Jump to content

People who believe in god are broken


Recommended Posts

Huh?

 

You are confused.

I am arguing why the placebo effect is scientific AND an act of faith.

It is measurable and observable and repeatable.

 

Without the act of faith, nothing happens.

Then, there is nothing to measure.

Faith on the part of patient is a requirement.

 

What are you saying?

 

 

No, it is not faith, it is the brain being fooled into producing endorphin, faith has nothing to do with it. The patient might have faith in his doctor but it's faith in a lie in this instance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Your evidence is good, their evidence is bad. Of course you will find the comparison flawed.   We have evidence that makes belief in the big bang reasonable to you. Such evidence for belief in God i

The signal in the clouds was intercepted, and the moo was dispatched!   Anyways, so, anyone who wonders why I was dispatched, I happen to know hebrew/aramaic, and spent 12 years studying the origina

Everyone on this site believes in something. If you are broken for believing in God then you are broken for believing in anything else that could turn out to be untrue.   Anyone here believe in str

Posted Images

Mods? Will you please point out the rules to DrDNA here and demand some proof of his/her unsupportable assertion?

 

Dear Lord in heaven. Are you some kind of bureaucrat that gets his kicks drowning people in paperwork?!

wiki

 

You have already proven that you know what it is and confirm that it exists.

Dont you simply disagree that it is faith?

Well, I don't think many scientists us that terminology to describe it.

Maybe I eve made it up.

 

I have made a logical argument for faith being responsible for the placebo effect.

It stands on its own merits.

Shoot it down if you can.

Which you have not.

(but don't try to drown me in crap)

Edited by DrDNA
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am arguing why the placebo effect is scientific AND an act of faith.

It is measurable and observable and repeatable.

 

Without the act of faith, nothing happens.

Then, there is nothing to measure.

Faith on the part of patient is a requirement.

Someone else suggested it, but in the case of a doctor whose credentials and experience can be verified and measured, blind faith is not required for the placebo effect; the mechanism involved here is trust.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ moontanman #321

This is a follow-on from a number of posts discussing the idea and should be read with the previous posts in order to make sense.

 

The brain wash part is a little dramatic, I'm not much of a humanist but would give people more credit than what you are suggesting. People might be unwilling to question things but are not incapable of doing so.

 

 

Brain washing, indoctrination, potato/potatoe, the fact remains that we are awash in our own society and it's beliefs, as a child you no choice in the matter. As an adult you have more of a choice but it's more deciding to swim up stream in a strong current. It's damn difficult to undo the brain washing/indoctrination you get as a child...

 

I can absolutely remember believing in things like the easter bunny, tooth fairy and santa when I was a kid but adults admitted when i questioned the evidence of these things that they were not true but when I questioned religion I got my ass beat....

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it is not faith, it is the brain being fooled into producing endorphin, faith has nothing to do with it. The patient might have faith in his doctor but it's faith in a lie in this instance.

 

Endorphins? OK. Maybe in some cases.

But we are not just taking about pain control.

If endorphins cured everything, then I'd be a marathon runner for sure.

 

I know of no drug study for any ailment in which the placebo effect is not involved.

Maybe you do.

 

You have proven my point to some extent.

Thank you.

 

Faith in a possibility.

Faith in "something" that cannot be easily dismissed.

Not faith in a lie.

Just pure and simple faith.

 

In fact, in many cases, Christian patients have faith in God and pray to God, that the Holy Spirit will intervene and assist with the treatment.

 

But for the sake of this argument, i don't really have a preference who or what it is faith in.

 

I said that it is an act of faith that is observable, measurable and that works.

Edited by DrDNA
Link to post
Share on other sites

You have already proven that you know what it is and confirm that it exists.

No, I actually posted a link that refutes your claim. According to the rules of the forum you need to back up positive assertions. Blah blah blah doesn't get it. Now, let's see your evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone else suggested it, but in the case of a doctor whose credentials and experience can be verified and measured, blind faith is not required for the placebo effect; the mechanism involved here is trust.

