How does one explain the Bible without quoting it? It's truly astonishing that a Bible teacher can write nearly a dozen paragraphs in explanation of an important doctrinal stance, but can only manage to quote a couple of short snippets of Scripture.
---------------
Does prayer make any difference? Does it really change anything? Someone once asked me that question, only in a slightly different manner: “Does prayer change God’s mind?” My answer brought storms of protest. I said simply, “No.” Now, if the person had asked me, “Does prayer change things?” I would have answered, “Of course!”
The Bible says there are certain things God has decreed from all eternity. (Where does the Bible say this?)
Does prayer make any difference? Does it really change anything? Someone once asked me that question, only in a slightly different manner: “Does prayer change God’s mind?” My answer brought storms of protest. I said simply, “No.” Now, if the person had asked me, “Does prayer change things?” I would have answered, “Of course!”
The Bible says there are certain things God has decreed from all eternity. (Where does the Bible say this?)
Those things will inevitably come to pass. If you were to pray individually or if you and I were to join forces in prayer or if all the Christians of the world were to pray collectively, it would not change what God, in His hidden counsel, has determined to do. If we decided to pray for Jesus not to return, He still would return. You might ask, though, “Doesn’t the Bible say that if two or three agree on anything, they’ll get it?” Yes, it does, but that passage is talking about church discipline, not prayer requests. (No, it's not a passage about church discipline. The author refers to Mt. 18:15-17 [left unquoted of course], which describes a reconciliation procedure with a brother, culminating in telling the issue to the church as a last resort. There is no "church" at all until the last step.
After telling it to the church the instruction remains directed to the individual: Treat him as a pagan or a tax collector. There is no church action at all.
Matthew then turns to a new subject in vs. 18, binding and loosing. The only way this idea can possibly connected with the previous procedure is to misrepresent it as a church procedure.)
So we must take all the biblical teaching on prayer into account and not isolate one passage from the rest. (?? The author will not discuss the Bible's teaching on prayer at all.)
We must approach the matter in light of the whole of Scripture, resisting an atomistic reading. Again, you might ask, “Doesn’t the Bible say from time to time that God repents?” Yes, the Old Testament certainly says so. The book of Jonah tells us that God “repented of ” the judgment He had planned for the people of Nineveh (Jonah 3:10, KJV). (Here is one of two Scripture snippets. But the author will offer no biblical reference in his explanation.)
In using the concept of repentance here, the Bible is describing God, who is Spirit, in what theologians call “anthropomorphic” language. Obviously the Bible does not mean that God repented in the way we would repent; otherwise, we could rightly assume that God had sinned and therefore would need a savior Himself. What it clearly means is that God removed the threat of judgment from the people. The Hebrew word nacham, translated “repent” in the King James Version, means “comforted” or “eased” in this case. God was comforted and felt at ease that the people had turned from their sin, and therefore He revoked the sentence of judgment He had imposed. (But we are left begging the question! Of course God doesn't repent, but He did relent. The people stopped doing evil, and God relented. He was going to do something, but did not do so based on the actions of the people.
So the question remains to be answered, did God change His mind?)
When God hangs His sword of judgment over people’s heads, and they repent and He then withholds His judgment, has He really changed His mind? (Yes, this is the question.)
The mind of God does not change for God does not change. (Why is God's unchanging nature coupled to whether or not His mind changes? What biblical reference tells us that God doesn't change so that means His mind doesn't change?
Again the author doesn't document his assertions, which is becoming increasingly frustrating.)
Things change, and they change according to His sovereign will, which He exercises through secondary means and secondary activities. The prayer of His people is one of the means He uses to bring things to pass in this world. So if you ask me whether prayer changes things, I answer with an unhesitating “Yes!” (If prayer changes things, then those things were first purposed by God in a different manner, and the intervening prayer means those things are now going in a different way from how God originally purposed them.
The author makes a distinction which sounds clever, but brings us back to begging the question.)
It is impossible to know how much of human history reflects God’s immediate intervention and how much reveals God working through human agents. Calvin’s favorite example of this was the book of Job. The Sabeans and the Chaldeans had taken Job’s donkeys and camels. Why? Because Satan had stirred their hearts to do so. But why? Because Satan had received permission from God to test Job’s faithfulness in any way he so desired, short of taking Job’s life. Why had God agreed to such a thing? For three reasons: (1) to silence the slander of Satan; (2) to vindicate Himself; and (3) to vindicate Job from the slander of Satan. All of these reasons are perfectly righteous justifications for God’s actions. (Where in Scripture are these reasons listed?)
By contrast, Satan’s purpose in stirring up these two groups was to cause Job to blaspheme God—an altogether wicked motive. But we notice that Satan did not do something supernatural to accomplish his ends. He chose human agents—the Sabeans and Chaldeans, who were evil by nature—to steal Job’s animals. The Sabeans and Chaldeans were known for their thievery and murderous way of life. Their will was involved, but there was no coercion; (No coercion? How does the author know this? What is the Bible verse that tells us this?)
It is impossible to know how much of human history reflects God’s immediate intervention and how much reveals God working through human agents. Calvin’s favorite example of this was the book of Job. The Sabeans and the Chaldeans had taken Job’s donkeys and camels. Why? Because Satan had stirred their hearts to do so. But why? Because Satan had received permission from God to test Job’s faithfulness in any way he so desired, short of taking Job’s life. Why had God agreed to such a thing? For three reasons: (1) to silence the slander of Satan; (2) to vindicate Himself; and (3) to vindicate Job from the slander of Satan. All of these reasons are perfectly righteous justifications for God’s actions. (Where in Scripture are these reasons listed?)
By contrast, Satan’s purpose in stirring up these two groups was to cause Job to blaspheme God—an altogether wicked motive. But we notice that Satan did not do something supernatural to accomplish his ends. He chose human agents—the Sabeans and Chaldeans, who were evil by nature—to steal Job’s animals. The Sabeans and Chaldeans were known for their thievery and murderous way of life. Their will was involved, but there was no coercion; (No coercion? How does the author know this? What is the Bible verse that tells us this?)
God’s purpose was accomplished through their wicked actions.
The Sabeans and Chaldeans were free to choose, but for them, as for us, freedom always means freedom within limits. We must not, however, confuse human freedom and human autonomy. There will always be a conflict between divine sovereignty and human autonomy. There is never a conflict between divine sovereignty and human freedom. The Bible says that man is free, but he is not an autonomous law unto himself. (Another series of bare assertions, not documented or referenced for us in any way.)
Suppose the Sabeans and Chaldeans had prayed, “Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.” I’m absolutely certain that Job’s animals still would have been stolen, but not necessarily by the Sabeans and Chaldeans. God might have chosen to answer their prayer, but He would have used some other agent to steal Job’s animals. (This is unfruitful speculation. Someone else would have been compelled to sin by stealing the animals? What?)
The Sabeans and Chaldeans were free to choose, but for them, as for us, freedom always means freedom within limits. We must not, however, confuse human freedom and human autonomy. There will always be a conflict between divine sovereignty and human autonomy. There is never a conflict between divine sovereignty and human freedom. The Bible says that man is free, but he is not an autonomous law unto himself. (Another series of bare assertions, not documented or referenced for us in any way.)
Suppose the Sabeans and Chaldeans had prayed, “Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.” I’m absolutely certain that Job’s animals still would have been stolen, but not necessarily by the Sabeans and Chaldeans. God might have chosen to answer their prayer, but He would have used some other agent to steal Job’s animals. (This is unfruitful speculation. Someone else would have been compelled to sin by stealing the animals? What?)
There is freedom within limits, and within those limits, our prayers can change things. The Scriptures tell us that Elijah, through prayer, kept the rain from falling. He was not dissuaded from praying by his understanding of divine sovereignty. (What was Elijah's understanding of divine sovereignty? What is the Bible verse that tells us this understanding Elijah possessed? Why doesn't the author explain the Bible to us?
This is becoming increasingly nonsensical.)
No human being has ever had a more profound understanding of divine sovereignty than Jesus. No man ever prayed more fiercely or more effectively. Even in Gethsemane, He requested an option, a different way. When the request was denied, He bowed to the Father’s will. (If anyone knew the Father it was Jesus. If anyone understood the purpose and will of God it was Jesus. But Jesus still prayed, which meant that His prayer must have had the possibility of being answered "yes." The fact that the Father answered no must be explained in terms of Jesus' purpose. Speculations about sovereignty are foreign to the text [again left unquoted.])
No human being has ever had a more profound understanding of divine sovereignty than Jesus. No man ever prayed more fiercely or more effectively. Even in Gethsemane, He requested an option, a different way. When the request was denied, He bowed to the Father’s will. (If anyone knew the Father it was Jesus. If anyone understood the purpose and will of God it was Jesus. But Jesus still prayed, which meant that His prayer must have had the possibility of being answered "yes." The fact that the Father answered no must be explained in terms of Jesus' purpose. Speculations about sovereignty are foreign to the text [again left unquoted.])
The very reason we pray is because of God’s sovereignty, because we believe that God has it within His power to order things according to His purpose. (The author asserts we pray because of His sovereignty but changes it to His power and then again to His purpose, all in one sentence.
We would say that few people pray with God's sovereignty in mind, they pray because they know God's character and power.)
That is what sovereignty is all about—ordering things according to God’s purpose. So then, does prayer change God’s mind? No. Does prayer change things? Yes, of course. The promise of the Scriptures is that “The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working” (James 5:16). The problem is that we are not all that righteous. What prayer most often changes is the wickedness and the hardness of our own hearts. That alone would be reason enough to pray, even if none of the other reasons were valid or true.
In a sermon titled “The Most High, a Prayer-Hearing God,” Jonathan Edwards gave two reasons why God requires prayer: (Oh, so the author can quote things. Just not the Bible...)
In a sermon titled “The Most High, a Prayer-Hearing God,” Jonathan Edwards gave two reasons why God requires prayer: (Oh, so the author can quote things. Just not the Bible...)
With respect to God, prayer is but a sensible acknowledgement of our dependence on him to his glory. As he hath made all things for his own glory, so he will be glorified and acknowledged by his creatures; and it is fit that he should require this of those who would be subjects of his mercy . . . [it] is a suitable acknowledgement of our dependence on the power and mercy of God for that which we need, and but a suitable honor paid to the great Author and Fountain of all good.
With respect to ourselves, God requires prayer of us . . . Fervent prayer many ways tends to prepare the heart. Hereby is excited a sense of our need . . . whereby the mind is more prepared to prize [his mercy] . . . Our prayer to God may excite in us a suitable sense and consideration of our dependence on God for the mercy we ask, and a suitable exercise of faith in God’s sufficiency, so that we may be prepared to glorify his name when the mercy is received.(The Works of Jonathan Edwards [Carlisle, Pa.: Banner of Truth Trust, 1974], 2:116)All that God does is for His glory first and for our benefit second. We pray because God commands us to pray, because it glorifies Him, and because it benefits us. (How does prayer benefit us? Why won't the author explain these things to us?)
No comments:
Post a Comment