The Problem With Prayer

[SwordOfTruth]

There's a fundamental problem with the idea of praying for things and the concept of the Omnipotent God portrayed by mainstream religions.

Let me ask those who believe in this particular God, do you truly believe that:

1. Nothing happens on Earth except that God directly causes it or allows it to happen?

2. God's will is absolute and can not be changed or obstructed?


Think this through most carefully. Do you often say The Lord's Prayer?

"Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed by thy name
Thy Kingdom come, Thy WILL BE DONE
On Earth, as it is in Heaven"


We have to face up to what this means. Is God in charge of everything or isn't he?

If you believe he is, then YOU MUST ACCEPT everything that happens because IT WAS GOD'S WILL that it happened. He either directly caused it to happen or he simply allowed it to happen. Either way it's his will that it happened.

As we stand today, this "God" has allowed millions to die from Covid and/or the various medical interventions. This "God" is also allowing all the current deaths and suffering in the various wars (Israel, Palestine, Ukraine etc).

Either you believe God is in control or you don't.

If you do, then praying and asking for things like Aunt Sally to be healed of Cancer, is surely going against God's will is it not?

God either directly caused the cancer or allowed it to happen. Either way God wanted Aunt Sally to have Cancer. It's his will.

It would be pretty sick of "God" to give people Cancer just to see if people would subsequently pray to him for their healing. I mean that would really be a sick thing to do and certainly not the behaviour of a benevolent being. That's not the nature of God that religion teaches or presents.

So something is very off with the idea of praying.

What it boils down to is this.

If you believe the defacto concept of God peddled by the Churches (i.e Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Omniscient etc) then YOU HAVE to accept the WILL OF GOD and thus everything happening around you.

Thus the ONLY prayer one can realistically make is along these lines:

"Dear God, help me to understand your will on Earth and accept it for what it is and help me understand my part in it"

No point praying for Aunt Sally to be healed. She's only ill in the first place by Gods permission and/or action. Praying for healing would in fact be acting against God's will. You'd be praying for God to do something different to what he willed and the Bible tells us that God's will is absolute and unobstructable.

I know this will challenge many but in the end, to wonder is to begin to understand . . . . . . Jose Ortega

 

[SwordOfTruth]

I realise since posting the above that many here are Open Theists and don't believe that God is all-powerful or all-knowing. That being the case I wonder where Open Theists stand on the issue of world control. Do you believe that Godis in control of everything that happens on Earth or do you believe that, since God is only partially potent, that there are things that happen on Earth beyond his control?

 

[Derf]

I realise since posting the above that many here are Open Theists and don't believe that God is all-powerful or all-knowing. That being the case I wonder where Open Theists stand on the issue of world control. Do you believe that Godis in control of everything that happens on Earth or do you believe that, since God is only partially potent, that there are things that happen on Earth beyond his control?

Potency does not equate to agency.

 

[SwordOfTruth]

Potency does not equate to agency.

Could you answer the simple question as given please?

Do you believe that God is in control of everything that happens on Earth or do you believe that there are things that happen on Earth beyond his control?

 

[Right Divider]

Could you answer the simple question as given please?

Do you believe that God is in control of everything that happens on Earth or do you believe that there are things that happen on Earth beyond his control?

No, God does not control everything that happens on Earth. He does not control those that commit evil.

 

[JudgeRightly]

There's a fundamental problem with the idea of praying for things and the concept of the Omnipotent God portrayed by mainstream religions.

I'll be answering these as a fundamentalist, Open Theist, and Mid-Acts Dispensationalist, of course.

Let me ask those who believe in this particular God, do you truly believe that:

1. Nothing happens on Earth except that God directly causes it or allows it to happen?

Everything that happens is allowed by God to happen.

However, that doesn't mean that God wants it to happen, or is okay with it happening.

2. God's will is absolute and can not be changed or obstructed?

God has certain things that He wants to accomplish, but which things are often hindered or prevented by men.

Think this through most carefully. Do you often say The Lord's Prayer?

"Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed by thy name
Thy Kingdom come, Thy WILL BE DONE
On Earth, as it is in Heaven"

No, because it was a prayer meant for the nation of Israel to pray, in hopes of the arrival of Christ's Kingdom on Earth... which never happened, but will happen in the future.