 

Thank you for reenforcing my point.

""Faith is confidence or trust in a person or entity.[1][2] ""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for reenforcing my point.

""Faith is confidence or trust in a person or entity.[1][2] ""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith

 

 

You ask for prayer I'll ask for a doctor...

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html?pagewanted=all

 

Analyzing complications in the 30 days after the operations, the researchers found no differences between those patients who were prayed for and those who were not.

 

In another of the study's findings, a significantly higher number of the patients who knew that they were being prayed for — 59 percent — suffered complications, compared with 51 percent of those who were uncertain. The authors left open the possibility that this was a chance finding. But they said that being aware of the strangers' prayers also may have caused some of the patients a kind of performance anxiety.

 

"It may have made them uncertain, wondering am I so sick they had to call in their prayer team?" Dr. Bethea said.

 

The study also found that more patients in the uninformed prayer group — 18 percent — suffered major complications, like heart attack or stroke, compared with 13 percent in the group that did not receive prayers. In their report, the researchers suggested that this finding might also be a result of chance.

 

One reason the study was so widely anticipated was that it was led by Dr. Benson, who in his work has emphasized the soothing power of personal prayer and meditation.

 

At least one earlier study found lower complication rates in patients who received intercessory prayers; others found no difference. A 1997 study at the University of New Mexico, involving 40 alcoholics in rehabilitation, found that the men and women who knew they were being prayed for actually fared worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But for the sake of this argument, i don't really have a preference who or what it is faith in.

 

I said that it is an act of faith that is observable, measurable and that works.

But who or what it is "faith" in does matter. In the case of God, there is nothing empirical to go by. In the case of a doctor administering drugs made by a pharmaceutical company, their validity and efficacy can be checked by the patient. That takes it from the realm of faith to the realm of trust. You don't have to blindly "believe" in your doctor or his medication, you can check it out so you can trust it.

 

I make the distinction here, despite dictionary references, to point out the difference between religion and science, and our dependencies on both. Science can be verified and therefore trusted, while belief in a deity cannot and therefore must be believed in through the mechanism of faith.

 

And the fuller definition you cited includes, "Depending on the religion, faith is belief in a single god or multiple gods or in the doctrines or teachings of the religion. Informal usage of faith can be quite broad, including trust or belief without proof, and "faith" is often used as a substitute for "hope", "trust" or "belief".

Link to post
Share on other sites


That's different. Sure, faith has effects that can be measured. That's part of the problem many of us have with those who base their decisions on truth proposals based on faith. That, however, is not the same as saying that faith is good enough to support an affirmative believe in the existence of a deity.

 

Good post but as Christians, we believe that all we need is faith in Christ. And that really sums it up. All the rest is flutter to a born again Christian.

 

I am asserting that faith is real. It is observable. It is measurable.

Christ said this long before the placebo effect was known.

 

 

New Testament verses on Healing Faith.

 

Matthew 9:22 Jesus turned, and seeing her he said, “Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well.” And instantly the woman was made well.

 

Matthew 15:28 Then Jesus answered her, “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed instantly.

 

Matthew 21:21-22 And Jesus answered them, “Truly, I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and thrown into the sea,’ it will happen. And whatever you ask in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith.”

 

Mark 10:52 And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way.

 

Acts 14:9-10 He listened to Paul speaking. And Paul, looking intently at him and seeing that he had faith to be made well, said in a loud voice, “Stand upright on your feet.” And he sprang up and began walking.

 

 

And the fuller definition you cited includes, "Depending on the religion, faith is belief in a single god or multiple gods or in the doctrines or teachings of the religion. Informal usage of faith can be quite broad, including trust or belief without proof, and "faith" is often used as a substitute for "hope", "trust" or "belief".

 

What's your point?

 

You ask for prayer I'll ask for a doctor...

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html?pagewanted=all

 

I am familiar with you references.

However, that dagger in the heart is, there is no evidence that the patients themselves had any faith.

 

For example, if I have faith (or pray) that my loved one will stop drinking, it may or may not have an effect.

But it is certainly not the same as them having faith in themselves (or praying themselves); that they can stop drinking.

Edited by DrDNA
Link to post
Share on other sites

New Testament verses on Healing Faith.

 

Matthew 9:22 Jesus turned, and seeing her he said, “Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well.” And instantly the woman was made well.

 

Matthew 15:28 Then Jesus answered her, “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed instantly.

 

Matthew 21:21-22 And Jesus answered them, “Truly, I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and thrown into the sea,’ it will happen. And whatever you ask in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith.”

 

Mark 10:52 And Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way.

 

Acts 14:9-10 He listened to Paul speaking. And Paul, looking intently at him and seeing that he had faith to be made well, said in a loud voice, “Stand upright on your feet.” And he sprang up and began walking.

Please refrain from the attempt to proffer hearsay story books as evidence of anything,this is a science forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What's your point?

My point is there is a difference between blind belief in a deity that can't be observed, and objectively deciding that your doctor and the drugs he is giving you are going to be helpful. The former I would define as an act of FAITH, the latter an act of TRUST. I'm making a distinction that the two are N-O-T the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is there is a difference between blind belief in a deity that can't be observed,

I'm not referring to a 'diety'. This is a common mistake of many atheists, agnostics. Even many ' Christians'. A diety is not the proper description for the God of the Hebrews.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not referring to a 'diety'. This is a common mistake of many atheists, agnostics. Even many ' Christians'. A diety is not the proper description for the God of the Hebrews.

I think I'd like to nominate you as the thread mascot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good post but as Christians, we believe that all we need is faith in Christ. And that really sums it up.

Precisely, and that's essentially the issue into which this thread has delved. That is why the recommendation has been made that they are broken. Faith alone is not good enough, and yet they accept it as such.

 

 

I am asserting that faith is real. It is observable. It is measurable.

Good for you, but just like I said to TAR when he discussed the "concept" of god, I will say to you. Nobody here is challenging that something called faith exists, so your point is quite peripheral to the discussion. Your point is broken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the word "broken" is appropriate. It implies that a person was previously in an unbroken state. How many people are atheists until they become broken by believing in god?

 

I think more commonly a person, such as myself, was raised in a religious household and never thought much about it. After they became educated (especially by learning about how many different and conflicting religions there are) they began to question their beliefs. Even the word "believe" is not appropriate. A better word would be "accept" as in accepting a religion without giving it much critical thought. The word "believe" implies some kind of confidence in a religion, which I believe most people do not feel. We just "go with the flow" to blend in socially and appear pious to our peers.

 

Religion or superstitions are things people accept, without believing much. It is a kind of comfortable thoughtlessness. "Ignorance is bliss."

 

Maybe "God" is something that exists, but is too subtle to detect scientifically.

Edited by Airbrush
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I'd like to nominate you as the thread mascot.

Thank you.

 

But I have very little faith that you know what I meant.

 

Deism is a belief in a god. But the belief is in an impersonal entity(ies).

For example, he (it) made the universe and does not interact with the universe after he created it.

 

Theism describes a God that is personal and ever interacting. For example, the God of Hebrews.

 

So, a deity, in the purest sense of the word, does not respond to prayers, does not perform miracles, etc.

 

A theistic God is a living, interacting God that we can have a personal, daily relationship with.

 

Sorry if this created any confusion fer ya.

Edited by DrDNA
Link to post
Share on other sites

It implies that a person was previously in an unbroken state.

I disagree. I witness manufacturing defects all the time. Some things are made broken.

 

In the context of this discussion though I suspect a great many of the broken people were not born that way, just broken by someone's hand me down beliefs in their upbringing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. I witness manufacturing defects all the time. Some things are made broken.

 

In the context of this discussion though I suspect a great many of the broken people were not born that way, just broken by someone's hand me down beliefs in their upbringing.

 

Good point. But what if religious belief has a survival value within certain societies? Then becoming "broken" by learning to believe in God will facilitate survival, reproduction, and longevity. Some people may rather stay "broken" healthy and happy. :D

 

Most important is how you eat, which is my religion. We are HOW we eat (among other things).

Edited by Airbrush
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the word "broken" is appropriate. It implies that a person was previously in an unbroken state.

 

Actually, it is a perfectly appropriate term and you are a genius for pointing it out! :o

 

According to Genesis, man was made in an "unbroken" state.

Then came the fall and as a consequence, we all became broken.

 

And iNow is correct as well.

People who believe in GOD are broken.

He just left out (accidentally, probably) the point that people that don't believe in GOD are broken as well. ;)

Edited by DrDNA
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not referring to a 'diety'. This is a common mistake of many atheists, agnostics. Even many ' Christians'. A diety is not the proper description for the God of the Hebrews.

 

 

A deity is exactly what the god of the Hebrews should be described as.

 

Actually, it is a perfectly appropriate term and you are a genius for pointing it out! :o

 

According to Genesis, man was made in an "unbroken" state.

Then came the fall and as a consequence, we all became broken.

 

And iNow is correct as well.

People who believe in GOD are broken.

He just left out (accidentally, probably) the point that people that don't believe in GOD are broken as well. ;)

 

 

DrDNA if you are going to continue to assert that your Christian god is real please provide some evidence of that claim. Belief in the "Hebrew" god is no different than belief in Zeus, Apollo, Thor or Jupiter.

 

Good point. But what if religious belief has a survival value within certain societies? Then becoming "broken" by learning to believe in God will facilitate survival, reproduction, and longevity. Some people may rather stay "broken" healthy and happy. :D

 

Most important is how you eat, which is my religion. We are HOW we eat (among other things).

 

 

Oh no, I'm a Southwest patty melt....

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the context of this discussion though I suspect a great many of the broken people were not born that way, just broken by someone's hand me down beliefs in their upbringing.

 

The original aspects of religion aren't "broken", and it's not illogical to like them, because despite all the bad rep by less than a 4th of the population of the planet, religions still have some good values. Without religion, humanity may have never formed a structured society in the first place, no one would see a reason to support each other. With religion, it's not so much about the stories as it is about what the founders of the religions meant. Jesus was most probably a reason person, but I don't think he wanted all gay people to be killed, he was a nice person, and he merely advocated being nice. What's so wrong about that?

Besides, the things that make someone religious are present in atheists, such as consciousness, emotions, experiences, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

DrDNA if you are going to continue to assert that your Christian god is real please provide some evidence of that claim.

 

Just read this completely and get back to me in a year or so.

Holy Bible

Then perhaps we can discuss your doubts intelligently.

You can't poo poo it if you don't know it.

 

It amazes me how scientists and pseudo-scientists love to argue about things they know nothing about, yet they immediately try to guard science from non-scientists and non-pseudo-scientists like it is the Holy Grail (pardon the pun...seriously not intended).

 

This is very similar to that so-called Christian guy in Texas that runs a """museum"""" with a rock in it that he claims has footprints, one being from a "dinosaur" and the other from a "man" imprinted at the same time period. he doesn't have a clue what he is arguing about either.

 

No. It is not similar. It is identical to the above.

 

In the context of this discussion though I suspect a great many of the broken people were not born that way, just broken by someone's hand me down beliefs in their upbringing.

 

You seem to be implying that we were all made perfectly and that the world (our parents, teachers, siblings, relatives, neighbors, religion, governments, "the man"....etc...) messed us all up?

 

 

What evidence do you have that this is true?

Edited by DrDNA
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read this completely and get back to me in a year or so.

Holy Bible

Then perhaps we can discuss your doubts intelligently.

You can't poo poo it if you don't know it.

It takes you a year to read the Bible?! It's never taken me more than a couple of weeks, and that's with just a couple hours of reading time each day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.