Does God Hear The Prayers Of An Unbeliever With The View To Answer Them?

[revjohn]

Damn, you're making me hungry, now, and I'm 90 minutes behind you. Lunch isn't for another hour at least here.

Well, I think Sanford Fleming is really to blame but go ahead, take it out on me.

And the cod is probably marginally healthier anyway.

Prior to preparation it was probably much more healthy. Owing to traditional recipe marginally better is likely the most I could hope for.

 

[revjohn]

It's humbling.

Whoa! That is quite the back-hand you have there

Thank you.

 

[Luce NDs]

There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
― Albert Einstein

From a scientist ... isn't that damned disturbing in a religious sense? The Deus!

 

[Mendalla]

Well, I think Sanford Fleming is really to blame but go ahead, take it out on me.

Hey, he isn't the one who mentioned cod au gratin.

There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”

Really? I usually agree with old Albert but I may part company on this one. A miracle is something that really needs to break our sense of reality in a way that gives real insight. A (clearly, recognizably, confirmed) dead man rising from the grave for instance. If everything was a miracle, there would be no miracles because the miraculous would be the norm (see footnote below). I think we can recognize moments of real change and power as miraculous and treat the rest as part of the wonder of existence but maybe not quite at that level. Birth has a miraculous element to it that I certainly recognized when I held Little M for the first time, but doesn't make every birth a literal miracle. Rather, experiencing the arrival of a new life can trigger one's sense of wonder in a way that makes you feel like you're in the presence of the miraculous. And maybe that's what Albert was getting at. We need to be aware more often of just how awesome and wondrous even ordinary elements of reality can be. It's not just about stopping to smell the roses, it's about stopping to appreciate and be blown away by the incredible chain of events that led to both the roses and you being there and you being able to smell them.

Footnote: This is a problem I have with the handling of magic in some schools of fantasy fiction and especially in certain roleplaying games. Too often, it becomes just a substitute for technology. Magical healing becomes a substitute for modern medicine, magic "lightning" or fireballs replace guns, and so on. It ceases to be magical when used that way. Magic should break our sense of what is real and normal, not be the normal.

 

[unsafe]

Revjohn -----again Thank you so much for all your input into this subject -----we all have different views and beliefs about this subject but to me these types of subjects are not often talked about and it is good to bring some light to subject ----

Whether we agree or not and there are some points we agree on and others we don't is not really issue for me ---it is more important in my view to make people aware of scripture ---we will all know the real truth revjohn when we meet our maker --until then we will continue to give our views and believe what we believe ------

God is sovereign but how far does His Sovereignty go as far as our free will goes ------and that is my next thread down the road -----there are many interesting views on this subject -----

So again thanks for your lengthily and thoughtful input ----it all helps to shed light on a difficult subject ----Have a great week --

 

[revsdd]

Whoa! That is quite the back-hand you have there

Thank you.

No back-hand intended. I'm genuinely impressed - and have said so before - with the patience and thoroughness with which you present your viewpoint.

 

[Luce NDs]

Hey, he isn't the one who mentioned cod au gratin.



Really? I usually agree with old Albert but I may part company on this one. A miracle is something that really needs to break our sense of reality in a way that gives real insight. A (clearly, recognizably, confirmed) dead man rising from the grave for instance. If everything was a miracle, there would be no miracles because the miraculous would be the norm (see footnote below). I think we can recognize moments of real change and power as miraculous and treat the rest as part of the wonder of existence but maybe not quite at that level. Birth has a miraculous element to it that I certainly recognized when I held Little M for the first time, but doesn't make every birth a literal miracle. Rather, experiencing the arrival of a new life can trigger one's sense of wonder in a way that makes you feel like you're in the presence of the miraculous. And maybe that's what Albert was getting at. We need to be aware more often of just how awesome and wondrous even ordinary elements of reality can be. It's not just about stopping to smell the roses, it's about stopping to appreciate and be blown away by the incredible chain of events that led to both the roses and you being there and you being able to smell them.

Footnote: This is a problem I have with the handling of magic in some schools of fantasy fiction and especially in certain roleplaying games. Too often, it becomes just a substitute for technology. Magical healing becomes a substitute for modern medicine, magic "lightning" or fireballs replace guns, and so on. It ceases to be magical when used that way. Magic should break our sense of what is real and normal, not be the normal.

Consider that magic was once defined by some sage (I forget who) as when a mystery becomes understandable ... image unraveling the mysteries of the cosmos!

Some fixed beliefs would prevent us from going there ... perhaps inhumanity doesn't belong there?

 

[Jaebius]

Wendy's makes a half-decent Cod Sandwich. Well, it's better than McDonald's Filet O' Fish anyway.

 

[Waterfall]

You are welcome.



Fair enough.

The question that begs to be asked then is, "If God does not intend to answer the prayers of non-believers then why does God bother to hear the prayer of unbelievers?"

Further to that, "If God hears the prayers of the non-believers and does not respond to those prayers is that not the same as God answering those prayers with 'No.'?"



Yes and no. The scripture does point out that the reason why some prayers are not answered is that the request failed in some other way. It does not divide answers between believers and non-believers so much as it stipulates between good prayers and poor ones.

Since we are discussing in terms of believers and non-believers it seems that in order for the non-believers to exist there has to be an element of un or non-belief. One wonders why in the presence of un or non-belief there is even prayer in the first place.

Some theologians have posited that this urge to prayer is a sign of the Holy Spirit working on the hearts and minds of individuals who may be wavering in their un or non-belief. That being the case it is the Spirit prompting them to prayer would God fail to respond to prayer instigated by the Holy Spirit just because the individual that the Holy Spirit is prodding towards prayer has not formally made a declaration of belief?



Apparently not every believer does either so in that there is little difference between the prayer of the believer and the non-believer.


Ahhhhh. So God does hear the prayers of the unbeliever with a mind to answer. Even if most of those prayers of the unbeliever are met with a "no" or "not at this time/in this way."



You use the phrase that God is not a respecter of persons quite a bit. I'm wondering what you mean when you use it. Because I actually agree with you that God is no respecter of persons but I seem to have a different understanding of what that means.


Then positing that God treats the believer differently than the unbeliever actually does introduce favouritism in that God favours the prayers of the believer ways that unbelievers do get.

The appeal to Isaiah 59: 2 is a poor proof-text to use in the believer/non-believer paradigm. Isaiah 59: 2 is written to a believing community and is enveloped in an understanding of covenantal blessings and curses. At most there is evidence of a divide between those who have been faithful to the covenant and those who have broken the covenant. It is a mistake of epic proportions to presume the divide is between believers and unbelievers.

Under the covenant established between God and Israel all parties agree that when the nation is faithful to the covenant God will prosper the nation and when the nation dishonours the covenant God will discipline the nation. Form the context of scripture the exile is God taking deliberate action designed to prompt the nation back into a faithfulness to the covenant.

Apart from that the poetic language employed, if taken literally poses a problem. If God refuses to hear those who dihonour the covenant and he refuses to hear those individuals while they are being disciplined how would God know that the discipline has worked?

And then there is the embarrasing fact that you and I have agreed with the premise that God hears the prayers of unbelievers whereas this poor bit of proof-texting claims that God does not hear.them.


The problem began when you decided this text spoke to the differences between believers and non-believers rather than to those who were faithful and those who were faithless. It also didn't help that you ignored the context of the passage and the message it conveys. Nobody can properly appeal to 59: 2 and go on to ignore 59: 21. Where he will not listen to the prayers of the faithless he is about to lay his Spirit upon them and the word he puts into their mouths he will hear.

James 5 is likewise written to a community of believers and is not a comparison between believers and unbelievers and the benefits that believers have over unbelievers. If anything it is instruction on how believers should behave.



First and foremost we should respect scripturures like these and not force them into saying things that they do not, as a matter of fact say.

These scriptures (Isaiah 59 and James 5) are written for the believer and they are written so that the believer may know what God is up to. They are not written so that we may feel superior to un or non-believers. If we get to such a place of arrogance we have spectacularly missed the point of the grace of Christ Jesus.

Particularly in light of Isaiah 59: 21 where God shows that he is no respector of persons by placing his spirit upon those in exile and putting his words in their mouths and the mouths of their children.

So then, if God can lay his Spirit upon the faithless and put his words into their mouths is it impossible for God to lay his Spirit upon an un or non-believer? It is, if God is no respecter of persons otherwise God actually turns out to be a respecter of personse and he gives everyone exactly what their merit wins for them.

So here's the thing, God answers prayer with yes, no or not at this time.....but when He says no.......how does one distinguish, (if someone is an unbeliever, approaching doubt, to begin with), that the answer came back no rather than God isn't really real because nothing happened?

 

[BetteTheRed]

Agreed. If the end result of "prayer" to "god" is "yes, no, not this way", and the end result of prayer to nothing is the same, what, except 'faith', distinguishes between the two?

 

[revjohn]

when He says no.......how does one distinguish, (if someone is an unbeliever, approaching doubt, to begin with), that the answer came back no rather than God isn't really real because nothing happened?

That becomes a challenge.

Bearing in mind that unbelievers are not likely to offer prayers to begin with. When asked about that unsafe suggested that unsaved was probably closer to her actual intent.

So the waters are slightly muddied when it comes to knowing just who it is exactly we are suppised to be dealing with.

The scriptures are pretty clear that individuals can pray to any god they wish but only the One God is able to answer.

If God was a vending machine we would have a greater certainty of what was going on with respect to prayer. You do everything right and you get what you asked for.

God, not being a vending machine only agrees to give us what we ask for if it is what God desires to give in the first place.

Ultimately there is no real difference, pragmatically speaking, between a "no" answer from a god who exists and a non answer from a god which doesn't.

Both may facilitate some personal growth. Or not.

Speaking personally I have never thought of prayer as a requisition system in the same way that the word/faith faction of Christianity has.

For me, I know that there will be an answer. It will likely look vastly different from what I was thinking and it may not be immediately noticeable. My perceived imminent need doesn't seem to be something which impresses upon God any need to rush.

What really is necessary from where I sit is that prayer is not just me whistling in the dark. I am heard. My prayer is considered and while God has freedom to answer prayer as God sees fit the prayers are not rejected.

Do I try bargaining with God? Less and less. I'm humbled by the fact that once upon a time I thought I held enough cards to entice God into haggling.

Of course since I start from a believing stance I know God exists to answer. Because God is not a puppet on a string I realize God is not under my control and never will be.

I am also mindful that whatever anyone intends for evil God is at liberty to redeem. Even those things which I count as tragedy first glance.

 

[revjohn]

Agreed. If the end result of "prayer" to "god" is "yes, no, not this way", and the end result of prayer to nothing is the same, what, except 'faith', distinguishes between the two?

Nuance.

By praying to something which has the sovereign ability to choose between 'yes', 'no' or, 'not at this time/in this way.' I have real potential for a 'yes' or a 'not in this way/in this time instead of a no.

By praying to nothing or not praying at all then I have no real option for any answer.

 

[unsafe]

revjohn ---

just want to clarify what an unbeliever is ----it is the same as a sinner an unsaved person who is unrighteous in God's eyes --------A believer is a saved person who is classed in God's eyes as a Saint and righteous person who is sin free as far as God is concerned because they are classed by God to be Born Again ---many people who say they are Christians are classed as unbelievers ----unsaved because they have rejected God's free gift of Salvation by Grace which comes through Faith ----The Bible only deals with 2 classes of people that I know of ----

this is what scripture says below-----Note Christian here is meaning Christ--ians to me which is the real meaning of the word Christian at least in the beginning now it is just a word that many people like to use - in my view ---Jesus says your either with me or against me ----you either walk in the light or you walk in the dark -----

2 Corinthians 6:14-16 (GW)
Christians and Their Relationships with Unbelievers
14 Stop forming inappropriate relationships with unbelievers. Can right and wrong be partners? Can light have anything in common with darkness? 15 Can Christ agree with the devil? Can a believer share life with an unbeliever? 16 Can God’s temple contain false gods? Clearly, we are the temple of the living God. As God said,

“I will live and walk among them.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.”

unsafe says
here is the I will which is God's promise ---Does God keep His Promises ----Now there is the question ??