(Not to say that we can't use it in other ways, but that that's it's primary purpose.)

We have to face up to what this means. Is God in charge of everything or isn't he?

God is sovereign, yes.

But not how Calvinists define the word.

Just look up the standard definition of "sovereign."

If you believe he is, then YOU MUST ACCEPT everything that happens because IT WAS GOD'S WILL that it happened.

Not everything happens because it was God's will.

In fact, all evil happens outside of His will.

He either directly caused it to happen or he simply allowed it to happen. Either way it's his will that it happened.

Willing something to happen, and allowing something to happen, are two VERY different things.

One makes God complicit, the other absolves God of evil.

As we stand today, this "God" has allowed millions to die from Covid and/or the various medical interventions. This "God" is also allowing all the current deaths and suffering in the various wars (Israel, Palestine, Ukraine etc).

So instead of blaming men for those deaths, you blame God?

How does that make sense?

Either you believe God is in control or you don't.

False dichotomy.

The third option is that God is in control of some things, and not in control of other things.

If you do, then praying and asking for things like Aunt Sally to be healed of Cancer, is surely going against God's will is it not?

Indeed, this is one of the problems with a theistic determinism view such as Calvinism.

It's not a problem with Open Theism.

God either directly caused the cancer or allowed it to happen.

The latter, of course, is true.

The former, of course, is false.

Either way God wanted Aunt Sally to have Cancer. It's his will.

No.

Just because something happens doesn't mean it's God's will for it to happen.

It would be pretty sick of "God" to give people Cancer just to see if people would subsequently pray to him for their healing.

Indeed.

Akin to the firefighter setting fire to someone's home so that He could rescue them from the burning building.

I mean that would really be a sick thing to do and certainly not the behaviour of a benevolent being. That's not the nature of God that religion teaches or presents.

WE AGREE!

So something is very off with the idea of praying.

No. Prayer is fine.

The belief that "everything that happens is God's will" is the problem.

Start by removing that premise.

What it boils down to is this.

If you believe the defacto concept of God peddled by the Churches (i.e Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Omniscient etc) then YOU HAVE to accept the WILL OF GOD and thus everything happening around you.

Thus the ONLY prayer one can realistically make is along these lines:

"Dear God, help me to understand your will on Earth and accept it for what it is and help me understand my part in it"

No point praying for Aunt Sally to be healed. She's only ill in the first place by Gods permission and/or action. Praying for healing would in fact be acting against God's will. You'd be praying for God to do something different to what he willed and the Bible tells us that God's will is absolute and unobstructable.

I know this will challenge many but in the end, to wonder is to begin to understand . . . . . . Jose Ortega

Indeed, if nothing happens outside of God's will, then God is unjust.

That being the case I wonder where Open Theists stand on the issue of world control.

God has the ability to bring about that which He wills, either through men's compliance, or in spite of men's rebellion.

Do you believe that God is in control of everything that happens on Earth

No.

or do you believe that, since God is only partially potent,

"Partially potent"

XD

God can do whatever he wants to do, that does not violate His character.

that there are things that happen on Earth beyond his control?

Beyond His control, no, but certainly that HE does not desire to happen.

 

[SwordOfTruth]

God can do whatever he wants to do, that does not violate His character.

But since you assert that he is not omnipotent then by definition you imply that there are things that can be done but which he specifically can not do, does not have the power to do.

 

[SwordOfTruth]

Everything that happens is allowed by God to happen.

In fact, all evil happens outside of His will.

So just to be clear you're saying that evil happens regardless of what he wants, but at the same time he's allowing that evil to happen anyway.

Willing something to happen, and allowing something to happen, are two VERY different things.
One makes God complicit, the other absolves God of evil.

I'm not comfortable with this. The concept of God "allowing something to happen" means by definition that he COULD if he wanted to, PREVENT it from happening. If not he wouldn't be allowing it. It would be happening outside his control and he would be powerless to stop it happening.

If God COULD prevent it but chooses not to prevent it then I'm afraid that rather does make God accountable for that thing not being prevented from happening.

