Don't pray to Jesus (Matthew 6:9)?

Faber · Post by **Faber** » Fri May 12, 2017 12:00 am

Matthew 6:9
Pray, then, in this way: Our Father who is in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. (NASB)
1. The hallowing/sanctifying the name of the Lord Jesus in worship is taught in 1 Peter 3:15. See here:
viewtopic.php?t=32506
2. Mark Bird: In light of the scriptural data that support all sorts of prayer to Jesus, what do we do with Jesusâ€™ instructions to pray to the Father (Matthew 6:9)? Does the fact that the model prayer addresses the Father and not the Son mean that we are never to address the Son (or the Spirit) in prayer? No. By giving us the model prayer, Jesus was not limiting our prayers to a certain structure or verbiage. Otherwise, we would need to eliminate using the expression â€œin Jesusâ€™ nameâ€� in prayer since that is not in the Lordâ€™s Prayer. We would also need to eliminate thanksgiving from our prayers, since that does not show up in the Lordâ€™s Prayer. But obviously, we should give thanks to God (I Thess. 5:19). Christ's words, "Our Father which art in Heaven" do not keep us from praying to Jesus any more than his words "Give us our daily bread" keep us from praying for something to drink. And the Lordâ€™s Prayer does not keep us from petitioning the Son any more than Christâ€™s instructions to â€œenter into the closet and pray to your Father in secretâ€� (Matt 6:6) keep us from praying in a public setting. We learn a great deal about prayer from the model prayer, but it does not teach us everything we should know about talking to God. It is appropriate to pray to the Father directly; the Lordâ€™s Prayer clearly shows that. However, just because we are permitted to pray, and even commanded to pray to the Father, that doesnâ€™t mean we are not permitted to pray to the Son.
http://www.wesleyantheology.com/should- ... jesus.html

Why do some continue to cite Matthew 6:9 in thinking it teaches the Lord Jesus is not to be prayed to when it really doesn't teach that at all?

Faber · Post by **Faber** » Sat May 20, 2017 7:52 pm

marco wrote:
Faber wrote: It's not merely to hear what is happening on earth but it also means fully knowing the heart which is the same thing as being omniscient. That is how kardiognÅ�stÄ“s is properly defined. Now if anyone chooses to define it where it doesn't mean that then they simply want to engage in playing make believe.
Is that so?

Yes.

That God is "kardiognÅ�stÄ“s" is the same thing as saying He is omniscient.
1. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (NIDNTT): This belief in the omniscience of God is expressed succinctly by the adj. kardiognÅ�stÄ“s (2:183, Heart, T. Sorg).
2. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT): The designation of God as ho kardiognÅ�stÄ“s, "the One who knows the heart," expresses in a single term (Ac. 1:24; 15:8) something which is familiar to both the NT and OT piety...namely that the omniscient God knows the innermost being of every man where the decision is made either for Him or against Him (3:613, kardiognÅ�stÄ“s, J. Behm).
3. Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (EDNT): On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider).
4. New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDOTTE): the psalmist acknowledged the omniscience of God who knows the secrets of the heart (44:21[22]) (3:426, ta`alummah - hidden, secret, Andrew Hill).
5. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG, 3rd Edition): knower of hearts, one who knows the hearts, of God Ac 1:24; 15:8 (on these pass. s. JBauer, BZ 32, 88, 114-117); Hm 4, 3, 4. - M-M. DELG s.v. gignwskw. TW (kardiognÅ�stÄ“s, page 509).
TW stands for the TDNT (Theologisches Worterbuch zum NT)
See #2 for "omniscient."

marco · Post by **marco** » Sun May 21, 2017 2:39 pm

Faber wrote:

That God is "kardiognÅ�stÄ“s" is the same thing as saying He is omniscient.

It isn't, as I already pointed out. However, to say God is omniscient means he possesses kardiognosis; he can read hearts.

The word you are using is derived from the Greek for a heart and the word for knowledge. It means "knower of hearts", a poetic description that can be applied to God and to those he has endowed with the supposed ability to read people's thoughts. BECAUSE God is omniscient, he knows what's in people's hearts. The converse isn't true.

God may have given this power to Jesus, making Jesus a kardiognostes.

marco · Post by **marco** » Sun May 21, 2017 2:40 pm

marco wrote:
Faber wrote:

That God is "kardiognÅ�stÄ“s" is the same thing as saying He is omniscient.

It isn't, as I already pointed out. However, to say God is omniscient means he possesses kardiognosis; he can read hearts.

The word you are using is derived from the Greek for a heart and the word for knowledge. It means "knower of hearts", a poetic description that can be applied to God and to those he has endowed with the supposed ability to read people's thoughts. BECAUSE God is omniscient, he knows what's in people's hearts. The converse isn't true.

God may have given this power to Jesus, making Jesus a kardiognostes. I suspect he gave it to an aunt of mine as well.

Faber · Post by **Faber** » Sun May 21, 2017 8:50 pm

I cited 5 sources that affirm that affirm kardiognÅ�stÄ“s means omniscient while you cited your opinion.

You used the word "derived." I don't know what you mean by that. Please properly define it.

marco · Post by **marco** » Mon May 22, 2017 5:53 am

Faber wrote: I cited 5 sources that affirm that affirm kardiognÅ�stÄ“s means omniscient while you cited your opinion.

You used the word "derived." I don't know what you mean by that. Please properly define it.

Yes, I know you cited 5 sources but it seems you have misunderstood your citations. To reiterate: OMNISCIENT is all knowing, including knowing the number of hairs on a person's head. (Matthew 10: 30). Kardiognosis is a term that means the knowledge of what is in people's hearts.

"Derived", which is causing you difficulties, refers to the Greek words kardia, heart and gnosis, knowledge.

Yes, one can say God is "a reader of hearts". This is a description of God in the same way as saying: God is love or God is merciful. There is a reference in Proverbs xxvii: 19: In its Latin form, "Quomodo in aquis resplendent vultus prospicientium, sic corda hominum manifesta sunt prudentibus."

"Just as the faces of watchers gleam in water, so do the hearts of men become open to the wise."

The process of knowing hearts is a gift from God. You employed the adjective rather than the abstract noun. I didn't offer an opinion - I gave a factual explanation.

Faber · Post by **Faber** » Mon May 22, 2017 5:04 pm

No, I didn't misunderstand my citations.
They all agree that kardiognÅ�stÄ“s means omniscient.

You have offered your opinion (citing no sources) that it doesn't mean that.

Let's review this one:
New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (NIDNTT): This belief in the omniscience of God is expressed succinctly by the adj. kardiognÅ�stÄ“s (2:183, Heart, T. Sorg).

One can express the omniscience of God by using the adjective kardiognÅ�stÄ“s.

marco · Post by **marco** » Mon May 22, 2017 6:25 pm

Faber wrote: No, I didn't misunderstand my citations.
They all agree that kardiognÅ�stÄ“s means omniscient.

I'm afraid we dealing with English interpretation here and they do not all agree that kardiognostes is a synonym for omniscient. Nor is it. This is a wrong extrapolation from the definition. I take it that it comes from some discussion forum.

The Catholic Dictionary puts the matter thus:

CARDIOGNOSIS: Definition

Literally "knowledge of the heart." The special charism that God confers on some people as recorded in the lives of the saints, to know the moral and spiritual condition of a person without self-manifestation. As an extraordinary supernatural gift, it must be distinguished from the psychological phenomenon of being able to shrewdly estimate someone's minimal external evidence.

You seem to avoid using the abstract noun.

Here is the English Encyclopedia:

Cardiognosis

ï‚Ž In Christian theology, cardiognosis (literally Knowledge of the Heart) is a special charism that God confers on some saints. In Christian asceticism, the term Cardiognosis also indicates the ascetical methods and meditation techniques which have the purpose of reaching an inner state of mystical experience

Faber wrote:
One can express the omniscience of God by using the adjective kardiognÅ�stÄ“s.

Well if one does, one will be wrong. Regardless of the theological aspects of the word, omniscience and kardiognosis are not the same. Whoever said they are is in error. There is a slight similarity in function: one with kardiognosis knows everything in a person's heart; the other knows everything. Obviously they're not the same.

Faber · Post by **Faber** » Mon May 22, 2017 7:53 pm

You affirmed that I misunderstood my 5 sources. I chose one of them below and it refutes your assertion - just like the other 4.

New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (NIDNTT): This belief in the omniscience of God is expressed succinctly by the adj. kardiognÅ�stÄ“s (2:183, Heart, T. Sorg).

