Statistically driven empirical study of prayer has an almost 150-year-old history. The first person to conduct such a study was Francis Galton whose retrospective statistical analysis comparing life expectancies of various classes to the amount those classes prayed and were prayed for concluded that intercessory prayer for longevity is ineffective. Since Galton there have been a host of studies conducted to test the efficacy of intercessory prayer (IP), most notably the separate experiments conducted by Robert C. Byrd; William S. Harris, et al; and Herbert Benson, et al; to test the efficacy of IP in cardiac care units. All of these studies starting with Galton share the common problems of defining prayer and controlling for bias. In order to better control for bias, subsequent research teams have had to continually refine their methodology, which means placing more and more restrictions on prayer. Most notably, Byrd, Harris, and Benson, prescribe the exact phrasing of the prayer to be said for the research subjects. The controls placed on prayer will only increase with future studies, if researchers are serious about removing potential sources of bias. Thus, there is a deep irony at the foundation of such studies, the more “scientific” they become, the more magical they become. Although magic today is more commonly understood in terms of fantasy fiction, witchcraft, or as a synonym for the amazing, the concept and practice of magic has a more basic meaning. Magic is the attempt to subject supernatural forces to a human’s will via a specific ritual. By testing if particular sets of words and styles of prayer will bring about a desired result, researchers are trying to find the proper incantation for manipulating God into healing patients—whether they realize it or not. This paper will proceed as follows: First, it will set forth the definition of magic as an attempt to bring the supernatural, specifically the Christian God, under human control. Second, it will give an overview of the history of empirical studies on the efficacy of IP and how they have become increasingly magical in their design. Finally, this paper will argue that because Christianity condemns the use of magic, no Christian should be involved in such research and Christian institutions should refuse to support such studies in any way.