Thus a parent sees their daughter standing in the road and also sees a car speeding towards her. The parent is not responsible for the car and it's speed and direction. But the parent IS responsible for the safety and well being of the daughter. So the parent runs into the road and takes the daughter out of danger.

Now if the parent decided not to take that action and thus "allowed a bad thing to happen" to the daughter then it's entirely reasonable to blame the parent for the gruesome outcome. It would be entirely reasonable for society to judge that parent and to suggest that they were toally unloving and irresponsible, not deserving of having a child.

The same must be applied to God. If he chooses to allow such an event to happen then we must rightly hold him accountable for doing so.

However this line of thinking pre-supposes that God is a parent of humanity and has responsibility for humanities well being. If he doesn't then the above does not necessarily apply. In this case we can consider that the parent is not present in the scenario but a complete stranger/bystander is present who has no personal responsibility to the child. That bystander could act to save the child or could walk on by uncaring and uninterested.
If they just walked on by could we morally suggest that the bystander was inhuman, un-loving? I think many people would suggest this was so.

If we are placing God in this position, suggesting that he has no responsibility for humans and is indifferent to humans, uncaring then once again we come to the inevitable conclusion that this isn't any kind of entity worthy of our reverence or worship.

 

[JudgeRightly]

But since you assert that he is not omnipotent then by definition you imply that there are things that can be done but which he specifically can not do, does not have the power to do.

Sure. God cannot do the irrational. He cannot count the number of hairs on the boogeyman's head, nor make a sphere-shaped square, nor can He know what a married bachelor is.

Why? Because God is not irrational.

He is reason itself.

(Which is not to say that reason is God.)

 

[SwordOfTruth]

Sure. God cannot do the irrational. He cannot count the number of hairs on the boogeyman's head, nor make a sphere-shaped square, nor can He know what a married bachelor is.

Why? Because God is not irrational.

He is reason itself.

(Which is not to say that reason is God.)

This is a little bit disingenuous for our discussion don't you think?

There has been no suggestion that God can or should be able to do the impossible or nonsensical.

We're talking about possible things that can be done but which you assert God can not do.

Omnipotent, means all-powerful which means nothing is beyond capability.

Your OT position appears to be that God is not Omnipotent and thus there are real ordinary things which he just doesn't have the power to do.

 

[JudgeRightly]

So just to be clear you're saying that evil happens regardless of what he wants, but at the same time he's allowing that evil to happen anyway.

Yes.

I'm not comfortable with this.

That discomfort is a result of the cognitive dissonance between reality and what you believe.

Keep digging for the truth.

The concept of God "allowing something to happen" means by definition that he COULD if he wanted to, PREVENT it from happening.

Right, God could, at any point, simply send all sinners to Hell, and be done with humanity, and be FULLY justified in doing so, because He is a righteous God.

But He is committed to redeeming mankind, and demonstrated such by going to the cross.

It comes back to the question I keep asking you.

Is is good for someone to avoid the consequences of their actions?

If a man goes on a murder spree, should he avoid the consequences of his actions?

If a politician takes his country to war, should he not face the consequences of his actions?

What about what happens when you shove reality in someone's face?

Do they generally admit they were wrong, or do they normally double down, or get angry, or go off and sulk?

The latter, right?

If God is trying to redeem mankind to Himself, don't you think that would be counterproductive?

Which is more loving to the victim of assault, that the criminal sees justice and the victim be compensated? or that the criminal never faces retribution for his thoughts and actions, even if the intended victim is never harmed?

Let me put it this way, the police uncover a potential school shooter (THAT would be something, wouldn't it!) and arrests him, and because he intended to murder people, he gets the death penalty.

At what point do you think God should have stopped that person from going to shoot up a school?

If not he wouldn't be allowing it.

Again, allowing something to happen is not the same as wanting it to happen.

It would be happening outside his control and he would be powerless to stop it happening.

You seem to think there is no in-between, that there could be no reason for God NOT to intervene.

Why?

If God COULD prevent it but chooses not to prevent it then I'm afraid that rather does make God accountable for that thing not being prevented from happening.

Does it?

Or perhaps you're missing important information that, should God intervene, would make the situation worse?

How could you know?

Thus a parent sees their daughter standing in the road and also sees a car speeding towards her. The parent is not responsible for the car and it's speed and direction. But the parent IS responsible for the safety and well being of the daughter. So the parent runs into the road and takes the daughter out of danger.

Indeed, that would be a good thing to do.

But God is not your parent. He is God.

He has delegated the authority and responsibility for protecting one's children to their parents. And the authority and responsibility to protect civilians to their respective governments.

And because He has done so, He respects that authority structure, and doesn't micromanage.

Now if the parent decided not to take that action and thus "allowed a bad thing to happen" to the daughter then it's entirely reasonable to blame the parent for the gruesome outcome. It would be entirely reasonable for society to judge that parent and to suggest that they were toally unloving and irresponsible,

Indeed.

not deserving of having a child.

Debatable.

The same must be applied to God. If he chooses to allow such an event to happen then we must rightly hold him accountable for doing so.

So let me ask you this.

If God holds out his hand all day to someone, and they refuse to take his hand, is He guilty of not forcing them to take His hand?

Or is He rightly justified in being exasperated when they don't?

However this line of thinking pre-supposes that God is a parent of humanity

Parent? Figuratively speaking, sure, but not quite.

He is God.

He is the Creator.

He designed things to run a certain way, and only intervenes when necessary, and to the best effect possible.

and has responsibility for humanities well being.

No. That responsibility He has delegated to humans.

Remember at the end of Genesis 3, He said "cursed is the ground for your sake," and Paul commands that if someone does not work, he shall not eat.

God is not responsible for men taking care of themselves.

If men fail, it is on them, not on God.

If he doesn't then the above does not necessarily apply.

He does not have responsibility for the well-being of men. He delegated that to men.

In this case we can consider that the parent is not present in the scenario but a complete stranger/bystander is present who has no personal responsibility to the child. That bystander could act to save the child or could walk on by uncaring and uninterested.
If they just walked on by could we morally suggest that the bystander was inhuman, un-loving? I think many people would suggest this was so.

If only more people thought like this.

We wouldn't see nearly half the videos online of people getting mugged, yet bystanders doing nothing about it.

If we are placing God in this position, suggesting that he has no responsibility for humans and is indifferent to humans, uncaring

God wants to save men's souls. He loves humanity so much that He even DIED for ALL MEN!

But!

Intervening in every little thing does not work in His favor towards that effect.

If God intervened in everything, then there would be no reason to put one's faith in Him.

then once again we come to the inevitable conclusion that this isn't any kind of entity worthy of our reverence or worship.

Only within your paradigm of beliefs.

 

[JudgeRightly]

This is a little bit disingenuous for our discussion don't you think?

There has been no suggestion that God can or should be able to do the impossible or nonsensical.

Unfortunately, sometimes people are silly, and say God can. I was just covering my bases.

We're talking about possible things that can be done but which you assert God can not do.

Noted!

Omnipotent, means all-powerful which means nothing is beyond capability.

And this is why I said the above.

Because "nothing is beyond capability" includes, but is not limited to, the irrational.

Hence the disclaimer.

Your OT position appears to be that God is not Omnipotent and thus there are real ordinary things which he just doesn't have the power to do.

I mean, He can't force someone to love Him.

Which is what it all comes down to, doesn't it?

Love cannot be compelled. So there are things God cannot do, because doing them would be not only contradictory but also counterproductive to what He wants to accomplish.

Let's use an analogy, see if it makes it easier to understand.

You tell your son that if he gets good grades in school, you'll take him to the amusement park as a reward. So he studies hard, and at the end of school year, he passes all his tests, and gets good grades. So you load up the car, and you, and your family, all start down the road to the amusement park. But on the way there, he starts being obnoxious, pestering his sister, and disobeys your wife's commands to stop.

What's a good father to do?

Well, you tell your son, "Son, because you have dishonored your mother by disobeying her, I can no longer reward you, so I'm turning the car around, and we're going home."

Of course, he complains, saying, "But you promised if I got good grades, we could go!"

"I cannot reward bad behavior, and your behavior on this trip has been atrocious."

(End of the analogy)

God is the same. He cannot reward bad behavior with blessings. So that's at least one thing He cannot do, even though He certainly has the power to do so, because TO DO SO would be to go against His righteous character.

 

[Derf]

Could you answer the simple question as given please?

Do you believe that God is in control of everything that happens on Earth or do you believe that there are things that happen on Earth beyond his control?

I did, but you didn't understand it. God made us to be able to do stuff. We are free agents. Therefore, God does not determine everything we do, although He might have the power to do so.

 

[SwordOfTruth]

He might have the power to do so.

Sorry but that's rather ambiguous. Does your god have the power to do anything at all (that is possible to be done) or are there (possible) things that he just doesn't have the power to do.

 

[SwordOfTruth]

Because "nothing is beyond capability" includes, but is not limited to, the irrational.
Hence the disclaimer.

You're dancing around the issue like a jumping bean as you are wont to do on topics that challenge your belief system.

What can your god NOT do that can be done?

If you believe truly that he is NOT all-powerful, then by definition this means there are things which CAN be done but which he specifically can not do for lack of power and ability. What are those things?

If your definition of "all-powerful" is just some facile notion of only being able to do that which is actually possible in the first place, then by any measure we're playing childish semantic games and your god is effectively omnipotent.

I mean, He can't force someone to love Him.

Saying it is so does not make that true.


What is love? It's some kind of interaction of "stuff" that exists in our hearts and minds which as humans we are incapable of understanding. We just know what we feel when it happens. If your god created the universe and created humans then he most certainly could manipulate that stuff to make someone love him. But of course what would be the point. The debate is not on the merits of whether making someone love him is worthwhile or not. The debate is whether your god is actually powerful enough to do it IF he wanted to do it.

Which is what it all comes down to, doesn't it?

No it's not. The concept of all-powerful is far wider than any issue of love between man and any god. Being all-powerful means your god can create planets and supernova and white giants at will. It means your god can create multiple universes, alter timelines, be everywhere in every place at the same time and so on. So which is it? Is your god all-powerful or not?

Love cannot be compelled.

False, again . .

So there are things God cannot do, because doing them would be not only contradictory but also counterproductive to what He wants to accomplish.

The desire not to do something does not equate to the inability to do that thing. If I have a gun I have the power to kill a person. My choosing not to do so does not mean I suddenly lack the power to do it.

Let's use an analogy, see if it makes it easier to understand.

No let's not do that because it's just another attempt to divert and side-step the core matter of the point being debated.

We are debating whether there is anything that your god specifically does not have the power or ability to do, which can otherwise be done.

Not what he desires to do or doesn't desire to do.

If there is some specific thing which you claim your god can not do if he chooses to want to do it then who or what IS capable of doing that thing in his stead?

 

[JudgeRightly]

You're dancing around the issue like a jumping bean as you are wont to do on topics that challenge your belief system.

I'm really not.

What can your god NOT do that can be done?

Reward bad behavior, and punish good behavior.

And not because he is completely incapable of doing so, but because He refuses to do so, because doing so would be unjust.

If you believe truly that he is NOT all-powerful, then by definition this means there are things which CAN be done but which he specifically can not do for lack of power and ability. What are those things?

Supra.

If your definition of "all-powerful" is just some facile notion of only being able to do that which is actually possible in the first place, then by any measure we're playing childish semantic games and your god is effectively omnipotent.

It's important to note the difference between the definition I gave, and the "classical" (read: Greek) definition.

Saying it is so does not make that true.

It is true, by the very definition (which I provided below) of love.

You cannot force someone to love you, because to do so requires the ability to hate, and choose not to.

If you try to force someone to love you, they will simply hate you for it.

Thus, you cannot force someone to love you, it will only result in hatred.

Thus, God cannot compel someone to love Him.

Love must be freely given, or else it's not love.

What is love?

"Baby, don't hurt me! Don't hurt me! No mo'!"

Sorry, you walked right into that one, I had to!

Jokes aside: Love is the commitment to the good of someone.

It can be anyone. Your relative, your friend, your dog, your neighbor, God, and even yourself.

If you are committed to someone's good, that is love.

If you know that a choice will not be good for someone, and you choose that option anyways, you don't love/aren't loving them.

It's some kind of interaction of "stuff" that exists in our hearts and minds which as humans we are incapable of understanding.

That's a terrible definition.

Mine's better.

We just know what we feel when it happens.

Love is not a feeling. It's not a chemical reaction, nor a potion.

It is a commitment to someone's good.

If your god

*God

created the universe and created humans then he most certainly could manipulate that stuff to make someone love him.

He could do that, but that wouldn't be loving, now would it?

Remember, start with the assumption that God is love, and then remember that God doesn't do anything that isn't loving.

And the result wouldn't be love of Him anyways. At best, it could be called Stockholm syndrome.

That's not healthy.

God is a healthy God.

But of course what would be the point.

There wouldn't be any, because what God desires is love, not Stockholm syndrome.

I think it's safe to discard the idea that God did such a thing, based on that alone.

The debate is not on the merits of whether making someone love him is worthwhile or not.

It isn't? News to me!

The debate is whether your god is actually powerful enough to do it IF he wanted to do it.

Are you sure?

Because God tells us in His word, through Paul, the following:

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing. Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.

Bible Gateway passage: 1 Corinthians 13:1-10 - New King James Version

The Greatest Gift - Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains...

www.biblegateway.com

Do you see now why I say "love is the commitment to the good of someone"?

No it's not. The concept of all-powerful is far wider than any issue of love between man and any god. Being all-powerful means your god can create planets and supernova and white giants at will. It means your god can create multiple universes, alter timelines, be everywhere in every place at the same time and so on. So which is it? Is your god all-powerful or not?

Supra.

False, again . .

Yawn.

The desire not to do something does not equate to the inability to do that thing.

It does if that thing is evil, and you are committed to good.

If I have a gun I have the power to kill a person. My choosing not to do so does not mean I suddenly lack the power to do it.

If you are committed to the good of that person, then you won't murder them.

That's part of what it means to love them.

At a minimum.

No let's not do that because it's just another attempt to divert and side-step the core matter of the point being debated.

The analogy answers your challenge.

Go through it, please.

We are debating whether there is anything that your god specifically does not have the power or ability to do, which can otherwise be done.

Answered, with the analogy given.

Not what he desires to do or doesn't desire to do.

Supra.

If there is some specific thing which you claim your god can not do if he chooses to want to do it then who or what IS capable of doing that thing in his stead?

Supra.

 

[Lon]

There's a fundamental problem with the idea of praying for things and the concept of the Omnipotent God portrayed by mainstream religions.

Let me ask those who believe in this particular God, do you truly believe that:

1. Nothing happens on Earth except that God directly causes it or allows it to happen?

Lamentations 3:37 Have to believe it. It is scripture.

2. God's will is absolute and can not be changed or obstructed?

a) God's will is decretive and prescriptive, which do you mean?
b) Changed? In His prescriptive will, we see Moses stepping in as mediator. Is this 'against' God's will? No of course not since He placed Moses in the first place. Even in your view, "God is a master chess player." It concedes the classic understanding and uplifts it.
c) Obstructed. Yes, I believe we have no ability as finite impotent people to obstruct God.

Think this through most carefully. Do you often say The Lord's Prayer?

"Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed by thy name
Thy Kingdom come, Thy WILL BE DONE
On Earth, as it is in Heaven"


We have to face up to what this means. Is God in charge of everything or isn't he?

If even in your view, He is a master chess player, prayer is ordained already. He knows every move. Could such be seen as 'changing' His game? He knows every move. Can you think of anyone, ever, beating God at chess???

If you believe he is, then YOU MUST ACCEPT everything that happens because IT WAS GOD'S WILL that it happened. He either directly caused it to happen or he simply allowed it to happen. Either way it's his will that it happened.

Prescriptive and Decretive.

As we stand today, this "God" has allowed millions to die from Covid and/or the various medical interventions. This "God" is also allowing all the current deaths and suffering in the various wars (Israel, Palestine, Ukraine etc).

Yet not one sparrow falls without His knowing and caring. The problem of suffering is a large theological discussion. We have to understand God and His interaction with what we view as atrocities in view of what He desires and what He is doing. Hurricanes, war, all manner of concerns.

