Does Praying Work?

PorfirioDiaz

just_sayin said:

Factfinder said:

just_sayin said:

Factfinder said:

just_sayin said:

ZeusAres42 said:

Until there is any empirical/observable evidence, I think it's safe to assume that there is no God. But does that answer the original poster's question? No. First, as I previously stated, it would be helpful if the original poster was more specific. I mean, are they asking if praying works for being able to see tiny unicorns living in our anuses or what?

That being said, praying, in some sense, can work, but that has nothing to do with any supernatural entity, or at least it can be adequately explained by natural phenomena. 

I think you are mistaken.  No amount of empirical/observable evidence will be enough for the faithful atheist.  @FactFinder said he would believe if someone could show evidence of god restoring someone's lost limbs.  I  provided him meticulously documented evidence that literally had the royal seal of approval.  Barnadot said he would believe if he saw a miracle happen on youtube.  I provided the video of Delia Knox who was paralyzed and got up and walked at a prayer service.  Jules said he wanted to see peer reviewed documentation and medical records and I provided him many.  I gave him medical records, peer reviewed journals from JAMA, Harvard, Yale, Science Direct, Stanford, and the National Academy of Sciences.  I showed him that the bulk of studies on prayer shows it works.  There is never enough evidence for them.  Evidence does not matter, they believe what they believe because of their faith in atheism.  They will always just ignore anything that contradicts their faith claims.  

Don't lie. You presented findings of an internal cult tribunal that was seeking facts about a claim in order to package and put out for consumption during medieval times. They were looking for a miracle to sell the people on for their cult. They put some facts together. There was a guy. The town existed. Somebody got hurt and broke their leg. He went away to get better treatment, a 50 day journey.  The claim was made he had wet gangrene after the 50 day trip. A condition that takes about three day to kill from the onset, which takes about a day. Became a beggar, came back. Mom said he went to bed with one leg, woke up with two.  A couple of practitioners saw a guy with an amputated leg. None however testify to sawing the leg off. They checked the hospital burial site for the leg. Surprise it wasn't there. The guy with the broken leg had it still, so naturally it wouldn't be there. The cult however deemed the miracle true because the leg wasn't in the ground. Nowhere in the whole delusional story is there anything resembling evidence. It is a fantasy concocted by a cult for the believing gullible in the 1600s.   

Actually doctors, Juan de Estanga and Diego Millaruelo, carried out the operation. The leg was cut "four fingers below the knee."  according to their testimony.  This is also confirmed by the intern who buried the leg and the Chaplin at the hospital.  All of which testified to the miracle.  Further, the miracle was not just verified by the church, but also by the state.  In fact the testimonies were certified by the king's own royal record keeper and preserved.  There are 24 eye witness accounts, along with medical records, both of the amputation and of the restoration of the leg.  Why do you seek to mislead?  Again, as is so often the case, I am the one referencing evidence and facts, and the atheist just wants us to believe on faith that their version of the account is true.  

Yeah well did they testify personally at the tribunal or were depositions sent? I mean you believe this fantasy so you should know little details like that. Didn't one of them say something like "the guy" referring to who was supposed to have been his patient? Who was the objective investigating body or sleuth experts? Oh yeah, none. As in no evidence, your faith means nothing and exposes your ignorance of empirical evidence. In every joke there must be some element of truth in order for it to be funny. No one hardly knows of this because Catholicism itself doesn't believe it, otherwise it would be boasting it of all the time word wide. That would be because the critical thinker knows the leg, scars and all never was cut off. Maybe someone else's but not the one in question. Which brings us to this point once again, certain benign facts were used in this fabrication to deceive the gullible during the spanish inquisition. You've produced no evidence that disprove that fact. The jokes on you!

The following is a google translation of some of the testimony:

The original tribunal record is here: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ucm.5325008951&view=1up&seq=136







Four witnesses who testified that the guy lost a leg by amputation at the hospital, that he stayed at the hospital.  And that 2 years and 7 months later the same guy had 2 legs.  I keep providing facts and evidence and you keep working in the faith realm.  Special pleading isn't evidence, @FactFinder.  I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist like you.  The evidence says the guy's leg was miraculously healed.  Your faith says it wasn't.  Which should I believe?

I agree that this account is insufficient proof. It is impossible to grow another leg back. If these testimonies are true (theyre not) the most likely scenario would be the having a twin brother who was not registered at birth (it does happen) visiting his brother with an amputated leg. 



This reminds me of the miracles of the lady indicated in the link ill provide below,


https://www.summarize.tech/www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHj0ruohYwk

just_sayin

  @ZuesAres42  @FactFinder  @PorfinioDiaz

OMG!  I am providing documented testimony by 24 different witnesses that was certified as accurate  by the Spanish king's official recorder.  And instead of evidence, the atheists just tried the old evil  twin referee defense without a shred of evidence.



I keep repeating myself, but I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

Factfinder

just_sayin said:

  @ZuesAres42  @FactFinder  @PorfinioDiaz

OMG!  I am providing documented testimony by 24 different witnesses that was certified as accurate  by the Spanish king's official recorder.  And instead of evidence, the atheists just tried the old evil  twin referee defense without a shred of evidence.



I keep repeating myself, but I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

That's cause it don't take faith. It takes reason, intellect, wisdom, and intelligence. Abandon childish wishful fantasies and function in reality. Then you will be atheist too!

PorfirioDiaz

Factfinder said:

just_sayin said:

  @ZuesAres42  @FactFinder  @PorfinioDiaz

OMG!  I am providing documented testimony by 24 different witnesses that was certified as accurate  by the Spanish king's official recorder.  And instead of evidence, the atheists just tried the old evil  twin referee defense without a shred of evidence.



I keep repeating myself, but I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

That's cause it don't take faith. It takes reason, intellect, wisdom, and intelligence. Abandon childish wishful fantasies and function in reality. Then you will be atheist too!

I think your claim falls under the Bigfoot classification. Everybody's seen him but no proof.

Barnardot

@PorfirioDiaz ;I think your claim falls under the Bigfoot classification. Everybody's seen him but no proof.

I think that no body needs any proof at all to say that some thing thats not proven is a load of crap. So in fact the thing is that the Bigfoot is like God. No body has ever seen God and has no proof therefore any one who actually believes in God is off his rocker. 

just_sayin

@Factfinder
That's cause it don't take faith. It takes reason, intellect, wisdom, and intelligence. Abandon childish wishful fantasies and function in reality. Then you will be atheist too!

I know your faith won't accept this, but the facts and evidence show the guy's leg was amputated and then 2 years and 7 months later grew back over night.  Instead of looking at facts and evidence you have appealed to evil twin referee fantasies and speculation.  Your faith is not based on facts and evidence.  In fact, it rejects those to maintain its view.  I expect at any moment for you to quote @MayCaesar's science of the gaps argument - 'Even when science says it doesn't know, trust us, science has the answer.'  

In case you haven't been tracking in this debate, I'm the one who has constantly referenced medical records, and eye witness testimony.  You and the other atheists have made unsubstantiated faith claims.

Like the evil twin claim:

Factfinder

just_sayin said:

@Factfinder
That's cause it don't take faith. It takes reason, intellect, wisdom, and intelligence. Abandon childish wishful fantasies and function in reality. Then you will be atheist too!

I know your faith won't accept this, but the facts and evidence show the guy's leg was amputated and then 2 years and 7 months later grew back over night.  Instead of looking at facts and evidence you have appealed to evil twin referee fantasies and speculation.  Your faith is not based on facts and evidence.  In fact, it rejects those to maintain its view.  I expect at any moment for you to quote @MayCaesar's science of the gaps argument - 'Even when science says it doesn't know, trust us, science has the answer.'  

