Why God Refuses to answer some people prayers.

[ScotSites]

As I said elsewhere Binah... why don't you peddle your fairy tales somewhere else!

[Celyn]

Originally Posted by Binah

Why God Refuses to answer some people prayers.?
Because some (most of) people don't ask properly!!!

All right, now, let us please get this straight. About

"Because some (most of) people don't ask properly!!!"

are you saying, then, Binah, that people would not die of cancer or heart disease, or anything, and that they, or their nearest and dearest, would not die in car crashes, in floods, or, in countries less fortunate (or less exploited?) than this one, would not die young of malnutrition or starvation? Or bombs and guns, too. Little details like that, you know. No Holocaust, no Hiroshima, no plague, no Black Death, no starvation, no wars of religions, no killing of supposed "witches" and of "heretics" , no, nothing at all, if only people do what you tell them and "ask properly!!!" (Asking with excessive use of exclamation marks will put you in the bad books when I rule the world, I can tell you. )

Obviously all such things can be averted as long as you do what Binah says, and "ask properly". That would sort out other tiny wee details like AIDS too, would it? When the preachers of gods in Africa declaim against the use of condoms, thus causing death to many many people?

And, to return to my earlier post, upon which, Binah, I note that you have not bothered to comment, are you now telling us that the child Madeline Neumann would actually have lived if only her parents had asked their god "properly"? Well, well, if only they had prayed to "Binah" instead, as you so obviously know better than everyone.

No, they did not telephone a doctor, but they did ever so helpfully get in touch with other people to help them pray. So they did NOT fail to notice that their young child was ill, but they DID choose not to do anything useful like get the child to a doctor or a hospital.

They KNEW their young daughter was ill but CHOSE not to bother with a doctor or a hospital. You know, ways that could have actually helped. Nothing whatsoever to stop them getting proper medical attention for the poor child and ALSO praying, if it made them happy, but no. Hmmm. Lovely of them, wasn't it?

And it is clear that these people had no problem with the whole "modern technology" thing: they are happy enough with the internet, and I would hazard a guess that they are happy to use a car, and so on.

This is NOT the only case in recent years of a child being killed because of a mad superstition: it just happened to be an extremely recent example. The very recent new-worthy nature of it made me think that perhaps Binah would have noticed it and would have bothered to formulate a response, but it seems not.

Oh, and any response from Binah, I should rather prefer it to be in a vaguely comprehensible form please.

Really, I'm sure I enjoy a game of Scrabble as much as the next person, but not when a message board post seems to be made from the lovely random nonsense of a bunch of Scrabble letters.

AND, importantly, Binah, that there is a forum here on this message board that is for discussion of philosophy and religion does NOT mean it is for Spamming anyone's own theory. It is for sensible discussion and for debate.

[kathyv]

Ignorance and neglect. This little girl didn't need to die this way. I can't believe the parents still have custody of the other children.

Don't lump these people into the pile of most believers, usually prayer is included with medical treatments, not instead of. It just makes me sick that people allow an unnecessary death to happen then use their 'belief' to cover their guilt, or call it God's will. . . I want to ask if it was God's will that they are so ignorant?


And binah, which 'group' do you place yourself in; the right askers or the wrong askers?

[kathyv]

A story in the weekend newspaper reported that a 15 month old baby has died in Portland, Or. because of bacterial pneumonia and infections. The parents would only pray and anoint the baby and were prevented, by counsel from their 'church', in seeking any other form of healing. This is absolutely sickening to me. Not only because the child was neglected to death, but because the religious representation called themselves Christan.

They are now being held for $2.5 mil. in bail. They luckily have no other children.

It's plain criminal neglect.

[aNonnyMoose]

Correct, Kathy. However, it's the cases like these which make those of us who do not subscribe to any of the strident faiths so suspicious, and likely to tar them all (and their subscribers) with the same brush. Using an invisible boogaloo as an excuse to avoid scientific fact is pre-medieval... but these are the same people who will shout "Kill the Unbeliever" and happily use modern weaponry to do so.

Hypocrites, all of them.

[Chrissie68]

Didn't ask properly..... what a load of bollox.

I am not defending these people - they did neglect the welfare of that poor girl and that alone resulted in her death. But when they were praying, they would have had absolute faith it was going to work.... They must've believed she would get well, however ignorant and backward that thinking is, they must have had faith. So how is that not asking properly? The trouble with religion is it has an answer for everything..... and always place the believer firmly in the wrong and sitting on the "guilty cushion" when it goes wrong.

The reason their prayer wasn't asnswered is simple.... they were talking to the bloody wall!