Either you believe God is in control or you don't.

Ephesians 1:11 Proverbs 16:9 Daniel 4:35 (and this from a man in exile)

If you do, then praying and asking for things like Aunt Sally to be healed of Cancer, is surely going against God's will is it not?

When you pray, do you ask or demand? I have prayed and God has answered 'yes' and 'no.' Isn't it according to HIS will? Yes it is. I'm not a narcissist, I pray God does HIS will in these circumstances.

God either directly caused the cancer or allowed it to happen. Either way God wanted Aunt Sally to have Cancer. It's his will.

Yes. 1 Peter 1:3-11 "...these have come so that your faith... might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ."

It would be pretty sick of "God" to give people Cancer just to see if people would subsequently pray to him for their healing. I mean that would really be a sick thing to do and certainly not the behaviour of a benevolent being. That's not the nature of God that religion teaches or presents.

Your ideas are driving your theology objections. The premises need examination and I pray this response helps.

So something is very off with the idea of praying.

What it boils down to is this.

If you believe the defacto concept of God peddled by the Churches (i.e Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Omniscient etc) then YOU HAVE to accept the WILL OF GOD and thus everything happening around you.

Yes. I'm terrible! I can't even make dinner consistently. The Lord's prayer specifically says: "Thy Will" and "Lead us."

Thus the ONLY prayer one can realistically make is along these lines:

"Dear God, help me to understand your will on Earth and accept it for what it is and help me understand my part in it"

Sounds good, not my only prayer item, but I'm on page with this. My will needs alignment with HIS will because I'm not perfect, He is.

No point praying for Aunt Sally to be healed.

Incorrect and makes prayer formula-matic. We are in a relationship with the Father and we are the ones that need to be conformed. My will is imperfect. Prayer aligns us with God. He is pleased to answer my prayers. It wasn't Aunt Sally. It was my mother. She passed. Was God answering my prayers? Yes. My desire was that she, I, the family grow closer to Him during the difficult time. Could God have healed my mother? Yes, absolutely. Am I mad at God for saying 'no'? No. He answered my prayer. Prayer is 'talking to God.' It isn't a formula, it isn't a magic genie rub. It is a conversation with my heavenly Father.

She's only ill in the first place by Gods permission and/or action.

Yes. Prescriptive will. Mom smoked many years. She was 30 years off of them. I may also suffer because I had second-hand smoke most of my life. If I get cancer, I will ask God to heal me. I'm in a relationship with God. His will is better than mine.

Praying for healing would in fact be acting against God's will.

Our respective takes: God instituted Moses as intercessor, a picture of Christ in the future. Did Moses interpose 'against' God's will? No, rather it was a balance between God's decretive and prescriptive will.

You'd be praying for God to do something different to what he willed and the Bible tells us that God's will is absolute and unobstructable.

Did I 'obstruct' God's will praying for my mother? Is He free to do as He pleases? The logic doesn't follow. I understand the Open platform, but for me, it isn't deep enough in conclusions to be viable. The Open paradigms simply do not go deep enough for building healthy theology standards.

I know this will challenge many but in the end, to wonder is to begin to understand . . . . . . Jose Ortega

Simply does not go deep enough for my theology paradigms. Scripture is replete with ideas we must continue to wrestle with. Hope you are blessed today and given more thoughts to work through. -Lon

 

[rstrats]

There are probably at least a few hundred prayers being said around the globe at any given moment. I always wonder how they are all kept separate in order to make the decisions for any actions to be taken with regard to each one of them. And of course, they just keep coming non-stop 24/7.

 

[Lon]

There are probably at least a few hundred prayers being said around the globe at any given moment. I always wonder how they are all kept separate in order to make the decisions for any actions to be taken with regard to each one of them. And of course, they just keep coming non-stop 24/7.

Using the cancer analogy: I don't believe anybody is praying that God will take somebody with Cancer. In general, having the heart of God, I'd reckon those prayers are very much unified and in accord. T God is sovereign, always makes the best choices. Romans 8:28

 

[JudgeRightly]

I don't agree with everything the woman being interviewed says, but I think she gives a good answer regarding the reason God doesn't intervene: