It is too simplistic to say, “because we needed to call on His help?”
That is often just an intuitive cry for help and, as such, could appeal to
anyone, not specifically to God. Children do it.
Indeed, when I hear people crying out “Oh my God” or something similar,
it is decidedly un-prayer-like. It is more rhetorical than supplicative.
“Saying a prayer” is tokenist and inane. Prayer is not like feeding a
parking meter. It is not another coin in the fountain. That misrepresents God.
What I have tried to communicate is that prayer is more like a courtroom drama, a petition to the supreme court of heaven.
I say that, because that is exactly how it is arranged. It has a mercy
seat or dock of petition, which is sealed in blood to assure our right of access.
It has an advocate, in Christ. In countries where an Advocate or
Barrister is used, they have exclusive access to the higher or supreme courts,
a right denied to solicitors or attorneys.
The advocate does not generally have direct dealings with the client,
but is retained by an attorney as legal counsel. That is because advocates are
specially trained in case law and how to build and present a case before a
superior presiding judge.
In our case, it means you and I do not need to have all the legal
faculties needed to defend our case, we turn to our advocate who merely elicits
our testimony, on layman’s terms, whilst He pleads our case on legal terms.
There is no other way (John 14:6). Jesus is the way.
Talking of doors, the court also has an open door, as applies to
weddings and civil courtrooms. It symbolizes the transparency of justice. Only the
door here is a torn veil.
The court has a qualified judge. He devoted millennia to ensuring His
own objective distance and His right to preside over that court in
righteousness and equity.
We also have a legal framework that defines the workings of the court.
It is called the New Covenant and it was sealed in blood, as in the blood
sprinkled on the mercy seat.
That Covenant or Constitution provides a basis for my access to the
throne of God, my right to be heard and my rights of way in the ensuing legal
discourse.
Finally, that was all underpinned by a guarantee, paid in advance
actually, yet ever potent. The fact that the judge tested and accepted the
sacrifice of His son, remains in perpetual witness before His throne, as a
guarantee of the Covenant and of my salvation.
If Lady Justice and the enabling legal apparatus of a civil court, is on
public display to vouch for its credentials, how much more does the display of the
man Christ Jesus, who entered that court from our side, not from the judges
entrance, uphold the rights of our court?
Now if you walked into an operating theatre, without knowing it was so,
how would you deduce it is so? The evidence would be compelling, all around
you. The instruments, the lights, the sterile conditions all testify to the
functional purpose of that room.
Well, if you were to enter the throne room of God, or at least the
throne room that we have been granted access to, what would you deduce? Clearly
every piece of furniture and every aspect of that court suggests a courtroom
and a place of justice.
If that is all true, then prayer is substantially how we engage it all.
I hear us singing, “our God is a mighty God”, yet rarely, if ever, have
I witnessed the outstretched arm or the might of God – in any circumstance.
The cross was certainly no demonstration of power. It was a paragon of
restraint, where God used “His little finger”, to tear down Satan’s pretexts
and usher in a New Dispensation.
The 40 day trial of Jesus in the Wilderness was also a courtroom drama
and a duel of wits, never a standoff of power or a trial of strength.
God will never de-robe, pull up His sleeves and intervene directly. He
is absolutely objective and detached. That is His role, without which, the cross
would failed. What Jesus did had to be objectively validated by a righteous
judge.
However, the court can rule in our favor. Hugh Glenister, a layman,
approach the South African Constitutional Court, to overturn a decision by the government
to disband the special investigative unit that prosecutes institutional crime
and corruption.
Though he stood alone against the might of the state, the court ruled
objectively in terms of the constitution, and rescinded the decision of the
state.
That is the same kind of power that is available to us. Sure we speak through
an advocate, but our testimony is heard. Sure we petition in Jesus name, but we
petition anyway. And that is what prayer is all about. It is not about
relationship, sorry.
Relationship implies an element of subjectivity and familiarity that
would compromise God’s court. He would have to recuse Himself if a relational
conflict of interest was in play. He looks beyond the relationship, as He
looked beyond the fact that His son was on a cross.
All that matters to God, our supreme judge, is the justness of our cause
and the grounds for our approach to His court. He doesn’t even have to like us.
Love can be subjective. Love may have made all this possible, but love does not
rule in His court.
The love argument is the basis for double-minded, sentimental prayers, that
appeal to God’s subjective favor, something He cannot offer without prejudice.
As such, double-minded prayers, according to James, have no currency.
Praying, “if it is your will” or “I hope you will hear me”, holds no water. The
writer to Hebrews urges us to approach boldly and be heard (Hebrews 4:16).
If we do that, all we need is God’s word, the raising of His scepter …
and the word of the court becomes law and that imposes an obligation of life.
Therein is the power of prayer.
Like all courts, that may take persistence and time, but effectual,
fervent prayer or a righteous or just man, will prevail (James 5:16).
So do we stand by and live with injustice or bemoan God’s inaction? No,
we move the court, by approaching it and by securing a right of way decision.
In so doing, prayer engages the power and resources of heaven in an unjust
world.
(c) Peter Missing: bethelstone@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment