General
What about what I might call the "contemplative approach"? Namely that the purpose of prayer is to enable the person praying to experience God... kind of like the "rational approach", but without presuming the contemplation to be so "intellectual". Or to make the person praying able to experience God (again, like the "educational", but less "intellectual" or "propositional")... Just trying to see where my own views fit in :)
- Looks like I missed that totally. This is very significant in Christianity, fairly wide-spread in Judaism (but, it appears to me, viewed as less theologically imporant than the other views); this view must also be existent to some degree in Unitarian-Universalism. We should add this in! I would prefer a different title than "contemplative approach", because that name may give the impression of formal philosophical contemplation. What about a name like the "experiential approach", or something like that? RK
- In Eastern Orthodoxy, this would be called hesychasm, I believe. It was defended theologically by Gregory Palamas at about three separate Hesychast Synods in Constantinople in the 1340's; it was attacked by Barlaam of Calabria, who advocated a more intellectual approach to prayer. This sort of prayer is described in great detail in the Philokalia, a compilation of what various Eastern Orthodox saints wrote about prayer. The Philokalia also talks a lot about the "prayer of the heart", or prayer without ceasing, which I think is related but slightly different. I suppose all of this might be called a subset of the "experiential approach". --Wesley
- I unconsciously left this view out because, though this experience exists in Jewish prayer, it usually isn't considered a separate type of prayer (although, of course, it could be.) Rather, I have seen it presented as a consequence, or effect, of one of the other types of prayer. Of course, if such emotional communion is the goal, it becomes a separate category of prayer outright. To give an example, Hasidic Jews (and some non-Orthodox Jews as well) follow the Kabbalistic form of prayer; yet in doing so they also state that they strive to feel an emotional bond with God. To wit:
- "In Hasidism, the kabbalistic type of kavvanot yields to a far more emotional involvement and attachment (devekut) to God. "The metamorphosis which took place in the meaning of kavvanot at the advent of Hasidism, and more explicitly after the Great Maggid [Dov Baer of Mezhirech], consists in this—that an originally intellectual effort of meditation and contemplation had become an intensely emotional and highly enthusiastic act". In Hasidism, prayer is a mystical encounter with the Divine, the heart leaping in ecstasy to its Source. Violent movements in prayer were not unusual; some of the hasidic groups even encouraged their followers to turn somersaults during their prayers." [Encyclopaedia Judaica, Prayer]
Also, we should add stuff on prayer in religions other than Western monotheism... -- SJK
- Absolutely. RK
I removed a sentence saying that critics have complained about lack of control in the Mayo study. If those critics are different from the writer of that sentence, I would like to see a reference. [Whoever wrote this, please replace this bracketed comment with four consecutive ~. Thanks.]
- Here is one rerference; there are more. Irwin Tessman and Jack Tessman in ""Efficacy of Prayer: A Critical Examination of Claims,"" Skeptical Inquirer, March/April 2000
- This article appeared before the Mayo study so it is irrelevant to the question --AxelBoldt
The study had in fact a control group. Whether the people in the control group were in addition prayed for by family and friends is irrelevant, since the trial was randomized and you would expect to see the same amount of family-and-friend prayer in the control group as in the study group. The study showed only that the additional effect of the prayer group was nil. --AxelBoldt
- You missed the point: how can one make any determination of the effect of prayer on a patient, if ALL the patients are being prayed for? (And in all likelihood, most of them are being prayer for by someone, even if this is not known.) In such a case, no control group is possible. Having additional people doing extra praying for some people only wouldn't make a difference - unless there was an additional and unreasonable hypothesis, such as that the prayers of friends and family outside the study don't count. In the study you describe, NO CONTROL existed. You had one group in which people were probably being prayed for a lot, plus five extra prayers, and a second group in which people were probably being prayer for a lot, without an extra five people. There is prayer in both groups! Hence, there was no control group to begin with; that is the essence of the criticism. (Unless the scientists running the study claimed that they somehow "knew" that no one was praying for these people. RK
- Where did you read this criticism? The study claims to show that the additional five people praying didn't make a difference, and they didn't. If you don't think that "more prayer is better", than those five people should at least have made a difference for those patients that nobody else was praying for; and you would expect about the same number of these in the treatment group and in the control group. But even for those it didn't make a difference. --AxelBoldt
Thanks much for the needed addition on Bahai prayer! RK
I removed the link to 'dua', because the article dua gives a common Indian surname. In the edit history of dua, a redirect to Duamutef is given, which is an ancient Egyptian god. If someone can make a good article about the Islamic dua, feel free to make a disambiguation page. Coffeemonster 14:44, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Removal: Matthew 21:22
Removed:
- In Matthew 21:22, Jesus is reported as saying "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer." It is not explained how conflicting requests of believers are resolved. [Whoever wrote this, please replace this bracketed comment with four consecutive ~. Thanks.]