In case you haven't been tracking in this debate, I'm the one who has constantly referenced medical records, and eye witness testimony.  You and the other atheists have made unsubstantiated faith claims.

Like the evil twin claim:

I know your faith won't let you accept this, but the facts and evidence show this story to be idiotically false. A leg that isn't in the grave but is attached to the guy points to it had never been amputated. Common names used, beggars being present and religious statues. Somebody hurt their leg on the farm. That's all the evidence there is. And even parts of that can be a lie. Everything else is hearsay, a fabrication of an evil cult who was busy torturing and raping young pretty girls during the Spanish inquisitions. That same mentality used a closed tribunal (meaning not made public till the package was ready) to gather benign facts of places in a region where rumors where flying around with gullible people of a gullible age at a vulnerable point in time and history; where one did not want to cross the power and influence the cult had in society. 

PorfirioDiaz

Heres my version of your story. We will call the amputatee, "GG" for reference. I will explain to you the reasons from the story and then below it, i will write my own theory.


From the beginning, GG was claimed to have fallen off because he fell asleep. This indicates he was probably a low energy individual and lazy at best to consider. Later in the story he is mentioned again and I quote, "GG wasn't able to sleep in his bed because soldiers were garrison there for the night, and GG slept in his mothers house". It wasnt up until then that GG miraculously grows back his leg the moment he moves in to his mothers house to sleep. I think what happened here is GG got caught lacking. And while asleep and unaware, accidentally exposed himself to his own mother and then claimed the whole story of growing his leg back. So all this time with an amputated leg and the night he sleeps at his mothers is when he grows it back?. Bunch of made up bull.


Also i believe i read that during those years in Valencia, they needed soldiers and whats one way to avoid getting called up? Yeah. Not only that but due to the lack of christians losing followers and muslims outnumbering them, a story like his would of had a huge effect in that aspect which it did because there is a leg carved of him on a building.



So you see, your only evidence is from the story you read. All the evidence in testimony could of easily been either simple to fool or in on it as part of a christian mission to bolster their followers.

PorfirioDiaz

just_sayin

PorfirioDiaz said:https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=_0t6llGkBLo

Heres my version of your story. We will call the amputatee, "GG" for reference. I will explain to you the reasons from the story and then below it, i will write my own theory.


From the beginning, GG was claimed to have fallen off because he fell asleep. This indicates he was probably a low energy individual and lazy at best to consider. Later in the story he is mentioned again and I quote, "GG wasn't able to sleep in his bed because soldiers were garrison there for the night, and GG slept in his mothers house". It wasnt up until then that GG miraculously grows back his leg the moment he moves in to his mothers house to sleep. I think what happened here is GG got caught lacking. And while asleep and unaware, accidentally exposed himself to his own mother and then claimed the whole story of growing his leg back. So all this time with an amputated leg and the night he sleeps at his mothers is when he grows it back?. Bunch of made up bull.


Also i believe i read that during those years in Valencia, they needed soldiers and whats one way to avoid getting called up? Yeah. Not only that but due to the lack of christians losing followers and muslims outnumbering them, a story like his would of had a huge effect in that aspect which it did because there is a leg carved of him on a building.



So you see, your only evidence is from the story you read. All the evidence in testimony could of easily been either simple to fool or in on it as part of a christian mission to bolster their followers.

There seems to be evidentiary problems with your theory:

1)  No less than 4 hospital doctors and workers testified that
a)  they were there when his leg was a) amputated - two doctors attest to this
b)  that it was amputated - all four witnesses who testified said this
c)  that the leg was buried in the cemetery by the church - the actual guy who buried the amputated leg testified to this
d) that the man convalesced at the hospital all winter long with just one leg
e) The hospital records record his admittance and surgery

2)  That the man lived 2 years and 7 months with 1 leg:
a)  Multiple family and towns people testified to this as the man frequently would show the stump to them and passersby as he begged for alms
b) the man was living with his mother and father because he only had one leg. 

