Pray away your diabetes- Ask me how

[Askthepizzaguy]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090521/...s_prayer_death

Comments on this article would be welcome. I'm biting my tongue.

"I just felt that, you know, my faith was being tested. I never went through an experience like that before in my life and I just thought, man, this is the ultimate test," she said. "We just started praying and praying and praying over her."

The interview occurred several hours after Madeline died. Her mother told the detective she believed her daughter would come back to life.

"It may be crazy to you but that's why I'm not crying and wailing right now," Neumann said.

She also said her husband briefly considered getting their daughter to a doctor. "I said, `No, the Lord's going to heal her.' I believed that God was going to just restore our daughter," she said.

Faith can hurt. Sometimes a little bit of healthy doubt is needed.

[Vuk]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090521/...s_prayer_death

Comments on this article would be welcome. I'm biting my tongue.





Faith can hurt. Sometimes a little bit of healthy doubt is needed.

I wouldn't say that this is a fair reflection on faith so much as two people's stupidity. Tell me where in the Bible does Christianity endorse such stupidity? This ain't a matter of faith, but one of stupidity. How many people die in Africa each year because of stupid medicine rituals that they beleive in?

[Sigurd]

An eye-opener for the Neumanns surely. I don't think many of the 35 000 denominations in the Christian faith do actually teach that you shouldn't involve medical doctors. There are probably a few, but the members should think again if or when stories like this happens. Any follow up story on this one?
Do the Neumanns now believe getting their daughter to a doctor was what they should have done?

[Vuk]

An eye-opener for the Neumanns surely. I don't think many of the 35 000 denominations in the Christian faith do actually teach that you shouldn't involve medical doctors. There are probably a few, but the members should think again if or when stories like this happens. Any follow up story on this one?
Do the Neumanns now believe getting their daughter to a doctor was what they should have done?

I think that they should have paid a little attention to the part that says "God helps them who help themselves". Why on earth is God going to help you or your daughter when YOU do not even think your/your daughter's life is worth getting you or her to the hospital? If you do not make an effort to save your own/your daughter's life, why should God make an effort?

[Gregoshi]

...If you do not make an effort to save your own/your daughter's life, why should God make an effort?

Because being saved by God is way cooler than being saved by a doctor.

[Rhyfelwyr]

God doesn't intervene in the world much nowadays because this is the time where everybody will mock Christians and the scripture and things are happening just like in Revelation.

There I said it.

[Beskar]

I wouldn't say that this is a fair reflection on faith so much as two people's stupidity. Tell me where in the Bible does Christianity endorse such stupidity? This ain't a matter of faith, but one of stupidity. How many people die in Africa each year because of stupid medicine rituals that they beleive in?

There is also many people dying of AIDS because catholic church is preaching them there that condoms are evil.

[Vuk]

Okay... if you're praying for god to cure you're diabetes, instead of taking your insulin, then god will kill you. For your stupidity.

No, He has already 'saved you' by giving you what you need to survive. It is your choice whether to accept it or not. I wouldn't expect Him to come down and spit in your eye and say "You no longer have diabetes!".

There is also many people dying of AIDS because catholic church is preaching them there that condoms are evil.

The Roman Catholic Church is a human institution. Where in the Bible does it say "Thou shalt not use condoms"?

[Rhyfelwyr]

I was just replying to IA's not very nice point that 'religious nuts' would be erased from the gene pool.

[rory_20_uk]

A contestant for this year's Darwin Award

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

There is also many people dying of AIDS because catholic church is preaching them there that condoms are evil.

Making that statement requires an incredible leap of logic, as demonstrated in the last thread on the matter.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Faith can hurt. Sometimes a little bit of healthy doubt is needed.

Simply wrong for this event. They were going against the teachings of the Bible:

"It is also written: Do not put the Lord your God to the test." Matthew 4:7

CR

[Askthepizzaguy]

Simply wrong for this event. They were going against the teachings of the Bible:

CR

It doesn't matter to me what the Bible says, it's not about religion, the question isn't about whether it's better to believe in something or not... religion or no religion should not, in either case, cause stupidity within people or irrationality in judgment. FAITH is the issue, not religion. The Bible could teach one plus one equals five and it still wouldn't cause people to basically kill their children because they believe that God will heal them, even though he clearly will not. That requires faith.

The difference being, I can believe in God (or disbelieve in God), but if I have faith that he will do something (or that I can do something); some wacky idea that I came up with by myself, that is taking a leap of faith. Religion involves a set of beliefs, usually involving those not supported by evidence and also involving the supernatural (if there is such a thing), but that's not always the case. Faith is unwavering belief in spite of evidence, or with a lack of evidence, in something. Whatever that thing is; be it religious theory or scientific theory or political theory, or any other kind of theory; and the belief is unquestioning. Unquestioning belief, ("blind faith") is dangerous and this is why. Because if you never question your beliefs then you might as well disconnect your brain because you've rendered it useless.

Blind faith also appears to be redundant, because what is faith unless it is blind to facts and deaf to evidence? Faith requires no evidence and it also requires one to sometimes ignore evidence. Hence the entire Faith versus Reason debate I had earlier with Rhyfelwyr, where I exhaustively demonstrated using example and logic and by definition, how dangerous faith is and how different it is from belief and from religion. Faith does not need to be religious, and it doesn't just mean belief. It means unwavering belief, stubborn belief, irrational belief, extreme belief. That's why we have to define certain things as faith, because we ALL have opinions and beliefs of some kind, and what differentiates rational opinions which can be altered or reasoned with and stubborn opinions which can never be altered, is faith, which opposes reason.

Acting on faith is almost by definition acting without reason or against reason. And what happens is people get hurt or they die when they ignore their own common sense. Acting on faith is dangerous. That's even intuitively obvious, because what is faith without risking being wrong? If we risk nothing by taking a leap of faith, then why is it so courageous (or stupid)?

[Strike For The South]

It doesn't matter to me what the Bible says, it's not about religion, the question isn't about whether it's better to believe in something or not... religion or no religion should not, in either case, cause stupidity within people or irrationality in judgment. FAITH is the issue, not religion. The Bible could teach one plus one equals five and it still wouldn't cause people to basically kill their children because they believe that God will heal them, even though he clearly will not. That requires faith.

The difference being, I can believe in God (or disbelieve in God), but if I have faith that he will do something (or that I can do something); some wacky idea that I came up with by myself, that is taking a leap of faith. Religion involves a set of beliefs, usually involving those not supported by evidence and also involving the supernatural (if there is such a thing), but that's not always the case. Faith is unwavering belief in spite of evidence, or with a lack of evidence, in something. Whatever that thing is; be it religious theory or scientific theory or political theory, or any other kind of theory; and the belief is unquestioning. Unquestioning belief, ("blind faith") is dangerous and this is why. Because if you never question your beliefs then you might as well disconnect your brain because you've rendered it useless.

Blind faith also appears to be redundant, because what is faith unless it is blind to facts and deaf to evidence? Faith requires no evidence and it also requires one to sometimes ignore evidence. Hence the entire Faith versus Reason debate I had earlier with Rhyfelwyr, where I exhaustively demonstrated using example and logic and by definition, how dangerous faith is and how different it is from belief and from religion. Faith does not need to be religious, and it doesn't just mean belief. It means unwavering belief, stubborn belief, irrational belief, extreme belief. That's why we have to define certain things as faith, because we ALL have opinions and beliefs of some kind, and what differentiates rational opinions which can be altered or reasoned with and stubborn opinions which can never be altered, is faith, which opposes reason.

Acting on faith is almost by definition acting without reason or against reason. And what happens is people get hurt or they die when they ignore their own common sense. Acting on faith is dangerous. That's even intuitively obvious, because what is faith without risking being wrong? If we risk nothing by taking a leap of faith, then why is it so courageous (or stupid)?

Everytime I want to debate you, you make these posts and I get lazy.


...GO JESUS!

[Crazed Rabbit]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It doesn't matter to me what the Bible says, it's not about religion, the question isn't about whether it's better to believe in something or not... religion or no religion should not, in either case, cause stupidity within people or irrationality in judgment. FAITH is the issue, not religion. The Bible could teach one plus one equals five and it still wouldn't cause people to basically kill their children because they believe that God will heal them, even though he clearly will not. That requires faith.

The difference being, I can believe in God (or disbelieve in God), but if I have faith that he will do something (or that I can do something); some wacky idea that I came up with by myself, that is taking a leap of faith. Religion involves a set of beliefs, usually involving those not supported by evidence and also involving the supernatural (if there is such a thing), but that's not always the case. Faith is unwavering belief in spite of evidence, or with a lack of evidence, in something. Whatever that thing is; be it religious theory or scientific theory or political theory, or any other kind of theory; and the belief is unquestioning. Unquestioning belief, ("blind faith") is dangerous and this is why. Because if you never question your beliefs then you might as well disconnect your brain because you've rendered it useless.

Blind faith also appears to be redundant, because what is faith unless it is blind to facts and deaf to evidence? Faith requires no evidence and it also requires one to sometimes ignore evidence. Hence the entire Faith versus Reason debate I had earlier with Rhyfelwyr, where I exhaustively demonstrated using example and logic and by definition, how dangerous faith is and how different it is from belief and from religion. Faith does not need to be religious, and it doesn't just mean belief. It means unwavering belief, stubborn belief, irrational belief, extreme belief. That's why we have to define certain things as faith, because we ALL have opinions and beliefs of some kind, and what differentiates rational opinions which can be altered or reasoned with and stubborn opinions which can never be altered, is faith, which opposes reason.

Acting on faith is almost by definition acting without reason or against reason. And what happens is people get hurt or they die when they ignore their own common sense. Acting on faith is dangerous. That's even intuitively obvious, because what is faith without risking being wrong? If we risk nothing by taking a leap of faith, then why is it so courageous (or stupid)?

Yawn. So you spent 500 words or so saying blind faith is stupid, using extreme definitions of faith.

And what the Bible says doesn't matter? Please - you started this as another one of your petulant attacks on Christianity. If these people had faith in the Bible, and believed in the Bible and Christianity, they would have known not to put the Lord to the test.

In short, you're using idiots to argue against having faith.

CR

[Seamus Fermanagh]

It doesn't matter to me what the Bible says, it's not about religion, the question isn't about whether it's better to believe in something or not... religion or no religion should not, in either case, cause stupidity within people or irrationality in judgment. FAITH is the issue, not religion. The Bible could teach one plus one equals five and it still wouldn't cause people to basically kill their children because they believe that God will heal them, even though he clearly will not. That requires faith.

The difference being, I can believe in God (or disbelieve in God), but if I have faith that he will do something (or that I can do something); some wacky idea that I came up with by myself, that is taking a leap of faith. Religion involves a set of beliefs, usually involving those not supported by evidence and also involving the supernatural (if there is such a thing), but that's not always the case. Faith is unwavering belief in spite of evidence, or with a lack of evidence, in something. Whatever that thing is; be it religious theory or scientific theory or political theory, or any other kind of theory; and the belief is unquestioning. Unquestioning belief, ("blind faith") is dangerous and this is why. Because if you never question your beliefs then you might as well disconnect your brain because you've rendered it useless.

Blind faith also appears to be redundant, because what is faith unless it is blind to facts and deaf to evidence? Faith requires no evidence and it also requires one to sometimes ignore evidence. Hence the entire Faith versus Reason debate I had earlier with Rhyfelwyr, where I exhaustively demonstrated using example and logic and by definition, how dangerous faith is and how different it is from belief and from religion. Faith does not need to be religious, and it doesn't just mean belief. It means unwavering belief, stubborn belief, irrational belief, extreme belief. That's why we have to define certain things as faith, because we ALL have opinions and beliefs of some kind, and what differentiates rational opinions which can be altered or reasoned with and stubborn opinions which can never be altered, is faith, which opposes reason.

Acting on faith is almost by definition acting without reason or against reason. And what happens is people get hurt or they die when they ignore their own common sense. Acting on faith is dangerous. That's even intuitively obvious, because what is faith without risking being wrong? If we risk nothing by taking a leap of faith, then why is it so courageous (or stupid)?

You appear to be setting up a thesis-antithesis using "faith" and "reason" as the key terms. This is a false dichotomy, as faith is neither a good synonym for unreasoning or irrational (even when you modify the term as "unwavering"), nor does faith -- even a profoundly stubborn faith -- preclude reason (A point better argued by Aquinas than by me).