- All this says is that the editor doesn't understand a particular isolated verse about prayer. There are dozens of other passages about prayer, in the scriptures of all religions, that could easily appear to be inexplicable on the surface. Do we really want to list and categorize such passages, and then add commentaries to document how authorities from each religion explain each confusing passage from their scriptures? I'm not sure this sort of project would benefit the article. Wesley 13:18 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- Well, the passage was added to the section containing the Christian understanding of prayer, so Jesus's opinion, supporting "request-style prayer", seems to be relevant. The criticising sentence is probably too much (and evident), so I'm happy with leaving it out. (However, it would certainly be interesting and relevant to learn how Christian authorities resolve the problem). The claim that this quote is isolated does not seem well grounded: it appears in a paragraph which describes how Jesus punished a bush for not carrying fruit by praying for its destruction. AxelBoldt 18:19 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- Ok, I'm happy to leave it in as it is now; the verse itself is relevant, and agree it doesn't seem to be taken out of context or anything of that sort. I'll keep my out for further commentary by Christian authorities... John Chrysostom just says that Jesus' goal was to increase his disciples' confidence in prayer, but doesn't directly address your question. http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF1-10/npnf1-10-73.htm#P6519_2001116. Wesley 16:44 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Prayer in public and school
How about public prayer or prayer in school? Any comments or ideas? I just completed the new article moment of silence (contributions would be appreciated). Usedbook 16:23 11 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- Those controversies perhaps ought to be mentioned here, although from the big perspective they may be somewhat parochial, given that they're only controversies because of the constitution of the United States. An article about the political debates over religion in schools in France, for example, would necessarily cast the debate in quite different terms; and I am wholly ignorant of whether it's been controversial other than in the USA and France, or under what terms the debate might be cast in those places. Some notice of civil religion probably ought to be taken as well. -- IHCOYC 00:06 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)
- IHCOYC, those are good points. I don't know, but I would imagine that in many Muslim countries it's required or nearly so for everyone to face Mecca and at least assume the appropriate posture of prayer if one of the daily prayer times happens to fall during school hours. I could imagine this could be controversial in a country which is heavily Muslim but not entirely so. There are probably other places with an entirely different angle on the debate. Wesley
- Hey, I am a new user. If you come to this page and wonder about its entirely new format, I have added Hinduism, the most representative of Eastern religion, into the mix. Also, I felt that inclusion of the Bible/Christian views on prayer as somehow separate from Christian prayer was unwarranted. Thus, taking the structure of the articlea and chronology of the religions' appearance into account, I rearranged the more general discussions to appear at the top and the religions to each be dealt with separately in order of their ages. I think, more so than even Judaism and Buddhism, Islam needs to be better represented, if only for its massive world population. It also has a very rigid and codified system of prayer, which would be interesting in contrast to the more widely differing sects within other religions. Also, in generalized statements about religion, I excised a statement or added other examples to balance what is sometimes unintentional bible-centralization. Example: "confession of sins" is a solely Christian concept, and while it may find analogies in other religions, it is certainly not one of the four primary forms of prayer when a world view is seen. I base this not only the number of other religions, but the number of adherents to different faiths. I also believe that the religion pages suffers from a similarly unbalanced viewpoint that unconsciously equates religion with Christianity. Understandably, the writer was not well-versed in other religions and thus, as in this prayer article, focused on what he/she knew. For this reason, we need to balance the equation with more contributors across the wikipaedic (dipthong!) board. --- Donaldsutherland
- Hi Donald, welcome. Good attitude. I've invited you to join the Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias project, message on your user talk page. I think you get it. Anyone else that understands what Donald means, you also may want to take a look at the project.Pedant 02:03, 2004 Oct 30 (UTC)
Hebrew Bible and Christianity
- We may not have this article say that the Hebrew Bible is Christian, and is separate from Judaiam. There is no historical basis for this position. Historically it is a fact that the Hebrew Bible developed first, from within the Israelite community. The Israelites then became the rabbinic Jews, and only later did Christians develop their addition to the Bible, the New Testament. Your editing of this article rewrites history. Therefore, the article should discuss these aspects of prayer in the same way: As prayer appeared in the Hebrew Bible, then as it changed in the New Testament. JeMa 15:22, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)
- There is also the matter of prayer in the Septuagint as not found in the Hebrew language Bible based on the much later Masoretic texts; these prayers and versions of prayers were retained by the Church but rejected by the Jews, along with the other differences between those texts. Wesley 16:42, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
Soldier in Iraq
While whoever posted this seemed distraught, I removed this request for prayers regarding this person's famlly life as it isn't appropriate for this forum. [Whoever wrote this, please replace this bracketed comment with four consecutive ~. Thanks.]
Oldest Liturgy
The article says the Roman Catholic Mass is the oldest liturgy. What are the dates of its origin, and how do they compare with the Divine Liturgy of St. James? Our Mass (liturgy) article doesn't cover the older history of the Mass or its origins. Wesley 16:42, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
Medical Effects of Prayer
Why does the study "Positive therapeutic effects of intercessory prayer in a coronary care unit population" (http://home.wxs.nl/~faase009/D960916-prayer.html ) appear to be missing? Is it for some reason discredited, was it simply unknown to the authors, or is it somehow considered trivial? I intend to add a reference to the study if no objections are posted. 18.242.6.95 16:56, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- There are also many studies of prayer that suggest that remote intercessory prayer is ineffective and practically useless in enhancing the health of another person. I consider this entire entry POV without a section on the medical effects of prayer. Adraeus 20:51, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
This sentence, "one such study (Byrd, 1988), with a double-blind design, showed with a p-value of 0.0001 that intercessory prayer to the Judeo-Christian god had a positive effect on a coronary care unit population," is all well and good, but what does the p-value mean? I've taken a look at the page for p-value and still have no better idea how to interpret this. Did it mean that it was very effective, marginally effective, or so barely effective that it was almost indistinguashable from not praying? — KayEss | talk 08:32, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
- P values are an indication of statistical significance. The smaller the better, but p<0.05 is considered significant in most studies. I will take it out of the article, because it just confuses and sounds like Byrd found something really shocking (quod non). JFW | T@lk 23:03, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
Controversy
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Please don't assume I mean offense. My reason for addition of this tag is the article consistently references an undefined "God," which can be construed as POV by those who are unfamiliar with the application of "God" in objective contexts. For those of monotheistic religions who are watching and editing this article, understand that there are more gods than your "God" and the process of prayer should be attributed to most gods of most religions, not just one. I understand that using the phrase "a god or gods" wherever there is a mention of "God" might become tiresome to read but perhaps that means there is a problem with the way the article is written. I suggest rewording the text to eliminate the many instances of "God" and replace where needed with "a god or gods" to make this article more-NPOV. Only use "God" and "Allah" in the appropriate subsections. Adraeus 05:05, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Islamic Prayer
I object to the statement "Some of the early Christians whom Mohammed observed, and from whom he adapted elements of his religion, prayed in the posture for which Muslims are now famous."
First of all, where is the fact proving this statement? Secondly, Islam is religion given to us from God, Allah, yehwe, whatever you want to call him (see Ahmed Deedat's books for more info). Therefore, it is only logical that Christians have the Old Testament as part of their Bible as Christianity can be seen as a continuation or correction of Judaism. Feel free to look at it in any way.
Similarly, Islam is from the same God that gave us Judaism and Christianity. Why shouldn't there be similar aspects in the other religions?
After all, if one looks closely at the 3 religions, one will find that all three religions forbid alcohol, promiscuity and others.
I move the editor strike that sentence.
--Marafa 08:29, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Category
User:Baphomet. has decided that Category:Superstition should be added to this page. The term "superstition" is heavily loaded, and applied to this page is probably POV. I oppose its use, and was wondering how other users felt about this. JFW | T@lk 11:07, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- This entire article is propoganda, it totally lack critique. Any resonable version of this article would atleast admit that a large number of people regard this as category:superstition. I have seen christians in the mid west claim that whilst other people prayers are superstition, as christain prayers theirs are not superstition. --Baphomet. 11:12, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
The article contains elaborate material that according to some (but by no means all) scientific studies, prayer does in fact have a beneficial effect. I think this is adequate to warrant its exclusion from your category. As for critique, I think the many studies that cite a lack of efficacy are enough critique. Please be advised that the three-revert rule is in operation. JFW | T@lk 11:16, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- There is no scientific evidence that prayer works. They only people to claim that have been a few US religious nutters, who wanted it to work, it has never been reproduced by independent researchers. As a doctor you should be ashamed of yourself pedling such rubbish.--Baphomet. 11:20, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- Also be advised that the 3RR rule also applies to you and that you introduction of it here when it is inappropriate is nothing more or less than an attempt at bullying. Never communicate with me again.--Baphomet. 11:20, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
Categories are not used to enforce NPOV. I do not see how my profession should be of relevance here; in fact, in my profession it is accepted that labeling people's behaviour such-and-such is generally detrimental. The doctors ("US religious nutters") still managed to get their research published in reputable peer-reviewed publications, suggesting that your label is somewhat short-sighted.
