This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Drs Chibnall, Jeral, and Cerullo are to be congratulated for their thoughtful discussion in "Experiments on Distant Intercessory Prayer: God, Science, and the Lesson of Massah."¹ As a conservative Christian and a physician who has conducted many clinical trials, I have found such studies to be greatly flawed, not only on scientific bases, but also on several theological bases. First, the Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is the only way to God (John 14:6). If this is true, then a study using prayers to a multitude of gods, spirits, etc is doomed to failure. Second, how can one offer sincere prayer without some type of personal concern for the object of the prayer? Third, such studies imply that God is forced to respond positively to the prayers that are offered. If so, He is not God but merely the servant of the suppliant. Fourth, can God be expected to respond . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Experiments on Distant Intercessory Prayer: God, Science, and the Lesson of Massah
John T. Chibnall, Joseph M. Jeral, and Michael A. Cerullo
Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(21):2529-2536.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT