It’s about the conversation. My wife can “know” that I love her, but if I never say it, it impacts the relationship.

There’s something very relational in prayer. Sharing with God what is on your heart, and listening for God to respond. The problem with prayer is that we usually focus more on us and not listing for God’s response.

I do not believe, as deism would indicate, that God is detached. Neither do I believe that God reacts mechanically - prayer is not a “gimme” situation, where we can say it the “right” way and get whatever we selfishly ask for.

Whether when dealing with enemies, weather patterns, sicknesses, or whatever, problems come our way often to remind us to turn to God. This is not an exception to a Biblical example, it is by far the most common Biblical example. God yearning for us to turn to Him. And putting us in situations that cause us to rely on Him more.

Yay. This is just what I’ve been commenting about over on over at http://nicholasfiedler.com/blog/?p=898#comments

My unstated conclusion over there is that if prayer is *just* about centering yourself, and there is no God involved, then it cannot, surely, do more than reinforce your prejudices and maybe, if you’re good at it, allow your conscious and subconscious minds to get in touch with each other.

But if God is involved, then prayer has got to be more about God bringing me around to his way of thinking, than vice versa. [Though you might say that Abraham's prayer for Sodom contradicts me somewhat.]

agree that it’s all about the relationship. and your example with your wife is very fitting. and i do believe that it’s a 2 way conversation. somehow . . . in an unexplainable way . . . there is a conversation going on. i won’t argue with that. so i’m not arguing for a classical definition of detachment. perhaps that is a bad word that i chose. but rather that god isn’t controlling. or that we can pull god’s arm behind his back tight enough until he gives us what we want. but again you’re right on with the formula or mechanic prayer. prayer isn’t an equation.

so i’m fine and in agreement with you that our situations force us to turn toward god and inward towards ourselves. but i would push back by saying that god puts us in situations only to cause us to rely on him.

in this way i think god is removed from events. he doesn’t force events or cause events to get us to rely on him more. in this case he would violate himself in contradictions at almost every point.

if put is in a persecuting situation to force us to rely on him . . . then what does that say about who he chooses to do the persecution. they have no choice? or is god just choosing them to do evil to teach us a lesson about trusting him? it all seems like a rather round about way of doing it.

my assertion is that god (for the most part) is hands-off. not hands-off relationally. but hands-off in controlling the events of the world. not that he can’t interfere or intervene. but for the most part chooses to let the clock wind on it’s own natural ability. except we’re not a clock and have a choice to play in it. our “choosing” is what is important. between choosing to be reformed into the way of jesus or be reformed into the way of destruction. prayer is the example of this. and i don’t think it takes away the power of prayer. but rather adds to it. it becomes a centering place of repentance and a place to conform our perspective and dreams into god’s. not forcefully, but slowly and willingly.

am i making any sense as far as my distinction between deism and then the elements of a god that “chooses” not to be controlling.

that’s why i think this conversation is connected to a larger conversation about reformed theology. but that’s neither here nor there.

andrew.
thanks for stopping by.

i’ll agree with you. if we’re not careful then prayer becomes nothing but a meditation with the self. that’s why i prefer to think of it as a 2 way meditation. meditation between god and me. sort of a dynamic conversation that flows both ways. but it’s never me coming to god and saying, please give me a raise. please heal my dad. please save the world. please bless me. please let me get a girlfriend.

but rather god i’m desperate. i’m tired. i’m joyful. i’m struggling. i’m soaring. and becomes sort of an inner dialogue about god’s dreams for you in the larger scope of the world. not a reduction of the self, but an expansion of it in the larger narrative of god’s hopes and dreams for the world.

You call this a conversation, but there is very little Eric. . . its basically just a blog

i gave that disclaimer already chappy. i make one little “nick is posting content” comment and next thing you know the nails come out.

cat fight!

or we could pillow fight.

He got on a roll Nick, it was a constant stream of “Brown is typing…”. It’s all good.

slap fight?

sword fight?

“in this way i think god is removed from events. he doesn’t force events or cause events to get us to rely on him more. in this case he would violate himself in contradictions at almost every point.

if put is in a persecuting situation to force us to rely on him . . . then what does that say about who he chooses to do the persecution. they have no choice? or is god just choosing them to do evil to teach us a lesson about trusting him? it all seems like a rather round about way of doing it.”

Yet the Bible is full of descriptions of stuff like that. And we shouldn’t always be so quick to run away from apparent contradictions - sometimes it actually is both, and it’s our limitations that forces us from seeing (spiritual) reality.

Did God create the storm around Jonah when he refused to go to Nineveh or not? Did God *cause* the whale to swallow Jonah? Or cause the other guys on the boat to toss Jonah at just the right time?

I don’t think you can pass that kind of stuff off as just random events. Miracles (good things) can happen by supernatural intervention. Bad things can happen that way, too.

And sometimes the bad things happen *intentionally* in order to turn us back towards God. Or to put us in a situation where we can bring more glory to Him.

This is not my rambling attempts at trying to make sense of something, this is my attempt to describe what I see in scripture. Deism is interesting in the theory of a God who isn’t intervening, but that idea clearly is not Biblical. Christ coming down as a man, healing and forgiving sins, offering himself as a sacrifice, and rising from the dead — the very central story of God’s great epic portrays the reality that God is very willing to intervene into the normal course of human and natural events.

“Christ coming down as a man, healing and forgiving sins, offering himself as a sacrifice, and rising from the dead — the very central story of God’s great epic portrays the reality that God is very willing to intervene into the normal course of human and natural events.”

i’m obviously not advocating such a strict view of deism. and there is a difference between incarnation as relationship. and god micromanaging events and people when we want something to happen.

“and there is a difference between incarnation as relationship. and god micromanaging events and people when we want something to happen.”

So what about mothers and fathers who pray for their children? Does this type of thing have no effect?

who am i to say what god listens to or hears or responds to. so let that be my disclaimer before i become the insensitive guy.

my experience and reflection is that prayer is more for inner transformation than it is for god’s intervention. and that inner transformation leads to local/global intervention.

does praying for god to raise up your kid make them godly because you prayed the prayer enough times that god decided to intervene and make (i.e. control) them godly? or does being in conversation with god lead you to a sacred space where you are able to become aware of god’s dreams for your family and you make a choice or don’t make a choice to align yourselves with them. either becoming a better parent through the process or becoming a destructive parent through the process?

i would say it’s less god “making” your child godly. and more of a direct link to how formative prayer is for the parents. thus the parents become more “godly” parents and the child becomes that as well.

I’d say it is both, actually. There are elements of my children’s spirituality that I cannot influence, except through prayer. There are spiritual realities beyond what I can see. There are evil spirits vying for my children’s soul, and they need God’s protection and provision. I’m not one to get all wrapped up in spiritual warfare, but if I am to believe in the Bible I must believe it exists, and that prayer affects it.

If praying for other people only directly affects the person who is doing the praying, then you take the mystical and spiritual element completely out of it.

i definitely understand your point derek. the whole spiritual warfare thing is admittedly a huge problem. but since i’m a heretic, i might as well admit that i line up with walter wink’s understanding of spiritual powers and principalities being the “spirits of this age”. not spiritual demons swirling around. but demonic none the less. all though i’ll be up front and admit that i’m probably way too influenced by the other end of the spectrum of postmodern reactionism. so to be fair . . . my lens is probably colored by that more than i would like to admit.

but i don’t think prayer being directly individual makes it less mystical or spiritual. for me at least, and i can’t argue for everyone who assumes some variant of my position, i find it to be more spiritual and mystical. realizing that god is in conversation with me is highly mystical/spiritual.

but again . . . i get the whole idea that elements of deism that i’m talking about are certainly de-spiritualizing the world in a way.