I warned you about the 3RR for your protection - violating it means you get blocked for 24h from editing Wikipedia, something you surely should wish to avoid. JFW | T@lk 11:25, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- Baphomet., perhaps your objections could be better served in an article summarizing the skeptic's response to prayer as it is formalized in various world religions. A link to such an article would perhaps be appropriate here at the end of the article, but what you're suggesting now is a bit short on objectivity, I think.
- There are skeptics enough to express doubts about the tenets of every religious practice or system, but this fact alone does not justify applying "category"-based pejoratives to each article that deals with faith issues. We are under no obligation to mimic the rhetoric of partisans on either side of a debate when categorizing a given phenomenon, and I believe it is POV to do so. Or do you hold that an article on, say, the scientific method should be categorized under "Genocide" ... because scientists developed, after all, an atomic bomb? BrandonYusufToropov 13:47, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- Would you be happier if it was qualified under folklore? I think within this article should be included scientific views on prayer, it's psychological effects. Without that this is just a PR piece, it is a significant world view that prayer is a self dellusional. It has also been suggested that practice does have advantages but not releated to religions view of the pratice. Not covering these reduces this article to propaganda.--Baphomet. 20:23, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- There are skeptics enough to express doubts about the tenets of every religious practice or system, but this fact alone does not justify applying "category"-based pejoratives to each article that deals with faith issues. We are under no obligation to mimic the rhetoric of partisans on either side of a debate when categorizing a given phenomenon, and I believe it is POV to do so. Or do you hold that an article on, say, the scientific method should be categorized under "Genocide" ... because scientists developed, after all, an atomic bomb? BrandonYusufToropov 13:47, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
Including information on the psychological effects of prayer, and the effects on the praying person's stress and physical and/or mental health may be noteworthy. However no scientific evidence that prayer works, via divine intervention, has ever been produced. Statistical arguments for such things are infamous because they can so easily be manipulated and skewed (not regarding prayer alone mind you, but regarding the effectiveness of our prison system and other matters). Unless it can be scientifically demonstrated that prayer is the direct cause of a recovery it shouldn't be suggested that prayer works. I'll say to you something similar to what I say to my pagan friends who try to get me to believe in magic "Show me a man's severed head being reattached without any human intervention due to prayer, and I'll believe it. Repeat the process before others, and it becomes science" (To them I say "I'll believe in magic when you conjure a fireball and light a campfire with it"). Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing belief in prayer, and I'm not saying that it doesn't have it's benefits. As a Psychiatrist I'm actually rather certain that prayer can have benefits on the overall health to a person (rather it's prayer to the Abrahamic God, pagan gods, or some unknown and undefined power). To be honest I have never known prayer to cure an illness that one wouldn't either recover from naturally or that wasn't being treated by worldly means. LucaviX 20:29, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
- Prayer as a social construct to set aside quality time?--WholemealBaphomet 00:39, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
No, prayer as a therapeutic practice. Prayer often helps people cope with things such as unexpected tragedy, loss of work, and other problems. There are types of prayer which most psychiatrist would consider psychologically unhealthy as well (such as begging a divinity for something) but most forms of prayer seem rather benign and beneficial. LucaviX 00:39, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
- Perhaps quality time was the wrong wording. Prayer time being a period for contemplation, the modern rituals of prayer, could provide time for contemplation, and that a society which maintains the contemplative periods does find benefits, explained through purely rational means?--WholemealBaphomet 00:59, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
As a psychiatrist I'm more concerned with how prayer can help others cope with difficulties, relieve physical and psychological tension and stress, and aid overall health in various other ways. I'm not saying it does so by giving people time to reflect, I believe a large part of it is a sense of relief in one's burden by putting one's trust in a higher power. In other instances it may increase a person's moral, particularly if that person believes that the god or gods they pray to will help them. I've seen firsthand the physical benefits of prayer when a relative was able to relax after putting his condition "in God's hands" (his words). I've also seen how it inspires people to know that they're being prayed for, if for no other reason to know that others care.
As for the psychological benefits, I've noticed that people who pray are typically happier and more content with their lives, suffering from less anxiety and proving less likely to have suicidal tendencies. This holds true for most of my clients as well, not simply the Christian ones mind you. I've also noticed that atheist and secularist who find (responsible) alternative therapies seem to be in better overall mental and physical health than those who do not (playing certain games and painting often seems to help). One particular example was a self proclaimed atheist (I think he was 14 years old at the time) who was the subject of a study at Vanderbilt Children's Hospital [1]. He recovered extremely quickly from a near fatal disease caused by untreated ecoli poison, and he seemed to be in higher spirits better physical and psychological health due in large part to his immersement in a Super NES videogame called EVO. In fact most people who played this game seemed to relax more, have higher spirits, and be in better overall mental health. --LucaviX 01:30, 5 September 2005 (UTC)