The Natural World

1041 Words5 Pages
As is evident everything in modern life is somehow affected by advancements in science and technology. Thus in the 20th and 21 centuries Christianity is increasingly relying on science to support their views. Using this line of thinking as a basis to understand the laws of nature and medicine, and thus be better able to serve the Christian people. Such a curiosity has crossed into other fields within Christianity, leading the Christian faith to employ research into their own faith. Such being the case with distant intercessory prayer (IP). On the other hand, science strives to understand and analyze all aspects of the natural world, which since 1965 has included IP. Thus, there are both proponents and opponents to the religious claims that…show more content…
Even leading to the development of the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM). While public media and Christian groups have often lauded the effects of IP, it wasn’t until 1965 that further scientific research into IP was conducted. Much of this research includes investigations, “designed to scientifically test whether praying for patients can, within the confines of a scientifically controlled study, actually be demonstrated to improve patients’ health relative to a control group that is not the object of prayer.” Masters reviews other scientific research of IP concerning conditions such as leukemia, cardiac disease, substance abuse, and pregnancy. Studies which were conducted to result in the best internal validity. The research study conducted by Masters produced results that found IP to be beneficial, yet could not produce results that were consistent across measures of the study. This being the case that some research studies into IP resulted in significant results, like that conducted by Harris in 1999, while other research studies found no significant results. Such results have led many Christian thinkers, including Masters himself, to believe that IP is still beneficial, but the studies were flawed through the failure to create explicit theories of IP. Evidenced through the failure to outline that there was no choice of outcome measures, in the types of wording of IP, nor choices for the patient’s
Open Document