nojoum wrote:

As far as I know in Christianity, Jesus Christ plays the role of a mediator between Christians and God. Christians are able to make request to God in Jesus's name and be certain that they will receive whatever they ask. On other hand, I have seen that Christians put emphasis on other people prayers or priests' prayers and that is exactly where I am puzzled. If Christ based on his words is the mediator on our behalf to God so that our prayers are answered, what is the need of others's prayers, be it ordinary people or priests?

Firstly, one of the main reasons is that Christ himself said that where two or three are gathered in my name there will I be also see https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+18:19-20&version=RSVCE. The point is not that God cannot answer our prayers throw Christ if we were to ask him alone but the point is that we need to be at peace with our brother in our hearts to do that i.e. if you have malice in your heart for anyone be it friend or enemy God will not answer that prayer. 

Secondly, as Christians we are in a relationship with God through Christ and there has been times where I am not in line with God's Will mostly due to things that I did or am thinking and my judgement maybe clouded and having someone pray for or with you tends to be a way through which you can reconcile with God.

Thirdly, praying together with other people with a common purpose tends to build a community where each can help the other in times of need and be as guides on your spiritual journey.

Last edited by Jason (6/13/2017 11:33 am)

Alexander wrote:

Longer answer: The prayers of other Christians are not in competition with the mediation of Christ - rather they are an extension of it, as they pray with the Holy Spirit dwelling in them. God wills our salvation as people in community, fellowship - we act as a family in Christ, and we ought to pray for one another. On another level, there's also the fact that Christians typically don't believe they will get whatever they ask for in prayer - that belief can be dismissed with 5 minutes of experiment, if it is ever held at all. Mostly Jesus just seems to be saying that we shouldn't be afraid that God will give us something bad if we ask for something good - basically, that God loves us like a father. That doesn't mean we will always get what we ask - when we do get what we ask for, we take it as a gift, but not for granted.

Of course being as a family requires the members of the family to love each other and one way to do that is through prayers. However, it does not mean that for my prayers to be answered, I need others' prayers.

Moreover, I'm not sure whether I should accept your assertion regarding Jesus and prayers. For example consider the verse below:

"If you remain in Me and My words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. This is to My Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, proving yourselves to be My disciples."

I dont really know how one would interpret this verse but to me it says that you can ask him and will answer.

Last edited by nojoum (6/13/2017 3:37 pm)

Thanks for the replies Jason and Alexander.

I'm really sorry and sad to say that I don't find your answers convincing. To me, it seems that they are not dealing with issue. I hope that others can make contribution to clarify the issue.

I also can understand why you need not be troubled with such question. After all, there is no harm in praying in group and since this is a Christian tradition, it is fine to follow it. Especially, when considering that there are tons of other problems that needs attention.
 

Last edited by nojoum (6/14/2017 12:57 pm)

Alexander wrote:

Perhaps a Protestant would be fine with it, though even then I'm not sure. It comes down to the oft-misunderstood "extra ecclesiam nulla salus". God wills salvation through the Church: salvation comes from being incorporated into Christ, which we refer to as becoming a member of his "mystical body", the Church (to what degree this Church is associated with the visible Church is a famously divisive issue, with views ranging from "the true Church has no overlap with the plainly corrupt visible Church" [absurdly hardline Protestants] to "the visible Church is absolutely identical to the mystical body" [absurdly hardline Catholics/Orthodox]). Christ's action extends through history by way of the ministry of the Church, animated by the Holy Spirit, so that you cannot simply say "Christ does this; so the Church can have no part in it". The Christian at prayer is only possible because he or she is a member of Christ's body, capable of being a living extension of his activity when the Spirit lives in them - this is why their prayer is not in competition with the mediation of Jesus. Basically, so far as I see it, only someone who doesn't see the Church (visible or otherwise) as in any way an instrument of salvation/distribution of grace, would agree with your point.

Thanks for the comprehensive explanation. I see your point and I accept in what it is because my knowledge of Christianity is cursory. However, I will make one comment regarding your last sentence.

You can still argue that church is an instrument of salvation but not in the sense of prayers being answered by God. Rather, the Church preaches the gospel so that the people know the gospel in its fullness and truth and by the virtue of knowing the truth, they would walk the path of righteousness. So they are merely responsible for preaching the gospel. The power to be born again and live a righteous life merely comes from Jesus.

Moreover, one can also argue that Church has the power to change people in the same way that Jesus gave disciples the power to heal the people. So you still can receive healing from Jesus directly or indirectly through his disciples. I also see a possible objection in that what if Jesus have actually mandated people to approach him through his church.

Alexander wrote:

Is there really no grey area between "sin" and "stuff God wills to bring about right now"? Can we not say that something may not be such that God would bring about a miracle to pull it off, yet not be in itself immoral?
In any case, the simple fact is that people don't always get what they ask God for. The authors of the NT knew this, so we can assume they didn't throw this knowledge out the window when writing these passages, and understood them differently to your interpretation. I would recommend taking Jason's advice and looking at the wider context for all these passages.

Maybe I need to see the context for all of the passages but I still I will respond to your objection.
Your objection to my response is still invalid. Because at least, I think we can agree that God must not reject my request for walking the path of righteousness. So all other grey things does not really matter. If God answers all request for living a righteous life then I don't need a prayer of a friend or the church.

Alexander wrote:

This is a very different line of questioning, and I'd rather not derail this thread, but in brief: in itself, of course the grace of God is enough. But the grace of God isn't forced on us. We can reject it in the first place, in which case we don't receive it at all, or we can reject it (in this life) after we have received it, in which case we lose it. This is hardly because the grace of God is "not enough" to walk in righteousness. You could offer me enough food to keep me alive, but I could still starve if I tell you to sod off. God doesn't "sod off", of course, and I believe he will keep offering up to the point of death if need be, but grace isn't coercive. If you want to discuss the sufficiency of grace, however, that's a controversial point itself and should probably go on a different thread.

Fine. I wont argue this point here.
 

Jason wrote:

I disagree with you here, God has no obligation to fulfil your request even if you walk the path of righteousness even through Christ. I think you are missing the point here. Even Christ himself said "My Father, if this chalice may not pass me by, but I must drink it, then thy will be done". What this means is that you can ask God for anything but He may or may not provide it to you in His own time since we need to be aligned with His Will (i.e. the ultimate final end). Now, that also does not mean that God does not listen to other people's prayers, He may do so if He chooses to.
 

I would answer it in two ways.
Firstly, what Jesus was asking was against his very purpose which is to save mankind. As you see the condition for the prayer, it requires to abide in Jesus's words. So by making such request Jesus was not abiding in God's words which would allow God to reject his request.

Secondly, are you telling me that I cannot ask God even what he wills for me? Or that God does not will for me to live a righteous life? Then such God is not even worthy of my attention. You are even contradicting Jesus's words who likened God to a humanly father. You are even putting God in lower position that humans.

EDIT: I think I now know why you gave such a an answer.
" I think we can agree that God must not reject my request for walking the path of righteousness"
I did not mean that since I walked the path of righteousness, God must answer my request' Rather that I ask God to give me the power to walk the path of righteousness. So Sorry for the grammatical mistake. Still my two objections are valid.
 

Last edited by nojoum (6/16/2017 2:23 pm)