Mikey Lynch on Excuse me, but what's ‘mission’? (04/12/2008).
Nigel Statham on The second commandment (03/12/2008).
Dave Woolcott on Evaluating truth (03/12/2008).
sandy Grant on The second commandment (03/12/2008).
Sandy Grant on Evaluating truth (03/12/2008).
Ben Hudson on Job and prayer (03/12/2008).
Dave Woolcott on Evaluating truth (03/12/2008).
Sandy Grant on Evaluating truth (03/12/2008).
Brad Hansen on Getting rid of the killer but (03/12/2008).
Paul Grimmond on Getting rid of the killer but (03/12/2008).
Excuse me, but what’s ‘mission’? by Peter Sholl (1 comment). As a new missionary visiting a church recently, this was a question asked by one keen enquirer. He explained that he … more
The second commandment by Lionel Windsor (2 comments). Church as we know it can sometimes be a bit weird and jarring. A few weeks ago at church, we heard … more
Getting rid of the killer but by Paul Grimmond (8 comments). I admit it, the title is a serious temptation: I feel an overwhelming desire to make bad jokes about posteriors (perhaps … more
What are we doing anyway? by Tony Payne (11 comments). One of the pitfalls most non-profit organizations fall into at one stage or another is endless discussion about vision and mission … more
Factotum #2 by Paul Grimmond (2 comments). Here is the next one in our line of Saturday blasts from the past. If you're new to us, let me … more
You must read this book by Gordon Cheng (0 comments). I am struggling to find reasons to avoid reading a few things, including a small pile next to the bed, and … more
Evaluating truth by Paul Grimmond (17 comments). I spent two days last week at a writing conference. It was a great couple of days, and I learned … more
Christian ministry and normal Christians by Tony Payne (19 comments). I count it one of the privileges of my life to have grown up in a time and a place when … more
An interview with Jean Williams by Sandy Grant (7 comments). Today we interview Jean Williams. Jean, how did you come to Christ? It's not an exciting story, but in … more
Guilt-edged pages? by Nicole Starling (5 comments). While ploughing my way through The Shack1 recently (and it was a matter of ploughing my … more
Paul is one of the Staff Editors at Matthias Media. He is married to Cathy and has three fantastic kids. He loves student ministry, reading, writing music and playing the saxophone, and is looking forward to meeting Jesus face to face.
Well, it kind of defeats the purpose of praying for healing for the sick though, doesn’t it.
We really should have a ban on all those types of prayers (for those with cancer to those who’ve stubbed their big toe) because (a) they don’t work, (b) they give false hope, and (c) they distract from the true nature of prayer and/or our mortality.
Lionel wonders why the prayer experiments ‘failed. But did they? From a worldly point of view, they probably did. But from a Godly perspective? Surely the ‘success’ of prayer (if that is the right word) is not to be measured by worldly effects (which is not to say we cannot rejoice in a healing as God’s work). That is the whole point of saying that we should trust not in the ‘power of prayer’ but in the power of God.
We had a conference a few years ago and the theme was “The Power of Prayer.” The speaker kept on giving examples about “believers in Korea (or some other country) praying five, six hours a day.” If his reports are to be believed, some Christians in Korea prayed upwards of twenty hours a day, while shut up in a cave. The examples he gave may have truth in them, but the impression that was left was prayer in itself is powerful. The fact that it is God who is sovereignly hearing and answering prayer was somehow lost or overshadowed. Now we have people who think that “longer prayers are holier prayers.”
Andrew Gleeson suggests that the success of prayer is not to be measured by its worldly effects. This sounds awfully like Schleiermacher, for whom religion was entirely subjective. Is the only important efficacity of prayer in relation to the believer?
Lionel, you have suggested that put to the test by your children, you too might withhold your fatherly ‘blessing’. Tell me though: if an outsider sought to size up your goodness as a dad by observing your responsiveness to your children, what ought they to expect to see? Given that the whole world sees Christians at prayer…
By the way, the abstract of Randolph Byrd’s article, published in Southern Medical Journal 1988 Jul; 81(7): 826-9, concluded: ‘The IP [intercessory prayer] group subsequently had a significantly lower severity score based on the hospital course after entry (P less than .01). Multivariant analysis separated the groups on the basis of the outcome variables (P less than .0001). The control patients required ventilatory assistance, antibiotics, and diuretics more frequently than patients in the IP group. These data suggest that intercessory prayer to the Judeo-Christian God has a beneficial therapeutic effect in patients admitted to a CCU.’ Sounds good! - but Byrd was criticised for not being more transparent about the highly selective nature of reported positive outcomes.
Hi Mike, I hope you’re well! I agree with your statement about subjectivity - prayer’s effects have got to be more than subjective. But my point is that the objectivity of prayer isn’t about a simple mechanical “cause and effect” thing - it comes from the fact that we pray as children to our heavenly Father who is at one and the same time the creator, sustainer and judge of our world. To try to measure the objective effects of prayer divorced from their relational context is, therefore, a highly dubious exercise at best.
As to your question about an outsider trying to size up my effectiveness as a dad by observing my responsiveness to my children - a couple of points. Firstly, my response to my children is primarily for the sake of my relationship with my children, not primarily for the sake of outsiders. And secondly - if outsiders were trying to assess me purely on the basis of how I react to some such bizarre experiment, I would say that such outsiders are completely misguided and need to take a reality check. If they really want to see what I’m like as a Father, they should hang around with my family for a while and observe my normal interactions with my kids. To push the analogy into the realm of God, prayer and evangelism - the best way for outsiders to see how good God is as a Father is not to conduct a clinical “prayer experiment”, but to observe real family interactions between God and his children. Primarily between God and his one and only Son - e.g. we could point them to Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and help them to reflect on how God has responded to that prayer, both in the life of his Son and in the lives of his children ever since.
Mike Paget asks apropos of my comment: Is the only important efficacity of prayer in relation to the believer?
I was careful to say that sometimes there are healings in response to prayer. What I question is whether that sort of success is the only or most important criterion of prayer’s worth. Are all the prayers that are not met to be regarded as a waste of time? That doesn’t mean their value must consist just “in relation to the believer”. Prayer is a way of glorifying God, and that is never a waste.
Commenting rules
If you would like your comment to be considered for publication, please observe the following rules:
Failure to adhere to these rules will result in your comment being quietly deleted.
If you want to give us feedback but don't want your comments to appear on the blog, DON'T use the form below. Instead, please send us an email or click on the button below.
Your Comment