With the amount of events chalked up to co-incidence so far, I'd think people should pray regularly just on the likelihood that they would be answered by co-incidence. People believe in not saying certain things or you'll "jinx it." Your good fortune will turn bad; your bad fortune will get worse. People believe this without belief that the bad luck stems from something or a spiritual someone. Why not recommend prayer to people even if they don't believe in God. The co-incidences sometimes just line right up.

That might not be rational though, and I agree that there is a rational explanation. That God exists. He hears the prayers sent to Him. And He answers them.

[it is rather arrogant to assume that the all-powerful creator of the universe is tinkering with your life while millions of people starve to death. Apparently your god is not omnibenevolent.]

God tinkers with anyone who will turn to Him though. We live in a broken world. Why it's broken or why it was even allowed to become broken I don't know. You've heard my best guess on it though. It's not just about us. In either case, it's still a mess of horrible suffering, and we are not rescued from this. (At least not yet). Would you be surprised to find out God is with those who starve as well?

We live in a world where our consequences matter. What we do affects those around us. Strive to help the person in need, the person in sadness, or anyone that you have the opportunity and the resources to help. We live in a broken world and we need to be a soothing element on the suffering wounds of our planet. It is broken because of us. Both because of our actions and because we turn from God. It stays broken because we don't turn back to God, repent of our wrongs and make efforts to correct it. On a country by country state, as well as an individual by individual state. We need to turn to God or He won't heal us.

(Continued)

Regarding the rock problem. Remind me why it's a problem again?

If God can't (or won't) create a rock that He can not lift, this proves there's a limit to His power? Is that it? The limitation being we reclassify God from being all powerful to being in charge and nothing can be more powerful then Him (making a limitation in what He can create). So far this doesn't seem like a problem that would shift God from existing to not existing. It just means God won't make anything that is out of His control. If He can and won't then it makes Him wise. If He can't make something that He can not move, then this doesn't sends Him spiraling into non-existence. None the less I do think God can make un-moveable promises. If that counts as a rock that He can not lift (or won't), then I'd count that as something awesome.

Not_Now.Soon,

Regarding your first experience, I spoke only of the MRI because you conceded that the coming out of the coma could have simply been the result of good medical help. Now you want to fall back to that and assert that it was the result of an answered prayer? It sounds like I’m wasting my time here, now.

As for your second experience (now that you’ve reminded me of a detail I had forgotten), this could be the result of all sorts of psychological phenomena. Given how powerful the brain is, and how little we know about it, how could you possibly rule out a rational explanation? You are fast approaching the Argument from Ignorance fallacy here.

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

<<You've had an experience close to the third experience I described? I would very much like to hear about it.>>

And I would very much like to tell you, but I get the feeling that you’d simply pick out some trivial difference to dismiss it as nothing like your experience.

<<I agree the brain can do some amazing things. But a slight feeling of warmth and electric feeling I had accompany it?>>

Yes, that’s not unusual at all.

Temporal Lobe Epilepsy can cause its sufferers experience God in a way which I can assure you that you never have. These people are often hyper-religious.

<<The problem with the explanation is both the event and the timing. It wasn't an eventual answer to a prayer. It was a immediate.>>

A simple co-incidence explains this. You should watch the video Toni Lavis linked to.

<<Same issue with the explanation of the forth experience. It was immediate.>>

Again, co-incidence and psychological.

There is another factor I haven’t mentioned yet, and that is the fact that our memories are terrible and change over time. This is why eyewitness testimony is now taken with a VERY big grain of salt. People can also invent memories. Not only are we VERY prone to remembering things differently over time, but our memories tend to change to favour how we want an event to have occurred.

Continued…

…Continued

<<With the amount of events chalked up to co-incidence so far, I'd think people should pray regularly just on the likelihood that they would be answered by co-incidence.>>

Sounds to me like there's a bit of confirmation bias going on here. You’re remembering all the hits and forgetting about a lot of the misses. We all do it. It's the reason so many parents think that sugar sends their children hyperactive when there is no evidence to support this: they forget all the times their children consumed sugar and nothing happened.

<<God tinkers with anyone who will turn to Him though. We live in a broken world.>>

That’s not an excuse.

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?"
- Epicurus

This little pearl of wisdom has been around longer than Christianity, and Christians are yet to come up with a satisfactory resolution to the problem.

<<We need to turn to God or He won't heal us.>>

Then your god is immoral.

<<Regarding the rock problem. Remind me why it's a problem again?>>

I cannot possibly explain it any clearer than I already have. Everyone else here seems to understand it. Although, it sounds like you may (reluctantly) understand it now.

<<So far this doesn't seem like a problem that would shift God from existing to not existing.>>

No, but it does infinitely reduce His power. Which is why many Christians have now demoted him to ‘maximally powerful’.

<<It just means God won't make anything that is out of His control.>>

More importantly, that it is possible for something to exist that is out of His control.

<<None the less I do think God can make un-moveable promises. If that counts as a rock that He can not lift (or won't), then I'd count that as something awesome.>>

So, you no longer believe that He is all-powerful, then?

// I'd think people should pray regularly just on the likelihood that they would be answered by co-incidence.//

Why? Random events leading to favourable outcomes occur independently of prayer, so what is the point?

//People believe in not saying certain things or you'll "jinx it." Your good fortune will turn bad; your bad fortune will get worse. People believe this without belief that the bad luck stems from something or a spiritual someone.//

If they're superstitious. It's what is known as 'magical thinking': the fallacious attribution of causal relationships between actions (such as prayers or jinxes) and unrelated events.

If you want to see magical thinking in action, a really good place to observe it is in the poker machine sections of pubs and clubs. Not all pokie players are superstitious (I've been known to make the occasional donation to my yacht club, even though I know full well how lousy the odds are), and not all magical thinking is obvious. But it is fairly common to observe people carrying pointless and frankly bizarre rituals when playing pokies - rubbing the screen for good luck and such like. Why do they do it? The machines are run on pseudo random number generators, and if it's not a touch screen interface then the computer inside has no way of knowing that you're polishing the screen, let alone caring. But still they rub away.

Research suggests that the explanation for this strange behaviour is very simple: people tend to have a far better memory for all the times when they've polished the screen and the machine has produced a favourable outcome, but ignore the cases when they've polished the screen and the machine has just swallowed their money - even if the latter are more numerous. The favourable coincidences of action and event reinforce their belief in magical thinking, whilst the occasions when their actions fail to produce favourable outcomes are - perhaps unconsciously - ignored.

One cannot help but see certain similarities between the supposed power of prayer and the power of pokie polishing.

//Why not recommend prayer to people even if they don't believe in God. The co-incidences sometimes just line right up.//

Because there is no point. The favourable event would occur even without the causally unrelated action, so you might as well save yourself the bother.

//I agree that there is a rational explanation. That God exists. He hears the prayers sent to Him. And He answers them.//

And I bet if you ask a pokie polisher, they'll tell you that their behaviour is perfectly rational because the machine knows when it is being rubbed the right way, and smiles favourably upon those who do it, rewarding them with great riches.

//Both because of our actions and because we turn from God. It stays broken because we don't turn back to God, repent of our wrongs and make efforts to correct it. On a country by country state, as well as an individual by individual state.//

And in the meantime, Christian children so young they're not actually considered to be capable of sin in the 3rd world continue to starve to death, die of malaria etc., whilst 1st world pagans, heretics, Buddhists etc. remain well fed and healthy. Many of those developing countries are considerably more Christian than Western countries, but seem to be copping way more supposed divine retribution than us. Seems a bit unfair, doesn't it?

Perhaps you might like to pray for your supposedly omniscient god to gain a better understanding of 'benevolence' and 'fairness'.

//this doesn't sends Him spiraling into non-existence.//

No one said it does. It just means he can't be omnipotent.

Here's a good one I found just now, AJ... a bit more relevant to the digital age than big rocks :)

Can God create a cryptography/key exchange system so secure that he himself cannot crack/bypass?

If no: He does not have the ability to authenticate any of his revelations, and therefore he lacks omnipotence, and cannot authentically reveal anything to anyone.

If yes: He does not have the ability to bypass encryptions therefore he lacks omnipotence and omniscience.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox