Is Matthew 21:22 blatantly wrong?

[Justin108]

Matthew 21:22 - "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

[Saved75]

Matthew 21:22 - "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

It is amazing how there are those who will extract a sentence out of the Bible, and claim it proves the Bible to be false.

This sentence you have extracted, actually comes right after Jesus had cursed a fig tree, which was said to have "withered immediately." It then goes on to say, "And when the disciples saw it, they marveled, saying, “How did the fig tree wither away so soon?�

At this point it says, "So Jesus answered and said to them." Now, who is "them"? It would be the disciples who are asking the question. Jesus goes on to say to them, "“Assuredly, I say to you." Now who is the "you?" Again the "you" would be the disciples. What does He tell the disciples? " if you have faith and do not doubt." Who is the you? Again the disciples.

you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but also if you say to this mountain, ‘Be removed and be cast into the sea,’ it will be done. 22 And whatever things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive.�

So as we look at the whole passage we see the "you" refers to the disciples, and is not a promise to us.

There is a law of double reference, Meaning, Although Jesus, [Or God in the Old Testament], was talking to certain people, or to a certain person, He is talking to every believer.
A proof text for that is in Mk 9: 20--23, Where Jesus was speaking to one man, when He said, "If you can believe", Then Jesus said it's for everyone, As He said,
"All things are possible to those who believe".
And Jn 14:, and Mk 16L 17--18, Although Jesus was speaking to His disciples, He meant it for everyone who believes.
Jn 14: 12, "HE that believes shall do the same works that I do".
Mk 16: 17, These signs shall follow THEM that believe".

[JLB32168]

So going by what Matthew actually says, all prayers should receive a resounding yes as long as the condition of "belief" is met.

So you’re asserting that the writer wished to imply that any request would be met no matter how bizarre or contradictory to other things Christ taught – such as, “God, make my mother die a horrible death?�

It is simply unreasonable to assume that the writer wished to convey such a nonsense idea – especially since the same writer has Christ say that God wants to give good things to his children and not bad.

Are you suggesting that every prayer that has ever been unanswered is evil?

No – but it may not be for the best. Christians believe in God often has an inscrutable will.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 22 by JLB32168]

Christians believe in God often has an inscrutable will.

versus

Christ say that God wants to give good things to his children and not bad.

I'll leave it up to you to figure out how one can say that this being whose will is inscrutable...wants good things for his children.

[OnceConvinced]

Matthew 21:22 - "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

“When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.�
‭‭James‬ ‭4:3‬ ‭NIV‬‬

Also the verse applies the condition "if you believe". Christians believe that faith is required to receive God's miracles.

So no the verse is not "blatantly wrong" in the context of the Christian faith.

False in my case. Back when I was a Christian, I asked for things that were not selfish in the slightest. I never asked for money or anything like that. Note, this was back when I was a Christian, so I obviously believed.
So what do you have to say to that? My younger self fulfilled your two conditions (belief + unselfish request) and yet prayers went unanswered/unfulfilled.

How true is this? Even when one asks with the right motives, one doesn't get everything they ask for. Even with faith and love for Jesus/God one does not get everything they ask for. So the original scripture is indeed a blatant lie.

The thing is that scripture does not add any stipulations. It does not say that it must be done with the right motives. James is adding to that scripture. Perhaps he realised it was a lie too, so had to find some way to justify the lie?

[OnceConvinced]

So as we look at the whole passage we see the "you" refers to the disciples, and is not a promise to us.

I have noticed arguments like this on a regular basis being used to justify bible lies and errors. Oh it was only meant to apply to the people at the time." But when it comes to scriptures like when Jesus says "This generation shall not pass away before my return", then conveniently that applies to people 2000 years or more into the future.

The 10 commandments for instance are all directed at the people of Moses time. "THOU" (YOU) shall worship no other god but me. If we apply your logic, Jack, then all those 10 commandments only applied to Moses's people and no one else.

What about the golden rule? Do unto others as you would have them do unto you? I guess that only applied to the people Jesus was talking to.

It really does seem as though Christians are making excuses for bible lies and errors.

Seriously. How many scriptures do we use today and claim for this day and age that were directed at people at the time. Should we take them all as only being relevant to the people they were spoken to? Surely we have to, to maintain consistency?

How about all these? If we go by what you're saying these things said by Jesus don't apply to us today but only to those he was speaking to at the time:

-Seek ye first the kingdom of God and all these things shall be added unto you
-Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me
- But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you
- So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you
- Love the lord your god with all your heart
- My grace is sufficient for you

I could go on, but won't. I could do the same for Paul too, whose letters were written to SPECIFIC people and churches. We should ignore all those letters because they weren't written to us today, but only to those people in his churches at the time.

Pretty much if we go by your logic, then most of the New Testament is not relevent to us in this day and age. Most of it is directed at specific people at the time.

[liamconnor]

Matthew 21:22 - "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

A very difficult verse indeed!

As for the more extravagant requests (winning the lottery) I think we can be gracious as readers to both Jesus and the author by assuming he did not intend to identify prayer with magic. (Reading to criticize is not a reasonable hermeneutic; better to read to understand the author's intent; and then criticize that intent).

One popular solution has been to focus on the word "believe"; refused petitions are refused because the petitioner doubted.

I am not entirely satisfied with this; but I have no better solution to offer.

What I find remarkeable is that our own skepticism of this promise would surely have been very present among the Matthean community! Internal evidence within the gospel suggests that they had experienced some persecution--it is hard to believe they did not pray for respite! And yet the logion still made it into their gospel, despite their own personal evidence to the contrary.

[Justin108]

So you’re asserting that the writer wished to imply that any request would be met no matter how bizarre or contradictory to other things Christ taught – such as, “God, make my mother die a horrible death?�

It is simply unreasonable to assume that the writer wished to convey such a nonsense idea – especially since the same writer has Christ say that God wants to give good things to his children and not bad.

I'll meet you half way. Let's assume (despite no such indication in the text) that Matthew 21:22 has a hidden clause that excludes all evil prayers from coming true. What about all the other unanswered prayers that were in no way evil?

Are you suggesting that every prayer that has ever been unanswered is evil?

No – but it may not be for the best. Christians believe in God often has an inscrutable will.

So when Matthew wrote "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer" what he actually meant was "If you believe, God will do what's best for you regardless of what you ask for"?

According to you, what Matthew actually meant is so far removed from what Matthew actually said. If Matthew didn't mean to say "you will get what you ask for", then why did he write it? You are dancing around the reality that Matthew 21:22 is a lie.

[Justin108]

One popular solution has been to focus on the word "believe"; refused petitions are refused because the petitioner doubted.

I have to hand it to the author. This is a bulletproof clause. If your prayer ever goes unanswered, it's your fault for not believing enough. What makes this especially bulletproof is the fact that belief cannot be measured in a quantifiable manner, so of course you can never prove to anyone that you did sincerely believe during your prayer.

It does make one wonder though... has there never been a single individual in recorded history with enough belief that has prayed for his lost limb to grow back? Is every individual who has ever prayed for such a miracle guilty of not having enough faith?

[JLB32168]

I'll meet you half way. Let's assume (despite no such indication in the text) that Matthew 21:22 has a hidden clause that excludes all evil prayers from coming true. What about all the other unanswered prayers that were in no way evil?

If they don’t accomplish the summum bonum then it might not be answered. “How do you know that denying a request doesn’t accomplish the summum bonum?� I don’t, but why should I assume otherwise – because you can’t see how it could be?

So when Matthew wrote "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer" what he actually meant was "If you believe, God will do what's best for you regardless of what you ask for"?

You’ve already agreed that the verse isn’t meant to be universal and unconditional so what’s the problem?

[Justin108]

If they don’t accomplish the summum bonum then it might not be answered. “How do you know that denying a request doesn’t accomplish the summum bonum?� I don’t, but why should I assume otherwise – because you can’t see how it could be?

So a loving mother who prays that her missing child returns home gets a call the next day that her daughter's raped corpse was found in a gutter. Is this summum bonum?

So when Matthew wrote "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer" what he actually meant was "If you believe, God will do what's best for you regardless of what you ask for"?

You’ve already agreed that the verse isn’t meant to be universal and unconditional so what’s the problem?

I didn't establish this. I just allowed it to be assumed for a moment in order to progress the debate. I specifically said "despite no such indication in the text" And all I allowed was for the possibility that intentionally evil prayers remain unanswered, not everything that isn't summum bonum. If God only intends for the greater good to happen regardless, then why does he tell us we will get whatever we ask for in prayer? What is the purpose of prayer at all if God will do what's best regardless?

If Matthew didn't intend to say that "you will get what you ask for" then Matthew shouldn't have sad "you will get what you ask for". As it stands, Matthew is blatantly wrong.