Prayer Mt 18

Clizby WampusCat said:

You didn't deal with it, all you said is that it does not mean what it says with no justification for that.

Click to expand...

Alright. I'll revisit your complaint here about how 'half-baked' my current address has been of Matthew 18:18-20, so let's put it back into the oven for some additional baking time since you think it's unpalatable at the moment.

You've also said that what you think I've stated thus far has been done with 'no justification.' Ok. I'll reconsider your point. Maybe I do need to add some more grist to my mill on this point.

So, what kind of statement(s) do you think I need to produce in order to justify my own interpretive angle on this, Clizby?

Clizby WampusCat said:

When are at least two Christians going to get together and pray about getting rid of Covid-19?

Click to expand...

As a Christian I believe every one of us have asked the same question. I believe it is a question of conceptual semantics that I wonder if us theist have a good understanding, at least I don't.

I have prayed with others about what I felt God should do in different situations with outcomes different than desired. Could it be argued that Jesus was only making that promise to his disciples or to all His followers.

These aren't the kind of questions that disprove or affirm the Christian faith. I can assure you millions of Christians are asking God to intervene, worst case scenario maybe he feels heaven and hell need a lot more souls.

RBPerry said:

I have prayed with others about what I felt God should do in different situations with outcomes different than desired. Could it be argued that Jesus was only making that promise to his disciples or to all His followers.

These aren't the kind of questions that disprove or affirm the Christian faith. I can assure you millions of Christians are asking God to intervene, worst case scenario maybe he feels heaven and hell need a lot more souls.

Click to expand...

Note that the promise of Matthew doesn’t have an expiration or a limitation. Jesus doesn’t say that it only applies to the disciples. Besides, I know many Christians take “where two or three gathered in my name” as applicable to them, today. Sermon on the Mount, applicable to the crowd, has a promise that says:
Ask, and it shall be given to you! Matt 7:7

I think you are also on a slippery slope with limiting Jesus’s promise to answer prayer because once you start with prayer promise, then the salvation promise is next. Perhaps Jesus never promised to save anyone other than his disciples?

BigV said:

Note that the promise of Matthew doesn’t have an expiration or a limitation. Jesus doesn’t say that it only applies to the disciples. Besides, I know many Christians take “where two or three gathered in my name” as applicable to them, today. Sermon on the Mount, applicable to the crowd, has a promise that says:
Ask, and it shall be given to you! Matt 7:7

I think you are also on a slippery slope with limiting Jesus’s promise to answer prayer because once you start with prayer promise, then the salvation promise is next. Perhaps Jesus never promised to save anyone other than his disciples?

Click to expand...

What you're saying here is a faulty analysis, one that refuses to look at the overall, and complex, context of the verses under discussion.

Here's what's NOT going to happen in all of this; atheists are NOT going to just come here onto CF and begin to tell EVERY SINGLE Christian that they're all wrong, especially not since an anomoly is present here in that there is more than one interpretation of these verses being stated by Christians and you're going to have to refute them all in order to pander to your own assertions.

BigV said:

Note that the promise of Matthew doesn’t have an expiration or a limitation. Jesus doesn’t say that it only applies to the disciples. Besides, I know many Christians take “where two or three gathered in my name” as applicable to them, today. Sermon on the Mount, applicable to the crowd, has a promise that says:
Ask, and it shall be given to you! Matt 7:7

I think you are also on a slippery slope with limiting Jesus’s promise to answer prayer because once you start with prayer promise, then the salvation promise is next. Perhaps Jesus never promised to save anyone other than his disciples?

Click to expand...

Read the first verse, The disciples came to Jesus and ask....... Jesus was talking to His disciples. You need to read the entire passages and put in the proper context.

2PhiloVoid said:

Here's what's NOT going to happen in all of this; atheists are NOT going to just come here onto CF and begin to tell EVERY SINGLE Christian that they're all wrong, especially not since an anomoly is present here in that there is more than one interpretation of these verses being stated by Christians and you're going to have to refute them all in order to pander to your own assertions.

Click to expand...

Well, too late for that. What you say Atheists can’t say had been said and on more than one occasion. You can’t handle the truth?

RBPerry said:

Read the first verse,

Click to expand...

So, tell me, why do Christians today pray the Lord’s Prayer?

And where does Jesus say that the faith of the disciples can do more than the faith of every other Christian?

BigV said:

Well, too late for that. What you say Atheists can’t say had been said and on more than one occasion. You can’t handle the truth?

Click to expand...

The truth of what? That the verses in question in this particular thread can't be recognized by some readers as being sandwiched within a context about Church Discipline and the Distribution of Forgiveness, a context that curtails the "give me what I want, Jesus" interpretation that some readers impose upon those verses?

BigV said:

So, tell me, why do Christians today pray the Lord’s Prayer?

And where does Jesus say that the faith of the disciples can do more than the faith of every other Christian?

Click to expand...

As for the Lord's prayer, Jesus gave an example as to how they should pray, and yes he was talking to his disciples, but I think it is a good example of what our requests should be. First that God's will be done, not our own will, then secondly asking that our needs be met. I have seen a few examples of God answering pray in miraculous ways, I have also seen many prays not answered in the way desired.

At the time Christianity was formed the disciples were given tremendous power to prove the validity of their testimonies. My personal belief is many times we don't see God respond to prayers for many different reason that are far beyond the scope a forum debate. Every effort was made to stop the Christian movement until Constantine 300 years after Jesus.

Stop and think if God answered every prayer the way we desired we would most likely hang ourselves with our own selfish desires. There was a movie out "Bruce Almighty" and it was hilarious, it was a good example of power gone wrong. One of the best comments was God was asked "How do you get someone to love you?" His answer was priceless "When you figure that out, let me know." the quotes may not be exact but you got the point.

RBPerry said:

As for the Lord's prayer, Jesus gave an example as to how they should pray, and yes he was talking to his disciples, but I think it is a good example of what our requests should be

Click to expand...

So why wouldn’t the prayer promises work the same way?

Either words of Jesus (who is God?) are true or they are not.

Besides, I have previously mentioned Jesus’s promise of John 14:12 explicitly says whosoever believes Will do the works of Jesus. Not limited to only the disciples. But, I’m guessing there is another excuse.

And sermon on the mount was spoken to the public, not to the disciples.

and, Matt 28 Jesus said that the disciples should make other disciples teaching them everything Jesus taught the 12. Sounds like Jesus made a mistake in his command, forgetting that his promises expire after 200ad.

2PhiloVoid said:

The truth of what? That the verses in question in this particular thread can't be recognized by some readers as being sandwiched within a context about Church Discipline and the Distribution of Forgiveness, a context that curtails the "give me what I want, Jesus" interpretation that some readers impose upon those verses?

Click to expand...

So how is your sandwich different from post 94?

BigV said:

So how is your sandwich different from post 94?

Click to expand...

In post #94, you say -- in jest -- that the verse means the opposite of what it supposedly says at a prima facie level.

Despite your jest there at post #94, I don't say that the verse means the "opposite" of what it says; no, what I do in the attempt to ascertain its odd meaning is to look at the literary context in which it sits. When I do that, I notice an interesting exegetical fact, and that fact is that Matthew 18:18-20 sits between a transition in a narrative passage to a sub-passage, with the overall passage itself beginning at Matthew 18:1, and ending (it seems) at Matthew 18:35. In looking at it further, I also notice that the general theme of this passage focuses primarily upon the issue of "dealing with moral offenders," some of whom will be encountered and dealt with from within the Church. So, that's point Number 1.

Point Number 2 is that we notice that the semantics of Matthew 18:18-20 seem to bit somewhat parallel to a similar statement about "Binding and Loosing" made by Jesus to Peter a little earlier in another passage in Matthew's Gospel (i.e. at Matthew 16:13-20, specifically at verses 18 & 19). So, being that this is the case, we would more correctly surmise that when Jesus tells Peter and the other Disciples about the effects of their binding and loosing through prayer, they are being told that they will be exhibiting the Power and Authority given to them by Jesus to dispense God's Grace, Mercy, and Forgiveness, if needed, which will come through the Person of Christ, through their Apostolic authority.

So, in short, there are finer details in these passages that can of course be looked at, but I don't think it's really necessary to do so. What I've just said above should be enough to spark additional insight to anyone who cares enough to read the flow of these passages in their entirety. But if needed, I can also find some commentary that more or less buttresses my own understanding of Matthew 18:18-20.

Clizby WampusCat said:

I have no idea. Again, it is your belief and claim. You need to provide the supporting evidence and others will evaluate it to see if they agree or not.

Click to expand...

I just did. See post #113. 'Method' isn't necessarily non-supporting.

Clizby WampusCat said:

When I was a Christian I prayed a lot and looking back there was no indication that God ever did anything. I misplaced my thanks many times and gave thanks to God when I should have given thanks to doctors, scientists etc. for actually doing something. I guarantee if we just prayed for people in medical need and did not take them to a hospital they would have died. The doctors and the science based medicine is what saved their life not Gods intervention.

As for the idea that Jesus was only talking to his disciples I think BigV has addressed that.

That is a scary thought.

Click to expand...

BigV has barely addressed anything the entire time he's been on CF, other than to just lodge Village Level complaints about this, that and the other ............so, I wouldn't be taking his citations too seriously.

2PhiloVoid said:

Despite your jest there at post #94, I don't say that the verse means the "opposite" of what it says; no, what I do in the attempt to ascertain its odd meaning is to look at the literary context in which it sits. When I do that, I notice an interesting exegetical fact, and that fact is that Matthew 18:18-20 sits between a transition in a narrative passage to a sub-passage, with the overall passage itself beginning at Matthew 18:1, and ending (it seems) at Matthew 18:35. In looking at it further, I also notice that the general theme of this passage focuses primarily upon the issue of "dealing with moral offenders," some of whom will be encountered and dealt with from within the Church. So, that's point Number 1.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a distraction.

Matt. 18:19 “Again, truly I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.

Sounds like you want to redefine 'anything' to be limited ONLY to the issues dealing with moral offenders, but that is not what the word 'anything' means. Why was Jesus being so ambiguous?

2PhiloVoid said:

BigV has barely addressed anything the entire time he's been on CF, other than just lodge Village Level complaints about this, that and the other ............so, I wouldn't be taking his citations too seriously.

Click to expand...

You have not been reading my posts in their context! Come on, learn some Epistemology for BigV's sake!

BigV said:

Sounds like a distraction.

Click to expand...

A distraction? Well, if you want to call fuller Exegesis and Hermeneutics a "distraction," then have at it. But I just call the lack of these things "ignorance."

Matt. 18:19 “Again, truly I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.

Sounds like you want to redefine 'anything' to be limited ONLY to the issues dealing with moral offenders, but that is not what the word 'anything' means. Why was Jesus being so ambiguous?

Click to expand...

Have you ever read Craig L. Blomberg's "A Handbook of New Testament Exegesis," or D.A. Carson's "Exegetical Fallacies"? If not, you're about to start .... !

And why do I say this? I say this because a singular word-study of some Greek terms does not constitute an application of Exegesis and Hermeneutical acumen; no, that kind of thing is just the tip of the iceberg.