Most everyone seems to be soliciting God's favour. It is of course a normal thing to do for those among us who do believe in God. Problem is, my opponent is asking for favours from Him at about the same time that I am. What's more, even in confrontational situations such as war, or a murder trial, both parties seek help from the same entity. Does God's help then go to the one who eventually wins? And does that mean God isn't on the side of the loser?
This request for favours goes up by way of prayer. Within the Christian faith, prayer has been defined as "Talking to God," or as
the act of attempting to verbally communicate with the supernatural. It is found in almost all the religions of the world. It is sometimes communal, as during a church service; it is sometimes done in private. Its purpose within Christianity is to assess the will of God for one's life, to praise God, to give thanks to God, to repent of sinful behavior, to ask forgiveness, to seek a favor from God, and (occasionally) to ask God to curse an opponent. [Source]
"Assessing the will of God," the same source informs us, is described in Psalms 86:6-7: "Give ear, O LORD, unto my prayer; and attend to the voice of my supplications. In the day of my trouble I will call upon you: for you will answer me." The other characteristics of prayer, from praising God to asking God to curse the enemy, are clear enough not to be belaboured.
The questions remain, however -- questions whose answers seem even farther away when one ponders the multitude of religions. When President George W. Bush, a well-known born-again Christian, kneels down at bedtime to ask for favours concerning the capture of Osama bin Laden, and the latter, a well-known Islamic Fundamentalist, does likewise to ask for something against the former, what happens? And is that what some label "the clash of civilisations/religions"?
One of the things that get me is how most who think God is on their side don't listen to Her. By right, prayer should be a two-way street. You ask, you praise, you acknowledge, BUT you also listen, intently. Our friends, however, know what their God requires of them, know who their God likes, dislikes, will help, will dump, and so on. So in prayer they're really just mumbling meaningless and memorised sayings of the sort, "Shower them with your love." But in all honesty they aren't listening.
If there's a God out there or up there, He is probably not on the side of rich folks who sit on poor folks. He's probably unhappy at folks who kill others in his name. He's probably wagging his finger at those who go against the grain of goodness that is inherent in human beings. What grain of goodness? I don't know and I can't be sure of it's existence except where it relates to my own consciousness. Wagging what finger? Again that's what I think God would do, if God existed. But I'm careful not to impose that on you. My own prayer is that we should all strive not to impose our consciousness on others, because I believe that if we succeed, we will have made a giant step toward living together peacefully. There are so many religions and beliefs that if all of us strive instead to impose ourselves on others, then as a race it is a sure thing tha we will never, ever stop fighting amongst ourselves.
Well, if one is to assume the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient god...
That god's will is not going to be changed by a prayer, because it is impossible for that god not to know what he is going to do and act accordingly. God cannot change his "mind".
Even if a god exists, prayer is useless.
Posted by: James Clark | March 12, 2006 at 05:47 PM
"Even if a god exists, prayer is useless"
--------------------
I agree that it is useless as a tool for changing God's mind, assuming "the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient god". Praying to have an enemy cursed or praying to win the lottery is therefore ineffective, or should be.
But when one rightly believes in God, and prays selflessly, then prayer becomes something else. It becomes a moment of intense thought, meditation, and humble soul searching... assuming "the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient god".
Posted by: Rethabile | March 12, 2006 at 07:11 PM
Be that as it may, it's not going to bring about the apparently desired results unless *people* get off their proverbial rear ends to set things straight (or croooked) themselves.
Posted by: James Clark | March 12, 2006 at 09:02 PM
Amen.
Posted by: Rethabile | March 13, 2006 at 12:49 AM
I would like to comment on this one but I fear going on and on... being misunderstood...
The first area of misunderstanding is when I ask Rethabile to examine the historical origin of the word "God." Just to pose this question shuts down 'good' people: they might put on their athiest protective gear when it is not needed.
We need to dig beneath these structures to find the Old Kingdom pyramids under the sand...
"God" is a word that came from England... Rethabile talking about Christian God is like Rethabile talking about Highland Games in Nigeria. The kilt looks funny on an African body... but people are dying over what I think is so funny---so I better stop laughing...
Since English is an egocentric materialistic language we cannot underestimate the problem of translating Biblical legends into this language.
Divinity is lost in the translation and we are left with is King George Bush God and linear prayers in 4/4 military beat.
Let's get back polyrhythms... Let's listen to old Blues instead of modern rock...
Posted by: Bryan Wilhite | March 14, 2006 at 04:51 AM
Bryan: If there's misunderstanding, then there's communication. Don't be afraid that we might misunderstand you.
The word "God" is occidental, you're right. In Sesotho we say Molimo (monotheistic) and Balimo (polytheistic). My use of the word is simply that: language. A superior being, whether it be a white-haired man with a smile, a black-haired woman with a grin, or the self. That's all. We in Lesotho were Chritianised by the 1833 French missionaries who converted Moshoeshoe I. There's nothing wrong with Christianity. Nor is there anything wrong with Buddhism, Islam and other religions. It is our interpretation and application of these teachings that are often wrong. And the interpretation and application are often wrong because of too much egoism/egotism.
Posted by: Rethabile | March 14, 2006 at 03:45 PM
PS: There's nothing wrong with the so-called animist beliefs either. II mean beliefs that I would label "of African origin." Nothing, but nothing wrong with them or any other religion.
Posted by: Rethabile | March 14, 2006 at 03:48 PM
One of the challenges our ancestors had to face was developing a storage mechanism for the accumulated wisdom of generations all the way back to the first ancestor.
Our ancestors were successful. They were successful not to make us proud to be Black or to terrify white people. Because pride on the scale of Western power (and white people) did not exist. All our ancestors wanted to do was to take care of their descendants. However, these French guys you talked about showed up and disrupted the data transfer process with a "new" protocol, trojan horses, phising attacks and of course viruses... It is not like these guys have some hidden switch that we can beg them to use and "switch off" all the "mistakes" they might admit to... They are only acting upon the information they receive from their ancestors...
Bishop Tutu still calls for reconciliation...
Posted by: Bryan Wilhite | March 14, 2006 at 09:36 PM