Healing

Do you guys believe it is for today? If so why don't we see more of it?

 

Yes, I have seen it. Maybe you aren't hanging out in the right places.
I mean do you talk to people about it? Lots of people have stories if you get on the right subject.
I don't particullary believe in people like Benny Henn etc.

 

The healing power of prayer has been documented in several secular double blind studies.

 

really? you have any links to this?

 

I think it still happens, but it doesn't get much, if any press. And what little does get press, I think is usually pretty questionable.

 

I do believe in it very much so. I've been healed of chronic back pain and have seen others healed of other ailments also. I was interested where everyone else stood on it.

why do you think we don't see more people getting healed today? I know there are pockets of believers who see it more than others, but I mean as a whole, why isn't there more healings in the body of Christ? (I have some opinions but I'm wondering what you guys think)

 

I agree.

As for the Benny Hinns of the world? If I can't get the sports tout gig going with Vito when I retire, I figure being Benny would be the next closest thing.

 

Recovery from ailments through means that emperical science is not equipped to explain is just not a common thing. There are serveral mystical traditions that employ non-"scientific" healing methods that can achieve results. And Slydevl is correct about prayer and belief being capable of drastic recoveries. But these aren't things any preacher or guru can just pull out of thin air by yelling "SHAZZAM!" That's why you can be sure if some preacher with a healing ministry is parading cripples and senior citizens with arthritis out every Sunday to be healed, it's a pretty safe bet he's planting people and putting on a dog-and-pony show.

Supernatural or mystical healing can be compared to magical divination. The practices are so full of charlatains and con-artists that when the "genuine article" comes along, it slips under the radar and only holds credibilty with those who are naturally inclined to believe in it. The genuine article does exist, but it's rare, and it takes a dynamic balance between skepticism and true belief to find it.

 

http://www.google.com/search?source...LD:en&q="healing+power"+prayer+"double+blind"

 

Flying Carpets and Scientific Prayers

Scientific experiments claiming that distant intercessory prayer produces salubrious effects are deeply flawed

By Michael Shermer

In late 1944, as he cajoled his flagging troops to defeat the Germans in the Battle of the Bulge, General George S. Patton turned to his chief chaplain for help. Patton: Chaplain, I want you to publish a prayer for good weather. I'm tired of these soldiers having to fight mood and floods as well as Germans. See if we can't get God to work on our side.

Chaplain: Sir, it's going to take a pretty thick rug for that kind of praying.

Patton: I don't care if it takes the flying carpet. I want the praying done.

Although few attribute Patton's subsequent success to a divine miracle, a number of papers have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals in recent years claiming that distant intercessory prayer leads to health and healing. These studies are fraught with methodological problems.

Suspicions of fraud. In 2001 the Journal of Reproductive Medicine published a study by three Columbia University researchers claiming that prayer for women undergoing in vitro fertilization resulted in a pregnancy rate of 50 percent, double that of women who did not receive prayer. ABC News medical correspondent Timothy Johnson cautiously enthused, "A new study on the power of prayer over pregnancy reports surprising results, but many physicians remain skeptical." One of those skeptics was from the University of California at Irvine, a clinical professor of gynecology and obstetrics named Bruce Flamm, who not only found numerous methodological errors in the experiment but also discovered that one of the study's authors, Daniel Wirth, a.k.a. John Wayne Truelove, is not an M.D. but an M.S. in parapsychology who has since been indicted on felony charges for mail fraud and theft, to which he has pled guilty. The other two authors have refused to comment, and after three years of inquiries from Flamm, the journal removed the study from its Web site, and Columbia University launched an investigation.

Scientific prayer makes God a celestial lab rat

Lack of controls. Many of these studies failed to control for such intervening variables as age, sex, education, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, marital standing, degree of religiosity and ignored the fact that most religions have sanctions against such insalubrious behaviors as sexual promiscuity, alcohol and drug abuse, and smoking. When such variables are controlled for, the formerly significant results disappear. One study on recovery from hip surgery in elderly women did not control for age; another study on church attendance and recovery from illness did not consider that people in poor health are less likely to attend church.

Outcome differences. In a highly publicized study of cardiac patients prayed for by born-again Christians, of 29 outcome variables measured only six showed a significant difference between the prayed-for and nonprayed-for groups. In related studies, different outcome measures were significant. To be meaningful, the same measures need to be significant across studies because if enough outcomes are measured, some will show significant correlations by chance.

Operational definitions. When experiments are carried out to determine the effects of prayer, what precisely is being studied? For example, what type of prayer is being employed? (Are Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Wiccan and shaman prayers equal?) Who or what is being prayed to? (Are God, Jesus and a universal life force equivalent?) What is the length and frequency of the prayer? (Are two 10-minute prayers equal to one 20-minute prayer?) How many people are praying, and does their status in the religion matter? (Is one priestly prayer identical to 10 parishioner prayers?) Most prayer studies either lack such operational definitions or lack consistency across studies in such definitions. The ultimate fallacy is theological: if God is omniscient and omnipotent, he should not need to be reminded or inveigled into healing someone. Scientific prayer makes God a celestial lab rat, leading to bad science and worse religion.

Originally Published in Scientific American. 11/1/04


Michael Shermer is publisher of Skeptic (www.skeptic.com) and author of The Science of Good and Evil.