Can Prayer Change the Past? Try It!

[whizler]

Why should God be subject to such a test? You're dealing with a person (Actually, someone tri-personal) and not with a machine. He is not obligated to respond in any way to you.

Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!

It seems fairly clear to me that your god is inviting such requests, and is promising to produce. Now, you personally may feel this is not something the above passage says, but other Christians do take passages like these at their face value. See, for example, How to Get Answers to Prayer.

[Doubting John]

You need to provide a provable test, first.

For all you know, it may have happened many times.

Michael

I have just done so. What's wrong with my proposal, especially if by your prayers you can help someone who has suffered because of something that happened in the past?

Why not try it? Why not?

[nickcopernicus]

NICK:
John, as some may have no doubt (no pun intended) guessed, I’ve been pushing the issue of time so much that I’ve probably been labeled as the unofficial “time keeper” of Tweb.
You take an interesting twist on it. Let’s explore this topic, shall we?

JOHN:
If God exists and if he has foreknowledge, then he can foreknow believers prayers. If he can do this then he can prevent something from happening in the past. So, my challenge is to have Christians pick any event in the past, announce that they are praying to change it, and then watch what happens. It's simple. It could be to prevent the Holocaust, the terrorist 9/11 attacks, or any tragic event reported in the daily newspaper.

This argument won’t convince believers. But I think it’s a good argument, depending to some extent on certain conceptions of God and of foreknowledge.

NICK:

Well, we should clarify what exactly “foreknowledge” means in this concept. Foreknowledge can be synonymous with “precognition.” There are actually two types of precognition.

1. x-->y. The if then. I can predict y if x happens. This is sometimes called soft determination.

2. y. In this context, time is linear/unchangeable and there are no choices made by anyone.

We should clarify this first. Which one does god have?

JOHN:
Relevant Factors:

There are certain conceptions of God that this argument will have a great deal of force against. If a believer thinks God exists outside of time, then God can actually change what we consider to be the past based upon his knowledge of what we pray for (there would be no time indexed prefix “Fore” to this knowledge of God’s because he would be present for all events timelessly).

There are certain conceptions of foreknowledge that this argument will have a great deal of force against, as well. If a believer is a Molinist, then his God would know what believers would be praying for regardless of whether the event occurred or not. Based upon God's counter-factual knowledge of future free-willed contingent actions, he could intervene to prevent tragic events regardless of whether these events have occurred or not. Based upon this foreknowledge, God could answer these, as yet, unspoken prayers, by preventing the events before they occurred.

But this argument has force against any Christian theist who believes God has foreknowledge. For if God foreknows the prayers of believers, then God should be able to prevent the past based upon his foreknowledge of these future prayers.

NICK:

I see. It seems as though you have separated the concepts. Good.
It is extremely difficult to discuss anything that “exists outside of time” There is nothing that exists outside of time. Although time and existence are distinct concepts, they are inseparable. The only way for God to exist outside of time would be if he or she did not exist. I think we are granting the assumption that god exists for the sake of this argument.

I suggest the following resolution.
God’s time is relative to our time.

YLT: And this one thing let not be unobserved by you, beloved, that one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day; 2 peter 3:8

The same claim is made in psalm 90:4.

Let us grant that God is capable of time travel as well.

JOHN:
Objections:

One objection is that the past cannot be changed. If a tragic event has already occurred in the past then it will do no good to pray for God to change it, because the past is fixed and unalterable. Well, there is some debate about whether the past is unchangable, especially if God exists. One thing is that in a universe like this one that is fundamentally chaotic on a micro level, and where there’s the possibility of wormholes, and time travel, who knows what can or cannot be done?

NICK:
“With god, all things are possible” or something like that… I think the ideal of praying to change the past is within the constraints of requesting something of God.

JOHN:
However, all I’m referring to when arguing about prayer changing an event in the past is that prayer would be changing what God foreknows, since he supposedly has foreknowledge of the future. Christian philosopher George Mavrodes thinks the past can be altered and argues that whenever he does something then he also prevents God from ever having foreknown that he didn't do it. [“Is the Past Unpreventable” Faith and Philosophy Vol. 1, no. 2, (April 1984).

NICK:
If we are using the model of x--->y, then I think it’s possible. There are a few solutions to this.

1. God could erase our memories or they would be erased. While we would not know that we prayed for it, the past still would have been changed.
2. God could create an alternate universe. That way something would have occurred in this universe, but not in the other. In actuality, God could answer ALL prayers that way. “God answered my prayer, but not in this universe.”

JOHN:
Whether the past can be changed really isn’t the issue here anyway, since I’m talking about whether God could prevent an event from happening before it occurred based upon his foreknowledge of a believers prayers. Here is where the argument has some force to it. If Mavrodes is correct that when he does something he also prevents God from ever having foreknown that he didn't do it, then the prayers spoken after a tragic event can be answered if and only if believers actually pray! By praying, believers alter what God knows in the past, namely God’s foreknowledge of what they do. In other words, if God can only foreknow what a believer does, then he can only retroactively answer prayers spoken after a tragic event if and only if they actually pray to change that event. If they don't pray then there are no prayers for God to retroactively answer. Believers must pray for God to foreknow that they would do so, thereby allowing God to answer these prayers by preventing the tragic event before it actually happens.

NICK:
It’s possible that God would answer the prayers that said believers would have prayed for had they happened.

JOHN:
One more time. Believers “change” or “alter” or “prevent” the past everyday by what they do. What do they “change” or “alter” or "determine," according to Mavrodes? They determine what God foreknows by their actions, and prayer is something they do. But God cannot foreknow what a believer does if he or she doesn’t do it. So they must do it to alter the past, specifically what God knows about our future actions. By praying after a tragic event occurred in the past believers are determining what God foreknows from all eternity. And based upon his foreknowledge God can prevent the past from happening before it happens. The problem is that since God foreknows what believers do, he supposedly also foreknows that they won’t be praying for a particular event to be changed. But if they do pray then God would have this foreknowledge. Whew! That’s complicated.

NICK:
Not when you add multiple universes into the equation.

JOHN:
One last objection is that if God did decide to prevent an event in the past based upon his foreknowledge of the future prayers of believers, then no one would know God changed that event. That’s a good argument, since all knowledge about an event, even the prayers themselves, would no longer exist. There would supposedly be no memory of those spoken prayers too. Let’s say believers prayed to change the 9/11 terrorist attacks and God foreknew these prayers and prevented it. Then we wouldn’t have any knowledge of that event or the fact that anyone prayed to change it, since we would be on a different time line.
…..

This argument is just one of many leading me to think that either God does not exist, or he doesn't have foreknowledge, or he doesn't care.

NICK:

pseudo Christian: Dear Lord Jesus, you said in your word that if we ask anything in your name, then it would be done. I pray right now that you will go back in time and stop the Cuban missile crisis from turning into a Nuclear holocaust. You know how bad it is right now. I know that you did not want all those people to die. I ask that you may go back and Help JFK to reason with those atheistic communists. In your name I pray, Amen”

See? None of use even remembers the nuclear holocaust.

Your argument does raise some interesting questions though.

Cheers,

Nick.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

It seems fairly clear to me that your god is inviting such requests, and is promising to produce. Now, you personally may feel this is not something the above passage says, but other Christians do take passages like these at their face value. See, for example, How to Get Answers to Prayer.

Yes. If you are truly seeking, you will truly find. There's enough reason now to believe in God though. Prayer in the ancient mindset was not a way of testing God. It was a way of honoring him. That makes all the difference.

[Doubting John]

pseudo Christian: Dear Lord Jesus, you said in your word that if we ask anything in your name, then it would be done. I pray right now that you will go back in time and stop the Cuban missile crisis from turning into a Nuclear holocaust. You know how bad it is right now. I know that you did not want all those people to die. I ask that you may go back and Help JFK to reason with those atheistic communists. In your name I pray, Amen”

See? None of use even remembers the nuclear holocaust.

Your argument does raise some interesting questions though.

Cheers,

Nick.

Thanks for all of your observations. But just one criticism. The above scenerio cannot work, because you did not announce you were going to change something in the past before you changed it through prayer.

A truly analogous situation would be for you to announce you're going to pray that the Holocaust never happened. Now pray that it changes.

[John Powell]

. . .
John Powell will like this, I think. Since he's looking for mutually agreed upon testable ways to determine if God exists.
. . .

POWELL:
I'm very much in favor of God-tests that are agreed upon by both theists and atheists and there could be virtue in this interesting challenge of yours, but I'm unclear about that virtue.

John Powell

[Doubting John]

There's enough reason now to believe in God though.

The second way out.

Either we shouldn't test God (the first way out, which I answered), or we already have enough evidence to believe.

Still looking for ways out, eh? Why?

If you want to be an apologist then you must continue seeking better ways to defend what you believe. To say we have enough isn't doing what apologists seek to do. They are continually seeking for better ways to defend Christianity. So why cut off a potential test before trying it?

I know why you do this.

You do this because you don't think it can be done, that's why.

Yet, you've already said God can do it.

Which is it?

If you believe any prayer at all can be answered, then why not this one? Why?

[Doubting John]

POWELL:
I'm very much in favor of God-tests that are agreed upon by both theists and atheists, but I'm doubtful as to the virtue of this challenge of yours.

John Powell

Why? I'm responding to their objections against this. Where am I wrong?

[nickcopernicus]

Hello Nang, it’s good to read from you again.

NANG:
The purpose of prayer is not to manipulate events. God alone controls all of history and everything that comes to be.

NICK:
How can we have free will if god controls everything?

NANG:
The purpose of prayer is thanksgiving and subjecting the human will to the will of God. A faithful Christian might pray about circumstances and events, but they will be willing to accept either a "yes," or "no" answer, for the circumstances and events are already determined.

NICK:
Then what’s the use of praying (i.e. asking for healing) if god’s will is going to be done anyway? If god controls all of history (i.e. time) then he controls whether you are going to pray or not; so even if you “choose” to pray, it’s because it was god’s will that you pray. What’s the point in trying if it was god’s will that you try, thus you try because it’s god’s will instead of because you wanted to try your best?
If it’s god’s will that you try your best then he will make you want to do so. Do you see the problem here? It appears to be a redutio ad absurdum.

NANG:
Prayer is the privilege of having fellowship with God. When that fellowship results in being a part of God working (positive) mercies, the believer is blessed and God is glorified. When that fellowship results in God working (negative) judgments, the believer is still blessed and God is still glorified.

NICK:
So prayer is a privilege? Are you saying that there could be a time when we are not allowed to pray? I’m not sure that’s scripturally supported. If prayer is only communication with god (it is at least that, but not all), then How is Satan able to communicate with him? He did in Job.

NANG:
IOW,s the believer does not pray to test the Lord. The believer does not pray to change God's mind. The believer does not pray to influence the will of God.

The believer simply prays, "Thy will be done," in faith that God is always wise and good.

NICK:
It is true that this is the basic gist that JC gave us in “the lord’s prayer,” But are we sure that’s the way we should pray? JC was really just talking to himself.
I’m not so sure we can not ask God for things and expect him not to give them to us.
What do you think the Psalmist meant when he wrote this?

O taste and see that the LORD is good; How blessed is the man who takes refuge in Him!
Paslm 34:8
Surley he or she did not mean that we should take a bite out of the Lord “our” god, did he or she?

I think he or she meant that if we gave following the lord the college try, (i.e. prayers of a righteous man availeth much) then we would be pleased.
Ask god to change the past.

NANG:
In direct answer to your hypothetical . . .the will of the King of the universe has already been accomplished and manifested throughout history, and of course, the decrees of the King are irreversible, irrevocable, and non-rescindable.

Nang

NICK:

I thought that with God, all things were possible; perhaps I was mistaken.

Do you expect me to believe that it was God’s will that Eve and Adam eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and evil so he or she would have to have us kill him or her? If everything was done according to god’s will, then it would be impossible to sin.
Sin is to go against god’s will, is it not?

[themuzicman]

I have just done so. What's wrong with my proposal, especially if by your prayers you can help someone who has suffered because of something that happened in the past?

Why not try it? Why not?

No, you've not provided a provable way to determine if the test works, because if God changes the past, we wouldn't know it. In fact, you may have already challenged us to do this, and God came through, and we'd never know it.

So, provide a way for us to know if the past has changed, first,.

Michael

[ApologiaPhoenix]

The second way out.

Either we shouldn't test God (the first way out, which I answered), or we already have enough evidence to believe.

Still looking for ways out, eh? Why?

A way out of what? You haven't said anything I view as a challenge here.

If you want to be an apologist then you must continue seeking better ways to defend what you believe. To say we have enough isn't doing what apologists seek to do. They are continually seeking for better ways to defend Christianity. So why cut off a potential test before trying it?

Actually, why should I have to give evidence when I have no evidence that something is only true if it is backed by evidence. SUrely you know about Plantinga's Reformed Epistemology.

I know why you do this.

You do this because you don't think it can be done, that's why.

*Yawn* Are you done playing Dr. Phil yet? It's getting really boring.

Yet, you've already said God can do it.

Which is it?

If you believe any prayer at all can be answered, then why not this one? Why?

Why should he? If you're not going to believe what has already been shown, God is under no obligation to give more. Theories are tested. Ideas are tested. Objects are tested. Persons are not because persons are not machines.

[whizler]

Yes. If you are truly seeking, you will truly find.

Yes, that's what part of Matthew 7:7 says, but it also says, right off the bat: "Ask, and it will be given to you." Do not Christians "ask" their god in the expectation of "being given" all the time?

There's enough reason now to believe in God though. Prayer in the ancient mindset was not a way of testing God. It was a way of honoring him. That makes all the difference.

Are asking and honoring mutually exclusive?

[Nang]

How is it possible that a negative answer is not considered an unanswered prayer?

There is no such thing as an unaswered prayer. For the prayers of regenerated Christians are instigated by the indwelling Holy Spirit of God. It is God's will His children pray, and He interecedes for them in their prayers. It is God's will to give His children answers, and every prayer is answered either "yes" or "no".

Someone who says an answered prayer is one in which God could sometimes say “No”, is merely saying God has responded in some way.

Correct. God responds with His answer.

I am sure there were many persons praying during the holocaust, asking God if it be His will, that the events would stop and more would be rescued. And God answered through the events as He purposed, saying yes at times and no to others, to accomplish His will.

But for us to say that prayer was answered we really want to know whether the request was granted or not.

No such thing.

A denied request is one that goes unanswered,

No, a denied request is one that God answers with a "no."

and a request granted is one that is answered.

Correct . . .with God saying "yes".

If someone wants to maintain that all prayers are answered, then we merely need to ask them whether God says, “yes” to all prayers, and God clearly doesn’t do this. That’s the whole reason why unanswered prayer is a problem in the first place, and it is a problem.

You are forcing a proposition, which is disingenous.

No Christian will accept your theory that God ignores or denies giving answer to the prayers He has instigated in the first place.

Try something else, if you must, but you will get nowhere with a false proposition.

Nang

[Doubting John]

No, you've not provided a provable way to determine if the test works, because if God changes the past, we wouldn't know it. In fact, you may have already challenged us to do this, and God came through, and we'd never know it.

So, provide a way for us to know if the past has changed, first,.

Michael

Sure I have. What's wrong with it?

Pick any tragic event in the past. Any tragic event at all.

Ask Christians to pray with you about it.

If God answers the prayer you've helped avert suffering, so why not?

You don't have to announce it to me, of course, but I'd like to know of it.

Just announce it to your Christian friends, that's all.

In this way it won't be a test to show anything to atheists like me.

It'll just be for the express purpose of helping someone in the past. And that's all I'm asking.

Pick a tragic event. Tell your Christian friends to pray that God prevents it from happening.

Pray.

Pray some more.

And some more.

Wait.

If that doesn't work you will know it hasn't worked.

My prediction is that it won't work and you will know it hasn't worked.

Pick another tragic event (since not all prayers are answered, anyway).

Tell your church to pray with you about this event.

I predict that won't work either.

Do it again with another event.

And again.

Do it from the heart.

Really care about the people and events you are praying for.

Nothing will happen.

That's my prediction.

Nothing will change.

Ever.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Yes, that's what part of Matthew 7:7 says, but it also says, right off the bat: "Ask, and it will be given to you." Do not Christians "ask" their god in the expectation of "being given" all the time?

Yes, provided it's in alignment with the will of the sovereign. God never offers a blank check.

Are asking and honoring mutually exclusive?

Testing the Sovereign is not honoring him.