Apologist explains how to get prayer answered.

[unknown soldier]

If there's one issue that keeps apologists busy, it's the issue of unanswered prayer. Skeptics often point out that the hungry children who pray for food often die of starvation. If God exists, then why don't we see better results from prayer? Christian apologist Kyle Butt answers this question on pages 229-244 of A Christian's Guide to Refuting Modern Atheism. He explains that effective prayer must conform to the following:

1. Prayer must be "in the name of Jesus." That is, prayer must be in accord with Jesus' teachings and authority.
2. It is necessary for prayer to be in accord with God's will. God has a way of doing things that no prayer can change.
3. The person praying must believe she will receive what she requests. Otherwise, she won't receive what she requests!
4. The person praying must be a righteous person. So all you sinners, forget it!
5. Prayer won't work if the petitioner prays with selfish desires.
6. Persistence in prayer is important. One or two prayers might not be enough.

I'm eager to read what other members here have to say about these guidelines, but allow me to start out saying that if 1 is true, then anybody who is not a Christian won't benefit from prayer. I wonder if those non-Christians see that their prayers aren't doing any good.

Guideline 2 seems odd. It's like God saying: "I'll do anything you ask as long as I want to do it."

I'd say that 3 can result in a "snowball effect" which is to say that if a doubter's doubt can lead to a prayer not being answered, then the doubter might doubt even more!

Regarding 4, it seems to me that sinners need answered prayer more than the righteous.

Guideline 5 also seems odd because if you're petitioning God for something you want or need, then you are thinking of yourself, and what's wrong with that?

Finally, 6 doesn't explain why God can't just grant the petition with one prayer request, and neither does it tell us how many prayers it takes to succeed. Could it be that the person praying is praying for something that in time she'll get whether she prays or not?

[brunumb]

[Replying to unknown soldier in post #1]

In other words, if any prayer is apparently answered it is nothing more than coincidence. Kyle Butt should have titled the chapter "The Christian apologist's guide to creating loopholes". The best reason for prayers not actually being answered by God is that there's no God there to answer them.

[unknown soldier]

In other words, if any prayer is apparently answered it is nothing more than coincidence.

Mere coincidence is my explanation for claims of answered prayers. The fallacy prayer warriors commit is the following:

If B follows A, then A caused B.

Of course, events A, B, C, D,...happen all the time at different times and are not related to almost all other events. An event that follows another event in the vast majority of cases can have happened for some other reason than the suspected preceding cause. So if I pray for good weather on the date of a church picnic, and when that dates arrives it is sunny and warm, then in all probability the good weather had nothing to do with my prayer. If the weather turns out to be cold and rainy, then to preserve my faith in prayer I can either ignore the failure of the prayer or explain it away.

Kyle Butt should have titled the chapter "The Christian apologist's guide to creating loopholes".

I emailed Kyle Butt to ask him what luck he's had with his own prayers, but he has as of now yet to reply. It seems reasonable to me that he's seen amazing answers to his prayers seeing that he knows what makes prayers effective.

But yes, he's come up with some loopholes just in case prayers don't pan out. His six criteria seem very tough, and I must wonder how many people can possibly go by all of them. It does appear that if Butt is right about what can make a prayer fail, then the person praying is to blame. So in addition to not attaining what we implore God for, we must also feel guilty.

The best reason for prayers not actually being answered by God is that there's no God there to answer them.

That's the most straight-forward answer I can think of, but it's a possibility that Christians are forbidden to entertain.

[The Tanager]

First, I have not read Butt's book (and haven't ever heard of him), so I'm just going off your summary of the points and not necessarily agreeing/disagreeing with Butt. Here are some initial thoughts:

1. To me this idea is about not praying for things Jesus spoke against, not that you have to be a Christian. For example, Jesus said to love your enemy, so one shouldn't pray that your enemy suffer greatly. If that person suffers, it's not because one prayed this.

2. This might be due to a different perspective on what prayer is. Many see prayer as akin to asking a genie for things. Another way to see prayer is to see it as a conversation where God seeks our transformation from "this is what I want" to "what do you want God?"

3. In Mark 9:14-29 we have a father crying out to Jesus "I believe; help my unbelief!" So, prayer isn't about perfect trust.

4. I'd have to see how Butt defines a "righteous" person. One possibility is that he's saying you can't go around knowingly sinning, not care, and still expect to get desired things from God simply because you ask Him for them. If Butt means that you have to be morally perfect to get what God wants, then I'd say he is Biblically way off.

5. It's not selfish to want a roof over your head. That's thinking of yourself, but it's not acting selfishly.

6. If praying is more about getting our hearts aligned with God than rubbing a magic lamp, then persistence is a needed thing because it's not easy changing our mindsets and getting us to act sometimes.

[1213]

[unknown soldier]

First, I have not read Butt's book (and haven't ever heard of him), so I'm just going off your summary of the points and not necessarily agreeing/disagreeing with Butt.

