Why pray if God has already made up his mind?

[PRmerger]

I have a friend that is finally coming back to his faith, but has questions.
He trusts, but still would like to see what answers are out there to consider.

"why do we pray if god has already made up his mind…does prayer help?

Because God gives us what Pascal calls the “dignity of causality”. We are given as human creatures the dignity of actually causing events.

“If you say that we should not pray because God already knows our needs,** then you must say that we should not farm or eat or read for the same reason. ** God lets us really cause events and really lets us make a difference not only by physical work but also by spiritual work.”

can we actually change god’s mind?"l

Yes and no. We can change the course of events by our prayers, works and actions, and in that sense we can “change” God’s mind. However, of course, God is Eternal and in that sense cannot change.

 

[belorg]

Hi Michael,

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
“600 To God, all moments of time are present in their immediacy. When therefore He establishes his eternal plan of “predestination,” He includes in it each person’s free response to his grace.”

As it applies to your question, God includes your prayers and His answer to them in His plan.

There is a problem of logical priority here. It follws from this that God changes His plans according to how each free person responds to His grace. His plan may be ‘ertenal’ in a temporal sense, but it most certainly is not immutable.

 

[fred_conty]

I have a friend that is finally coming back to his faith, but has questions.
He trusts, but still would like to see what answers are out there to consider.

“why do we pray if god has already made up his mind…does prayer help? can we actually change god’s mind?”

Please help me with discussion points to bring up to him.
Thank you!

michel

Praying makes us dependent on God and shows that we cannot do anything of ourselves without him.
The boy David overcame the giant Goliath being dependent on God for his source of strength.
Samson also knew his power came from God.

Without God, we are on our own.
And when we don’t pray to God, what does that tell him?

The best prayer of asking, is to thank him. For gratitude brings more blessings.

And the prayer of the sinful recognition of ourselves moves God to pity us and raise us up.

Should we pray? What was Jesus doing before his passion started?

Just a thought.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

There is a problem of logical priority here. It follws from this that God changes His plans according to how each free person responds to His grace. His plan may be ‘ertenal’ in a temporal sense, but it most certainly is not immutable.

I’m having a hard time seeing your point given what CCC #600, which I cited, asserts as a statement of RC doctrine. Let me rephrase things and see where this leads us.

If God, who is outside of time and infinitely intelligent, from all eternity sees all of time at once including–what are to us–future contingents (among which are free acts of human beings including prayers), His single plan from all eternity takes all of these into account.

I don’t see how given what CCC #600 asserts there is a problem with logical priority or with the immutability of His plan.

If the operative definition of God in RC doctrine were of a superior intelligence operating within time and possessing somehow the power to arrange the course of events, then you would have a point that “God changes His plans according to how each free person responds to His grace.” As it is, this is not the case.

Takes into account from all eternity, yes; changes, no.

 

[belorg]

I’m having a hard time seeing your point given what CCC #600, which I cited, asserts as a statement of RC doctrine. Let me rephrase things and see where this leads us.

If God, who is outside of time and infinitely intelligent, from all eternity sees all of time at once including–what are to us–future contingents (among which are free acts of human beings including prayers), His single plan from all eternity takes all of these into account.

Which means that all these ‘future contingents’ are logically prior to God’s act, which leads to a huge contradiction because God is supposed to be the cause of these future contingents but a cause cannot be logically posterior to its effect.
To state it in another way: God’s plan is contingent upon these future contingencies.

I don’t see how given what CCC #600 asserts there is a problem with logical priority or with the immutability of His plan.

The problem is that His plan is logically posterior to the future contigencies, which means that, provided God is eternal and has no beginning, there are to ‘states of mind’ to be distinguished in God.
The first one is a state of mind at which God has not made a plan, and a second at which God has made a plan. There may not be any temporal distinction between the two states, but there most certainly is a logical disntinction. Which means that God is not immutable.

If the operative definition of God in RC doctrine were of a superior intelligence operating within time and possessing somehow the power to arrange the course of events, then you would have a point that “God changes His plans according to how each free person responds to His grace.” As it is, this is not the case.

Takes into account from all eternity, yes; changes, no.

I think I have made clear why this is false.

 

[Jelrak_TB]

Does a mother suspect her child who begs for milk?

Sorry, this may not have been clear: what was meant was that a parent whose child might beg in such a manner might be held in suspicion.

 

[Jelrak_TB]

Possible, except that God has told us that some of His actions will be in response to our prayer. So it cannot be from lack of faith, because faith tells us to pray. You could ask why it is that God has decided to act this way, but that’d be a different question.

OK.

 

[Jelrak_TB]

Dear Jelrak TB:

I wouldn’t think of it that way. Think of it rather as God in His graciousness allows us actually to have a part in His universe, as His children. If you think of it that way, you would see it’s not “begging.”

(Even though, I admit, a lot of my prayers do sound a bit like begging.)

Haha, OK.

 

[Jelrak_TB]

Asking for things is only a small part of prayer.

Prayer is first and foremost an intimate, two-way conversation between lovers. We pray mostly because we want to converse with the one we love.

Sometimes when I am worried and try to pray, and my mind is all scattered, I hear a little voice, a whisper which says, “Shhhhhh… be quiet… take a deep breath and everything will be all right.” And then the voice says, “Pray to me. Just tell me that you love me.”

Abba… Father… I love you more than I love my own life.

That’s why we pray. If you don’t pray like that, then ask God to teach you how to love him. That’s what we should be asking for.

-Tim-

This sounds very peaceful. What about if the whispering voice cannot be heard?

 

[Jelrak_TB]

No. We pray to God because it is one of the means by which we develope a relationship with Him and because he asked us to… Remember Christ was continually praying to the Father, eventhough Christ himself was also God ( the Son of the Father eternally begotten in the Godhead). Why was he constantly praying when He was also God? Because he loved the Father and that love was the motive for his prayer. So if we love God and wish to have a relationship with him we will pray often, morning and evening at least. But actually we should have him at the back of our minds all the time - sort of a perpetual, background contemplation.

OK, thank you.

How does one know if God is the one being reached through prayer? To clarify, how is one certain that one is making contact with anything outside of one’s own subconscious?

The specifics behind this question is that I have often discovered the solution to a difficulty by voicing it aloud. Might not any response from prayer be little more than this type of mind echo?

 

[Jelrak_TB]

I think that since time does not restrict God, since God created time, He is able to know (by His omniscience) the time before, during, and after we send up our petitions not only for our own personal needs but also for the needs of others as well. Therefore, I believe that one of the reasons that the Bible says “…your Father knoweth what is needful for you, before you ask him” (Matthew 6:8) is that in God’s eyes we are about to make, are making, and already have made our prayers in the now moment of eternity. Therefore, the statement that God “has already made up His mind” would indicate that we have already finished our prayer before God; otherwise, it would not be logical to say that God “has already made up His mind.” And so I think one of the reasons that we should always pray is that the prayers that the eternal God hears us making, and responds to either practically or spiritually, are one means by which He uses to bring about His will on earth.

This makes some sense.

Could it not then be equally said that God would also foresee the events that might finally break one’s spirit entirely? What might explain his inaction at such a time? Would not his seeming refusal to provide aide when the lives of one’s children might be at risk be at the very least disconcerting given God’s certain foreknowledge of the event?

If a vehicle is approaching a child playing in the street is it common for a loving parent to refuse to act until asked politely to assist?

Might the child in question, now bereft of a limb, find such a parent loving simply because he/she has chosen to step in after the fact to provide consolation?

 

[sllhouette]

Sorry, this may not have been clear: what was meant was that a parent whose child might beg in such a manner might be held in suspicion.

haha, do we suspect a mother whose infant begs for milk?

 

[JDaniel]

I have a friend that is finally coming back to his faith, but has questions.
He trusts, but still would like to see what answers are out there to consider.

“why do we pray if god has already made up his mind…does prayer help? can we actually change god’s mind?”

Please help me with discussion points to bring up to him.
Thank you!

michel

Michel:

What happens to you when you decide not to maintain a close affinity with an exceptional, don’t-want-to-lose-you friend any more? (I can tell you what’s happened to me! )

God bless,
jd

 

[fred_conty]

This makes some sense.

Could it not then be equally said that God would also foresee the events that might finally break one’s spirit entirely? What might explain his inaction at such a time? Would not his seeming refusal to provide aide when the lives of one’s children might be at risk be at the very least disconcerting given God’s certain foreknowledge of the event?

If a vehicle is approaching a child playing in the street is it common for a loving parent to refuse to act until asked politely to assist?

Might the child in question, now bereft of a limb, find such a parent loving simply because he/she has chosen to step in after the fact to provide consolation?

Jelrack, you said
“Could it not then be equally said that God would also foresee the events that might finally break one’s spirit entirely?”

God does know precisely this breaking point. St. Paul says that God does not allow us to be tempted beyond our endurance. If we break, then it is because we did not use the means God has given to us. In this case we are limiting our reference to the evil of sin, for instance, murder, adultery, lieing, stealing, etc.

Your next question was,
" What might explain his inaction at such a time?"

Because God has made the human person with a spirit which allows that person to say “yes” or “no” in response to being inticed to evil. It is not an “inaction” on God’s part, but an “inaction” on the part of the individual to fail to chose what is best for themselves and the society they live it. And so we have criminals in our society and sinners in our world who have made wrong choices. Just as two single people who commit fornication have an unwanted child by their actions which burdens themselves, their community, and wounds the baby in more ways than we can ever know. The action on God’s part is the instruction “to due unto others and you would have them do unto you”, and “to love one another.” It is the failure of taking responsibility for one’s own actions, and laying the blame on others, that make people grow old but not grow up. It is a hallmark of christianity to say “I’m sorry for what I have done” and then try to repair the damage. It isn’t God’s doing, it is our undoing. It is not his “inaction” but our “action”. As Ghandi once said, that if christians were like Jesus, the whole world would be christian.

Your third question was,
“Would not his seeming refusal to provide aide when the lives of one’s children might be at risk be at the very least disconcerting given God’s certain foreknowledge of the event?”

Everyone’s life is at risk all the time. I’ve heard of a meteor hitting a swimming pool in CA and killing people at a party. Boats tipping over, skiers going over clifts, cars colliding, poison water, rattlesnake bites, planes crashing, falling off high ladders, passerbys being shot, dying of overweight, children drowning, trains derailing, mountain slides, coalmining disasters, shark killings, leaking gas, brakes failing, crib deaths, …, …, …, and on and on. This is but a trickle.

What is God suppose to do with his foreknowledge about all this bad stuff? It’s just a sick world we live in and it is only going to be perfect in the world that God promised us in the future for those that love one another and love him. This is the christian point of view not the world’s view. The world is getting sicker because it is not listening to God. The killing of over 1 million innocent lives in the woumbs of mothers every year in the USA. If we say that God does nothing with his foreknowledge, what are we doing about our own foreknowledge of these innocent ones. We are killing them, not God. It is our responsibility to “provide aide when the lives of one’s children might be at risk be at the very least disconcerting given OUR certain foreknwledge of the event?”

When we honestly look around, aren’t we really responsible for what is going on in our own backyard?
God gave us the earth and all that is in it to help us and also to oversee everything as we see in the book of Genesis. If it is not everything we want it to be, then who better get going?

Just a few thoughts.

 

[JDaniel]

I have a friend that is finally coming back to his faith, but has questions.
He trusts, but still would like to see what answers are out there to consider.

“why do we pray if god has already made up his mind…does prayer help? can we actually change god’s mind?”

Please help me with discussion points to bring up to him.
Thank you!

michel

Michel:

This is not an easy question to answer. If you think about it, God does not per se “change” as though He might at the moment I resume praying, or return to the Faith. God is infinite. He’s everywhere, every-when. In response to this he knows everything that will happen and everything we will do. He knows, for instance, that we will resume praying. He knows that we will pray profusely. He knows the level of our sincerity whenever we resume praying. He knows these things already, so at the moment you think you are affecting Him, He is already affected.

Personally, I think God smiles. I think we can make Him smile. Of course not in time, but in a manner befitting He Who Knows All Things in one, infinite act of understanding. I am not saying that God is somehow mutable. He does what he does in his inscrutable way.

Just my preferences.

God bless,
jd

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

Which means that all these ‘future contingents’ are logically prior to God’s act, which leads to a huge contradiction because God is supposed to be the cause of these future contingents but a cause cannot be logically posterior to its effect.
To state it in another way: God’s plan is contingent upon these future contingencies.

Your causal analysis appears limited to inanimate physical objects. Creation, however, is an act of making or doing by a personal agent. In this order the effect is always logically prior to the cause: because the effect is what you intend to make or do. The medieval dictum holds–what is first in the order of intention is last in the order of execution. You have uncovered no contradiction whatsoever here.

The problem is that His plan is logically posterior to the future contigencies, which means that, provided God is eternal and has no beginning, there are to ‘states of mind’ to be distinguished in God.
The first one is a state of mind at which God has not made a plan, and a second at which God has made a plan. There may not be any temporal distinction between the two states, but there most certainly is a logical disntinction. Which means that God is not immutable.

First of all, the issue is whether or not God’s plan is immutable. So even on the face of it your schema does not entail that God’s plan is mutable.

Secondly, as I‘ve shown there is no contradiction involved when the effect logically preceeds the cause in the practical order of making or doing.

Third, bringing the universe into being ex nihilo and governing it according to His plan–all are brought about in one cognitive and volitional act of God from all eternity. Creation; providence (plan); governance (willing the execution of the plan) are not separate in God. God’s free unitary act of creation at once comprehends and includes all events both necessary and contingent. This gets back to what CCC #600 asserts: “To God, all moments of time are present in their immediacy.”

Given our finite limited intellect we distinguish creation, providence, and governance conceptually in the logical order, but there is no compartmentalizing in the existence of God and there are not three separate states of mind in God in the one act of creation-providence-governance.

And so here also you have shown no contradiction in the teaching of CCC #600. Perhaps there were truths about the doctrine of creation that you were not taking into account.

 

[belorg]

Your causal analysis appears limited to inanimate physical objects. Creation, however, is an act of making or doing by a personal agent. In this order the effect is always logically prior to the cause: because the effect is what you intend to make or do. The medieval dictum holds–what is first in the order of intention is last in the order of execution. You have uncovered no contradiction whatsoever here.

In your view, God’s intention is at least partially caused by the ‘futiure contingents’. So the future contingents exist logically prior to God’s intention.

First of all, the issue is whether or not God’s plan is immutable. So even on the face of it your schema does not entail that God’s plan is mutable.

My schema entails that God’s plan logically prior to the future contingents was different from God’s plan posterior to those contingents. Even if God’s plan was empty prior to the contingents and it had some content afeterwards, there is a xhnage in God’s plan.

Secondly, as I‘ve shown there is no contradiction involved when the effect logically preceeds the cause in the practical order of making or doing.

Third, bringing the universe into being ex nihilo and governing it according to His plan–all are brought about in one cognitive and volitional act of God from all eternity.

In a temporal sense, that may be true, but it follows from your schema that in a logical sense this is not true.

Creation; providence (plan); governance (willing the execution of the plan) are not separate in God. God’s free unitary act of creation at once comprehends and includes all events both necessary and contingent. This gets back to what CCC #600 asserts: “To God, all moments of time are present in their immediacy.”

That’s a temporal assertion, not a logical one. Logically, they are separate. Otherwise your accoutn of the effects of prayer does not work.

Given our finite limited intellect we distinguish creation, providence, and governance conceptually in the logical order, but there is no compartmentalizing in the existence of God and there are not three separate states of mind in God in the one act of creation-providence-governance.

Then the state of mind of God cannot be influenced by prayer.

And so here also you have shown no contradiction in the teaching of CCC #600. Perhaps there were truths about the doctrine of creation that you were not taking into account.

**I **was taking into account all ‘truths’ about the doctrine of creation… I don’t think you were, though.

 

[shoe]

This makes some sense.

Could it not then be equally said that God would also foresee the events that might finally break one’s spirit entirely? What might explain his inaction at such a time? Would not his seeming refusal to provide aide when the lives of one’s children might be at risk be at the very least disconcerting given God’s certain foreknowledge of the event?

If a vehicle is approaching a child playing in the street is it common for a loving parent to refuse to act until asked politely to assist?

Might the child in question, now bereft of a limb, find such a parent loving simply because he/she has chosen to step in after the fact to provide consolation?

If God brings into existence a physical world and gives His human creatures free will, then pain and suffering become a natural consequence of that free will. God will not infringe upon mankind’s free-will choices by suppressing the end results of wrong choices. If God were to prevent the effects of wrong choices from taking place, He would have to rule out the existence of human life as we know it from entering His creation: God would have to make human beings on the order of programmed machines, or at the very least, like animals programmed to live off their instincts only, and therefore human beings would cease being human.

But the Bible is clear that God never designed a plan or commanded the doom of any soul on planet earth; and God also never made becoming a child of His a difficult thing to become, either because of a rebellious heart or a harsh life. The Bible says that God is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should return to penance”(2 Peter 3:9).

And it’s not as though God made human beings with the possibility of experiencing great sorrow but lacking the fortitude within Himself to accept and face the same kind of human sorrow. God created the rules of life through Christ; and, through Christ, He has gone by them. He has not required humans to experience something such as humiliation, torture, and death that He has not required of Himself.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

In your view, God’s intention is at least partially caused by the ‘futiure contingents’. So the future contingents exist logically prior to God’s intention.

No, they may in certain ways possess a logical priority within God’s overall intention, but not to His overall intention, which is singular and concerns all of creation in all of time. So here as well there need be no contradiction in addition to the fact that creation-providence-governance is an act of making or doing and so logical priority of effect over cause is unproblematic.

My schema entails that God’s plan logically prior to the future contingents was different from God’s plan posterior to those contingents. Even if God’s plan was empty prior to the contingents and it had some content afeterwards, there is a xhnage in God’s plan.

Going from “no x” to “the existence of x” is not a change in x: it is the coming into existence of x. The invention of the automobile is not a change in the automobile: it is the coming into existence of the automobile. So again, regarding the plan itself, your schema facially did not entail a change in the plan. “Entail” meaning logical entailment.

But, again, a certain logical priority within God’s singular overall plan is unproblematic. Still, there is no before and after in God Himself or with respect to His relationship to creation or His plan anyway. God is outside of time.

In a temporal sense, that may be true, but it follows from your schema that in a logical sense this is not true.
. . . .
That’s a temporal assertion, not a logical one. Logically, they are separate. Otherwise your accoutn of the effects of prayer does not work.

A certain logical priority within God’s singular overall plan is unproblematic.

Then the state of mind of God cannot be influenced by prayer.

No, again. The single cognitive act of God involving His plan from all eternity has already included every prayer in time. To phrase it as you do: it has already been influenced by every prayer in time.
This is because, as CCC #600 states “To God, all moments of time are present in their immediacy. When therefore He establishes his eternal plan of ‘predestination,’ He includes in it each person’s free response to his grace." God’s singular intention in creation-providence-governance takes into account and includes all of creation in all of time. God’s intelligence is infinite and nondiscursive and sees all of time at once.

 

[belorg]

No, they may in certain ways possess a logical priority within God’s overall intention, but not to His overall intention, which is singular and concerns all of creation in all of time. So here as well there need be no contradiction in addition to the fact that creation-providence-governance is an act of making or doing and so logical priority of effect over cause is unproblematic.

They possess a logical priority to God’s overall intention because God’s overall intention is singular. It is singular and causally depends on future contingents, which in turn, are causlayy dependent on Him. that is a logiocal contradiction.
Let me put it in another way: If I don’t pray, God’s overall intention is different from if I do pray. That’s what your csnema entails.

Going from “no x” to “the existence of x” is not a change in x: it is the coming into existence of x. The invention of the automobile is not a change in the automobile: it is the coming into existence of the automobile. So again, regarding the plan itself, your schema facially did not entail a change in the plan. “Entail” meaning logical entailment.

His plan is empty at one stage and full at another stage. You that’s a change in plan.

But, again, a certain logical priority within God’s singular overall plan is unproblematic. Still, there is no before and after in God Himself or with respect to His relationship to creation or His plan anyway. God is outside of time.

That’s a temporal concept. That’s not what I am talking about.

A certain logical priority within God’s singular overall plan is unproblematic.

I hae shown you way it is not only problematic, but lethal. Irt leads to a genuine contradiction.

No, again. The single cognitive act of God involving His plan from all eternity has already included every prayer in time. To phrase it as you do: it has already been influenced by every prayer in time.

Which is exactly why it leads to a contradiction.It has been icaused by the very thing that it causes.

This is because, as CCC #600 states “To God, all moments of time are present in their immediacy. When therefore He establishes his eternal plan of ‘predestination,’ He includes in it each person’s free response to his grace." God’s singular intention in creation-providence-governance takes into account and includes all of creation in all of time. God’s intelligence is infinite and nondiscursive and sees all of time at once.

That’s, again, a temporal concept. Logically, God’s plan is caused by future contingents which are by definition (since they are contigents) caused by God’s plan. That means that, had God caused different future contingents, his eternal plan would have been different and so the different contingents would have caused different contingents. IOW if God had caused different results, then those results would have caused God to cause different results. Can a contradcition be made any clearer?