Praying for God to Save Someone

[thegospelgeek]

You said in two sentences what I haven't said so well in a paragraph

I'll also add Luke 18:1-8 to this discussion.

I fell your paragraph and my sentences support one another. As well a the parable in Luke 18

 

[Allan]

In Romans 10:1, Paul wrote: "Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved."

I dare say that all of us at some time or another (and probably repeatedly) prayed for God to save an individual. Paul himself prayed that God would save every Jew.

Implied in our prayer is the recognition of God's sovereignty. That is, God has the ability to answer our prayer--to save anybody. But aren't we also assuming that God may overcome one's resistance? We know that God will save anyone who is willing to repent and trust Christ for salvation. But when we pray for someone's salvation, aren't we actually asking God to make him willing?

I guess I'm also asking, if God can't do those things, why did Paul pray for the salvation of every Jew, and why do any of us pray for God to save anyone?

Though we can 'petition' God for things that does not necessarily mean God will, in His mercy, do such once or even every time. Prayer is us coming before God to express our hearts in faith while HE expresses to us (in our hearts or His word) what He is intending to do.

So though we pray, as says the scripture, for all men everywhere it is through prayer that we will see and know the plan of God as He chooses to reveal it to us. But as also says the scriptures that this is a good or right saying: "That God desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth" Should our prayers reflect anything less? Not that all 'will' be saved as though 'desire' was to infer His decreed will but that it is in fact God's desire or wish. I doubt seriously that God creates anything with a heart to destroy it from the outset and scripture backs up that principle:

Eze 33:11 Say unto them, [As] I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

 

[thegospelgeek]

Though we can 'petition' God for things that does not necessarily mean God will, in His mercy, do such once or even every time. ..........

Agreed.

God is neither a vending machine nor a drive thru window.

 

[MB]

"Implied in our prayer is the recognition of God's sovereignty. That is, God has the ability to answer our prayer--to save anybody. But aren't we also assuming that God may overcome one's resistance? We know that God will save anyone who is willing to repent and trust Christ for salvation. But when we pray for someone's salvation, aren't we actually asking God to make him willing?"

Is convincing someone of the truth denying them in someway there resistance. It's true many are stuborn and it's true many resist. Yet once convinced of the truth they either have to live with there conviction or submit to the righteousness of God. I don't know about anyone else but conviction took me all the way to my knees in submission.
MB

 

[MB]

I am as strong a believer in the absolute sovereignty of God, yet, until that same God personally discloses who are the elect of His choosing, I shall pray for the worst sinner to come to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. It does not alter my theology one bit.

Cheers,

Jim

Hi Jim God has told us who the elect are;
2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

It says in the verse above the elect are elected through sanctification and belief of the truth.
MB

 

[webdog]

Hi Jim God has told us who the elect are;
2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

It says in the verse above the elect are elected through sanctification and belief of the truth.
MB

It goes back further than that even...

Behold my servant, whom I uphold; my elect, in whom my soul delights; I have put my spirit on him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. Isaiah 42:1

See a pattern?

 

[Marcia]

It's probably a shock, but I disagree There are many instances of God decreeing something will be done, to only see God react to prayers. Couple off the top of my head: God telling Moses to get out of the way while He destroys the Israelites who were worshipping the golden calf. After Moses interceded, the Bible says He relented of the disaster that He spoke of bringing. God's dealing with Ninevah is another. God was going to destroy the city, but after they repented, He changed His mind of bringing destructioin, an example of God reacting. Hezekiah is another example. God had the message sent to him to get his house in order as he was about to die, and after his prayer, God granted him another 15 years.

Now we can look at this in two ways, God was pretending or lying initially in these instances, since He is omniscient, or He was seriously going to do what He said, and changed His mind. The third possibility is God's dealing with mankind within time and space being a mystery which includes and is not limited to an infinite God choosing to listen to the prayers of the righteous and unrighteous alike. I hold to this view. Even the prayer of salvation is God listening to, and granting us righteousness. If prayer is simply us doing what God has planned for us to do, there are many problems with what He has decreed, and then "relented" from scattered throughout the Bible. It's not just man's view of God changing, it's His Word stating how and when He decides to change, which is the very definition of sovereign.

So God really was going to take Hezekiah and changed his mind? That means that his original plan was wrong or not as good. That means that God is affected by man. It also means God did not know that he would change and give Hezekiah more years since He only reacted to the prayer.

If one has the view that God reacts and changes his mind, then God cannot be perfect. If God changes, that means he was less perfect than before or went to a plan that was better than what He had.

There is no other way to see it. This view is the view of Open Theism.

Luke 18.1-8 is merely telling us to persist in prayer; this does not mean we change God's mind. Persisiting in prayer humbles us and changes us. Prayer conforms us to God's will; it does not conform God to our will.

 

[webdog]

So God really was going to take Hezekiah and changed his mind?

Isn't that what the text says? Was He kidding? What do you call something that is not true?

That means that his original plan was wrong or not as good. That means that God is affected by man.

It means no such thing, you are erecting a strawman...

It also means God did not know that he would change and give Hezekiah more years since He only reacted to the prayer.

Ah...here is the mystery that we won't be able to figure out this side of Heaven (if ever). There is no theological belief or system that can explain it, try as they may.

If one has the view that God reacts and changes his mind, then God cannot be perfect. If God changes, that means he was less perfect than before or went to a plan that was better than what He had.

Why? What does that have to do with God's perfectness? His Word, you know, that which is God breathed states He relented. Are you going to question Him and tell Him he's less than perfect?

There is no other way to see it. This view is the view of Open Theism.

Non sequitur. Open theism is the belief God does not know the outcome of the end results. It states in Scripture He relents, accept it.

Luke 18.1-8 is merely telling us to persist in prayer; this does not mean we change God's mind. Persisiting in prayer humbles us and changes us. Prayer conforms us to God's will; it does not conform God to our will.

You have a faulty view of Luke 18. Just read the passage with an open mind, and leave the presuppositions at the door. To play devil's advocate, using your view, what good would persisting do? You would have to re-write Scripture to state the prayer of the righteous availeth zilch.

 

[Marcia]

Webdog, again, I ask you how God could change His mind if he is perfect and knows all, including the future?

Why would God react to man?

The passages in scripture are anthromorphisms, the way man sees God.

(1) Scripture teaches the concept of God’s immutability, i.e., the notion that his essence, character, and will are stable and perfect. Thus, while ordinary things undergo transformation, the changeless Creator does not. He is the same forever (see Psa. 102:26-27). With the Lord there can be “no variation, neither shadow that is cast by turning” (Jas. 1:17 ASV; cf. Heb. 13:8).
To suggest that God is whimsical, constantly changing his mind, as such fluctuations are characteristic of humanity, is to reflect upon the very nature of divine being.
(2) The fact that God is omniscient also enters into this subject. The concept of omniscience suggests that the Lord knows everything there is to know — past, present, and future. He has never “learned” anything, nor has he “discovered” a new fact. He is never “surprised” by what men may do. He knows our thoughts (cf. Heb 4:12-13), and the very intricacies of our bodies (Psa. 139:1ff; Mt. 10:30). Not even a bird falls to the earth without his awareness of the event (Mt. 10:29).
As noted above, divine omniscience extends also into the future. One of the dramatic differences between the true God, and those that are false, i.e., mere inventions of illusory minds, is Jehovah’s ability to see the future. The prophets of the Old Testament challenged their heathen rivals: “Declare the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that you are gods?” (Isa. 41:23). The hundreds of prophecies that adorn the pages of the Bible are astounding evidence of the Lord’s foreknowledge.
In view of this amazing attribute, it is impossible to conclude that the Creator of the Universe vacillates back and forth, doing one thing now, then later changing his mind—in any literal sense of that expression.

http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/559-does-god-change-his-mind

It is only logical to conclude that if God changes his mind, his former thinking was wrong or lacking in some way.

 

[Marcia]

It is a not a non-sequiter to bring up Open Theism, because the view that God changes his mind is very much a part of it since Open Theists avow that God only knows the future that can be known and therefore, will react to man and change his mind. IOW, God does not always know what man will choose or do, so God is put in a position where he changes his mind.

Take Hezekiah. If God added years to Hezekiah's life because Hezekiah asked for it, then what does this mean? It has to mean one or more of these:
1. God did not know Hezekiah would ask for this
2. God's plan to take Hezekiah was wrong and it was better to change it
3. God was not as compassionate when he planned to end H's life and became more compassionate by adding the years to his life

This could be applied to Nineveh as well.

Changing his mind also puts God in time. God is not in time.

 

[webdog]

Webdog, again, I ask you how God could change His mind if he is perfect and knows all, including the future?

Have I not said this is the mystery? Can a potato bug understand human marriage?

Why would God react to man?

Because He is sovereign, and He wanted to?

The passages in scripture are anthromorphisms, the way man sees God.

I disagree. It's pretty clear when we have God speaking in first person to Hezekiah to conclude it's an anthromorphism.

It is only logical to conclude that if God changes his mind, his former thinking was wrong or lacking in some way.

Why? Have you ever changed your mind and your former thinking was not wrong or lacking? I have.

It is a not a non-sequiter to bring up Open Theism, because the view that God changes his mind is very much a part of it since Open Theists avow that God only knows the future that can be known and therefore, will react to man and change his mind. IOW, God does not always know what man will choose or do, so God is put in a position where he changes his mind.

There is much more to open theism than that. Particular traits shared do not automatically lead to something else. Case in point, catholics and baptists both believe in the Trinity, yet a baptist is not considered a catholic for sharing this belief.

Take Hezekiah. If God added years to Hezekiah's life because Hezekiah asked for it, then what does this mean? It has to mean one or more of these:
1. God did not know Hezekiah would ask for this
2. God's plan to take Hezekiah was wrong and it was better to change it
3. God was not as compassionate when he planned to end H's life and became more compassionate by adding the years to his life

or 4, which you won't admit to, that it's in God's good pleasure to do so.

Changing his mind also puts God in time. God is not in time.

Wrong, God is omnitemporal existing outside and within time at the same time. This thinking is christoplatonism. Christ, being 100% God was in time, as were the christophanies in the OT.

Doesn't this verse speak of God's reaction to man? Anthromorphism from Christ in the first person?

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!

 

[Tom Butler]

Some of you who know me too well probably figured I posed this question in the OP to make non-Calvinists uncomfortable. I plead guilty. If man has the ultimate power to choose or reject Christ, why pray for him?

John Piper posed this question "What do you want God to do for Him? You can't ask that God overcome the man's rebellion, for rebellion is precisely what the man is now choosing, so that would mean God overcame his choice and took away his power of self-determination."

But Calvinists are not off the hook, either. If God has elected someone from eternity and will bring about repentance and faith in Christ at some point in time, what point is there for anybody to pray for his salvation?

We have an interesting set of scripture truths to work through. First, God's immutability. If God does not change, what's the point of prayer? Two, the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much. If God is immutable, how does this scripture square with that? Three, Paul's praying for all Jews to be saved. Fourth, Resolving God's sovereignty and man's volition, as expressed at the beginning of this post.

It is a given among us all that we should pray for the salvation of souls. We are told by Jesus himself to ask for what we want. We know it is God's command that we pray. The question is not should we. It is, WHY should we, with regard to the salvation of a soul?

And then the next question, if there is a relation between prayer and the salvation of a sinner, how then should we pray?

 

[Marcia]

Have I not said this is the mystery? Can a potato bug understand human marriage?

Because He is sovereign, and He wanted to?
I disagree. It's pretty clear when we have God speaking in first person to Hezekiah to conclude it's an anthromorphism.

So if God changed his mind, then his previous plan wasn't good enough? Or would God change his mind to a worse plan?

Change implies imperfection. One changes for the better or the worse. God's plan cannot change or it says the same thing - he has bad plans made better or good plans made worse.

Why? Have you ever changed your mind and your former thinking was not wrong or lacking? I have.

Of course I change my mind - I'm human. God is not human.

There is much more to open theism than that. Particular traits shared do not automatically lead to something else.

I didn't say it leads to Open Theism, I said it was a part of it, and it is. Many of the arguments for Open Theism are exactly the ones you are using for God changing His mind.

Wrong, God is omnitemporal existing outside and within time at the same time. This thinking is christoplatonism. Christ, being 100% God was in time, as were the christophanies in the OT

God is not in time. Jesus is no longer on earth as a man but has ascended. God the Father did not incarnate - but this is another topic. If God is in time, he changes and grows which means he is not perfect.

Doesn't this verse speak of God's reaction to man? Anthromorphism from Christ in the first person?

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it

This has nothing to do with God changing his mind.

 

[Tom Butler]

The best answer I have found to the OP question is that of John Piper, whom I quoted in an earlier post. Calvinists, of whom Piper is one, hold that God does not save independently of the gospel; and that God has ordained both the end and the means with regard to salvation.

Piper says God has tied salvation to the preaching of the gospel. And prayer, too.

Prayer is like preaching in that it is a human act also. It is a human act that God has ordained and which he delights in because it reflects the dependence of his creatures upon Him. He has promised to respond to prayer, and his response is just as contingent upon our prayer as our prayer is in accordance with his will. "And this is the confidence which we have before Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us" (I John 5:14). When we don't know how to pray according to God's will but desire it earnestly, "the Spirit of God intercedes for us according to the will of God" (Romans 8:27).
In other words, just as God will see to it that His Word is proclaimed as a means to saving the elect, so He will see to it that all those prayers are prayed which He has promised to respond to. John Piper, Prayer and the Sovereignty of God, 1976, Desiring God Ministries.

The full article:
http://www.spiritone.com/~wing/prov_pra.htm

 

[ajg1959]

The best answer I have found to the OP question is that of John Piper, whom I quoted in an earlier post. Calvinists, of whom Piper is one, hold that God does not save independently of the gospel; and that God has ordained both the end and the means with regard to salvation.

Piper says God has tied salvation to the preaching of the gospel. And prayer, too.



The full article:
http://www.spiritone.com/~wing/prov_pra.htm

Prayer, and what to pray for has been a topic of study of mine for several years now, and I still dont understand it.

If we are to pray for everything, including someone elses salvation, does that mean that God wouldnt touch the heart of that person if I didnt pray for him? If He does respond to my prayer for another's salvation, then why cant I get everyone in my family saved through my prayers, and not have to depend on them to pray for salvation themselves? Can my prayers over ride someone else's free will?

This reminds of the story where Peter was in prison and facing execution. Peter knew that Jesus had promised him a long life, and that Jesus would protect him, so he wasnt worried. In fact, he was so unconcerned that he went to sleep. The church was afraid for him though and prayed diligently for him. An angel went to release Peter and had to actually kick him to wake him up to go free.

My question is this.....Did God send the angel to release Peter because it was God's plan to do so? Or did God send the angel because of the prayers of the church?

Peter knew that he was in no danger and he depended on and beleived that God's will would be done. So, it is my opinion that Peter's release had nothing to do with the prayers of the church, and everything to do with God's plan. However, I do beleive that God used the situation to bring the church together into one accord, and to draw it closer to Him.

As far as salvation goes, the Bible says that it is God's will that ALL would be saved, but it is up to the individual to accept the Gospel of Jesus. If it is already God's will for us to come to repentence, then why does He need us to remind Him of that? If I fail to pray for someone's salvation, will God let them die lost? I have a hard enough time working out my own salvation, am I really responsible for other folks salvation?

"Traveling mercies" is another prayer I dont understand. I know several people that are afraid to get into a car without praying for protection first. To me, this kind of borders on superstition and not faith. Do they really think that God will let them have an accident if they dont remind Him to protect them?

One thing that I have learned through my study of prayer is that if I lead an obedient life and look to God for everything that the Holy Spirit leads me to pray according to God's will.

I am not convinced that prayer will change the will of God. I personally think that the will of God should change my prayers.

This is one of the most interesting threads I have read in a long time, and it provokes many questions and thoughts.

AJ

 

[webdog]

So if God changed his mind, then his previous plan wasn't good enough? Or would God change his mind to a worse plan?

Change implies imperfection. One changes for the better or the worse. God's plan cannot change or it says the same thing - he has bad plans made better or good plans made worse.

Change implies no such thing, particularly when you are referring to God. Marcia, face it...He has said it, not me. God's creation itself was change. Was God less then imperfect before creation? Was God part of change (within time too, I might add)?

Of course I change my mind - I'm human. God is not human.

Of course He doesn't change His mind the way a human changes theirs, the Bible specifically says just that. To deny that God can change His mind as He sees fit, and for His good pleasure is to deny His omnipotence and His Words from Scripture. Any course of thinking and determination is a change from the way it was prior. The earth hasn't always been here. God created it, hence a change from how it was.

I didn't say it leads to Open Theism, I said it was a part of it, and it is. Many of the arguments for Open Theism are exactly the ones you are using for God changing His mind.

Which is neither here nor there...a red herring.

God is not in time. Jesus is no longer on earth as a man but has ascended. God the Father did not incarnate - but this is another topic. If God is in time, he changes and grows which means he is not perfect.

...then God is not omnipresent, since He cannot be present in time. Think how absurd this really is, Marcia. Do we have the Holy Spirit indwelling man...in time? You would have to discount most of the Bible to state God is not in time, this is close to buddhism. You cannot prove a negative.

This has nothing to do with God changing his mind.

Never said it did. You stated God NEVER reacts to man. This passage proves otherwise. Salvation itself is God's reaction (regenerating) to man.

 

[Tom Butler]

I am not convinced that prayer will change the will of God. I personally think that the will of God should change my prayers.

Exactly. If I think my prayers will convince God to do something he does not intend to do, I'm whistling in the wind. Yet, Jesus taught his disciples to pray. Paul urged "fervent" prayer. Paul prayed for the salvation of Jews.

Praying is a recognition that we are totally dependent on God to provide what we ask for. It is a recognition that he can grant our prayer. It also recognizes that God can say yes, no, or wait a while. It also recognizes that God's response will be what is best for us.

So I will pray, and leave the results to God. I will continue to pray for God to save people, even knowing that God will inevitably bring about the salvation of his elect. Non-Calvinists may obediently pray for God to save people, even if they believe that it is ultimately up to the individual to choose.

And the rest of you must get in line behind me when I sit at the feet of the Lord Jesus with my first thousand years worth of questions.

 

[webdog]

Exactly. If I think my prayers will convince God to do something he does not intend to do, I'm whistling in the wind. Yet, Jesus taught his disciples to pray. Paul urged "fervent" prayer. Paul prayed for the salvation of Jews.

Praying is a recognition that we are totally dependent on God to provide what we ask for. It is a recognition that he can grant our prayer. It also recognizes that God can say yes, no, or wait a while. It also recognizes that God's response will be what is best for us.

So I will pray, and leave the results to God. I will continue to pray for God to save people, even knowing that God will inevitably bring about the salvation of his elect. Non-Calvinists may obediently pray for God to save people, even if they believe that it is ultimately up to the individual to choose.

And the rest of you must get in line behind me when I sit at the feet of the Lord Jesus with my first thousand years worth of questions.

Was it God's will when He sent Samuel to tell Hezekiah his life was ending? Did He really intend for Hezekiah to get his home in order, or was He lying or kidding, then? Did He hear Hezekiah's prayer, and respond to it?

 

[rbell]

I am not convinced that prayer will change the will of God. I personally think that the will of God should change my prayers.

Well said.

Independent of the sovereingnty/predestined issue...when we pray for others, maybe God changes us. He opens our eyes to opportunities to share. He shows us places that we can "plant a seed." He heightens our sensitivity to how we are being watched, and how our actions either help or hurt the receptivity of the Gospel.

So yes...it is critical for us to pray, even if God never "changes" our "target." Maybe the whole point is for us to be changed.

Forgive me for being so simple. Probably most of you got this years ago...but it takes me longer to get stuff (is that from being simple, or from being stubborn?

 

[Andy T.]

2 Peter 3:9 states the lost absolutely "thwart Him".

Where does it say that in the verse - that man thwarts God? I don't see it stated in that verse. Or are you interpreting it using your own theological presuppositions that you so often accuse others of doing?

BTW, I have my interpretation of that verse and I freely admit that I use historical-grammatical methods (i.e., immediate context) and systematic theology (i.e., larger context of the Bible) to interpret what Peter is saying in that verse. And you do the same, as well. And we disagree over each other's interpretation, that's all. So my point is, the next time either one of us says the other is "reading into it" or using "presuppositions," we need to look at ourselves in the mirror and admit that we do the same thing.

Peace, brother.