Here's a link to A Christian's Guide to Refuting Modern Atheism. It's a good book in that it shows the viewpoint that many apologists have of atheism. I recommend you read it.

To me this idea is about not praying for things Jesus spoke against, not that you have to be a Christian. For example, Jesus said to love your enemy, so one shouldn't pray that your enemy suffer greatly. If that person suffers, it's not because one prayed this.

I understand what you're saying, but other parts of the Bible do not prescribe goodness toward enemies. Psalm 3:7 (NRSV) for example, has this to say:

Rise up, O Lord! Deliver me, O my God! For you strike all my enemies on the cheek; you break the teeth of the wicked.

So it appears that the Psalmist has no qualms about beseeching God to make his enemies suffer.

Many see prayer as akin to asking a genie for things.

I've noticed that many Christians tend to characterize those who ask God for things as being childish or ignorant. Don't you think that is a harsh judgment?

Another way to see prayer is to see it as a conversation where God seeks our transformation from "this is what I want" to "what do you want God?"

I think it's safe to say that God is more likely to get something from you than you from him.

In Mark 9:14-29 we have a father crying out to Jesus "I believe; help my unbelief!" So, prayer isn't about perfect trust.

Butt quotes James 1:6-8 which says (NRSV):

But ask in faith, never doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind; for the doubter, being double-minded and unstable in every way, must not expect to receive anything from the Lord.

So if a person prays and doesn't receive, then she's even more likely to doubt she'll get what she is praying for, and she'll be worse off than when she started. Not only will she be empty-handed, but now she's being told she's at fault judged as being "double-minded and unstable in every way." With Bible passages like this, it's a wonder anybody bothers to pray.

I'd have to see how Butt defines a "righteous" person. One possibility is that he's saying you can't go around knowingly sinning, not care, and still expect to get desired things from God simply because you ask Him for them. If Butt means that you have to be morally perfect to get what God wants, then I'd say he is Biblically way off.

I think it's safe to say that Butt doesn't expect anybody to be perfect, but unfortunately he does not tell us what imperfections God will overlook.

It's not selfish to want a roof over your head. That's thinking of yourself, but it's not acting selfishly.

Butt's example of selfishness is to ask for money to have a good time. I'm not sure why God would object to such a request. Is it God's will that we have empty pockets and we be miserable?

If praying is more about getting our hearts aligned with God than rubbing a magic lamp, then persistence is a needed thing because it's not easy changing our mindsets and getting us to act sometimes.

As far as I'm concerned, it makes no sense for a real God to want us to persist in prayer. Can't he get it the first time we pray? If a God is unreal, then those who created him will tell us to persist in prayer his creators knowing full well that a made-up God cannot answer prayers.

[JehovahsWitness]

If praying is more about getting our hearts aligned with God than rubbing a magic lamp, then persistence is a needed thing because it's not easy changing our mindsets and getting us to act sometimes.

As far as I'm concerned, it makes no sense for a real God to want us to persist in prayer. Can't he get it the first time we pray? If a God is unreal, then those who created him will tell us to persist in prayer his creators knowing full well that a made-up God cannot answer prayers.

Do you see how your conclusion aligns perfectly with Tanagers "genie in a bottle" approach? A genie has no other consideration but to satisfy his master's request - that's what makes him (the genie) the slave. He must use his powers to satisfy the request REGARDLESS of the genie's judgement as to whether the request is for the long term good of the individual or others.



Unlike you, most believers don't view think of God as a slave that must use his unlimited powers to immediately satisfy their every desire. Rather they acknowledge an omnipotent Creator may have good reason, reason we may not always fully understand, to refuse request we might make. Accepting the above is a crucial component of what the bible calls... faith.




JW

For more, please go to other posts related to...

FAITH, PRAYER and ....WORSHIP

[brunumb]

Unlike you, most believers don't view think of God as a slave that must use his unlimited powers to immediately satisfy their every desire.

Do you have evidence to support that claim?

[JehovahsWitness]

Unlike you, most believers don't view think of God as a slave that must use his unlimited powers to immediately satisfy their every desire.

Do you have evidence to support that claim?

We need look no further the religious texts on the subject. Gods are rarely presented at being at the whim and wish of their subjects The pagan gods, were depicted as being masters over humans not the other way round. Jupiter would kidnap humans for his amusement, Zeus had affairs with them and even though Hesiod's Theogony and Works and Days , and Homer's the Iliad and the Odyssey do depict gracious magnanimous dieties, they were always so from a position of power.

The bible likewise depicts a God vastly superior to humans that expects them to bow to his will and even though there might be sects that believe god unconditionally grants all requests, they would have difficulty surviving faced with the evident demonstration that He does not.

MATTHEW 26:39

Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will."

For more, please go to other posts related to...

PRAYER, GOD, and ....WORSHIP

[The Tanager]