? re. Faith and Science

[learning]

Hi, I read a question recently, and I'll give more detail later, but how as christians, do we get a Biblical worldview of how to handle the ideas of faith and science? For instance, we are to have faith in God, and we are told to 'test all things' as well. How do you draw a line between 'testing things', or using your common sense, ie. if there's a flood, you put on a sump pump, move things, clean things up, call the insurance agencies, or if you have a cold, you get medications to help your sniffles and help to keep you awake during the day and help you sleep at night.
But... the question was, how do we know when to turn to God (of course we should be praying all the time) and when to use what we can of this material world? How do you know if you are 'over testing' I guess may be the question, or not showing enough faith in God?



I think of examples in the Old Testament, where one King died of foot ailment or infection (this is quite possible if it were gangrene) and the scripture says that this King looked to Doctors but didn't look to or pray to God. Yet he had been a good King up to this point.

Also, God condemns Israel and Judah in the Old Testament at times when they look to other nations to help them as allies, instead of turning to God.

I have thought a little about this, and the example I have is sort of related, in that, right before Sept 11th, I read a commentary about Nehemiah building the walls of Jerusalem. There, when they were threatened, they said that they 'prayed to their God and posted a guard.' To me, this showed perfectly that it was both these things we should do. Pray and do something practical.

But some Christians say when we are sick, perhaps we should call the elders of the church first to anoint us before we go looking for remedies. And I know some who say we shouldn't bother God about things He knows we know enough to do for ourselves. ( the God helps those who help themselves idea) So... any ideas out there?

[George Murphy]

Hi, I read a question recently, and I'll give more detail later, but how as christians, do we get a Biblical worldview of how to handle the ideas of faith and science? For instance, we are to have faith in God, and we are told to 'test all things' as well. How do you draw a line between 'testing things', or using your common sense, ie. if there's a flood, you put on a sump pump, move things, clean things up, call the insurance agencies, or if you have a cold, you get medications to help your sniffles and help to keep you awake during the day and help you sleep at night.
But... the question was, how do we know when to turn to God (of course we should be praying all the time) and when to use what we can of this material world? How do you know if you are 'over testing' I guess may be the question, or not showing enough faith in God?



I think of examples in the Old Testament, where one King died of foot ailment or infection (this is quite possible if it were gangrene) and the scripture says that this King looked to Doctors but didn't look to or pray to God. Yet he had been a good King up to this point.

Also, God condemns Israel and Judah in the Old Testament at times when they look to other nations to help them as allies, instead of turning to God.

I have thought a little about this, and the example I have is sort of related, in that, right before Sept 11th, I read a commentary about Nehemiah building the walls of Jerusalem. There, when they were threatened, they said that they 'prayed to their God and posted a guard.' To me, this showed perfectly that it was both these things we should do. Pray and do something practical.

But some Christians say when we are sick, perhaps we should call the elders of the church first to anoint us before we go looking for remedies. And I know some who say we shouldn't bother God about things He knows we know enough to do for ourselves. ( the God helps those who help themselves idea) So... any ideas out there?These are reasonable questions. Perhaps the best way to think of it is that God normally works through the natural processes of the world (which themselves are God's creation). One traditional way of saying this is that God is the First Cause who acts through secondary causes. While God may choose to act in some miraculous way, we have no business demanding that he do so. Thus we ought to look to God, and pray to God, as the ultimate source of our help, and part of our prayer should be to help us see what penultimate means God may give us for help, and make use of them.

Maybe the simplest case to think of is provision of our food. We pray "give us this day our daily bread" but if the farmer doesn't work, if we don't go to the store &c, God won't miraculously drop bread on our tables.

When we pray for healing, we should recognize that in the great majority of cases God will work through natural processes - includes medicine, the skills of doctors and nuses &c - to heal. The practice of anointing the sick described in James is good, but it isn't an alternative to medical treatment.
In fact, in biblical times olive oil was a medicine (think of the Good Samaritan). So maybe the best way to think of anointing is that it's the use of a symbolic medicine, to be accompanied with prayer (as James says) that God will heal through whatever medical means God chooses.

