Oh wait, that's not the purpose of the study?
It's to once again test the power of prayers for healing. Deja vu. Wasn't there a similar study previously that failed?
Oh, this one's different. It actually passed. Wait... what? 
"Western and Mozambican Iris and Global Awakening [two evangelical/missionary organizations that cooperated with the research] leaders and affiliates who administered PIP all used a similar protocol. They typically spent 1-15 minutes (sometimes an hour or more, circumstances permitting) administering PIP. They placed their hands on the recipient's head and some- times embraced the person in a hug, keeping their eyes open to observe results. In soft tones, they petitioned God to heal, invited the Holy Spirit's anointing, and commanded healing and the departure of any evil spirits in Jesus' name.
Those who prayed then asked recipients whether they were healed
."
Hmm... something seems fishy about this study... although it was peer-reviewed.
Oh, I see where I bolded. It's entirely subjective. But what if they say they're not healed?
"If recipients responded negatively or stated that the healing was partial, PIP was continued. If they answered in the affirmative, informal tests were conducted, such as asking recipients to repeat words or sounds (e.g. hand claps) intoned from behind or to count fingers from roughly 30 cm away. If recipients were unable or partially able to perform tasks, PIP was continued for as long as circumstances permitted."
So if they said they were healed, they were retested compared to their results prior to the PIP. Okay, that's all fair and such, surely they tested against a control group that conducted the same test without magical healing.
Didn't they?
Err... no. No control group whatsoever. The study wasn't even single-blind or double-blind. This is the definition of bad science.
As for the title to this post...
Conducting similar studies under controlled clinical conditions in North America would be desirable, y
et neither Iris nor Global Awakening claims comparable results in industrialized countries
(
arguing that "anointing" and "faith" are lower where medical therapies are available
)—see Supplemental Digital Content for our unsuccessful attempts to collect data in the US.
That's pretty awful. Thanks, Templeton Foundation, for absolutely nothing of any use.
Source
1 Comment
Recommended Comments