The more I think about it, the less I understand the concept of prayer.
Coming from the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints means I'm coming from the point of view that prayer is not only meaningful, but necessary. Not only are their biblical injunctions to "pray always" (Luke 21:36), but Mormonic ones, too (as noted here). In many ways, the phrase itself is used, within Mormon thinking, as an imperative. "Pray!" is the phrase--one of the New Commandments. On a worshipful level, from the point of view of me as a fallible, mortal human, that makes a lot of sense. Invoking the attention and seeking the love of the Higher Power falls in line with what I, as a spiritual son of God, ought to do. It's on the other side of the coin that I don't understand. God's omnis (omnibenevolence, omnipotence, omniscience) preclude any sort of need on His part. As I understand it, God's all-knowing prevents Him from being surprised by any sort of petition. That's part of the definition. Time, for Him, would be a constant now, with the past and future perpetually before His eyes. His limitless power would then allow Him to interact through time (which doesn't bind Him) to intervene in the best possible way (because of His all-goodness) within the finitude of mortal time. And, because He already knows all that will happen, He'll know that what He's done is the correct thing. It's this sort of thinking that leads to Calvinistic interpretations, but since Mormonism rejects that aspect of the Protestant Reformation, I have to also figure out how free will factors into the equation. Again, from my personal point of view, this works swimmingly: God can do anything, if I but ask--granting Him permission to intervene in my life. Indeed, I think a lot of people put prayer into that particular bin. But the idea that I, mere mortal and infinitely powerless being, can grant, or acquiesce, or allow God to do anything seems, at the very least, incredibly arrogant and, at the worst, blasphemous. I don't get to tell God what He can do--or, rather, I can try but I don't have any authority over Him to do so. A frequent refrain is one about parent to child (the paradigm that constantly crops up in these discussions) because a parent can know what a child wants, can offer help, but shouldn't interfere unless the child asks. But as far as it being a parallel, it breaks down when we remember that a parent's paltry power is nothing compared to God's. And God can do many things that parents are physically incapable of doing, no matter how much we wish it otherwise. To explore this aspect further is really to tread over theodicy, and since that's what Paradise Lost is for--and, I suppose, other scriptures--I'm not going to follow this thinking any further. Instead, I want to go back to the idea that God is waiting for us to invite Him in. And while I believe that's true, it's also clear, based upon Paul's conversion (Acts 9) and Alma the Younger's (Mosiah 27), that God intervenes in ways that are definitive and proactive; there was no prayer of Saul's that invited his blinding on the road to Damascus. So why does God want to hear prayers? There's nothing new in them that He doesn't already know. As the mightiest Authority in the universe, there's no permission that we can grant Him that He couldn't already take. And He already has seen our conclusion here on Earth, which again points to the irrelevance of trying to surprise the Almighty. My best guess? Prayer isn't for God at all. It's for the prayerer (I wish that were a word), not the prayeree. It's less about trying to get God to do something and more to get ourselves to do something. Using God as the ruler, perhaps it's more about straightening ourselves to His line than getting Him to bend to ours. One thing I believe, though: Without God we haven't a prayer. |
AuthorWould you like to support my writings? Feel free to buy me a coffee (which I don't drink, but I do drink hot chocolate) at my Ko-Fi page. Thanks! Archives
July 2022
Categories
All
|