Copyright
© 2003 by Vincent Cheung
disclaimer
on webpage:
"Under our copyright policy, you are permitted to print, copy,
and distribute unlimited copies of
our publications for any ministry purpose, such as for your church,
study group, or personal outreach."
1.
Praying through the Son
2. Praying to the Father
3. Praying by the Spirit
4.
Prayer and Sovereignty
5. Prayer and Omniscience
6. Pray and Transcendence
7.
Praying and Motivation
8. Praying and Obedience
9. Praying and Persistence
10.
Praying and Experience
11. Praying and Revelation
PREFACE
In his book, With Christ in the School of Prayer, Andrew Murray writes, "Reading a book about prayer, listening to lectures and talking about it is very good, but it won't teach you to pray. You get nothing without exercise, without practice."1 This is a most foolish thing to say. If reading, listening, and talking about prayer "won't teach you to pray," then how are these activities "very good"? If I get "nothing" without practice, then why should I read his book?
His book is supposed to contain insights about prayer drawn from the instructions and examples of Jesus.2 But the statement quoted implies that "practice" or experience is a superior teacher than the very words and acts of Christ. The horror of the situation dawns on us when we realize that it seems most people share Murray's view about learning spiritual things.3 They say that you can read about it and talk about it, but experience is the best teacher. However, if experience is the best teacher, then Jesus is not the best teacher, and Scripture is not the best source of information. This is blasphemous.
The truth is that experience is the worst teacher, especially when it comes to learning spiritual things.4 Our culture exalts learning by experience, and many Christians assume such a view even though it contradicts their professed allegiance to God and Scripture. Against this popular view, I urge that we must dethrone experience and exalt revelation, that is, the words of Scripture. This means that reading a book can really teach you a lot about prayer,5 and since I would like to show you some of the things that Scripture teaches about the subject, it makes sense that I have written this book.6
PRAYER AND THE TRIUNE GOD
The doctrinal formulation for the Trinity is that God is "one in essence, and three in person." This does not entail a contradiction, since we are not saying that God is "one in essence, and three in essence," or that God is "one in person, and three in person." That is, we are not saying that God is one and three in the same sense, but that he is one in one sense, and three in another sense. Therefore, there is no contradiction in the doctrine of the Trinity.
By the word "essence," we refer to the attributes of God, such as his omnipotence and omniscience. The sum of the divine attributes constitute the definition of God, just as the sum of any object's attributes constitute the definition of that object. The word "person" refers to a center of consciousness within the Godhead. Thus God has one definition, but there are three persons who wholly and equally participate in that definition.
However, this does not translate into polytheism. The above does not compel us to affirm the existence of three distinct and independent Gods. This is because the God of the Bible is by definition a Trinity; therefore, one Trinity constitutes only one God. For example, if by definition a normal human body includes two kidneys, then the fact that I have two kidneys does not mean that I consist of two human bodies. Since by definition each normal human body has two kidneys, the very fact that I have two kidneys means that I have one normal human body. Likewise, the biblical definition of deity is that God is a Trinity, so if there is one Trinity of divine persons, there is one God.
There is no other God besides the God of the Bible, and the God of the Bible is a Trinity. Even by itself, this doctrine sets Christianity apart from all other worldviews and philosophies, whether religious or secular. Since this is a foundational belief about reality that contradicts all other worldviews on their views of reality, it means that if Christianity is true, then all other religions and philosophies are false, and if even one non-Christian religion or philosophy is true, then Christianity is false. Christians should be unafraid to affirm this, and to defend Christianity as the exclusive truth in private conversations and public debates.7
The following three chapters discuss the relationship between prayer and each person in the Trinity.
1. PRAYING THROUGH THE SON
There is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 2:5)
One of the first things that you must know about prayer is that you do not have access to God unless you are a Christian. Prayer is not just about what you say, but an important aspect of it is where you stand in relation to God. The enemy of God clearly does not have the same privileges in prayer as the friend of God. Since the Bible teaches that the only way a person can have a right relationship with God is through Jesus Christ, only prayers offered by a Christian are acceptable to God. Relating prayer to the Trinitarian God portrayed in Scripture, this means that only prayers presented through God the Son, Jesus Christ, are acceptable to God the Father.
Some have proposed the absurd and unbiblical interpretation of the exclusivity of Christianity so as to say that Christ has made access to God possible for humanity in general so that even a non-Christian may pray to God through him in a certain sense. "Of course Jesus Christ is the only way to God," they may acknowledge, "but this means that if you are a sincere Muslim or Buddhist, you are saved through Christ." Not all of them would say it in these words, but this is what their theory amounts to. However, this is clearly a rejection of scriptural teaching on the subject, only that these people do not want to be explicit about it.
Thus by "Jesus Christ," I do not mean an abstract principle or spirit of "Christ" that is detached from the historical Jesus in the Bible or from his identity as the second person of the Trinity. What I mean is that short of a conscious and explicit affirmation of what the Scripture says about the historical person of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, no one can have access to God. In other words, if you do not explicitly affirm the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Resurrection, and that these doctrines contradict all other religions, then you are not a Christian, and you do not have access to God. You are not acceptable to God, and you will suffer endless torment in hell after death. This is what Scripture teaches, and this is what I mean. Just as you cannot say that you are a Christian if you believe that there is more than one God, do not say that you are a Christian if you think that Muslims will go to heaven, or that Buddhists in some sense have access to God through Christ.
The Bible says that God has chosen some people to be saved, and those whom he has chosen will approach him, but only through Jesus Christ. All others are excluded and condemned.8 That is, only true Christians are saved and have access to God, and all non-Christians are condemned to hell and do not have access to God. This is what the Bible teaches, and this is Christianity. If you disagree with it, then you have rejected Christianity, and I challenge you to refute it. If you claim that this is only my interpretation of Christianity, then at least you must refute me.9 It is dishonest and irrational to dismiss this view just because you do not like it - suppressing the truth is one of the major sins by which countless individuals will be condemned forever (Romans 1:18-19). Maybe you agree with what I have said, but you do not think that it should be stated so bluntly. If this is what you think, then you must also offer arguments to establish your claim.
There are those who insist that all religions are essentially the same. They do not say that all the beliefs of all the religions are identical, but they are saying that they are similar enough on the most important matters so that it is at least possible for different religions to unite, that one religion should not challenge another one as false, and that no religion should claim to be exclusively true so that all the others are false. I will mention only several problems with this view.
It is impossible to define religion in a way that includes all the thought systems that these people want to include, or exclude those that they want to exclude. For example, if I define religion as "the service or worship of God or the supernatural,"10 then this may exclude some forms of Buddhism. But those who say that all religions are essentially the same usually want to include Buddhism.
I may change my definition to, "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith,"11 which should be broad enough to include Buddhism, but then I cannot exclude communism. Another dictionary gives a similar possible definition: "any system of beliefs, practices, ethical values, etc.,"12 and with this gives humanism as an example. But if we include communism and humanism as religions, then we must also include totalitarianism and democracy. But are communism, totalitarianism, and democracy essentially the same? And are all these essentially the same with Buddhism and Christianity?
For the sake of simplicity, I have given examples only from the dictionaries. Although texts on the philosophy of religion are more detailed in their attempts to define religion, their efforts fail to overcome the difficulties illustrated. The point is that no matter how our opponents define religion, the definition is either going to be too narrow or too broad for their purpose - they are going to include certain systems that they want to exclude, or they are going to exclude certain systems that they want to include. The difficulty exists because the various religions are not essentially the same; they contradict one another on many essential points. The implication is that not all of them can be correct, and thus it is impossible to unite them.13 A more productive project would be to identify and clarify the beliefs of each religion, and examine each one to see which ones are true and which ones are false.
Since Christianity claims to be the only true worldview,14 if it is indeed a true worldview, then its claim to be the only truth is also true, and all other worldviews are therefore false. On the other hand, if any non-Christian worldview is true, then Christianity is false. Therefore, any adherent to a non-Christian worldview must squarely face Christianity and defeat it, and any Christian must be prepared to demolish any non-Christian worldview. To make the worldviews appear to be in essential agreement when they are in essential disagreement is dishonest, ignorant, and irrational.15
When people say that all religions are essentially the same, they are usually only thinking of a non-foundational aspect of the religions, or an aspect that is foundational to some, but non-foundational to others. But then they are no longer comparing the essential points of the various religions.
For example, if the claim is that all religions are essentially the same because they all teach people to strive toward goodness, then my objection would be that ethics is not the foundation of the biblical worldview, even if it is an important aspect. Christian ethics is founded on Christian metaphysics; that is, what the Bible teaches about morality depends on what the Bible teaches about reality. Without the biblical view of reality, there is no foundation for the biblical view of morality.
Therefore, the biblical view of reality is the more essential aspect of the Christian worldview. However, in the list of worldviews usually included by those who say that all religions are essentially the same, we find various different and contradictory views of reality. Some affirm monotheism, others affirm polytheism and pantheism. Some even affirm naturalistic atheism.
Thus to say that both Buddhism and Christianity teach people to be good does not establish any essential similarity between the two systems, but merely hides the essential differences. Christianity affirms as its essential claims that God is a Trinity, that Christ is both God and man, and that Scripture is infallible. There are others, but these three beliefs are enough to exclude all non-Christian systems, and to establish that Christianity is essentially contradictory to all non-Christian worldviews, including Judaism.16
Many of those who say that all religions are essentially the same tend to emphasize what they perceive as similarities in the area of ethics. I disagree with this approach, because as I have shown above, different religions may construct their ethics upon different views of metaphysics (or reality), which to them is more foundational. One does not have the right to dictate to all the religions what is essential to them and what is not. Rather, we must allow each religion to specify its central claims. If I say that monotheism17 is foundational to my religion,18 then you have no right to say that it is not foundational to my religion. And you would be mistaken to say that my monotheistic religion is essentially the same with another person's polytheistic religion, even if our systems of ethics are identical.19
However, Christian ethics is not identical to non-Christian ethics. They are not even similar. You may say that all religions direct people to walk in love and goodness. First, this is not true. The ethical aims and directives of various religions are often very different. Second, how do you define love and goodness? The Bible says that love is the fulfillment of the biblical moral laws, so that if you walk in love, you will obey the commands in the Bible. But if your religion defines love differently, as all non-biblical religions must do, then whatever you call love is not what the Bible calls love. Therefore, it is impossible to say that all religions direct people to walk in love, since even though you attempt to use the same word to describe their moral directives, they are not similar at all, and there is no common concept of love.
The very first of the Ten Commandments demands exclusive worship of the Christian God. Therefore, from a biblical viewpoint, it is immoral and sinful to be a non-Christian. Now, who are you to say that this is not an essential belief in Christianity? It is just as essential as the commandment against murder, and much more important and foundational, since even the commandment against murder is founded upon the exclusive authority of God. Now, do all religions have as their essential belief that they are to worship only the Christian God? If not, then how are they the same with Christianity?
It may be possible under both democracy and communism to affirm that there are such things as red roses, but that does not mean that democracy and communism are the same, or even similar to each other, because they differ on the essential points. Those who attempt to unite all religions arbitrarily choose certain points that they perceive to be common to all religions, and then make these points the essential points of all religions. But they have no right to dictate and specify the essential points of all religions, and even on those points that they think all religions agree, the various religions in fact do not agree. The truth is that the various religions are different, and they contradict one another on many essential and non-essential points. Therefore, not all religions can be true. Since Christianity says that all other religions are false, if we can show that Christianity is true, then even this pronouncement about all non-Christian religions is true, and thus we have also shown that all non-Christian religions are false.
My exclusive view is unpopular today, even among those who call themselves Christians. However, popularity does not indicate whether a particular belief is true or false. A common objection against exclusive religion is that it is arrogant to say that my own position is the only correct one, and that all who disagree with me are wrong.20 But what is your definition of arrogance? If Christianity itself asserts that I must accept it to be the only true religion and consider all non-Christian religions to be false, then under Christianity I am not arrogant to take such an exclusive position. You can only call me arrogant based on a non-Christian standard. If so, then you must establish the non-Christian worldview by which you call me arrogant to be true, and that Christianity is false. If you fail to do this, then you have no authority to call me arrogant.
In addition, the claim that there is not one exclusively true religion is itself a universal judgment about all religions, thus you are imposing your own view on all religions, saying that not one of them may claim to be exclusively true. You are saying that only your view about the various religions is correct (that no one religion is exclusively true), and that all who believe otherwise are mistaken. This is arrogant according to your own standard.
I may give a similar response to the charge that it is narrow-minded to say that only my view is correct, and all who disagree with me are wrong. But why is it bad to be narrow- minded? By what standard do you determine that to be narrow-minded is bad, and then impose that label on me? If Christianity is indeed exclusively true, then it would be a good thing to be "narrow-minded." That is, if only Christianity is true, then it would be good to believe that only Christianity is true, whether you call that narrow-minded or not. But if Christianity is exclusively true, and you remain open-minded about the issue, then you are not affirming the truth, and you are the one who has a problem.
The people who use the charges of arrogance, narrow-mindedness, bigotry, and the like, are in fact employing a name-calling tactic that, if successful, enables them to avoid facing the real questions. Is Christianity exclusively true or not? If not, you do not need to call me names - just refute me, and that will be the end of it. Since I perceive that name-callers are trying to avoid confrontation, I can also play the name-calling game and say that they are idiots and cowards, and we can go back and forth forever without facing the real questions. If you disagree with the claim that Christianity is the only true religion, and that all non-Christians will be condemned to endless torment in hell, all you have to do is to confront my arguments and refute the claim.
Even many professing Christians would consider me too harsh, but this is because they have been affected by non-Christian standards of right conduct. If the apostle Paul could tell the opposing Jews to castrate themselves (Galatians 5:12),21 then I am already being quite mild.22 Many of the Christian writers who affirm that only Christianity is true nevertheless sound reluctant to bluntly state this belief, and they are just as reluctant to clearly state its implication, that if only Christianity is true, then all non-Christian religions are false. They grudgingly affirm the exclusivity of Christianity, as if they resent the Bible for containing such a teaching. This attitude is sinful. Instead, they ought to embrace and defend the words of Scripture with force and with joy. Anything less indicates an unscriptural empathy to false religions and sinful humanity at the expense of faithfulness to Christ.
You will have to read some of my other books to see my arguments for Christianity,23 but what I have established here is that the various religions are essentially different and opposed to one another. Therefore, if you claim to be a Christian, then by necessary implication, you are also saying that all non-Christian religions are false, and that all non-Christians will be condemned to endless torment in hell. If you have a problem with this, then you should examine to see if you have truly affirmed Christianity, for if you disagree with Christ and the apostles, then on what grounds do you claim to be a Christian? Jesus says, "He who is not with me is against me" (Matthew 12:30). If you are not a Christian, then you are not just non-Christian in your beliefs, but you are anti-Christian. This is the way it is, whether you like it or not.
In the context of church government, one who affirms religious pluralism and the legitimacy of non-Christian religions or worldviews should have the implications of such a belief shown to him. The church should make clear to such a person what the Bible teaches on the subject. After that, if the person refuses to change his mind, then he should be excommunicated, or expelled from the church. We must begin to realize that believing false doctrine is much more sinful and destructive than something like murder or prostitution. False doctrine is a much greater evil than these other things, and we must protect the flock by removing those who insist on affirming unbiblical ideas: "A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough" (Galatians 5:9). One reason why much of the church is so weak today is a lack of swift discipline.
Since I have established the exclusive truth of Christianity elsewhere, and since I have exposed the absurdity of asserting the essential unity of all religions, we may proceed with the assumption that Christianity is exclusively true, and that all non-Christian religions are false. Thus we may with greater appreciation return to the teaching stated earlier, that only Christians may offer prayers that are acceptable to God. Putting this another way, for one's prayer to be acceptable, he must have a right relationship with God, but to have a right relationship with God, he must first have a right relationship with the designated mediator between God and humanity.
The only mediator between God and humanity is Jesus Christ, who is both God and man. We are not talking about some general principle of Christ or the "spirit" of Christ, but the historical Jesus of Nazareth, God the Son who took upon himself human attributes, who died for his people and was raised from the dead. You cannot be a Muslim or Buddhist and say that you are somehow praying through Christ. You cannot say that you can be a Mormon or Hindu, but as long as you pray with a certain attitude or spirit, you are praying through Christ. You cannot say that Christ is somehow the mediator of all these religions. No, the Bible requires that you acknowledge by name the historical Jesus of Nazareth, who is both God and man, and who is the sole mediator between God and humanity. He is the only way to God; all other roads lead to endless torment in hell.
Some groups that claim to affirm the Christian faith suggest that saints and angels may act as mediators between God and humanity, so that they may appeal to, say, Mary the mother of Jesus for help and for intercession. This is a direct rejection of scriptural teaching. 1 Timothy 2:5 says that there is only one mediator, not two or three, or three hundred. There is only one. Outside of Jesus Christ, there is no access to God at all. Jesus Christ is the mediator between God and humanity, but he does not give to all humans proper access to God. Rather, through him only Christians have access to God the Father in prayer and worship.
2. PRAYING TO THE FATHER
This, then, is how you should pray: "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven." (Matthew 6:9-10)
If you are not a Christian, then you are not a child of God, but you are a child of the devil. All human beings are God's creatures, and this much is true. But when we are speaking of the relationship that we have with God, then humanity is divided into the children of God and the children of the devil. And ever since the beginning of human history, the two groups have been in conflict against each other (Genesis 3:15).
Those who think that all human beings are the children of God are ignorant of what the Bible says on the subject. Jesus says that the "father" of his opponents is the devil, and that they make their disciples twice as much the children of hell as they (John 8:44; Matthew 23:15). Paul writes:
If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ....For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father." The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children. (Romans 8:9, 15-16)
The passage refers to a specific "Spirit," that is, the Spirit of Christ. If you do not have the Spirit of Christ, you do not belong to Christ, and if you do not belong to Christ, you cannot call God your Father. The Bible contradicts the notion that humanity is "one big family," but insists that the family of God consists only of Christians. If you are not a Christian, you cannot call God your Father, because your father is the devil. It makes no difference whether you belong to a religion that you consider to be very proper, or if you think that you are a very good person - you are a child of the devil if you are not a Christian.
When Jesus teaches his disciples to address God as their Father, he immediately excludes all non-Christians from having access to God. Rather, all who approach God the Father must do so through God the Son, Jesus Christ. Christians have the Spirit of Christ in their hearts by which they may legitimately call God their Father. Thus being a Christian is the prerequisite to having any positive relationship with God.
This exclusive view is contrary to what many people want to believe. Even some who call themselves Christians hesitate to state the biblical position in such an explicit manner. However, since the above is what the Bible teaches, we must never do anything to obscure the message. If Christians have not been so afraid to offend people, we would not have so many false converts in our churches today.
Is what I am saying hard and offensive to you? People complained against what Jesus teaches also: "On hearing it, many of his disciples said, 'This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?' Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, 'Does this offend you?'" (John 6:60-61). How does Jesus handle their discontent? Instead of trying to qualify his teaching so as to soften it, he bluntly applies the doctrine of election to their case: "He went on to say, 'This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him'" (v. 65). His statement is not well received, for the next verse says, "From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him" (v. 66).24
If you are offended by the straightforward and no-nonsense presentation of the gospel, then God has not chosen you for salvation, and you have no ability to accept it. Or, it is possible that you are among the elect, but God has decided for you to accept the gospel later. In any case, what many Christians fail to realize is that the non-elect should be offended at the gospel message. We are not supposed to distort it so that it offends no one. The gospel offends people not because it is irrational, for it is rationally invincible. But the non-elect are offended at the true gospel precisely because they are both irrational and sinful, and God has not regenerated them so that they may react to the gospel in a positive way (1 Corinthians 1:18-31).
Maybe you are one of the many false converts in our churches, and no one has made clear to you the gospel message. Do you think that you are a Christian just because you muttered the "sinner's prayer"? Do you think that you are a Christian, even when you have not explicitly or implicitly renounced all non-Christian religions and philosophies as false? If you have affirmed a "gospel" that does not exclude other religions, then you have not affirmed the true gospel. My suggestion to you is the same one that Paul gives to the Corinthians: "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves" (2 Corinthians 13:5).
Jesus teaches that we should pray to God the Father. Since the Father is a divine mind and not a non-rational object, we are to use intelligible language to express our thoughts, and this excludes all the religions that do not deal with a divine rational person. And since we must pray to the "Father," a definite person, not just any person will do; rather, we must only pray to the divine Father of the Bible.
This "Father" is defined by many distinct attributes the sum of which restricts our conception of him to a very specific person, so as to make us realize that prayers made to any other person is misdirected. It also means that we must gain an accurate grasp of how the Bible defines this divine person, so that the conception of God in our minds will correspond to the conception of God as revealed in Scripture.
The above leads us to reject the notion that it matters little what you believe about God as long as you are sincere. It is possible to sincerely believe something and be mistaken. To sincerely believe in the Buddha does not make you acceptable to God, since from a Christian perspective, you would just be sincerely sinful. What God requires is that we sincerely affirm the truth; although faith is important, the object of faith is also important. We must believe the right doctrines. We must define "God" - the object of our faith - according to the attributes ascribed to him in the Bible.
Before dealing with some of the central divine attributes in relation to our context, that we must direct our prayers to the Father brings up a point that is particularly relevant to our times, namely, much of feminist theology is contrary to biblical teaching, and thus must be rejected and opposed. For example, although God is without gender, since he reveals himself in the Bible in male roles and with male pronouns, we are to address him as "Father" and not "Mother," with "he" and not "she." I would like to deal with the threat of feminist theology more thoroughly and systematically elsewhere, and I realize that its subversive ideas relate to more than this one issue in our example. For now, we should at least recognize that the central agenda of feminist theology is anti-Christian;25 therefore, let us determine to challenge the unbiblical assertions from its proponents whenever they may come up, and excommunicate the unrepentant. We will now return to discuss the divine attributes.
"God is love" (1 John 4:8, 16) is frequently recited by people who wish to prove certain points about their conception of God, or of what God would do or would not do. These people make a number of inferences from the proposition, "God is love," that they think should be true if indeed God is love. But what is love? And what does it mean for God to be love? It certainly does not follow that a God who is love will not send anyone to hell, since the same Bible says that he sends many people to hell. It also does not follow that a God who is love will accept non-Christians, since the same Bible says that he rejects non- Christians.
Some people like to emphasize "God is love" because they falsely think that the divine attribute of love will spare them from the judgment promised to those who disobey God. For example, they may say that since "God is love," then he also loves the homosexual and will not judge him. But since this inference contradicts other propositions in the Bible, it is a false inference.
The love of God does not contradict the other things that the Bible says about God. We must define love correctly. Further, the same Bible that says, "God is love," also says, "God is light; in him there is no darkness at all" (1 John 1:5). How come this verse, which is in the same letter by the apostle John, is so seldom mentioned? Perhaps it has something to do with the next verse, which explains what "God is light" implies: "If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth" (v. 6). Walking with God requires adherence to his standard of right living, and if you do not do this, then you are not walking with God. Thus this very passage about the light of God shines upon those who hides under the darkness of a distorted interpretation of "God is love," and exposes the fact that they are not really walking with God.
The same Bible that says, "God is love," also says that, "God is light." And the same Bible that says, "God is light," also says that, "God is a consuming fire" (Hebrews 12:29). All three propositions are true, and they are consistent with one another, but the invalid inferences that people make from "God is love" often contradict the other two propositions. That God is a consuming fire does not mean that he will give you a warm and welcome feeling. The writer of Hebrews states this proposition in the context of telling his readers to worship God "with reverence and awe" (v. 28). The image of God being a consuming fire is associated with his anger, judgment, and power to destroy.26 The modern man may disapprove of such a God, but what is wrong with such a God? If God comes at you as a consuming fire, it is you who are at fault. Paul tells his readers to recognize both the "kindness and severity" (Romans 11:22, NASB) of God. He says that he is severe against those who disobey him, but he is kind to you, that is, if you continue in his grace.
Many times I have heard preachers say, "God is not mad at anybody." This is false, and provides the non-Christians with false comfort. The Bible says that if you are a non-Christian, God is now very angry with you, and "It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God" (Hebrews 10:31). Jesus says, "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him" (John 3:36). Jesus declares that he who is not with him is against him (Matthew 12:30); there is no neutral ground. You need not deliberately align yourself against Christ to be counted as his enemy, since you were born his enemy. 1 John 5:12 says, "He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life." You may suppress your knowledge of God and your rebellion against him (Romans 1:18), but God is very aware, and you will not get away with anything (Hebrews 4:13).
If you are not a Christian, the great force of divine wrath will be poured out against you, perhaps in a moment you do not expect, and it is as if you will hear God say, "You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?" (Luke 12:20). Of course, as I have explained elsewhere, the wrath of God is not an emotion, since God is not a man and has no emotions.27 However, this should not give you any relief, because it remains that God's wrath is a policy of thought and action against his enemies that will stop at nothing short of effecting their utter destruction and endless suffering.
Today's preachers tend to obscure the wrath of God, and present him as a harmless and helpless clown. There are some "fire and brimstone" sermons, which the congregations detest, but even most of these sermons are not nearly terrifying enough to describe the horrors of hell, the helpless state of those without Christ, and the greatness of God's mercy toward his elect.
I urge you to read the sermon, "Sinners in the hands of an angry God" by Jonathan Edwards.28 It provides a much-needed biblical perspective about the sinner's condition. It is inappropriate to reproduce the sermon in full here, but here are several passages from it:
The wrath of God is like great waters that are dammed for the present; they increase more and more, and rise higher and higher, till an outlet is given; and the longer the stream is stopped, the more rapid and mighty is its course, when once it is let loose. It is true, that judgment against your evil works has not been executed hitherto; the floods of God's vengeance have been withheld; but your guilt in the mean time is constantly increasing, and you are every day treasuring up more wrath; the waters are constantly rising, and waxing more and more mighty; and there is nothing but the mere pleasure of God, that holds the waters back, that are unwilling to be stopped, and press hard to go forward. If God should only withdraw his hand from the flood-gate, it would immediately fly open, and the fiery floods of the fierceness and wrath of God, would rush forth with inconceivable fury, and would come upon you with omnipotent power; and if your strength were ten thousand times greater than it is, yea, ten thousand times greater than the strength of the stoutest, sturdiest devil in hell, it would be nothing to withstand or endure it.
The bow of God's wrath is bent, and the arrow made ready on the string, and justice bends the arrow at your heart, and strains the bow, and it is nothing but the mere pleasure of God, and that of an angry God, without any promise or obligation at all, that keeps the arrow one moment from being made drunk with your blood. Thus all you that never passed under a great change of heart, by the mighty power of the Spirit of God upon your souls; all you that were never born again, and made new creatures, and raised from being dead in sin, to a state of new, and before altogether unexperienced light and life, are in the hands of an angry God. However you may have reformed your life in many things, and may have had religious affections, and may keep up a form of religion in your families and closets, and in the house of God, it is nothing but his mere pleasure that keeps you from being this moment swallowed up in everlasting destruction. However unconvinced you may now be of the truth of what you hear, by and by you will be fully convinced of it. Those that are gone from being in the like circumstances with you, see that it was so with them; for destruction came suddenly upon most of them; when they expected nothing of it, and while they were saying, "Peace and safety." Now they see, that those things on which they depended for peace and safety, were nothing but thin air and empty shadows.
The God that holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider, or some loathsome insect over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked his wrath towards you burns like fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the fire; he is of purer eyes than to bear to have you in his sight; you are ten thousand times more abominable in his eyes, than the most hateful venomous serpent is in ours. You have offended him infinitely more than ever a stubborn rebel did his prince; and yet it is nothing but his hand that holds you from falling into the fire every moment. It is to be ascribed to nothing else, that you did not go to hell the last night, that you was suffered to awake again in this world, after you closed your eyes to sleep. And there is no other reason to be given, why you have not dropped into hell since you arose in the morning, but that God's hand has held you up. There is no other reason to be given why you have not gone to hell, since you have sat here in the house of God, provoking his pure eyes by your sinful wicked manner of attending his solemn worship. Yea, there is nothing else that is to be given as a reason why you do not this very moment drop down into hell.
The terrors of hell is indeed frightening, but surely, you think I will tell you, God has sent Christ to make salvation possible for everyone, even you, so that in the end you will determine your own destiny, that you can save yourself from endless torment. But God has not left even this for the sinner to determine. Jesus says that no one can be saved except the Father has chosen him; unless God first shows you mercy, you will not and cannot choose him. Thus even in this aspect you are powerless, and you are completely at his mercy. As Edwards states in his sermon, "It will be as it was on the great out-pouring of the Spirit upon the Jews in the apostles' days, the election will obtain, and the rest will be blinded."
Therefore, cry out to God for mercy, and it may be that he has shown kindness toward you and has regenerated you, so that your plea for mercy will indeed come from a sincere heart instead of being done in pretense or in carnal fright, and thus you will obtain salvation through true faith in Jesus Christ. If you think that you are already a Christian, then believe and behave like a Christian. As Jesus says, "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 7:21). Why do you call him "Lord," but refuse to do what he says (Luke 6:46)? Can it be that your profession of faith is false? You cannot cheat your way into heaven. Test yourself! "Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you unless, of course, you fail the test?" (2 Corinthians 13:5).
3. PRAYING BY THE SPIRIT
For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit. (Ephesians 2:18)
The Bible teaches that we must pray through the Son, to the Father, by the Spirit. But not everyone has the Son (1 John 5:12), and not everyone has the Spirit (Romans 8:9); therefore, not everyone can pray to the Father. It is important to understand the relationship between prayer and the exclusivity of Christianity, because if not everyone has access to God, then one who prays better possess a correct sense of what and who he is before God. Is he still the enemy of God, or has God changed his heart and given him the gift of faith to embrace the gospel?
The exclusivity of Christianity continues to be important and relevant for the Christian, since he ought to retain a sense of gratitude and awe that he has indeed been chosen to approach God: "Blessed is the man You choose, and cause to approach You, that he may dwell in Your courts" (Psalm 65:4, NKJ). Rather than having the arrogant and foolish attitude that God should thank the human individual for believing in the gospel, the human individual should develop his new life "in fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12-13), knowing that he is permitted in God's presence solely because of God's pleasure and discretion.
The Christian had done nothing to deserve salvation, and in himself he was no better than the non-Christian, who would be condemned to endless suffering in hell. The Christian can thus say nothing to congratulate himself, whether of his good sense for choosing Christ, since Christ says, "You did not choose me, but I chose you" (John 15:16), or for his moral superiority, since "Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath" (Ephesians 2:3). So then, let him who boasts boast not about himself, but about what God has done for him in Christ (1 Corinthians 1:31).
The Christian in himself was not intellectually and morally superior to the non-Christian. But make no mistake about it - once God changes and saves him, the Christian is indeed intellectually and morally superior. False humility and scriptural ignorance may cause many believers to deny this, but the Bible teaches that we have been enlightened and sanctified in Christ, and our spiritual growth involves increasing in knowledge and holiness. Also, the Bible calls unbelievers foolish and wicked in contrast to those who have been changed by God through Christ.
If you do not have superior wisdom, as God defines wisdom, then you have not been enlightened; if you do not have superior character, as God defines character, then you have not been transformed. Therefore, if you are not intellectually and morally superior than the unbelievers, then God has not done any work in you, and you are not even a Christian. To deny that Christians are intellectually and morally superior to non-Christians is to contradict Scripture, and insult the work of God.
The Holy Spirit gives Christians access to God, so as to make prayer possible. But he helps us in another way as well:
In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will. (Romans 8:26-27)
Some of the Greeks understood our limitations when it comes to prayer, and had reached corresponding conclusions about it: "Pythagoras forbade his disciples to pray for themselves, because, he said, they could never in their ignorance know what was expedient for them. Xenophon tells us that Socrates taught his disciples simply to pray for good things, and not to attempt to specify them, but to leave God to decide what the good things were."29
The Christian is not in such an unhappy condition, since Scripture reveals a considerable amount of knowledge about the will of God, so that from it we can deduce much information to understand and interpret our particular situations. The Bible itself claims to be sufficient, meaning that if you have complete knowledge of its content, and if you fully follow what it teaches, you will never transgress the will of God. Of course, no one has complete knowledge of the Bible, and no one fully follows it, and thus we must often ask God for his forgiveness. The point is that the Bible itself contains sufficient information, so that when we fail to live a perfect life before God, we may never say that it is because the Bible contains insufficient information (2 Peter 1:3).
That said, since we often do not know everything about a situation, even our own, and since we cannot know all the relationships between various events and options, we sometimes do not know what is the best thing to pray for in any situation. We may know what we want when it comes to our personal lives, but even then we may not know whether what we want is always best, or whether it conforms to the specific plan that God has for our lives.
This is just to say that we are not omniscient, and not that Scripture provides insufficient information. Failing to know everything is not a sin, but there remains the practical problem of not knowing what to pray. That is, it is not an issue of lacking the necessary information to achieve holiness, since the Scripture is indeed sufficient, but it is an issue of practical helplessness because of our human limitations.
The Spirit gives us access to God so that we may pray, but we do not always know for what we should pray. So, Paul says, "the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express." What does this mean?
First, we need to clarify what "groans that words cannot express" may mean. If it is meant that these "groans" represent thoughts that are inexpressible by means of words, then this appears to be impossible. If words are only arbitrary signs that represent thoughts, then in principle words are capable of expressing any thought. For example, "X" can be a word representing any thought at all. No matter how profound a given thought is, if a mind can think it, then words can express it. In fact, "X" can designate an entire proposition or even all the propositions in an entire book; therefore, in themselves words are always adequate to express any thought.
But if the "groans" are not thoughts, and if they are not meant to produce thoughts in another mind, then they are not meant as vehicles of expression at all, and thus the word "cannot" would appear to be inapplicable to verbal communication. That is, there would be a category mistake if the verse indeed says that some thoughts cannot be expressed in words, since all thoughts can be expressed in words. And anything that can be expressed must either be thoughts, or must generate thoughts in another mind. Otherwise, the transaction cannot be rightly called communication. The verse must be translated or understood differently. Or, maybe this verse is saying that we do not have the intellectual clarity or ability to put these groans into words, but it is not saying that words themselves, or language itself, is deficient in expressing thoughts.
In any case, we must reject the popular notion that language is inherently incapable of expressing many things. This is nothing more than an anti-intellectual prejudice. The above shows that any limitation in expression must be in the mind, and not in language itself.
However, if Paul is indeed saying that the Spirit provides a solution to our limitation by "groans that words cannot express," so as to limit the ability of language itself to give expression to thoughts, then my argument must be wrong and we should not explain away the passage, but we must accept that there is indeed an inherent limitation in language. But a careful examination of the passage shows that we need not come to such a conclusion. Douglas Moo points out that the term translated "that words cannot express" in the NIV appears only here in biblical Greek, and the meaning implied by its etymology is more properly denoted by, "unspoken" or "wordless."30 Likewise, Thomas Schreiner writes, "it much more likely means 'without speech,' the absence of any vocalization at all."31 Whatever the "groans" are, they are not thoughts that are meant to be spoken; therefore, the verse does not say that there are any inherent limitations in language itself in giving expression to thoughts.
The groans are not literal audible sounds, but they are metaphorical. We find ample support for such an interpretation from the verses that precede our passage:
I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. (Romans 8:18-23)
Paul describes the tension and the frustration that we experience by living in the imperfect present while expecting the perfect future. We long for the completion of our salvation, even "the redemption of our bodies." And thus our "groaning" is not an audible sort, but a metaphor for the tension and frustration that we now experience. That this "groaning" is metaphorical is even clearer when we see that, in a sense, the creation itself shares this tension and this frustration, and "has been groaning" along with us. But the creation itself is not a rational entity, and does not literally groan as a woman suffering "the pains of childbirth." Therefore, the "groaning" in these verses represent an intense anticipation for the fulfillment of the plan of God, rather than an audible sound.
Paul writes that, in some sense, the Spirit also groans for the will of God to be fulfilled. Verse 26 says, "We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express." Since we do not always know for what to pray, the Spirit intercedes for us with "groans" that are not audibly uttered. But what does this mean? What is the nature and mode of this intercession?
Schreiner writes the following:
These groanings are not audible. They are the inexpressible longings that arise in every believer's heart to do and know the will of God. That the groanings arise in the hearts of believers is suggested by verse 27, which says that "God searches the hearts." This is most naturally understood to refer to the hearts of believers. God searches the hearts of believers and finds unutterable longings to conform their lives to the will of God. The Holy Spirit takes these groanings and presents them before God in an articulate form. Even though believers cannot specify these requests to God adequately since they do not know his will sufficiently, the Holy Spirit translates these groanings and conforms them to God's will.32
The passage indeed implies that believers "do not know his will sufficiently,"33 and that the passage says that the Holy Spirit does something about it, and this "something" is related to the "groans" mentioned. However, I disagree with Schreiner when he says that these groans are "in the hearts of believers" in the sense that these are the groans of the believers, which the Spirit transforms into acceptable prayers to God.
According to Schreiner, verse 27 suggests that the groans are in the hearts of the believers because it says that "God searches the hearts." Although I agree that the "hearts" are the hearts of the believers, I disagree that the verse supports his conclusion. We need to read the entire verse, which says, "And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will." The words, "he who searches the hearts" merely identify which "he" we are talking about. The next words tell us what "he who searches the hearts" actually does - he "knows the mind of the Spirit." Now, verse 26 says that the Spirit "intercedes for us," and verse 27 says that the Spirit "intercedes for the saints," so that it is the Spirit's prayer that God hears in this passage, and not that of the believers.
Assuming an understanding of the context of this passage, that is, at least verses 18-28, we may paraphrase as follows: "We do not always know for what to pray, but the Spirit prays for us inaudibly. Now, he who knows our thoughts also knows the Spirit's thoughts; therefore, although the Spirit prays inaudibly, God hears the Spirit's prayers for us. And such prayers are effective, since the Spirit prays for us in accordance with the will of God." The reason Paul refers to God as the one "who searches our hearts" may be because the Spirit is one who indwells believers, so that Paul seems to say, in effect, "He who knows your thoughts also knows the thoughts of the Spirit who lives in you."
Douglas Moo arrives at a similar conclusion, and writes:
Moreover, it is likely that the groans are not the believer's but the Spirit's....it is preferable to understand these "groans" as the Spirit's own "language of prayer," a ministry of intercession that takes place in our hearts in a manner imperceptible to us. This means, of course, that "groans" is used metaphorically....I take it that Paul is saying, then, that our failure to know God's will and consequent inability to petition God specifically and assuredly is met by God's Spirit, who himself expresses to God those intercessory petitions that perfectly match the will of God....
Verse 27 continues Paul's discussion of the intercession of the Spirit and focuses on the effectiveness of this intercession. The reason for this effectiveness is the perfect accord that exists between God, "the one who searches hearts," and "the mind of the Spirit." God, who sees into the inner being of people, where the indwelling Spirit's ministry of intercession takes place, "knows," "acknowledges," and responds to those "intentions" of the Spirit that are expressed in his prayers on our behalf.34
I have heard several preachers maintain that our passage does not teach that the Spirit prays for us, but that the Spirit helps us to pray. They say that the Spirit will not do something for you that you are supposed to do yourself, although he will help you do it. However, it begs the question to say that this passage does not teach that the Spirit prays for us because it cannot be true that the Spirit prays for us. Rather, since this passage teaches that the Spirit prays for us, it means that it is true that the Spirit prays for us.
Hebrews 7:25 indicates that Jesus Christ "always lives to intercede" for believers. Thus he has a ministry of intercession through which he prays for believers, and this ministry occurs independently of the believers themselves. In addition, it occurs in heaven, so that it is indeed "imperceptible to us." What our passage teaches is that the Holy Spirit also has a ministry of intercession. These preachers miss the point of the passage, whose very intent is to tell us that the Spirit has a ministry of intercession through which he prays for believers, and that this is an act that occurs independently of the believers themselves, so that it is also "imperceptible to us."
These same preachers that I have heard would teach that Christ is interceding for us, and they find no conflict between this ministry of intercession and our own responsibility to pray. If we can acknowledge that Christ prays for us, then it is irrational to insist that the Spirit cannot also pray for us, especially when our passage explicitly states this. Christ prays, the Spirit prays, and we pray - there is no conflict between these three.
Jesus refers to the Spirit as "another Counselor" (John 14:16, or "Advocate"). That the Spirit should have a ministry of intercession for the benefit of Christians fits very well with his ministry of being the second Advocate, paralleling the ministry of Christ as the first Advocate. Christ now serves as our Advocate in heaven, and the Spirit now serves as the indwelling Advocate on earth. Both of them pray for us.
Just as the fact that Jesus Christ has a ministry of intercession on our behalf does not prevent or discourage us from praying, the fact that the Spirit also has a ministry of intercession on our behalf should not prevent or discourage us from praying. It may very well be true that the Spirit helps us pray, but the passage under discussion is saying that he himself prays for us to God, and since his prayers are always in accordance with the will of God, they are always effective, and this is something that we will examine later in this chapter.
Another contrary interpretation of our passage is that the "groans that words cannot express" refer to speaking in tongues. Since we do not always know for what to pray, the Spirit grants us words to speak in a language that we do not understand so as to bypass the limitations of our minds. However, if our interpretation of this passage is correct, we have already eliminated the possibility that Paul is referring to tongues. Our interpretation says that it is the Spirit who prays in inaudible "groans" in a manner that is apart from and imperceptible to believers, but this description excludes tongues altogether. This is not to say that the Bible does not endorse speaking in tongues; whether it does or not, this passage does not seem to have tongues in mind.
This brings me to a point related to speaking in tongues, although it is not directly relevant to our passage. Regardless of whether we think speaking in tongues is for today, and regardless of what we think it does, many people who speak in tongues use it in a way as to avoid having to struggle through the difficulties of praying in English (or their known languages). That is, whenever they find it hard to express themselves in English, or whenever they find it hard to extend the length of their prayers, they will simply begin speaking in tongues, and thus avoid having to exert further effort in prayer. As a result, some important aspects their spiritual growth are halted.
This is one criticism that Neil Babcox offers against speaking in tongues. Although he thinks that speaking in tongues is not for today, even if he is wrong about this, what he says below is still applicable:
At no time are we more aware of our weakness and inadequacy than when we kneel to pray....In the face of such spiritual helplessness, tongues can become a crutch. For example, when I found myself mute and dumb in His presence, I could far too quickly remedy the situation by praying in tongues. Again, when I was oppressed with a sense of guilt and felt alienated from God, it was far more easy to pray in tongues than to search my heart for the cause of the guilt. But what was all of this if it was not an evasion? Whereas previously I could avoid the difficulties inherent in prayer by resorting to tongues, now I found myself praying, "Lord, teach me to pray."35
There are various reasons why you may have trouble praying in English, but almost all of them relate to deficiencies in the mind. Maybe your thoughts are unclear; maybe you are easily distracted; maybe you lack the ability to put your thoughts into words; or maybe your ignorance of scriptural teaching prevents you from properly relating to God. Whatever the reason may be, rather than giving up or resorting to tongues, you must struggle to attain fluency in prayer. And since most of the problems are in the mind, this is the area that you must work on. Peter Kreeft writes, "The first cause of a specifically human act is always internal, not external. By 'a specifically human act' I mean one like asking a question, creating a work of art, making a moral choice, affirming another person, or appreciating the beauty of nature or praying....That is why thought is where the action starts....Thought is the first battlefield."36
Although spiritual growth involves much effort and much struggle, if we have some sense of direction and purpose, and if we know what to work on, then the effort and the struggle will bear good fruit. The struggle in prayer should not consist mainly in forcing yourself to pray when you cannot pray well, but it should involve developing a spiritual mind by reading and thinking. If you wish to pray better, then you must make your thoughts clearer and richer. Thus the most important thing you can do to improve in prayer is theological study and reflection, which consists of much reading and thinking. For example, you will not be able to enrich your prayer and worship by engaging the divine attributes if you do not know about them. Meaningful prayer and worship depends on theological knowledge. Therefore, reading a book on systematic theology does much more to improve your prayer life than reading one that is specifically about prayer, but whose content is mainly pragmatic, anecdotal, or otherwise theologically shallow.
Jesus would sometimes spend an entire night praying, from evening to morning (Luke 6:12). The content of his mind was very rich and his knowledge was very broad. We cannot attain to his level, but we can strive to become better. And the Spirit is involved in all of this it is he who grants us knowledge and understanding, who causes us to recall and obey the words of God, and who transforms our thinking and our character through Scripture. Although our passage does not specifically refer to the Spirit's role in helping us pray, but rather indicates that the Spirit prays for us, other biblical passages assure us that he is here to help us in every aspect of our spiritual life, including our struggle to pray better by establishing a foundation of greater knowledge and deeper reflection regarding the things of God.
Paul has been telling us about the Spirit's ministry of intercession. Because the Spirit always prays "in accordance with God's will" (Romans 8:27), his prayers are always effective. Verse 28 then describes the result of such an effective ministry: "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose."37 The HCSB is better: "We know that all things work together for the good of those who love God: those who are called according to His purpose."38
Although Peter Masters is addressing another topic, the following warning against what he calls "pietistic speaking" also applies to how believers often misuse Romans 8:28:
Many Christians have picked up a manner of thinking and speaking which is highly destructive to genuine guidance. We may call it pietistic speaking. These friends constantly ascribe all kinds of everyday events to the special and direct intervention of the Lord, as though their lives were filled with minor miracles. They believe this kind of thinking and speaking is what the Lord wants from His people. They think that it reflects gratitude and a spiritual attitude. However, this trend often leads to a form of spiritual "superstition"...
It is significant that when believers pick up the habit of pietistic thinking and speaking, they tend to focus on...earthly rather than spiritual matters. And most significantly, they are usually good events, and not hard or painful ones. We have heard friends say: "The Lord sent a bus for me this morning," and, "The Lord enabled me to pass my exam, because actually I did very badly." Other comments about the Lord's direct interventions concern everyday affairs like the weather, or the Lord preventing the cakes from burning....
We must not drift into the idea that only small, earthly and good things are examples of His providence. Why should we single out life's happy surprises and coincidences as instances of God's work in our lives? Why not talk about the days when nothing remarkable happened? Why not talk about illnesses and times of failure? After all, God superintends all that happens to His children.39
The relevance of the above to a correct understanding of Romans 8:28 is in the fact that we must define "good" the way God defines it, and not the way we would like to define it. In our passage, Paul is trying to give us a proper perspective from which to interpret the things that we suffer in this life. He says in verse 18, "I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us." So when verse 28 says that "all things work together for the good," the "all things" should really include "all things." In fact, Romans 9 indicates that even the creation and destruction of the reprobates serve to glorify God and edify Christians.
But the main emphasis on Romans 8:28 appears to be on suffering. Most people assumes this to be so even without noting the context of the passage, but they may still misunderstand the verse if they assume a false definition of "good." For example, the verse cannot mean, "All things, whether good or bad, work together for your good - that is, to make you rich." The "good" in our verse cannot mean material riches because that is not how God defines "good." Jesus says, "Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions" (Luke 12:15). Nor can the verse mean, "All things, whether good or bad, work together for your good that is, to make you popular," because God does not define "good" as popularity.
Our answer is in verse 29, which says that God has predestined us to be "conformed to the likeness of his Son." Thus God defines the "good" in verse 28 as that which functions to further our sanctification. To the extent that we fail to focus on spiritual things, this may not be the top item on our agenda, but God is greatly concerned with it, and he works all things - even the lives of others and the destinies of nations - to effect our sanctification. "It is God's will that you should be sanctified...For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life" (1 Thessalonians 4:3-7).
However, this is not to say that God does not give us pleasant things. In the context of admonishing wealthy people, Paul writes that God "richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment" (1 Timothy 6:17). The point is not that God only gives us pleasant or unpleasant things, or that only certain things further our sanctification, but that all things work together by the providence and wisdom of God to further the great purpose of our sanctification, which refers to our increase in knowledge and in holiness (Colossians 3:10; Ephesians 4:24).
But then we return again to the exclusivity of Christianity, for all things work together for good, not for everyone, but only for "those who love God" (v. 28). Paul writes, "If anyone does not love the Lord a curse be on him" (1 Corinthians 16:22). We have already seen from other verses that the wrath of God remains on non-Christians, and there is no escape from judgment except through Jesus Christ.
Who then are "those who love God"? Are they those who have chosen Christ by their own "free will"? Are they those who have the good sense and moral propensity to accept the gospel? Scripture states that no one can choose God unless God has first chosen him. Thus the verse says that those who love God are those "who are called according to His purpose." It does not say that they are those who love God because they have chosen to love him according to their own reasons, but that they love God because they have been chosen by him according to his own purpose. Those who loved God are those who have been "summoned by preference."40
The rest of humanity will be "thrown into the fire and burned" (John 15:6). In the plan of God, they serve to produce an environment in which the chosen ones may increase in sanctification, and to promote the glory of God by their destruction and damnation. Their lives have no positive meaning for themselves. Many are appalled and outraged at such a God who is sovereign, and who dares to exercise his sovereignty, but "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?" (Romans 9:21).
PRAYER AND THE DIVINE NATURE
In the introduction to the previous section, I mentioned that God is defined by the sum of his attributes. Some of these attributes are his sovereignty, knowledge, and transcendence or, we may say that God is all-powerful, God is all-knowing, and God is spirit. Stephen Charnock is credited as having said, "It is impossible to honor God as we ought, unless we know him as he is."41 Accordingly, there is an intimate relationship between prayer and the divine attributes; the former is impossible without knowledge of the latter.
Let us suppose that you are responsible for making a speech at a banquet honoring a distinguished professor. Now, if you think that the professor is a man when she is a woman, if you think that her field is physics when it is history, and if you think that she comes from Texas when she is from India, then your speech is not going to make much sense, and both the professor and the audience would think that your speech is referring to someone else.
Likewise, many people pray to "God," but if they were to describe him, what we hear may not correspond at all to the biblical God. If this person's "God" is completely irreconcilable with the Bible, can we say that he is praying to God, and can we say that this person is a Christian? The Israelites pointed to the golden calf that they had made and declared, "These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt" (Exodus 32:4). But God himself disagreed.
If your "God" is a "golden calf," then you are not a Christian. From the biblical perspective, you are an idol worshiper. Of course, you can say that you are a Christian anyone can say that - but you are not one by biblical definition. And if your definition of "Jesus" is too far off, then you are not a Christian even if you define "God" in terms of the biblical divine attributes.
Therefore, let no one say that theology is unimportant or impractical - it is the most important factor in the Christian life and the necessary foundation for the "practical" issues to be intelligible. Besides its inherent value, theology is the prerequisite for all spiritual activities, including prayer. People say that if you want to know God, then you should pray. No! If you do not know something about God first, then you cannot pray. If you do not have at least a minimal but biblical conception of God,42 then you may just be praying to an entity produced by your own imagination instead of the true God, which is idolatry. Thus if you want to know God, study the Scripture, then pray to this God that it teaches you about.
As Christians, we may know something about the divine attributes, but we do not always pray as if these attributes are true of God. Christians who dare not explicitly deny the attributes of God nevertheless often implicitly deny them when they pray. We must correct this, or our prayers will not please God and glorify him as much as they should. For example, God's omniscience has a number of implications for prayer, and we must pray "as if" God is omniscient, because he really is. Imagine a prayer whose content assumes or implies that God is powerless, ignorant, and local. Such a prayer insults God rather than glorifies him.
We will be discussing three divine attributes and their implications for prayer, but you must make the effort to learn more about God. As you learn more about him, you should consider the implications that this new knowledge has on your prayers, and thus make your prayers increasingly consistent with the way God is as revealed in Scripture.
4. PRAYER AND SOVEREIGNTY
I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7)
Some Christian ministers are fond of affirming the proposition, "God needs you," in one form or another. The immediate context may be an exhortation to greater dedication in prayer, evangelism, helping the needy, giving money to the church, or some other activity that would advance the kingdom of God. Although some of these ministers mean what they say literally, perhaps not all of them do, and certainly not all of them intend all that is implied when we say that God needs us. Nevertheless, the proposition is so unbiblical, and the implications so blasphemous, that we should stop saying that God needs us in all settings and contexts, and in whatever form the proposition may take.
Confronting the philosophers of Athens, Paul states, "The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else" (Acts 17:24-25). For a minister to say, "God needs you," or anything to that effect, is therefore a direct contradiction of Scripture. God is self-sufficient and all-sufficient. We need him for everything, but he does not need us for anything.
It is often to motivate their congregations that ministers say God needs them. The assumption is that the commands of God appear to be more meaningful if God actually needs these people to help him. But when we think this way, we are thinking of God as if he is a finite being, and so we are no longer thinking about the Christian God, nor are we thinking as Christians. Of course we should obey the commands of God, but we should not sustain our motivation for doing so with the idea that he needs us to obey them or his plans would somehow fail.
Since God commands us to pray, negligence in prayer is sinful. However, it does not mean that our failure to pray will hinder the plan of God. He does not need our prayers. Neither has he bound himself to a certain way of interacting with his creation, so that he will or can only act when certain conditions are met on the human side. Some have gone as far as to say that God has given dominion to man, so that God will or can only intervene if man grants "permission" for God to do so. This is plainly false. The Bible testifies that God controls all things, including the thinking and behavior of demons and humans. He sends even evil spirits to do his bidding, and he gives to or takes from his creatures whatever he pleases, whenever and however he pleases.
God possesses absolute sovereignty. This means that he determines all things, and he carries out what he has determined by his omnipotence. But he chooses to use means to accomplish his ends, and his means often involve human beings and their prayers. Nevertheless, he has not bound himself to use these means or any means at all in accomplishing his plans. In addition, the means by which he accomplishes his ends do not work autonomously, but they are themselves determined by his sovereignty, so that nothing in creation escapes his attention and control.
It follows that the proposition, "Prayer changes things," is false. Prayer does not change anything. It is God as a person who exercises his omnipotence to change things, and not the human act of prayer that changes them. Also, prayer does not change God, since he is immutable in all his attributes and decrees, and he has determined in eternity all that he will do.
Some passages appear to say that our prayers can change God's mind until we examine them more carefully. For example, after the people of Israel had sinned by making and worshiping the golden calf, God says to Moses, "Now leave me alone so that my anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them. Then I will make you into a great nation" (Exodus 32:10). But after hearing the intercession of Moses (v. 11-13), verse 14 says, "Then the LORD relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened." Therefore, on the surface it appears that God changed his mind in response to the prayer of Moses.
However, the above interpretation contradicts the following two verses on the subject: "God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?" (Numbers 23:19); "He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind." (1 Samuel 15:29). Since these two verses explicitly state that God does not change his mind, we must conclude that the above interpretation saying that God does change his mind must be false, even without further argument.
Nevertheless, for the sake of confirmation, we may directly deal with the passage from Exodus, and show we can arrive at the same conclusion, that God does not change his mind after all. Now, Jacob says in Genesis 49:10, "The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his." This is understood as predicting the lineage of the Messiah, finding its ultimate fulfillment in Jesus Christ.
Exodus 32:10 has God saying that he would destroy the Israelites and raise up a new nation through Moses. But Moses was a Levi, which means that God had never planned to raise up a new nation through Moses, and only several verses later, it turned out that he did not have to.43 W. Bingham Hunter is thus correct when he says, "My conviction is that references to God's 'repenting,' 'relenting' or 'changing his mind' in Scripture are figures of speech; technically speaking, they are anthropopathisms expressions which explain God in terms usually used to describe human emotions."44
God is sovereign, meaning that he determines and controls everything. Since this is true, it follows that everything about a person's prayer has also been determined by God. If it appears that God is responding to a prayer, it is because God has decided that he would act in history by means of this prayer, and this prayer has also been determined and caused by him to occur in precisely the way that it occurs. Therefore, prayer does not change things, and prayer does not change God. From God's perspective, prayer is an effect caused by God, which may lead to other effects that are also caused by God. Prayer itself is not a cause that causes God to act; rather, the person who prays does so because God is acting on him and causing him to pray.
Many people's idea of prayer amounts to thinking that, "In prayer a human being seeks to assert self-will over the will of God."45 Stanley Grenz observes, "Some Christians fail to see this conflict as in any way problematic. They readily admit adhering to exactly this understanding of prayer. Certain evangelical and charismatic circles describe prayer as a technique for bending the divine will."46 To the extent that one's idea of prayer resembles this description, he has altogether misunderstood the nature of God, Christianity, and prayer. We must completely abandon and clear away from our minds the idea that prayer is "for bending the divine will." The divine will cannot be bent, and it cannot be changed; our idea of prayer must correspond to this reality. Prayer is meaningful because "God has decided to include humans in the divine program for the world,"47 and not because he needs our permission or request to act.
Therefore, we must define prayer not as changing the will of God, but we must think about it from another perspective. A more biblical view of prayer is to think of it as one possible means in the process by which God gives us what he wants, or achieves some other purpose of his. This may include his plan to grant us some material goods, or it is part of the process that effects our sanctification.
Such a view of prayer is correct because it is what the Bible teaches, and it is consistent with other biblical doctrines. A view of prayer may appear to be derived from several isolated biblical passages, but if it contradicts the attributes of God or other biblical doctrines, then it must not be a biblical view of prayer, and those biblical passages must have been mishandled.
Failing to observe this, some have derived principles and definitions on prayer that they find meaningful, but by the time they are done, there is no room left for the Christian God in their theology of prayer, so that they have the "prayer" that they like, but no God. Such is the case with a view of prayer affirming that God changes his mind in response to our petitions, which fails to note the figurative intent of some passages, and the explicit scriptural statements that contradict their position.
Forming a proper conception of prayer brings us to note the implications of biblical prayer and its relation to divine sovereignty, namely, we must think, speak, and pray "as if" God is sovereign, because he really is sovereign. Divine sovereignty does not threaten the meaningfulness of prayer as long as we do not insist that meaningfulness depends on some weakness or deficiency in God, so that he needs us to pray in order to intervene or accomplish his plans. Rather, prayer is meaningful because it is a chosen means that plays a role in accomplishing the plans of God. Divine sovereignty also implies that there is never a need to assume that all is lost due to a failure to pray, although such failure is a moral problem that we must correct. We should realize that the fate of the universe does not depend on us. For this reason, referring to "the power of prayer" is misleading, since there is no power in prayer itself, but the power is only in God. If we insist on using this phrase because of habit, at least we should be aware of the truth, that the power is in God alone, and that we say such things as "the power of prayer" only as a manner of speaking.
5. PRAYER AND OMNISCIENCE
And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. (Matthew 6:7-8)
God has exhaustive knowledge of all things. He knows all bout our past, present, and future. He knows all of our thoughts and actions. He is omniscient. Scripture repeatedly reminds us of this attribute of God, and we must take care not to forget it, or act in a way that is inconsistent with it. That is, if God is omniscient, then we should think and act in a way that reflects our acknowledgment of this divine attribute. In our context, divine omniscience has several implications for how we should pray.
Some people think that God will hear them because their prayers are long and repetitious. In some religions, prayer often consists of monotonous chants or prescribed prayers that are recited again and again without thought. On the basis of God's omniscience, Jesus condemns such prayers. He tells us not to be like these pagans because God already knows what we need before we ask him.
Once I was on a telephone conference call with several women who regularly called in to pray and to discuss spiritual things. After several needs were mentioned, one of them hijacked the conference and began to pray...and pray...and pray. Much of it was repetitious, unbiblical, and pious-sounding mystical nonsense. So I lost interest and put down the phone to make myself a cup of coffee. Then, I went to my desk and tidied it up a little. When I picked up the phone, she was still praying, and it sounded just the same.
I am not sure how long she prayed, but I think it must have been twenty minutes. In a setting where the primary function of the conference is discussion, the prayers should be brief, perhaps limited to one minute or so. In this case, her prayer could have been said in ten to thirty seconds. No public prayer should last twenty minutes unless there is some sort of a prior agreement, and even then I hesitate to give my approval to it, since given the way people pray nowadays, it would just be twenty minutes of wasted time. But if we are assured that the entire prayer will consist of meaningful content without needless repetition or other stupid behavior, then perhaps an even longer prayer is justified at times.
If I were to think better of the woman than what her behavior suggested, I would say that she had formed some poor prayer habits. But in this case, it was evident that she wanted to dominate the conference, and to get the attention and approval of other participants. She wanted to show the rest of us her spirituality and passion for the things of God, which her lengthy prayer in fact suggested to be false. She succeeded in annoying me and nothing more. But if she had gained the admiration of the other women that night, according to Jesus, that is all the reward she was going to get. She did not impress God at all.
I was not the leader or moderator of the conference call, but if I had been responsible for it, I would have spoken to her after the first instance of such violation and point out to her from the Bible that her behavior was wrong. If she had continued, I would have to embarrass her by addressing it on the conference call itself. If she had insisted on continuing such behavior, I would have to forbid her from participating again. This treatment follows the general pattern for church discipline outlined in the Bible.
Maybe you also pray like this woman. If so, stop it! You are not spiritual, and you do not know God. You are praying as the pagans do. You are treating God as the pagans treat their deities, who are not gods at all. All the reward you are going to get is the admiration of unknowledgeable people who would be fooled by your false piety. The more spiritual and mature believers would be disgusted by the shameful display that you call prayer. Ecclesiastes 5:2 says, "Do not be quick with your mouth, do not be hasty in your heart to utter anything before God. God is in heaven and you are on earth, so let your words be few." Of course, God welcomes his people, and you may pray as long as you wish if you continue to have something meaningful to say. But leave out the nonsense.48
Christians should pray "as if" God is omniscient because God is indeed omniscient. This is the principle that we must keep in mind, that we must reflect our belief in the divine attributes in all that we think and do. God already knows our thoughts, desires, and circumstances; therefore, when we pray, we do not need to repeat ourselves in chant-like fashion or make the prayer as long as possible and keep on going even if we have already finished presenting our petition. There is no need to provide a very detailed description of the circumstances surrounding the situation, or give elaborate arguments on why God should grant a particular request. He already knows the situation thoroughly.
There is a popular teaching that we should always be specific in our prayers. Instead of asking God for wisdom, we should ask him to enlighten us on the subject that we wish to understand. Instead of asking him to provide, we should ask him to give us a certain amount of money. Instead of asking for a spouse in general, we should specify the exact characteristics that we wish him or her to have.
However, this teaching appears to be unbiblical, especially when one insists that all prayers must be specific, and that the level of specificity must be very high. Some of the prayers in the Bible are specific, but many are very general, even when they are directed toward clear and specific needs. In any case, the number of highly specific prayers in the Bible does not justify the teaching that we should make most or all of our petitions highly specific.
This is not to say that most or all of our prayers should be general. I merely want to point out that it is unbiblical to insist that most or all prayers should be specific, since the Bible does not provide justification for this teaching. In fact, given the omniscience of God, our starting assumption should be that most prayers do not need to be highly specific or contain many details. Although I do recommend that one be specific when confessing his sins, I can think of at least several biblical passages in which even prayers of such a nature are not very specific.
Some people argue that making our requests specific has the positive effect of focusing our minds when we pray. This may be true, but we are not praying to ourselves. In prayer, we are not trying to achieve mystical breakthroughs or reach an altered state of consciousness. Rather, we are addressing an intelligent person who simultaneously perceives our words, thoughts, and circumstances. If God is omniscient, then we should not act as if he is not omniscient.
It is also said that if we will make our petitions specific, then we will more easily recognize our answers when they come. However, this is true only if God answers our prayers in the way that we prescribe, but there is nothing in Scripture promising that God will give us what we ask in the exact manner and form that we expect. It may be that he decides to answer our prayers in ways that will further our sanctification, whereas when we prayed we were only concerned with our apparent need and not thinking about our spiritual growth at all. That said, at times, God may move a person to pray a very specific petition so that when the answer comes, the person would be more convinced that the prayer has something to do with it. But again, there is nothing in Scripture to indicate that this is the rule rather than the exception.49
There is another issue that may pressure a person to make his petitions highly specific. I am not sure how many people have thought of it, but it receives little attention from books on prayer. Moreover, since discussing it will involve a partial but instructive exposition of two relevant passages, the point is indeed worthy of mention. Here are the passages:
Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.
Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him! (Matthew 7:7-11)
So I say to you: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.
Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? Or if he asks for an egg, will give him a scorpion? If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him! (Luke 11:9-13)
The context of these parallel passages is prayer, and in them, Jesus gives his hearers three examples illustrating how earthly parents respond to the petitions of their children. On this basis, he makes a "from lesser to greater" argument50 to establish the superior benevolence of the heavenly Father.
The three examples Jesus gives about earthly parents tell us the point that he intends to establish about the heavenly Father. We may represent these examples by the following propositions:
1. If your son asks for bread, you will not give him a stone.
2. If your son asks for a fish, you will not give him a snake.
3. If your son asks for an egg, you will not give him a scorpion.
The "stone" probably refers to one of the limestone pebbles of the Palestine seashore that looked like small loaves of bread. The "snake" in the second example may be an eel, which the Jews could not eat because it was considered unclean. As for the scorpion, its claws and tail are folded in when it is at rest, and thus may resemble an egg.51
In effect Jesus is saying to his hearers, "You will not give your son something that makes it look like you have granted his request, but in fact it is the means by which you will make his situation worse." From this premise, Jesus argues that God is not like the pagan gods that we read about in mythology, who would use the request of a petitioner as an opportunity to mock and torment him. These mythological deities may make the petitioner's situation worse in the process of granting the request, or by granting the request, they would make his situation worse through the consequences produced by the granted petition.
For example, if a man were to ask for a large sum of money with the intention to cure his wife of a fatal disease, these mythological deities may kill his wife in a car accident so that the man may receive the money he wants from her life insurance. But then, the man would no longer need the money. Stanley Grenz gives the following example:
The goddess of the dawn, Aurora, fell in love with a human youth, Tithonus. When offered by Zeus any gift she might choose for her lover, she requested that Tithonus live forever. Unfortunately, Aurora failed to specify that Tithonus remain forever young. Her request was granted, but in an unfortunate way. Poor Tithonus grew ever older and could never die. The gift of Zeus became a curse.52
In my example, the man would need to specify that his request must be fulfilled in a way that will not bring any harm to his wife. But then the deities may decide that the man himself or his son should die in the process of granting the petition. The man may specify that no harm should come to anyone in order for the request to be granted or as the result of the request being granted. But then he fails to specify how long it should take before the money comes, so that he may not get it in time.
In Grenz's example, Aurora could have specified that Tithonus were to remain forever young besides living forever. But then she may have failed to specify that Tithonus should also be immune to sickness, so that the result may be that he could be immortal and young, but forever ill and in torment.
As one who often deals with theology and philosophy, I try to be specific and precise when communicating my views, and I try to anticipate objections or misunderstandings so that I may address them in my presentation. However, even if I were to anticipate all the ways in which my words can be distorted and misunderstood, and even if I were to anticipate all the potential objections to my views, it would be impossible to address all of them in any given presentation. But the fact is that I may indeed fail to anticipate certain objections and distortions, so that I can only address them if they were directed at me after my presentation.
However, the difficulty is nothing compared to the problems that may arise when speaking to God. If God were to behave like the pagan deities, it would be impossible to outwit him by formulating a perfect petition that cannot be distorted or answered in a way that makes things worse. But Jesus assures us that this is not something we need to worry about - God is not like the pagan deities. He is not trying to trick us or mock us. Thus I need not try to cover myself from every possible angle when I bring my request before him. God already knows about my needs, and I can trust him when I speak to him. He will not use my petition as an opportunity to make my situation worse. When I ask for an egg, I do not need to specify that I want a chicken egg of a particular size, of a particular color, from a particular farm, and that I do not want a poisoned or spoiled one.
Therefore, when we pray, we may wish to include some details, and be specific enough to constitute clear communication. But we must also assume the omniscience and benevolence of God, so that we do not need to worry that a prayer that is not highly specific will be unanswered. In fact, the Bible shows that God will often do greater things than we request and expect.
Abraham asked God to spare the cities if there were only five righteous men there, and it was likely that his main concern was saving Lot from destruction. Since there were not even five righteous man in the cities, God was technically justified in destroying them, which he did, but he removed Lot from cities before he destroyed them. Assuming that Abraham's main concern was really Lot's safety, his prayer technically failed, but God knew Abraham's thoughts and granted what he was really after.
In the same way, although it is irreverent to be careless with our words when we pray, we do not need to be perfectly precise and extremely specific. This is not an excuse to be lazy. The biblical prayers are specific enough so that we know a prayer that simply says, "Bless me," is likely to be too general in most contexts. Nevertheless, God always knows what you are going through, so that at times even "Help me!" is sufficient. The point is that it is wrong to pray as if God knows nothing, or as if he is looking for loopholes in our petitions so that he may answer them in ways that will ultimately harm us. If God wants to harm us, he can do so without the opportunity generated by an imperfectly formulated petition.
We should pray in a way that implies our acknowledgment of the divine attributes of God, and here we are emphasizing his omniscience. That God knows everything, even our thoughts, implies that we do not even need to pray aloud, but that he can hear us even when we pray to him in our minds without speaking out our prayers. There are several examples in the Bible where prayers to God were made only in the mind, and they were answered (Genesis 24:45; 1 Samuel 1:13).
Nevertheless, there are advantages to praying aloud. Although I have argued above that our prayers do not need to be extremely specific, they should not be so general that even we have no idea what we are saying to God. Speaking out our prayers forces us to put our thoughts into words, and therefore helps to focus our minds when addressing God. For this reason, you should usually pray using clear and distinct words even when you are praying only in your mind. That is, you may "speak" those words to God in your mind without saying them aloud with your mouth, and he will hear you.
Another reason for praying aloud is so that others may be edified. We are not saying that we should pray aloud so that others may hear us in order to impress them. Jesus condemns such a motive for prayer. What I am pointing out is that our prayers, although addressed to God, may also be a source of comfort and instruction for other people (John 11:41-42). When others hear how expectant and reverent we are when we pray, it may encourage them to pray likewise. And since any prayer presupposes a theology, our prayers will have the effect of informing and encouraging others if they are rich in theological content, as with the prayers of Paul in his letters. Praying aloud is also necessary when we are in public gatherings and when we are praying in agreement with other people.
Whatever we do, the principle remains that we are to avoid being hypocritical and self- serving in our motives and in our prayers. And we are to keep in mind that God is omniscient when we pray.
You may already be wondering, if God is omniscient and already knows what we need, then why do we pray to him at all? That God knows everything does not only mean that we do not need to be highly specific in our prayers, but it seems to imply that we do not need to pray at all. If he already knows all of our thoughts, desires, and needs, and if he knows our circumstances even better than we do, then why does he not just decide whether to grant us whatever we need regardless of whether we pray or not? Thus the omniscience of God appears to destroy the relevance of prayer.
The above fails to grasp the purpose of prayer. If the purpose of prayer is to inform God of our needs, desires, and circumstances, then it is indeed unnecessary and irrelevant, since God already knows all these things. But the purpose of prayer is not to give him information that he does not already have.
First, we must pray because God commands us to pray. If we do not get any additional explanation, this is sufficient reason to pray.
Second, prayer is meaningful because it is a means by which God executes his plans. W. Bingham Hunter says, "I passionately disagree with the notion that prayer is a way to get from God what we want."53 Instead, he offers the following definition: "Prayer is a means God uses to give us what he wants."54 Prayer is one step in the process by which God executes his plans for his creation, and even our prayers are sovereignly caused by him. Therefore, prayer accords with both his comprehensive sovereignty and knowledge.
Third, we should pray because prayer is not only about getting things from God, but it is a means by which we grow in our sanctification. The Bible tells us that the will of God is our sanctification (1 Thessalonians 4:3-7). The things that God commands us to do and the things that God causes to occur in our lives all contribute to the purpose of our sanctification in Christ. In prayer we struggle against temptations, distractions, lusts, and unbelief. We struggle to find words to express our needs and desires. We study diligently to refine our prayers so that they may be more pleasing to God. But if we see prayer only as the means by which we attain what we need for self-preservation or self-gratification, then we will fail to see all the activities and benefits related to prayer that contribute to our spiritual growth. When we learn to see prayer from the broader perspective, that it is a means to meet our needs as well as one that contributes to our sanctification, we will understand that although God knows and determines all things, there is no conflict between his attributes and our need to remain in the habit of prayer and worship.
6. PRAYER AND TRANSCENDENCE
Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth. (John 4:23-24)
God is a transcendent spirit. He exists in a higher form than his creation. Although this is true, he is not aloof from his people, since by his omnipotence he is able to govern his creation and communicate with his creatures. Nevertheless, his transcendence means that he is not local. In fact, the Bible teaches that he is omnipresent: "Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there" (Psalm 139:7-8).
That God is omnipresent does not mean that he occupies all of physical space, at least not in the sense that we occupy physical space. Since "God is spirit" and not matter, he occupies none of physical space at all. God says in Jeremiah 23:24, "Do not I fill heaven and earth?" Now, if he fills his creation in terms of its physical space, then nothing else can exist as physical matter or occupy physical space, since we would not be able to occupy the same physical space as God. Omnipresence means, not that God fills all of physical space, but that he knows and controls all of his creation, including all of physical space, so that the same verse from Jeremiah emphasizes, "Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see him?" In this very real sense, God is everywhere, and there is nowhere that you can go in creation where there is no God, or where his knowledge and power does not extend. This chapter explores some of the tremendous implications that this divine attribute has on prayer.
Leading up to our text on the spiritual nature of God and the nature of true worship is a point brought up by a Samaritan woman: "Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem" (John 4:20). By "this mountain," the woman means Mount Gerizim, and she is referring to the debate between the Jews and the Samaritans about the proper place of worship. Jesus answers that true worship is not to be identified with location, but with whether the person is worshiping "in spirit and in truth." Jesus appeals to the spiritual nature of God as the basis of this reply.
