I usually open my prayer with thanksgiving. I thank God for all the goodness that God has done for me. I thank God for the good night sleep, the beautiful sunshine and the hope of a new day. God for me is a supreme being who is the Creator of all things. God made the heavens and the earth. I know so because God revealed this truth. David Cunningham says that God reveals whatever we know about God. He uses the analogy of a producer to describe how God created the world and gives it the gift of life. Yet, science explains creation with the Big Bang Theory where the universe was formed randomly and thus leaving out the existence and relevance of God. But Cobb believes that by rejecting the assumptions that discount God then there is a way to make God plausible. For example, if we reject the assumption of the Big Bang Theory that the universe was randomly formed and instead ask why it happened, then we will find God as the cause for life to exist.[1] Cobb uses the arguments of science and philosophy to prove that God is believable even to this modern day. I so believe, thus I ought to be thankful to God.

            Part of my prayer is to ask God to give me strength and good health, to keep me from harm and to provide for my needs. Sometimes I even ask God to help me get the things I want – like passing an exam. I was brought up to see God as an all-powerful God who could do anything. God causes all things and make all things happen according to God’s own will. God is able to do that for God is omnipotent. This is how I understand God. Indeed, Cobb argues, because this is how Christian tradition has been teaching us about the omnipotent God. Cobb says that an omnipotent and unchanging God is not credible and plausible in this modern world. Thus to make God plausible, Cobb corrects the misunderstanding of God’s omnipotence from “creation out of nothing” to “no creation apart from God.” This is in contrast to Cunningham’s understanding that the world was created ex nihilo.[2] This is to emphasize that God producing something does not lessen God but makes God even greater. However, I like Cobb’s argument better for it gives a new definition on God’s omnipotence. We can now read the Bible’s depiction of “God as having great power, but it does not deny some power to creatures as well.”[3] For Cobb, the omnipotence of God finds meaning in God’s relationship with us and our relationship with God.

            I know God is real and not just an abstract idea because I have relationship with God. I have a relationship with God through my experience of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. When I pray to God for forgiveness of my sins and to keep me from sinning again I am asking the triune God. I ask the Father for forgiveness but I know Christ’s sacrifice cleanses me of my sin. When I ask God to keep me holy, I know I am asking the Holy Spirit to sanctify me. To know the relationship between the Father, the Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit allows me to experience God fully.

            My knowledge of God is related to my understanding of the Trinity. I can know God better by understanding their triune relationship. Both Cobb and Cunningham define the Trinity of God. Cobb uses the community to paint a picture of the Trinity. The church has said that the divine in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is equally divine – three persons but one substance. The use of the word “persons” in three persons of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit does not have the same meaning as persons is used today. The three persons act together and not separately. Cobb, who always argued for the relevance of God in the modern world, believes that we must emphasize the community between God and the world so we can understand our relationship with God.

            Similarly, Cunningham describes God through the relationship of the Trinity. He uses the analogy of a producing God to describe the Trinity. The word ‘producing’ is a relational word between producer and product and an active word that demands taking care of the product like a farmer who produces vegetables takes care of his/her products. God produces God – Word and Spirit. Through revelation, we know that God is an internally self-differentiating being. Cunningham noted Thomas Aquinas’ description that the “two divine processions within God imply multiple relations within God” – both passive and active relations. This relations must be understood not like an independent individual relating to another individual but something like a pregnant woman who has within her the relationship of ‘motherhood’, ‘childhood’ and a ‘mediating’ placenta. Cunningham uses this “analogy [to] underscore[s] the dynamic nature of God’s internal relations.”[4] For Cunningham, the nature and character (immanence) of God is closely intertwined with God’s actions in relation to the world (economy).

            When I pray, I know God will hear my prayer because God is a loving God. I know God loves me so much because the Father was even willing to give up His Son, Jesus Christ, to die for my sins. Knowing that God has the triune nature of Father, Son and Holy Spirit gives me confidence that God indeed loves me. The relationship of the triune God tells me that God takes care of His people. I like how Cunningham describes the economic nature of God with the analogy that God is a producer. God produces the world and takes care of the world wanting only what is best for them. God’s love for the world leads the Father to process and send His son and the Holy Spirit to call back his product away from sin and back to God’s fold. Truly, only a loving God would be willing to go down from God’s pedestals to be with God’s creation.

            I always close my prayer in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I refer to God in these names to recognize that God is a triune God and to respect their relationship with each other. Cunningham however argues that the use of Father, Son and Holy Spirit has gender bias and tends to focus on the individuality of each person that makes Christians forget the relational nature of God. Thus, he suggests the use of Source, Wellspring and Living Water. Placher, on his synthesis of Cobb and Cunningham’s essays, pointed out that the use of such alternative terms replaces a personal language with God. It has also been argued that Father, Son and Holy Spirit is the name of God thus it is improper to call God with other names. This has remained an open issue.

            In closing, our understanding of God affects our daily activities. Our words, thoughts and actions depend on how we know God. Cobb is arguing that we can know and find God even within the realms of science and philosophy. On the other hand, Cunningham is saying that we can know God by God’s revelation in the Trinity and God’s relationship with the world. As Placher pointed, the two essays offer two perspectives on how to talk about God. I only wish they elaborated on how the perspectives on God affect people’s lives. The people’s understanding of God is very important in their relationship with God. It is important to give the Christians a concrete and intelligible definition of God even if it is not a comprehensive one. So what do we mean by God? To answer this, let us start with our prayers.