If you read the testimonies you would know that the soldier was sleeping in the room the man normally slept in, that's why he was in his mother and father's room.

I get your faith in atheism won't allow you to acknowledge that you are pulling stuff out of @Jack 's prison wallet.  The testimonies are extensive and were certified by the King's own legal attendant.  Except for every single piece of evidence and testimony your story makes sense.  So whether you like, or don't like it, learn to love it, because its the truth!!! 

It will take more than your made up twin evil referee theory to win this debate.



 https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=_0t6llGkBLo

PorfirioDiaz

just_sayin said:

PorfirioDiaz said:https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=_0t6llGkBLo

Heres my version of your story. We will call the amputatee, "GG" for reference. I will explain to you the reasons from the story and then below it, i will write my own theory.


From the beginning, GG was claimed to have fallen off because he fell asleep. This indicates he was probably a low energy individual and lazy at best to consider. Later in the story he is mentioned again and I quote, "GG wasn't able to sleep in his bed because soldiers were garrison there for the night, and GG slept in his mothers house". It wasnt up until then that GG miraculously grows back his leg the moment he moves in to his mothers house to sleep. I think what happened here is GG got caught lacking. And while asleep and unaware, accidentally exposed himself to his own mother and then claimed the whole story of growing his leg back. So all this time with an amputated leg and the night he sleeps at his mothers is when he grows it back?. Bunch of made up bull.


Also i believe i read that during those years in Valencia, they needed soldiers and whats one way to avoid getting called up? Yeah. Not only that but due to the lack of christians losing followers and muslims outnumbering them, a story like his would of had a huge effect in that aspect which it did because there is a leg carved of him on a building.



So you see, your only evidence is from the story you read. All the evidence in testimony could of easily been either simple to fool or in on it as part of a christian mission to bolster their followers.

There seems to be evidentiary problems with your theory:

1)  No less than 4 hospital doctors and workers testified that
a)  they were there when his leg was a) amputated - two doctors attest to this
b)  that it was amputated - all four witnesses who testified said this
c)  that the leg was buried in the cemetery by the church - the actual guy who buried the amputated leg testified to this
d) that the man convalesced at the hospital all winter long with just one leg
e) The hospital records record his admittance and surgery

2)  That the man lived 2 years and 7 months with 1 leg:
a)  Multiple family and towns people testified to this as the man frequently would show the stump to them and passersby as he begged for alms
b) the man was living with his mother and father because he only had one leg. 

If you read the testimonies you would know that the soldier was sleeping in the room the man normally slept in, that's why he was in his mother and father's room.

I get your faith in atheism won't allow you to acknowledge that you are pulling stuff out of @Jack 's prison wallet.  The testimonies are extensive and were certified by the King's own legal attendant.  Except for every single piece of evidence and testimony your story makes sense.  So whether you like, or don't like it, learn to love it, because its the truth!!! 

It will take more than your made up twin evil referee theory to win this debate.



 https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=_0t6llGkBLo

Like i said


There was a religious power grasp between muslims and christians where muslims were pushing christians out. The doctors could of been part of a religious mission to install new faith in christianity and qhat better than this guys amputaed leg story.


If you bend your leg well enough and fold it, tie it up real tight. It is impossible to confirm if the leg is amputaed or not unless you strip him naked. Explain to me why all the years sleeping alone and the one kight he sleeps at his moms where he unconsciously stretches his legs and gets caught all of sudden he grows it back?

Barnardot

@PorfirioDiaz @just_sayin ;Explain to me why all the years sleeping alone and the one kight he sleeps at his moms where he unconsciously stretches his legs and gets caught all of sudden he grows it back?

It doesn't matter how much you argue with such a sower puts as @just_sayin. He has the reputation on this site as the biggest lier and poster of false evidence. He is still being petitioned to get kicked off here because of his constant lies and posting offensive spam. Believe me he's one of the worst Ive seen in a long time. Just dont open any of his spam links is all I can say.

Factfinder

just_sayin said:

PorfirioDiaz said:https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=_0t6llGkBLo

Heres my version of your story. We will call the amputatee, "GG" for reference. I will explain to you the reasons from the story and then below it, i will write my own theory.


From the beginning, GG was claimed to have fallen off because he fell asleep. This indicates he was probably a low energy individual and lazy at best to consider. Later in the story he is mentioned again and I quote, "GG wasn't able to sleep in his bed because soldiers were garrison there for the night, and GG slept in his mothers house". It wasnt up until then that GG miraculously grows back his leg the moment he moves in to his mothers house to sleep. I think what happened here is GG got caught lacking. And while asleep and unaware, accidentally exposed himself to his own mother and then claimed the whole story of growing his leg back. So all this time with an amputated leg and the night he sleeps at his mothers is when he grows it back?. Bunch of made up bull.


Also i believe i read that during those years in Valencia, they needed soldiers and whats one way to avoid getting called up? Yeah. Not only that but due to the lack of christians losing followers and muslims outnumbering them, a story like his would of had a huge effect in that aspect which it did because there is a leg carved of him on a building.



So you see, your only evidence is from the story you read. All the evidence in testimony could of easily been either simple to fool or in on it as part of a christian mission to bolster their followers.

There seems to be evidentiary problems with your theory:

1)  No less than 4 hospital doctors and workers testified that
a)  they were there when his leg was a) amputated - two doctors attest to this
b)  that it was amputated - all four witnesses who testified said this
c)  that the leg was buried in the cemetery by the church - the actual guy who buried the amputated leg testified to this
d) that the man convalesced at the hospital all winter long with just one leg
e) The hospital records record his admittance and surgery

2)  That the man lived 2 years and 7 months with 1 leg:
a)  Multiple family and towns people testified to this as the man frequently would show the stump to them and passersby as he begged for alms
b) the man was living with his mother and father because he only had one leg. 

If you read the testimonies you would know that the soldier was sleeping in the room the man normally slept in, that's why he was in his mother and father's room.

I get your faith in atheism won't allow you to acknowledge that you are pulling stuff out of @Jack 's prison wallet.  The testimonies are extensive and were certified by the King's own legal attendant.  Except for every single piece of evidence and testimony your story makes sense.  So whether you like, or don't like it, learn to love it, because its the truth!!! 

It will take more than your made up twin evil referee theory to win this debate.



 https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=_0t6llGkBLo

1 a. How much were they paid to testify? Or guess you didn't think about that while defending your preconceived notion. 
b. Wow, something that big and only 4 testified. Oh, no red flags there. Do you know what empirical evidence is?
c. I see, did he travel to tell the king this or was he paid? During the times of inquisitions things did get desperate. Fact you wish wasn't.
d. Stating something doesn't qualify as evidence. Even if you eagerly believe it.
e. Hospital records are altered all the time. There is no evidence hospitals in spain kept matriculas records in the 1600's.
2 a. Yup, beggars, desperate times, "all I have to do is what?" Okay. 
b. No physical evidence. Just cult transcripts which are cultic in nature, not scientific.

Classic defense strategy, bring mom in to testify as to the character of the one being investigated. Carries little weight as mom's almost always back up the stories their children tell them. 

Don't think you get anything really. I as an atheist have no vested interest in this story, do you?

A man with two legs is evidence he didn't have an amputation. Not evidence he had one. Try again.

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Praying Worked For Me!!

I got over 400 comments on this debate!

Factfinder

@JulesKorngold

I got over 400 comments on this debate!

Congratulations! Glad my post helped!

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Thanks!

@Factfinder
Your 283 comments certainly helped!  

just_sayin

JulesKorngold said:

I got over 400 comments on this debate!

Don't forget to thank God for answering your prayer.