Failing to understand the spiritual and transcendent nature of God, the enemies of Israel says in 1 Kings 20:23, "Their gods are gods of the hills. That is why they were too strong for us. But if we fight them on the plains, surely we will be stronger than they." They thought God was local. Those who understood the true nature of God knew better, so that even as Solomon dedicates the Jewish temple, he exclaims, "But will God really dwell on earth? The heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built!" (1 Kings 8:27). He knew that a transcendent God does not "live" in a physical temple. Although the form of worship that the people of God assumed during this period of redemptive history included the use of a physical temple, those who had understanding knew that God was not local.
The coming of Christ signified that what the Old Covenant anticipated was about to be fulfilled. Kenneth Wuest's comments on Romans 12:1 are very applicable at this point: "This is in contrast to the worship of the priests which consisted of outward forms, symbolic in themselves of spiritual truth, and yet not rational in the sense that this worship was not devoid of a material connection....Israel preached the gospel through the use of object lessons, the tabernacle, priesthood, and offerings. The Church preaches the same gospel in abstract terms."55
Old Covenant worship was indeed founded upon intellectual truth, but much was associated with and implied by outward expressions and rituals. Christ's fulfillment of the Old Covenant and inauguration of the New Covenant signaled the dawn of a new era in which the people of God are free to worship him as spirit to spirit, mind to mind, intellect to intellect. True and acceptable worship is now independent of our location, and much less associated with physical expressions and rituals;56 rather, the emphasis rightly returns to sincerity and truth, to motive and doctrine.
Daniel was a pious man. Most Christians today cannot claim to approach his spiritual devotion, extraordinary character, and intellectual prowess. How many of us can claim to be "ten times" greater than the intellectual elite of our day "in every matter of wisdom and understanding" (Daniel 1:20)? More than a few theologians of our day insist that the Hebrews favor "practical" wisdom over theoretical or academic wisdom. This is not true. At least with Daniel and his friends, there is no doubt that the emphasis is placed on their "book smarts,"57 since verse 17 says, "To these four young men God gave knowledge and understanding of all kinds of literature and learning."58 Of course, this does not contradict or undermine any supernatural endowment God chose to give them: "And Daniel could understand visions and dreams of all kinds" (v. 17). For our purpose, the point is that Daniel was an all-around superior specimen of a believer.
Nevertheless, when Daniel prayed, he went to a room where "the windows opened toward Jerusalem" (6:10). Now, those who had understanding knew that this was unnecessary, and Daniel probably did not always prayed this way. Daniel was not wrong in doing this under the Old Covenant, but under the New Covenant, it would be meaningless to do what he did. In fact, the only meaning conveyed by praying toward Jerusalem today would be a denial of the work of Christ. God is not bound to any point in space, or even especially associated with any point in space. Jerusalem is not an especially holy place today, and there is no such thing as a "holy land" from the Christian perspective.
Pilgrimage to a certain geographical area is unnecessary, and betrays not only a lack of understanding, but also a shirking of real spiritual duty, which pertains more to things like doctrine, prayer, and good works. So what if you travel to the empty tomb where Jesus occupied? Why would you feel "closer" to him? Jesus is no longer there; he left that place two thousand years ago. Now, perhaps visiting some of the biblical sites may excite you about the biblical narratives you have already read, and because of this you feel closer to God. But feeling is deceptive, and any real intimacy comes from thinking about the words that you have already read from Scripture, and you can do that at home. The Bible says that only those who believe the truth and obey his commands are close to God.
Any real benefit that you may receive from visiting these sites occurs only because they remind you of what you have already read from the Bible, which brings us back to the point that true spirituality depends on the intellect and its relationship with revealed truth; it has nothing to do with your location. But since these benefits occur only in the mind, you can receive them by reading your Bible wherever you are, only that the benefits will be greater, since you are spending more time reading and thinking, rather than sight-seeing, and trying to convince yourself that you are getting closer to God by doing so. My point is that you must not treat God as if he is local; God is spirit, and you must treat him as such by worshiping him in spirit and in truth, and not by going to Jerusalem. You are also spirit, created in his image, and therefore you can associate with him by interacting with the words of the Bible, which is his revelation to you.
One of my classmates in high school was a Muslim. He had a prayer carpet with a compass sewn into it so that he could face the direction of Mecca when he prayed. Muslims are very concerned with Mecca; their faith is entwined with this place. Thus Robert Morey wisely suggests that the United States should threaten to destroy Mecca in order to deter the Muslim terrorists.59
I saw a five-ton statue of Buddha in Thailand that was made out of fine gold. The monks covered it up with mud during wartime to protect it. The statue could not protect itself; it could not talk, hear, or do anything. When the Christian God commanded the use of physical objects in worship, he still made it clear that he himself transcended those objects, and had no direct relationship with them. So when Uzzah reached out to steady the ark of the covenant during transportation, God struck him dead (1 Chronicles 13:9-10). He will not be treated like a Buddhist statue.
The Catholics take care to secure the "bread and wine" of communion, lest they spill the body and blood of Christ! Even some who call themselves Christians act as if the Bible itself that is, the physical object consisting of paper and ink - is especially holy, and some act as if the crucifix has special powers. But the power of God is not tied to these physical objects, and the power of the Bible is in its words, not the physical book itself. We appropriate the power of the "Bible," not by physically wielding it, but by reading it and believing its doctrines. The Christian must repudiate the sort of practices and superstitions found in Islam, Buddhism, and Catholicism. We worship God "in spirit and in truth," and not by facing a certain direction or by kissing a book.
You approach God by knowledge and by faith, not by physical technique or posture. Prayer is not better when you do it in a church, or when you are in Jerusalem, but you must pray "in spirit and in truth." If you are in ignorance or in unbelief when it comes to biblical doctrines, or if you praise God with your lips while your heart is far from him, then you will not be heard, and you are not close to God even if you are face to face with Christ.
It follows from God's transcendence that we can pray anywhere and at anytime. You can even pray with your mind and God will hear you, for even before Psalm 139 mentions his omnipresence, it says, "O LORD, you have searched me and you know me. You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar. You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O LORD" (v. 1-4). The French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre could not stand the idea of Someone constantly "staring" at him, and who is aware of all that he thinks and does, and thus he needed to be an atheist. Now, although the divine attributes may produce in Christians a holy fear, they also bring invincible peace and comfort, and we would have it no other way.
PRAYER AND THE MORAL LIFE
W. Bingham Hunter writes, "From a biblical point of view, prayer is related to everything that we are and everything that God is. God does not respond to our prayers. God responds to us: to our whole life....Our all-knowing God responds to our entire lives, of which our prayers are merely a small part. This means that how you and I live when we are not praying and worshiping is as significant perhaps more so than when we do."60
This being the case, in thinking about prayer, it would be a mistake to place the emphasis on the very act of prayer, or any technique associated with it. A discussion on the believer's moral life will prove to be pertinent and helpful to his prayer life even if we do not directly relate the two. Nevertheless, since this is a book about prayer, we will examine several points about the moral life, and relate it to the prayer life.
7. PRAYER AND MOTIVATION
And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. (Matthew 6:5-6)
The effect of sin in man is so strong that he can often make the most sacred activities into expressions of his wickedness. He can do something that appears to be very spiritual from a very unspiritual motive. For example, a person who prayer long and often may appear to us as very spiritual and devoted, but this is not necessarily true, since he may be praying precisely to make us think this about him. Sin has made the heart of man so vile that he may even give his life to make himself look good to others, and thus Paul writes that he is possible for a person to suffer martyrdom without any love in his heart. Surely some people willingly endure persecution just for the glory of it.
Many people display strong emotions when they pray or sing at church. Although some of them are probably sincere, many of them are not. Their emotions do not result from an intense gratitude toward the grace of God, but from their self-pity or the desire to cause others to think that they are spiritual. For similarly illegitimate reasons, other people dance and scream at church, perhaps to demonstrate to any observers their spiritual freedom and love for God. They are trying to show that they love God so much that they do not care what other people think about them; however, they do what they do precisely because they care very much about what other people think.
Preaching the true gospel includes a declaration of the sovereignty of God and the cost of discipleship. For the most part, the church today preaches a false gospel that hides or even denies these two crucial elements. Because of this, many false converts have been introduced to the church community so that I would go as far as to say that most people who call themselves Christians today are not true Christians. Since people who are not true Christians cannot worship God in spirit and in truth, there is very little true worship in our public gatherings today. It is easy to throw a rock concert and call it a worship service, and it is easy to think that if we feel good about something, then it must be acceptable to God. Some churches think that true worship includes rolling on the floor and foaming at the mouth. But only the Bible can show us what is true worship.
If God has truly regenerated you, then your faith is real and at the root of your personality is the desire to offer true worship. But since your sanctification is incomplete, you still continue to commit sins, and therefore you must consider the possibility that you do not always worship God with complete purity and sincerity. That is, although at the root of your personality you indeed love God, and you indeed offer him true worship to some extent, you do not always love or worship him in complete purity and sincerity. Rather, you continue to love and worship him imperfectly, and with ulterior motives.
Jesus says that the first and greatest commandment is for us to love God with our all, and there are people who really think that this is what they are doing. However, they fail to realize what this commandment really means. You may feel very loving toward God, but that is not at all an indication of how much you love him. Jesus says that if you love him, you would obey his commandments. Thus if you love him perfectly, would you not obey his commandments perfectly? If you indeed love God with all of your heart, then you would be perfect, and you would never sin. But the apostle John tells us that if we say that we have no sin, then the truth is not in us. If we admit that we continue to sin, then we have also admitted that we do not love God perfectly.
Also, it is impossible for most people to love God very much at all, not to say perfectly, because of their ignorance of theology. If you know next to nothing about God, then you cannot love him, since your love is either directed toward nothing, or to a false conception of God. Whether you have no conception of God or a false conception of God, the object of your love is not God, and whatever you think you love so intensely is not God, but a product of your imagination and false theology. In fact, unless you are among the elect, the more you find out about God, the more you may hate him. Only the elect can love a God who has absolute sovereignty and exhaustive knowledge, who does whatever he pleases, justifies the elect, and condemns the reprobates.
There is a common misunderstanding that if God gives you a command, then you are surely able to obey it. However, a command of God serves only to define sin, that it would be sinful for you to disobey it, but it says nothing about whether you will be able to obey it. Jesus says that the first and greatest commandment is for us to love God with our all, but no one is able to obey it. No one loves God perfectly, and anyone who claims to be doing it has only succeeded in showing us his very low definition of what perfection means.
Now, that we are unable to obey God perfectly when God