 

[Waterfall]

That becomes a challenge.

Bearing in mind that unbelievers are not likely to offer prayers to begin with. When asked about that unsafe suggested that unsaved was probably closer to her actual intent.

So the waters are slightly muddied when it comes to knowing just who it is exactly we are suppised to be dealing with.

The scriptures are pretty clear that individuals can pray to any god they wish but only the One God is able to answer.

If God was a vending machine we would have a greater certainty of what was going on with respect to prayer. You do everything right and you get what you asked for.

God, not being a vending machine only agrees to give us what we ask for if it is what God desires to give in the first place.

Ultimately there is no real difference, pragmatically speaking, between a "no" answer from a god who exists and a non answer from a god which doesn't.

Both may facilitate some personal growth. Or not.

Speaking personally I have never thought of prayer as a requisition system in the same way that the word/faith faction of Christianity has.

For me, I know that there will be an answer. It will likely look vastly different from what I was thinking and it may not be immediately noticeable. My perceived imminent need doesn't seem to be something which impresses upon God any need to rush.

What really is necessary from where I sit is that prayer is not just me whistling in the dark. I am heard. My prayer is considered and while God has freedom to answer prayer as God sees fit the prayers are not rejected.

Do I try bargaining with God? Less and less. I'm humbled by the fact that once upon a time I thought I held enough cards to entice God into haggling.

Of course since I start from a believing stance I know God exists to answer. Because God is not a puppet on a string I realize God is not under my control and never will be.

I am also mindful that whatever anyone intends for evil God is at liberty to redeem. Even those things which I count as tragedy first glance.

It sounds a bit like Deism when prayers are answered by "no" but then we have Jesus and the disciples, could a deist then say that this was the plan from the beginning in order to further explain what is expected from us and that possibly it should be apparent that we have already been given the answers to our prayers?
Just wondering because I believe the same way you do about prayer....yes, no or not this way.....but that no seems a stretch.

 

[Mendalla]

It sounds a bit like Deism when prayers are answered by "no"

Why? We are free to say "no", why wouldn't a personal, interventionist God be free to do so? By suggesting there's something wrong with God saying "no" you are actually making him less free than us.

And Deism doesn't say the answer is "no". Deism says no one is really listening because God doesn't intervene once things are set in motion. Praying is as pointless for a Deist as it is for an atheist when push comes to shove.

 

[Waterfall]

Why? We are free to say "no", why wouldn't a personal, interventionist God be free to do so? By suggesting there's something wrong with God saying "no" you are actually making him less free than us.

And Deism doesn't say the answer is "no". Deism says no one is really listening because God doesn't intervene once things are set in motion. Praying is as pointless for a Deist as it is for an atheist when push comes to shove.

I was referring to the point that with Deism there would be no answer, as everything was set in place from the beginning, and we determine what to do with that. So no, would refer to why God is not answering.

 

[Mendalla]

I was referring to the point that with Deism there would be no answer, as everything was set in place from the beginning. So no, would refer to not answering.

No, "No" would have to be a direct answer. "No, that's not how it works." "No that's no what you're getting" It might not be as direct as a booming voice saying it, but it should come in some form. No answer should not equal "no" because that's not how language works. Unless there's something in the Bible that suggests no answer from God is automatically an implied "no".

Why? How else are we to know it's really a no if it isn't explicitly a "no"? It could be the third option, "not this way" and the person is too hung up on getting their way to see that. It could be a "yes" but the person didn't recognize it because it came in a different form than they were expecting (there's a joke about this that I should try to find). And so on.

"No" needs to be as explicit as "Yes" really, even for God. No answer isn't really an option for "no" because there are other options that could lead to "no answer" or at least the perception that there is no answer.

 

[Waterfall]

No, "No" could also be a direct answer. "No, that's not how it works." "No that's no what you're getting" It might come in that direct a form, but it could come in some form. Not answering could be just not answering meaning the atheists or deists are right.

Sort of what I'm trying to say about Deism, but with atheism there is no God, so not referencing that.

 

[Mendalla]

Sort of what I'm trying to say about Deism, but with atheism there is no God, so not referencing that.

I edited while you were replying. Read my full answer now.

 

[unsafe]

This is interesting ------

How can I be sure I am praying according to the will of God?

Question: "How can I be sure I am praying according to the will of God?"

Answer: Man's highest aim should be to bring glory to God (1 Corinthians 10:31), and this includes praying according to His will. First, we must ask for wisdom. “If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him” (James 1:5). In asking for wisdom, we must also trust that God is gracious and willing to answer our prayers: “But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt” (James 1:6; see also Mark 11:24). So, praying according to the will of God includes asking for wisdom (to know the will of God) and asking in faith (to trust the will of God).

Here are seven biblical instructions that will guide the believer in praying according to God’s will:

1) Pray for the things for which the Bible commands prayer. We are told to pray for our enemies (Matthew 5:44); for God to send missionaries (Luke 10:2); that we do not enter temptation (Matthew 26:41); for ministers of the Word (Colossians 4:3; 2 Thessalonians 3:1); for government authorities (1 Timothy 2:1-3); for relief from affliction (James 5:13); and for the healing of fellow believers (James 5:16). Where God commands prayer, we can pray with confidence that we are praying according to His will.

2) Follow the example of godly characters in Scripture. Paul prayed for the salvation of Israel (Romans 10:1). David prayed for mercy and forgiveness when he sinned (Psalm 51:1-2). The early church prayed for boldness to witness (Acts 4:29). These prayers were according to the will of God, and similar prayers today can be as well. As with Paul and the early church, we should always be praying for the salvation of others. For ourselves, we should pray as David prayed, always aware of our sin and bringing it before God before it hinders our relationship with Him and thwarts our prayers.

3) Pray with the right motivation. Selfish motives will not be blessed by God. “When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures” (James 4:3). We should also pray, not so our lofty words can be heard and we may be seen by others as “spiritual,” but mostly in private and in secret, so that our heavenly Father will hear in private and reward us openly (Matthew 6:5-6).

4) Pray with a spirit of forgiveness toward others (Mark 11:25). A spirit of bitterness, anger, revenge or hatred toward others will prevent our hearts from praying in total submission to God. Just as we are told not to give offerings to God while there is conflict between ourselves and another Christian (Matthew 5:23-24), in the same way God does not want the offering of our prayers until we have reconciled with our brothers and sisters in Christ.

5) Pray with thanksgiving (Colossians 4:2; Philippians 4:6-7). We can always find something to be thankful for, no matter how burdened we are by our wants or needs. The greatest sufferer that lives in this world of redeeming love, and who has the offer of heaven before him, has reason to be grateful to God.

6) Pray with persistence (Luke 18:1; 1 Thessalonians 5:17). We should persevere in prayer and not quit or be dejected because we have not received an immediate answer. Part of praying in God’s will is believing that, whether His answer is “yes,” “no,” or “wait,” we accept His judgment, submit to His will, and continue to pray.

7) Rely on the Spirit of God in prayer. This is a wonderful truth: “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). We have the Spirit’s help in praying. At the times of our deepest depression or sorrow, those times when we feel that we “just cannot pray,” we have the comfort of knowing that the Holy Spirit is actually praying for us! What an amazing God we have!

What assurance we have when we seek to walk in the Spirit and not in the flesh! Then we can have confidence that the Holy Spirit will accomplish His work in presenting our prayers to the Father according to His perfect will and timing, and we can rest in the knowledge that He is working all things together for our good (Romans 8:28).