There's some sense in the old saying, "Pray as if everything depended on God, and work as if everything depended on you."

Shalom,
George

[geochron]

I don't believe God intervenes in the world at all. I believe he helps us to cope with the world. I believe he provides spiritual comfort, not physical relief.

[learning]

I don't believe God intervenes in the world at all. I believe he helps us to cope with the world. I believe he provides spiritual comfort, not physical relief.

geochron, are you a theist?

anyways, I believe He does work through physical processes, but may use the comfort you mention to help accelerate the physical processes. That is what I have seen in anything miraculous I have seen personally or heard of personally, that God's answer to prayer is the speeding up of some of the physical processes. Perhaps it is the comfort the person gets through prayer, but I think usually it is more. But I do believe we should use both as was mentioned in the above post.

[Lion]

Geochron:
You said;
I don't believe God intervenes in the world at all. I believe he helps us to cope with the world. I believe he provides spiritual comfort, not physical relief.
----------------
I’m getting a different impression of you. You at least admit that such a being could exist! I thought you were a person who believed the earth just happened, and all the things we see, all the plants and animals and people just accidentally evolved.

That is a big admission for a person who professes to believe there is a God but still thinks he is an absentee landlord. Tell me about him, please .

I happen to think God has had a real influence in my personal life. Let me tell you about what happened to me. You said god helps us cope with the world. My personal makeup is not adaptable to military life. I have had just enough experience with the military to know that.

I found myself out of a job in San Jose, Cal. I went to te employment office and they gave me a referral to NACA lab at Moffit field at Sunnyvale. I bought a bus ticket and started for Sunyvale. My seatmate told me that United Airlines was hiring. It was few miles further to the airport so I went there instead of Sunnyvale, and got a job. United had a contract to overhaul planes that flew the route to Australia. That was when they had to put in extra gas tanks just to get to Hawaii. We got notice that there were to be no more deferments for men 18 through 25. United told selective service they couldn’t operate if they lost all the men in that age.

Selective service said too bad, so sad. United complained to the air force. They said just let us know when they are drafted. I was drafted into the air corps enlisted reserve, inactive duty and sent home, working for United.

Yes, God enabled me to avoid the draft. He didn’t intervene directly and He had other plans for me. I wanted to go to college, but as it turned out, that was impossible. He worked it so I was drafted again, but I hated every minute of the 93 days was in, but I got the start needed. I got a year of college courtesy of the army and a GI loan. God enabled me to cope with the situation was in. But that wasn’t all. Let me tell you when He touched me directly.

Sometime in the winter of 1949-50 my infant daughter got sick We called the doctor. (they made house calls then) and he gave her a shot of the latest miracle drug, Penicilin. She wasn’t taking any liquid and was severely dehydrated. We have since learned what to do but we didn’t know then. My wife woke me with the words, “The baby is dying, I just know it.”

My only thought was to pray. So we knelt beside the bed and I asked God to heal our daughter, and promised that we would serve him forever. We got up from our knees and turned to the crib. The baby gave the sweetest smile I have ever seen on an infant that young and she began to cry. My wife said, “It worked! I think she’s hungry.” She took a full 8 oz bottle and went to sleep.

Say what you will, I saw it and I believe God works. We had done what we could. The rest was up to God.

[George Murphy]

I don't believe God intervenes in the world at all. I believe he helps us to cope with the world. I believe he provides spiritual comfort, not physical relief.Then what does "Give us this day our daily bread" mean?

But please note that I did not speak of God's "intervention," in the sense that God "violates" the laws of physics. What I said was that God works through natural processes. & since the outcomes of those processes are not rigidly determined (as quantum & chaos theories have shown us), God has some flexibility in the way he acts even if he does not do anything that violates the laws of physics.

Shalom,
George

[geochron]

What does "Give us this day our daily bread" mean when thousands of people who say it starve daily? Personally I think of it as metaphorical - spiritual food, if you like. If I believed that god literally provided my daily bread as a result of my praying to him, I'd have to wonder what made me so favoured when so many other people's prayers aren't answered. For me, that thought leads on to vanity, self regard and conceit.

I'm not going to comment directly on Lion's personal experiences.

I should have been more clear. Since it's my day to stir things up...

I don't believe God intervenes in the world to answer prayer.

I'm uncommitted as to whether he intervenes to suit his own purposes. I'm not clear how one would tell.

I think the story of creation and the Garden of Eden is an elaborate fantasy concocted to solve the problem of evil, which in turn arises from the notion that God intervenes in the world to change events.

I believe Christ lived as a human to show us how through faith you can prevail through the most appalling adversity.

[geochron]

I’m getting a different impression of you. You at least admit that such a being could exist! I thought you were a person who believed the earth just happened, and all the things we see, all the plants and animals and people just accidentally evolved.

That is a big admission for a person who professes to believe there is a God but still thinks he is an absentee landlord. Tell me about him, please .



I believe God created everything, bearing in mind that we don't know what everything is or indeed how much of it there is. I'm not really that interested in whether he intervened in the evolution of the physical universe(s) thereafter.

If you look back, I objected to your misrepresenting my profession, essentially implying that people like me are unprofessional imbeciles or consciously deceitful. I especially objected to it when it became clear you knew virtually nothing about what geochronologists do but were happy to slander us anyway. I believe you have good intentions, but we know what is paved with those. I think you made some incorrect assumptions about me because I took issue with your statements about geochronology.

[learning]

Thank you all, this is helpful. It reminds me of a saying I heard, something about 'bread' I think there is a Jewish saying that God wanted us to be part of the process of that. He made the wheat, but somehow, allowed us the knowledge and means of figuring out how to make bread, and that in itself is almost a miracle, or quite interesting.

I think that this is how He allows us to be part of the healing process too, whether that's through prayer, or direct, physical medical intervention. I find the more we learn about what God made, and how the human body works, etc. the more Praise I feel toward God.

[George Murphy]

I don't believe God intervenes in the world to answer prayer.
If you continue to use the language of God "intervening," and don't consider the distinction between that type of divine action and God's action through natural processes (what is called "concurrence" or "cooperation" in traditional doctrines of providence) it isn't likely that we'll make much progress on the other issues you raise.

Shalom,
George

[geochron]

If you continue to use the language of God "intervening," and don't consider the distinction between that type of divine action and God's action through natural processes (what is called "concurrence" or "cooperation" in traditional doctrines of providence) it isn't likely that we'll make much progress on the other issues you raise.

Shalom,
George

What progress would you like to make?

I don't think it does any harm or good to have a belief about the systematic interaction between God and natural processes. Did he set it all up and watch it unfurl? does he maintain natural law on a daily basis? - how would we tell and are the two options different in a meaningful way, especially if God is eternal?

I don't see that quantum indeterminacy helps much (was it you that mentioned it?). Consider multiple Schrodinger's cats. If one prays to live does God make sure it is among the 50% who survive and, to preserve the stats, condemn another cat to death? Suppose all the cats pray - are the ones that die less worthy somehow? Should the cats that survive believe that they owe their survival to God's intervention? And if they do, why do they think God chose their prayers to answer?

From a personal point of view, I find the idea that God nudges a natural process, with or without breaking a physical law, for my benefit, as a result of prayer, to be spiritually poisonous. I outlined the reason above.

Cheers,

G.

[bigsplit]

The question I have is what power does prayer unleash? Will we one day have the technology to observe what forces prayer unleashes? I often wonder what Jesus implied when he stated that with faith we could move a mountain. I think the miraculous events we have observed could have a scientific explaination, the problem is we have not advanced to a level in which we can observe the full spectrum of Gods creation. I think it is we who have the power to generate miraculous things, we just do not know how this power manifests itself from the "spiritual" or that we do not understand into our reality. I think the only intervention God makes is through the power he created the Universe with, and it is up to us to utilize his gifts. Science is limited by our observational abilities, our Universe and powers therein are not. When we can't explain we call them miracles, but that doesn't mean they are magical...there is a cause and effect for everything in the Universe, including the effects of the power of prayer.

[Lion]

I think you have all missed something. Call it whatever you want to, the shamans and witch doctors of pimitive cultures are in contact with supernatural forces we cannot see or control.

I was talking with Kata Ragoso, a Solomon islander, many years ago. One of my co-workers had asked me a question, Why go across the seas to convert the primitive peoples? Aren’t they happier left alone?

It so happened Kata was the speaker at a meeting I was attending, so I made a point to speak to him privately. I posed the question to him.

His reply spoke volumes. No, he said. The native peoples live in fear, fear of displeasing the spirits. The witch doctors can cause all kinds of bad things to happen to innocent people if the witch doctor is mad at that person. He can order the death or other evil and the other person is not aware he has displeased the witch doctor. But when a person accepts Jesus, the witch doctors are frustrated. He has no power over that person..

In the Bible all is made clear. There are two opposing forces in the world, good angels and bad ones. The good angels can protect people from the evil ones. Rev 12 tells that a third of the angels rebelled and were cast out of heaven. Satan deceived Eve and all the problems we have resulted from that disobedience. Just because they can’t be seen doesn’t mean they aren’t there. All the stories about Jesus casting out devils actually happened.

[George Murphy]

What progress would you like to make?Toward a better understanding of the issue that was originally presented. Since your belief (as stated in your closing paragraph below) is based essentially on the argument from incredulity ("I can't believe that God would do X) then you may not want to make any progress because then you'd have to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

I don't think it does any harm or good to have a belief about the systematic interaction between God and natural processes. Did he set it all up and watch it unfurl? does he maintain natural law on a daily basis? - how would we tell and are the two options different in a meaningful way, especially if God is eternal?It does make a difference from the standpoint of the doctrine of creation, which isn't just about how things originated. But of course that isn't physics, so if by "makes a difference" you mean "is observable by scientific means", the answer is no. That's what's meant by saying that the world is understandable etsi deus non daretur.

don't see that quantum indeterminacy helps much (was it you that mentioned it?). Consider multiple Schrodinger's cats. If one prays to live does God make sure it is among the 50% who survive and, to preserve the stats, condemn another cat to death? Suppose all the cats pray - are the ones that die less worthy somehow? Should the cats that survive believe that they owe their survival to God's intervention? And if they do, why do they think God chose their prayers to answer?This misses the point, which is as follows. If Laplacian determinism held then all future states of the universe would be determined by the initial state (initial values of positions and momenta) and all the forces that act otoal Hamiltonian). In that case a God who didn't "intervene" would be locked into just a single course of events and God couldn't take prayer into account in determining what would happen. But chaos theory has shown that for some systems extremely small changes in initial conditions will soon result in major changes in the futures state of the system. In fact, changes below the level of what can be specified in accord with the uncertainty principle can result in such changes. Thus by acting at the quantum level, in a way that doesn't violate any of the alws of physics, God could bring about macroscopic changes in the world in response (e.g.) to intercessory prayer. This doesn't mean that everything could be accomplished in that way, but God no longer has to be seen as restricted to a unique course of action. God can still cooperate with natural processes and have some flexibility of action.

[quote] From a personal point of view, I find the idea that God nudges a natural process, with or without breaking a physical law, for my benefit, as a result of prayer, to be spiritually poisonous. I outlined the reason above.
[QUOTE]

First of all, you're not told to pray only - or even primarily - for your benefit but for the benefit of others - including enemies.

& then the whole weight of the biblical view of divine action and prayer, & the great majority of the Christian church - including modern scientists and theologians who have considered this question (e.g., J. Polkinghorne, R. Jenson) - are opposed to your view. Normally I might not make such an obvious appeal to authority but as I noted above, your whole argument is one from personal incredulity which carries no weight at all.

Shalom,
George

[geochron]

Toward a better understanding of the issue that was originally presented. Since your belief (as stated in your closing paragraph below) is based essentially on the argument from incredulity ("I can't believe that God would do X) then you may not want to make any progress because
then you'd have to consider the possibility that you're wrong.



Freshman critical thinking classes have a lot to answer for. I was describing my belief system. Of course it involves arguments from (better, "statements of") credulity or incredulity. So does any belief system.

Allow me to restate my belief system in an attempt to circumvent your somewhat uncharitable misinterpretations...

If I believed God intervened (in any way, consistent with quantum mechanics or not) to help anyone (me, other people) out of difficulties because of my prayers, then I would be tempted to think that I was somehow more favoured than other people. This is based on (but I don't argue follows logically from) the observation that lots of evil events come to pass in spite of the prayers of millions of other people. I think that such self regard would be a bad thing for me. Note that my role in the argument is as pray-er, not prayed for.



It does make a difference from the standpoint of the doctrine of creation, which isn't just about how things originated. But of course that isn't physics, so if by "makes a difference" you mean "is observable by scientific means", the answer is no. That's what's meant by saying that the world is understandable etsi deus non daretur.



You missed my idea. For an eternal being all times in our universe are "now". Hence it makes no difference at what point he interacted or interacts with the universe from our point of view - it's the same action by God.



This misses the point, which is as follows. If Laplacian determinism held then all future states of the universe would be determined by the initial state (initial values of positions and momenta) and all the forces that act otoal Hamiltonian). In that case a God who didn't "intervene" would be locked into just a single course of events and God couldn't take prayer into account in determining what would happen. But chaos theory has shown that for some systems extremely small changes in initial conditions will soon result in major changes in the futures state of the system. In fact, changes below the level of what can be specified in accord with the uncertainty principle can result in such changes. Thus by acting at the quantum level, in a way that doesn't violate any of the alws of physics, God could bring about macroscopic changes in the world in response (e.g.) to intercessory prayer. This doesn't mean that everything could be accomplished in that way, but God no longer has to be seen as restricted to a unique course of action. God can still cooperate with natural processes and have some flexibility of action.



Nonlinear dynamics are still deterministic as you note. Turning to quantum mechanics, the laws in this case are statistical laws, which was the point of my Schrodinger's cat thought experiment. Your belief seems to be that God intervenes as long as it doesn't become statistically significant. I'm neutral about the idea. I don't see any need for it but it might be true. I also don't see the advantage to this over believing that God circumvents physical laws. (Except that it removes the possibility of their being any evidence.)



First of all, you're not told to pray only - or even primarily - for your benefit but for the benefit of others - including enemies.



It seems you want to think ill of me - I can't say I understand why. If you look back through the thread you'll perhaps understand why I chose to express myself this way. The point is the same if I recast the argument in terms of God helping other people out of jams because of my prayers, but not helping different people out of jams because of other people's prayers; it's just more long winded. The danger I see to my spiritual health from a belief in the special efficacy of my prayers is the same.



then the whole weight of the biblical view of divine action and prayer, & the great majority of the Christian church - including modern scientists and theologians who have considered this question (e.g., J. Polkinghorne, R. Jenson) - are opposed to your view. Normally I might not make such an obvious appeal to authority but as I noted above, your whole argument is one from personal incredulity which carries no weight at all.



Equally your argument and their arguments carry no weight since they are based solely on beliefs. On my side is that it sidesteps the problem of evil, which others invent elaborate and to my mind unconvincing arguments to circumvent.



Shalom



I'm wondering if this was ironic :smile:

[learning]

geochron, do you believe God wants us to pray? And if you do, How do you believe He wants us to pray and why?

[learning]

I got permission from the one who sent the e-mail. It is from Sonlight (thought I don't homeschool, I get their e-mail called 'Beam')
Here is the question in it's fullness. from 'John'

"A Biblically-Based Scientific Model

... I am convinced that evangelical Christians must not merely 'affirm' but actually LIVE OUT the truth that God's Word takes precedence over all the errant words of man. And we need to do this, to the best of our ability, not only when it comes to debating the age of the earth and matters related to ex nihilo creation vs. evolution. We also need to deal with this when it comes to the far-flung reaches of scientific investigation.

And it is in this latter area I believe the evangelical Christian church is particularly lacking.

It seems to me that it is primarily (if not only) in the areas of creation/evolution and old-earth/young earth that the popular Christian culture seeks to wrestle with issues related to Scripture and science.

But what bothers me is the realization that there are very serious issues related to Christian faith and science that are NOT touched-on. Thus (to look at my concerns from a historical perspective) : how were questions answered with respect to apparent 'Christian' objection to the dissection of human cadavers? What about Christian teaching with respect to the use of surgery or scientifically tested drugs--rather than, or in addition, to prayer? And what about the use of social-scientific methods related to testing responses to various stimuli: are these worthy of Christian's use...whether in business or in evangelistic campaigns? Why or why not, biblically speaking?

I know that these and other questions have been hotly debated in the past. They rarely bother anyone today. Yet what that tells me is NOT that they are INVALID questions; rather, that Western culture has 'moved on'. The scientific method, which refuses to take much of anything at face value, but ALWAYS seeks to test hypothese (in other words, the scientific method, which is, at root, deeply skeptical)...--The scientific method is pretty thoroughly inbred in our culture.

But that, it seems to me, is somewhat inimical to thoroughgoing Christian faith.

A few more examples of what I'm talking about.

I know of VERY FEW Western Christians who, when they get sick (anything from a headache to a broken arm to a deadly disease), think FIRST to call the elders of their church and seek prayer and anointing with oil. (James 5:14) No. The people I know think FIRST to take an aspirin or Tylenol (R), or to go to the emergency room, or seek the aid of a doctor.

When our computers crash, our toilets overflow, or our cars stop running, no one I know gets down on his or her knees and begins to pray. No. Right away, we begin to try to follow very rational methods to diagnose the problem ourselves. ... or get help from some trained expert.

If and/or when we bump into someone who talks about his or her computer being demonized or suggests that the reason a computer network refuses to operate is because of 'spiritual warfare' .. -- most evangelicals I know are likely to look at the person a bit askance. We aren't trained to think of demonic powers influencing our equipment. We have been imbued with a scientifically skeptical worldview when it comes to the influence of demons....

So the question I believe we need (or, let me say, I want) to address with our students has to do with when and where and how and why one should adopt the scientifically skeptical approach (including hypothesizing and carefully experimenting to see whether the hypothesis is correct)-- the method that has helped make the West as technologically advanced and wealthy as it is-- and when and where and how and why one should 'simply believe' what one is told.

***

What I have just said approached the problem primarily from a physical/scientific direction. If I may pose it more as a biblical-interpretive question:

God calls upon His people to 'test' Him in SOME things (Malachi 3:10). and He commands us to 'test the spirits' to see whether they are from Him or not. (I John 4:1) But then, in OTHER areas, He says, we are NOT to thest Him (Dt. 6:16 and I Cor. 10:9).
So how and when and where and why should we 'switch modes,' as it were, between 'testing' and 'not testing.' Are there times when it is appropriate to utilize the scientific method and other times when it is NOT appropriate? If so, how can we know the difference? Aren't the modes of faith and science at least somewhat ANTAGONISTIC one to the other? So can we, and if so, how can we integrate them properly? Are there hints in Scripture? Does the Bible speak to the issue of when and how we are supposed to test our hypotheses (use scientific method)--not only with respect to God, but with respect to 'stuff'.? Does Scripture speak to our need to know HOW to 'know' something about the world in which we live, what EVIDENCE we can or should accept and what evidence we should reject?

It seems beyond the question to me that God calls us to FAITH. But He also tellls us to stand against CREDULITY. . . . So what's the difference? And how do we know it?"

end of quote.

I, learning, think that he asks some very good questions here, and they relate not just to science, but I think the Christian walk, too. Like the idea of knowing God's will for one's life.

also, please don't turn this into a YE-OE or creation-evolution thing, I want to get to the main questions he is asking here.

Anyways, geochron, I hope YOU don't take my question about prayer as an attack. I am trying to see things from your point of view, and I think the discussion that you provoked (in a good way) has been helpful in this subject. I rather think, and I'm only guessing here, that your idea of some Christian's prayers is like a poem I read about a Finnish young man is sitting in a university room, telling God how this young man thinks that God should run the universe.! :)

[George Murphy]

Freshman critical thinking classes have a lot to answer for. I was describing my belief system. Of course it involves arguments from (better, "statements of") credulity or incredulity. So does any belief system.

Allow me to restate my belief system in an attempt to circumvent your somewhat uncharitable misinterpretations...

If I believed God intervened (in any way, consistent with quantum mechanics or not) to help anyone (me, other people) out of difficulties because of my prayers, then I would be tempted to think that I was somehow more favoured than other people. This is based on (but I don't argue follows logically from) the observation that lots of evil events come to pass in spite of the prayers of millions of other people. I think that such self regard would be a bad thing for me. Note that my role in the argument is as pray-er, not prayed for.Of course all arguments depend on presuppositions, axioms, or whatever you wish to call them. The problem I have with your basic presupposition is it doesn't seem to lead to any interesting results, not that it is a priori implausible. Seeing the intensity with which you'd invested your basic belief, I surmised that you were unlikely to be very open to seeing it changed. Your response confirmed that. I'm sorry if it seemed uncharitable to say that. OTOH such a charge sounds a bit odd coming from someone who describes the beliefs of others as "spiritually poisonous."

I'm not sure where you get the idea that a person who prays has to believe that God regards him or her as specially privileged, as if that person's prayers were always moved to the top of the pile, so to speak. If I ever get that idea I only have to be reminded that Jesus tells all his followers to pray, not just me. & the fact that in the model prayer which he gave, the Our Father, we are always praying in the plural, as part of the Christian community ("Give us this day our daily bread ...") brings that out clearly.

& a point that hasn't been mentioned is that petitionary prayer is first of all an expression of trust that God does do things, not an attempt to get God to care for people that he otherwise wouldn't bother with. Luther brings this out well in his explanation of the Our Father in the Small Catechism. E.g., "God gives daily bread without our prayer, even to all evil people, but we ask in this prayer that God cause us to recognize what our daily bread is and to receive it with thanksgiving." (A Contemporary Translation of Luther's Small Catechism [AugsburgFortress, 1996].)

You missed my idea. For an eternal being all times in our universe are "now". Hence it makes no difference at what point he interacted or interacts with the universe from our point of view - it's the same action by God.An eternal being is not necessarily a timeless being - as both modern trinitarian and process theologians have made clear. In particular, the Christian claim is that God is involved in the history of the world and that that history has been made part of God's history via the incarnation. But the question of whether or not God "intervenes" in the world in the sense in which I've used the world doesn't really depend on that. The question is still meaningful even in a block universe: Is there a rational pattern of events within that universe or are there breaks in the pattern? (& in fact Goedel's theorem strongly suggests the latter independent of any theological considerations.)

Nonlinear dynamics are still deterministic as you note. Turning to quantum mechanics, the laws in this case are statistical laws, which was the point of my Schrodinger's cat thought experiment. Your belief seems to be that God intervenes as long as it doesn't become statistically significant. I'm neutral about the idea. I don't see any need for it but it might be true. I also don't see the advantage to this over believing that God circumvents physical laws. (Except that it removes the possibility of their being any evidence.)It's not just that "God intervenes as long as it doesn't become statistically significant." God is always acting in the world but does so within the limits of what is possible with natural processes - including QM. & my point is that those limits still allow some flexibility. & the advantage of this is that we are able to understand the world because God is not performing miracles continually.

It seems you want to think ill of me - I can't say I understand why. If you look back through the thread you'll perhaps understand why I chose to express myself this way. The point is the same if I recast the argument in terms of God helping other people out of jams because of my prayers, but not helping different people out of jams because of other people's prayers; it's just more long winded. The danger I see to my spiritual health from a belief in the special efficacy of my prayers is the same.I don't think ill of you personally & from some of your posts on other threads I'd thought that you were fairly sensible but on this issue I think you're way off. Again, who ever said that God was going to help other people out of jams because of your prayers but not because of someone else's?

Equally your argument and their arguments carry no weight since they are based solely on beliefs. On my side is that it sidesteps the problem of evil, which others invent elaborate and to my mind unconvincing arguments to circumvent.The Bible and, to a lesser extent, Christian tradition carry a great deal of weight for Christians. Of course they don't have the same significance for others.

Your statement that your approach "sidesteps" the problem of evil is accurate. I would prefer to meet it head-on, point out that the cross puts the whole question of theodicy in a different light, recognize that that doesn't answer all questions, & encourage people to put themselves (among other ways, through prayer) in God's hands as instruments for dealing with evil.

Shalom (non-ironically: It's the way I usually end posts),
George

[Lion]

I think the last two posts hit the nail on the head. I have always believed in prayer, because payer does change thinge. I can look back on my life and see where my prayers have changed the outcome of future events. we must always remember that God doesn't answer our prayers in the way we ask or expect. He always answers. Sometimes the answer is no, other times yes, and others wait, and sometimes it's I have something better for you. I hope a personal story will illustrate what I mean.

I was on temporary assignment in Alaska. I had finished my job and was ready to go back to Seattle but someone mixed my orders and I had to wait over the weekend. In the meantime four soldiers were facing court martial over some orders I had knowledge of. The orders were wrong but the chaplain wanted to teach the men a lesson so he wouldn't let the men appeal to the chief chaplain. It was war time and the charge was mutiny, a death penalty offense. I couldn't do anything about it. But when I went to the airport for transportation I accidentally met the chief chaplain. He told me about the four men. Up to that time I had no ability to affect the outcome of events. But when the chief chaplain began telling me about the case, I told him what I knew about the orders.

He replied, "Oh I wish I had known. I could have gotten them off. but we are waiting for a plane and I can't do anything."

To make a long story short, The plane didn't go that night. It went the next night. The chief chaplain told the story and the men were saved from death. God knows how to work things out and arranges circumstances for good. Why was I delayed? Why did the plane need repair and a wind blow so the mechanics couldn't work on it? Why did the men talk to me in a chance encounter? Why did the chief chaplain sit next to me in a crowded room? I don't know. But it gives me confidence to know God works in mysterious ways, and he works things out.

[Lion]

To all,

Lion had been a participant on this thread. It is with much sorrow that I must report that he has suffered a massive stroke and is not expected to live more than a few hours. I will miss my Dad very much. I will take comfort that when Gabriel blows that trumpet, he will hear and rise healed.

Ted

[rogero]

To all,

Lion had been a participant on this thread. It is with much sorrow that I must report that he has suffered a massive stroke and is not expected to live more than a few hours. I will miss my Dad very much. I will take comfort that when Gabriel blows that trumpet, he will hear and rise healed.

Ted

Ted,

My prayers for you and your family. Even though we didn't see eye-to-eye on origins issues, your Dad was always polite to me and very good man.

God bless you!

Roger

[HRG_new]

To all,

Lion had been a participant on this thread. It is with much sorrow that I must report that he has suffered a massive stroke and is not expected to live more than a few hours. I will miss my Dad very much. I will take comfort that when Gabriel blows that trumpet, he will hear and rise healed.

Ted

My sincerest condolences to you and your family. I remember your father well, although we were mostly on opposite sides of the debate.

Warm regards,
HRG.

[NeilUnreal]

I am truly saddened by the loss to us and the much greater loss to your family. Whether we all agreed or not, we are all diminished.

-Neil

[maudman]

To all,

Lion had been a participant on this thread. It is with much sorrow that I must report that he has suffered a massive stroke and is not expected to live more than a few hours. I will miss my Dad very much. I will take comfort that when Gabriel blows that trumpet, he will hear and rise healed.

Ted

Ted

I am sorry to hear this, Your dad was an example for us in his faith and the faith of our Lord, I Think he will be missed here.

My prayers are with you.

Peace Ted, Maudman