at 10:25 PM
Alexander M Zoltai said...: As far as "answers" to prayer, I've found that it takes a "season" of prayer for me to notice "answers" and they are slow in coming...; May 6, 2008 at 11:16 PM
Alexander said...: I'm with you on this one...if I have not received a yes or a no, I am reminded to pray without ceasing.

Prayer is a conversation with God. More than likely, not audible, sometimes quiet, sometimes loud and clear, and sometimes the "maybe" answer comes.

It is not about rubbing a bottle for a genie and getting our wishes.

Mostly, we pray for God's will in our lives...and hold on to our hats! :); May 6, 2008 at 11:27 PM
Sufi said...: It is the same concept in Quran as well. Actually, let me quote you directly from the post I had made on my SufiSpot.com blog.

Truly, those who have faith (in this Quran), as well as those who follow the Jewish (faith) and the Christians and the Sabians -- all who believe in God (Allah) and the Last Day, and do righteous deeds, shall have their reward with their Sustainer; they need have no fear , neither shall they grieve. (2:62)

Its in Islamic faith as well that God listens to every prayer, although, we might not understand what is good for us right away but if you notice, it all works out in the end. Just have faith. God is there, listening to every prayer. Good always comes from Prayers. Here and Life afterwards.; May 7, 2008 at 12:31 AM
LucyS said...: I would like to share a personal experience with answered prayer. A couple of years ago, my husband and I were driving home one night from a friend's house, about 80 miles away, along the PA Turnpike. Just after we had gotten on the T'pike, the car started to overheat, so we pulled over and my husband determined that there was a problem with the thermostat. He waited for the car to cool down enough to drive and then headed to a service area, which was fairly close. By this time, it was overheating again, so we let the car cool off for a half-hour, during which time I was quietly praying for God to send someone to help us with the car. I did not know how we were going to get home if we had to stop to let the car cool down every time it ran for more than 10 minutes. Anyway, we got back on the road to try again. Sure enough, within 10 minutes, the car was overheating again, so he pulled onto the shoulder to let it cool off. After it cooled, we decided to get off at the next exit and just hope that there would be a service station near the exit. My heart sank when the exit turned out to be in a very rural area with few signs of life and it was already quite dark. After a couple of miles on a winding, rural road, with absolutely no shoulder to pull onto if we needed, we arrived in a small town and, right in the center, was a well-lit Sunoco station with a large parking area under the lights. My husband got out and opened the hood, to see if there was any way he could get the thermostat to function enough for us to get home. In the mean time, I again started to pray that God would send someone to help. Almost immediately, a man walked into the Sunoco station from the street, went directly to my husband, and started talking to him. This man lived across the street and had come over to see if we needed any help. He had a garage where he worked on his own cars and offered to help us fix ours. After working for an hour, they finally got the thermostat to function and we were able to drive home without incident.; May 8, 2008 at 4:56 AM
Anonymous said...: I really like this question and your openness to other beliefs and religions is very heartening...and touching. The world needs open minds and hearts, now more than ever. Bless you for that. I am proud of you. It allows me to "be" here in this space with you.

My church would be wild and remote Nature. Quiet still time alone in Nature, talking "with" nature and more importantly listening to the collective voice of Nature(and sometimes the individual voices such as a particular tree or plant or animal...or water or sky). It's not that Nature is my God; it's that I hear the voice of my creator, of love, of the divine more clearly through and with Nature. I find the clearest reflection of my deepest soul in Nature. Nature sought me out and spoke to me. I learned to listen.

As to my prayers being answered, I guess they always are because my deepest need is to be loved. I don't just mean by friends and family...that too (that is a precious gift). What I really mean is that no matter the condition or challenging events of my life....what is vitally important or necessary for me (to feel that my prayers are answered) is to feel that I am "in love" in the literal sense. By that I mean that I exist in a state of love, that I feel love coming into me and back out of me, and even around me everyday. I find that the more I give thanks for EVERY SINGLE THING, the more I forgive myself for my human failings the more I am loved and "in love". And I don't write this from a place of someone who has not known deep suffering. I have. For me prayer is not only active and sometimes directed toward a specific need or outcome, but it is MUCH more a state of being in love "with" the Divine, the mystery, the eternal, the unknown, the creator, all of life. It's a letting go and trusting that there is something more, something that loves me so deeply that it is moved by even a single tear.

Thank you for inspiring me.
RainforestRobin
www.nakedineden.com; May 9, 2008 at 12:24 PM
LucyS said...: Thanks, Robin. What you said reminds me, somehow, of one of my favorite scripture passages:
For the LORD does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart. [1 Samuel 16:7b]
-Thank you.; May 9, 2008 at 1:23 PM
IJ Hanna Lucky said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM
IJ Hanna Lucky said...: Hi, great post, the whole of my life is an answered prayer.that am alive today is an answered Prayer, I have experienced answers to Prayer most times in my prayer life like you rightly put most times in life when you pray God answers in His own time.
sometimes immediately, somtimes later all that matters is, are you ready to wait for God to answer you?

thanks for the post.

BTW you can visit my blog and see the posts on prayer/testimonies/healing for you to know why I said my life is about prayer and God answers to them.

Godbless you in Jesus Mighty Name AMen.; May 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Anonymous said...: "What many fail to realize is that an anwer to prayer can be "No,""

Amen!

Anyways, quick prayer story:
After Hurricane Katrina, I went with a group from my church to New Orleans to do relief work. We helped some pastor from I believe Iowa to set up a tent to distribute food and clothes. Someone from our church warned that the heat was going to spoil some supplies we just got. Os this pastor grabbed me and another guy and said, "we need to find some ice"
This old coot had no idea what he was doing. We got so lost, almost ran out of gas. All the while he is muttering stuff like he is whining to God about ice and gas and all sorts of stuff. Like we weren't even in the car.

Suddenly we took a wrong turn down this road and ended up on a dock met by two big guys with shotguns. They asked if they could "help" us in this "what the heck are you guys doing here" kind of tone. This crazy old coot of a pastor piped up and said "Yeah, you could give us some ice".

It seemed a little tense for a couple minutes and one of them walked away. He came back with a pallet stacked 5 feet tall full of bagged ice. Then they gave us some gas. No questions asked. The old coot said "Thank you" and we took off to aimlessly search for our camp.; June 12, 2008 at 6:15 PM
LucyS said...: What a great story. Hearing about this old pastor reminds me of something I have always found interesting about many of the "Bible heroes." They took their complaints (whining, if you will) directly to God and God honored their honesty. Take a look at Elijah (see 1 Kings 19). He had just showed the 300 prophets of Baal how powerful the God of Israel was by calling down fire from heaven. Then the queen (Jezebel) threatens his life and he goes running into the wilderness, like a scared rabbit; exhausts himself; and then goes whining to God that God won't even stand up for Himself and that he (Elijah) is the only one left who cares. Does God chastise him for his self-righteous arrogance?--No-- He just sends an angel to give Elijah something to eat. I think that's pretty neat.; June 12, 2008 at 9:01 PM

What is Occam's Razor?

(1) Occam's razor (sometimes spelled Ockham's razor) is a principle attributed to the 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae ("law of parsimony" or "law of succinctness"): "entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem", or "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity".

This is often paraphrased as "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best." In other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood.

Originally a tenet of the reductionist philosophy of nominalism, it is more often taken today as a heuristic maxim (rule of thumb) that advises economy, parsimony, or simplicity, often or especially in scientific theories.

[From Wikepedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor]

(2) Okham's RazorSharon Kaye
There are so many interesting theories about the nature of reality. How do we decide which to accept and which to reject? As we go through life, we examine new ideas and reexamine old ones in an attempt to establish a suitable collection of beliefs. Sometimes this process feels like walking through the a la carte line in a cafeteria where you can pick and choose any combination you want. Just as a smart eater will use healthy principles to make these choices, a smart thinker will use epistemic principles to evaluate beliefs.
Ockham’s Razor is one of the most important epistemic principles. It states that if you have to choose from some number of competing theories, choose the simplest theory because it is most likely to be true.
Suppose, for example, that the newspaper, which is delivered daily to your doorstep, is missing this morning. There are a number of possible explanations. The delivery person could be ill, the newspaper plant may have shut down, or outer space aliens may have stolen it for the purpose of spying on Earthlings. The obvious choice among these three possibilities is the first. The second and third choices seem increasingly unacceptable. But why? If the choice is mine, what is there to prevent me from accepting the alien theory?
The answer is that the alien theory is too complicated. The illness theory requires me to believe in the presence of a virus, something I already believe in for other reasons. The alien theory, in contrast, requires me to believe in something that I have no other reason to acknowledge. This is to say that the alien theory asks me to adopt more assumptions than does the illness theory.
One might still wonder why added assumptions constitute a problem. After all, it is not as though we are short on brain space. My interest in creativity and originality might lead me to take pride in developing a more complicated theory.
But this would be a mistake. Complication is not something to take pride in because it necessarily increases the risk of error. Each and every belief is a liability insofar as it carries the possibility that it may not be true. The more assumptions you adopt, therefore, the more likely it is that you have unknowingly committed yourself to a falsehood. Falsehood is the great enemy of intelligence. To live intelligently, we must minimize the risk of error as much as we can.
Ockham’s Razor does not state that the world is maximally simple. Clearly, the world is not simple. The world is so complex that it would not be entirely surprising if it turns out that outer space aliens do exist. The point is that we should not move to that conclusion until the evidence forces us there – until we are not able to explain what we observe in a simpler way.
Philosophers have used the Razor in many different ways. Sometimes they use it to defend traditional views. The great twentieth-century philosopher Bertrand Russell appeals to the Razor in his refutation of idealism, the view that the external world does not exist. Russell writes:
Thus every principle of simplicity urges us to adopt the natural view, that there really are objects other than ourselves and our sense-data which have an existence not dependent upon our perceiving them. . . . Since this belief does not lead to any difficulties but on the contrary tends to simplify and systematize our account of our experiences, there seems no good reason for rejecting it. (The Problems of Philosophy, Oxford University Press, 1968, p. 24.)
On the other hand, philosophers have also used the Razor to attack traditional views. For example, atheists increasingly use it against theism. If we can now explain everything about the world that there is to be explained in purely natural terms, then there is no need for the supernatural assumption. Sure, you can still add it if you want, but it is no longer an intelligent choice.
As this last example suggests, there is room for disagreement over the use of Ockham’s Razor. After all, positing an extra entity can actually simplify a theory. (Imagine trying to do physics without the electron.) Richard Swinburne argues that the God hypothesis performs a similar function. Like any philosophical tool, the Razor is itself controversial, raising some interesting epistemological questions.
One question about the Razor that is rarely asked, however, is this: why is it called a Razor? When I ask my students this question, they often answer that it is called a Razor because it trims the fat. It is true that trimming the fat is an apt metaphor for what the principle of simplicity accomplishes insofar as it signifies getting to the "meat of the matter," the essentials. But who uses a razor for trimming fat? Ask any butcher and you will learn that there are plenty of other more effective tools for such a procedure.
Ockham’s Razor is named after the fourteenth-century logician, William of Ockham. Although he did not invent the principle of simplicity, he used it so effectively and with such devastating effect, that it became indelibly associated with him. Did they use razors for trimming fat back in the Middle Ages?
Of course not. The primary use for the razor in the Middle Ages was the same as it is today: shaving. The problem is that, unlike trimming fat, shaving is not an apt metaphor for what the principle of simplicity accomplishes. Setting aside certain medical contexts, shaving is a cosmetic procedure. We shave to beautify ourselves, not to simplify ourselves. In fact, one could argue that shaving makes personal hygiene considerably more complicated. Nor do we shave to get down to the essentials as though a bald man is somehow more authentic than a hirsute. Shaving is a matter of personal preference. If the epistemic principle in question were about personal preference, then it should have been named the ‘principle of prettiness’. Granted, ‘elegance’ has long been regarded as a desirable quality in theories, and elegance is closely related to simplicity. But since when is hair inelegant? Just what were they thinking when they named Ockham’s Razor?
My own personal theory is that they were thinking about another use of the razor during the Middle Ages. At the end of the fourteenth century, paper was only just being introduced in Europe as a common writing material. Before then, everything was written on parchment, which is made from animal skins. The picture below features a typical medieval scribe:
Notice the tools he holds. In his right hand is a quill for applying ink. In his left hand is a razor. He uses the razor to scrape the parchment clean when he makes an error. His razor is an eraser.
I believe that we would all do well to be more conscious of the principle of simplicity. It is not a matter of personal preference; it is a matter of accuracy. Ockham’s Razor is the way to keep your mind neat and clean.
(Sharon Kaye is assistant professor in philosophy at John Carroll University Cleveland, Ohio)

[From Royal Institute of Philosophy: http://www.royalinstitutephilosophy.org/think/article.php?num=18)

GLOSSARY OF PHILOSOPHICAL TERMS

A list of USEFUL TERMS, from the University of Aberdeen, Philosophy, School of Philosophy, and Religious Studies, Old Brewery • High Street • Aberdeen • AB24 3UB http://www.abdn.ac.uk/philosophy/guide/glossary.shtml
DETERMINISM The theory that whatever happens (including human acts) is caused by something else. Physical Determinism maintains that the ‘something else’ is a physical entity or event; Psychological Determinism maintains that the cause (at least, the immediate cause) of a human act is a psychological or mental entity or event (e.g. a desire, a decision).
EMPIRICISM The doctrine that knowledge comes from experience.
EPISTEMOLOGY The branch of philosophy that involves the study of knowledge.
ETHICS The branch of philosophy that deals with moral issues. Key questions in ethics include: What is it right (or wrong) to do? Do the intentions behind an action determine its goodness or does the actual outcome of the action matter more? Are there any universal ethical rules?
FIDEISM Holds that religious beliefs can not be justified by rational means, but only through faith.
LOGIC The branch of philosophy that deals with the formal properties of arguments and the philosophical problems associated with them. Central questions in logic include: What is a good argument? How can we work out if an argument is good or not? What are paradoxes? Can they be resolved? How can we talk meaningfully about objects that don’t exist e.g. Sherlock Holmes, or unicorns?
METAPHYSICS The branch of philosophy which studies the underlying structure of reality. Central questions in metaphysics include: Can we act freely? What is it for something to exist? How are causes related to their effects? What is time? What is space? How is change possible?
NATURAL THEOLOGY Knowledge of God which is obtained by reason alone, without the aid of revelation.
ONTOLOGY The branch of METAPHYSICS which studies the nature of existence. Central questions include: What kinds of objects exist? What is it for something to exist?
PHILOSOPHY OF MIND The branch of philosophy which studies the nature of the mind. Central questions in the philosophy of mind include: Is it possible for a machine to think? How is the mind related to the brain? Do animals have minds? How can I know that anyone else has a mind? (This last one is sometimes called the problem of other minds.)
PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION The branch of philosophy which discusses the nature and existence of God. Central questions include: Does God exist? What sort of evidence could justify belief in God? If there is a God, why is there so much suffering in the world? Is there life after death? Do we have souls? How could we know anything about God?
PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE The branch of philosophy which analyses the nature and results of scientific inquiry. Central questions include: Do scientist describe reality or just appearances? Can we have good reason to believe in the existence of unobservable entities (e.g. quarks)? What happens when one scientific theory replaces an older theory?
POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY The branch of philosophy that discusses freedom, justice, rights, democracy and other political issues. Central questions include: Is democracy the best form of government? How can we balance rights and responsibilities?
RATIONALISM The doctrine that genuine knowledge, or at least the most significant kind of knowledge, is not established by sense-experience, or at least not by sense-experience alone.... Contrast EMPIRICISM
SOLIPSISM A form of SCEPTICISM. Solipsism is the belief that nothing exists except my mind and the creations of my mind.
THEODICY An argument which tries to explain how a good and all-powerful God could create a world with suffering and evil in it.
UTILITARIANISM The doctrine that acts are right solely in so far as their consequences maximize the general happiness (in some versions: maximize the general pleasure; in some versions: maximize the general welfare). It is controversial whether the general happiness must be interpreted as the happiness of the majority.
VERIFICATION PRINCIPLE An account of meaningfulness which claims that all and only those sentences which can be empirically verified are meaningful.

SOUL and SUBSTANCE

PARADIGM

Statement of Purpose

Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Answers to Prayer

12 comments:

Blog Archive

About Me

ShareThis

Followers

My Other Blogs

An Inspiring Blog.......

BlogCatalog

FAVORITE SITES CONCERNING SCIENCE, RELIGION, AND PHILOSOPHY

Thought-Provoking Blogs

What is Occam's Razor?

GLOSSARY OF PHILOSOPHICAL TERMS