What did Jesus mean when he told his followers that "whatever" they asked in his name would be granted? Did he literally mean that Christians could pray for "anything" and the prayer would be answered? That would not seem to make sense in view of 1 John 5:14-15. Furthermore, here is what certain exegetes have to say about the passage in the Gospel of John:
"Joh 14:13 -
Whatsoever ye shall ask - This promise referred particularly to the apostles in their work of spreading the gospel; it is, however, true of all Christians, if what they ask is in faith, and according to the will of God, Jam_1:6; 1Jo_5:14" (Albert Barnes).
How, then, are we to understand "Whatsoever you shall ask, I will do it," if there are some things which the faithful ask, and which God, even purposely on their behalf, leaves undone? Or ought we to suppose that the words were addressed only to the apostles? Surely not. For what He has got the length of now saying is in the very line of what He had said before: "He that believes in me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do;" which was the subject of our previous discourse. And that no one might attribute such power to himself, but rather to make it manifest that even these greater works were done by Himself, He proceeded to say,"For I go to the Father; and whatsoever you shall ask in my name, I will do it." Was it the apostles only that believed on Him? When, therefore, He said, "He that believes in me," He spoke to those, among whom we also by His grace are included, who by no means receive everything that we ask. And if we turn our thoughts even to the most blessed apostles, we find that he who labored more than they all, yet not he, but the grace of God that was with him, besought the Lord thrice that the messenger of Satan might depart from him, and received not what he had asked. What shall we say, beloved? Are we to suppose that the promise here made, "Whatsoever you shall ask in my name, I will do it," was not fulfilled by Him even to the apostles? And to whom, then, will ever His promise be fulfilled, if therein He has deceived His own apostles?
The last quote is from Augustine's _Tractate_ 73.2.
Regards,
Edgar
18 comments:
Edgar,
In John 14:14 the word "me" (...ask "me" anything in my name..) appears in the Kingdom Interlinear, but it does not appear in the New World Translation.
Is there any other instance in the 'New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures' where a Greek word was not translated into English from the Kingdom Interlinear that would alter the meaning of a passage to the level it does in John 14:14?
FR, I'm sure other verses in NWT are translated in ways that diverge from the KIT: I don't think the NWT was ever meant to slavishly follow the KIT, which would be impossible anyway or not great translational practice.
See https://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/05/john-1414-and-new-world-translation.html
Please also see https://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/05/john-1414-and-new-world-translation.html
I discuss the issue of KIT versus NWT there. Notice that Godet says the reading is impossible.
Sorry, I meant to include this link where you can read about Godet: https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2012/05/frederic-louis-godet-argues-that-me-in.html
Thanks for the links, but from what I can see in my studies no passage comes close the meaning of text being so different than John 14:14 from the KIT to the NWT.
As I said above, you seem to be assuming that the NWT has to follow the KIT slavishly, but that's not true. See https://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2010/11/john-1414-from-rdb-files.html
Other translations omit "me" as well. Furthermore, see the NWT footnote in the 1984 Ref Bible. How were they trying to hide anything? Compare 1 Peter 3:15 in KIT and the NWT 1984.
Everything you have mentioned I am well aware of. My point is it is highly questionable that one word is not carried over to the English translation which would demonstrate prayers to Jesus knowing the Jehovah's Witnesses forbid this very practice. No othe passage can be supplied that even comes close to what they have done with John 14:14.
I am not sure how ths relates to 1 Peter 3:15. It reads "Lord" (kurion) from the KIT and "Lord" is found in the 1984 version. "Lord" was carried over, but the "Me" in John 14:14 was not.
Even if we include "me" in John 14:14, a word that others likewise omit, it doesn't prove that Jesus should be the proper object of prayer. This is another point that some scholars have noted. You act like the NWT could not make a textual decision to leave out "me" and just include a note like they did in 1984, as though they had to follow the KIT. That is not a reasonable stance to me. At any rate, it would take more than the inclusion of "me" to establish a basis for offering prayer to Jesus.
I checked the KIT and the information I was thinking about came from the ftn for 1 Peter 3:15, but I originally thought some of the main text reflected what's in the ftn.
Have you ever read or studied the purpose for the KIT and what it used for said textual base? And the more I study John 14:14, I see little basis for including me.
Having "me" included does indicate the Lord Jesus is the proper object of prayer.
That's what many Trinitarians claim, but asking Jesus could mean that a Christian should pray to God in Jesus' name. John 16:23, not pray to Jesus.
Asking the Father is praying to the Father (John 15:26), and asking Jesus is praying "to" Jesus (John 14:14).
John 16:23 doe not forbid praying to Jesus. The context has to do with the apostles not asking the Lord Jesus anymore questions concerning His figurative teachings concerning His resurrection (John 16:18, 30). Their understanding will increase when the Holy Spirit would later be given to them. At that time such questions will no longer be asked.
The verb "asking" in and of itself does not prove that the GNT is urging prayer to Jesus. You must be referring to a different scripture than John 15:26 because it says nothing about asking the Father. Meanwhile, you assert that asking Jesus counts as prayer to him, but it proves nothing. We prayer to the Father, in the spirit, and through the Son. Jesus is high priest and intercessor, so even if we did ask him for anything, we do so by asking in his name. Furthermore, when he uttered the words, he was talking to his apostles. They didn't have to pray to the Lord: those men talked personally with him and could ask face to face.
I never said John 16:23 prohibits/forbids prayer to Jesus, but it doesn't teach that we should prayer to the Christ either. I see that you even mention the original context and I agree with those remarks, but one point you're overlooking is that the apostles didn't have to offer prayer to the Lord and it's very unlikely they would have done so.
John 15:16 refers to asking the Father which means praying to the Father.
Praying to Jesus does not prove nothing. It proves He is God.
Good News From God!: Prayer is part of our worship, so we should pray only to our Creator, Jehovah. (Matthew 4:10; 6:9) (page 24)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102012193
I agree that when we ask God for X in a certain way, then such an action is prayer. However, to ask Jesus something might not count as prayer: he serves a different role than his Father does, so a Christian might ask Jesus for something without the act being counted as prayer.
Where does the Bible say we should pray to Jesus? Secondly, is it wrong to ask an angel for something? Would asking an angel for something be considered an act of prayer?
It does constitute prayer because when praying to Jesus it wouldn't matter if it was done only in the heart. He would still hear. This proves He is God (1 Kings 8:38-39).
You didn't answer some of my questions, but oh well. I disagree that we're clearly commanded to offer Jesus our prayers.
Romans 10:13
Romans 10:13 does not prove praying to Jesus. http://chivchalov.blogspot.com/2020/10/name.html?m=1
Post a Comment