When it reads "expressed succinctly" it means the same as what it stated previously -> omniscience.

In addition to playing make believe with how the words of the Bible are properly defined one can also engage in the same kind of play with English grammar.

marco · Post by **marco** » Tue May 23, 2017 3:48 am

Faber wrote:

You affirmed that I misunderstood my 5 sources. I chose one of them below and it refutes your assertion - just like the other 4.

You picked ONE because that seems to illustrate your point while the others don't. Tedious though this is, I shall examine each definition and show why you are wrong, if I may.
The reason why you are keen to make kardiognosis and omniscience synonymous is because in Acts Jesus is a reader of hearts and if this means he's omniscient, hey presto, he is God. You are wrong in supposing omniscience is kardiognosis, however, and to build Christ's divinity on a misconception about words is also wrong.
However, let's trudge through the statements:

1. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (NIDNTT): This belief in the omniscience of God is expressed succinctly by the adj. kardiognÃ…Â�stÃ„â€œs (2:183, Heart, T. Sorg).

This is not a definition. It is an opinion about some (unstated) definition. It is a wrong opinion as I have several times demonstrated. So: NO definition here.

2. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT): The designation of God as ho kardiognÃ…Â�stÃ„â€œs, "the One who knows the heart," expresses in a single term (Ac. 1:24; 15:8) something which is familiar to both the NT and OT piety...namely that the omniscient God knows the innermost being of every man where the decision is made either for Him or against Him (3:613, kardiognÃ…Â�stÃ„â€œs, J. Behm).

This says that an omniscient God possesses kardiognosis, which is obvious. It does NOT state the converse. You have wrongly assume that someone with kardiognosis possesses omniscience. SO: wrong deduction.

3. Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (EDNT): On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider).

This has nothing remotely to do with kardiognosis being omniscience. It attributes omniscience to God. So: simple confusion, I suppose, just because the word omniscient is mentioned.

4. New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDOTTE): the psalmist acknowledged the omniscience of God who knows the secrets of the heart (44:21[22]) (3:426, ta`alummah - hidden, secret, Andrew Hill).

The good psalmist says God is omniscient. Do you REALLY think this has anything to tell us about kardiognosis being a synonym for omniscience? So: nothing whatsoever to do with the point.

5. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG, 3rd Edition): knower of hearts, one who knows the hearts, of God Ac 1:24; 15:8 (on these pass. s. JBauer, BZ 32, 88, 114-117); Hm 4, 3, 4. - M-M. DELG s.v. gignwskw. TW (kardiognÃ…Â�stÃ„â€œs, page 509).
TW stands for the TDNT (Theologisches Worterbuch zum NT)
See #2 for "omniscient."

We know what kardiognosces means and it gives the correct definition here. It has nothing to say about omniscience being the same as kardiognosis. So: nothing.

As I said, you seem to have been confused by the dictionary entries. And wrong.

Faber wrote:
When it reads "expressed succinctly" it means the same as what it stated previously -> omniscience.

As I said, this is NOT a definition; it is an expression of opinion, after some definition.

Faber wrote:
In addition to playing make believe with how the words of the Bible are properly defined one can also engage in the same kind of play with English grammar.

I've no idea what this group of words means. I suspect its intention is derogatory but I would just be guessing.

To clarify:

Omniscience: The ability to know all things. It comes from omnis, all and scire, to know, both Latin.

Kardiognosis: The ability to know what's in people's hearts. It comes from Greek, kardia, heart and gnosis, knowledge.

Omniscience covers kardiognosis BUT kardiognosis does not cover omniscience. A moment's thought will tell you this is so.

Faber · Post by **Faber** » Tue May 23, 2017 4:05 am

I picked one because I did not want to engage in a long-winded post.

I stopped after reading your first response because you are playing make believe with how the words of the Bible are properly defined. This is a classic example of what Humpty Dumpty did to the words he wanted to redefine. See here:
viewtopic.php?t=32532&start=0

You previously wrote what you thought "derived" meant - again just your opinion.

Are you in an expert in the Greek of the New Testament? If you are please state your credentials. If not, then thanks for your opinion but the serious Bible student will go by what the words of the Bible really mean.

A gentle reminder:
No single translation trumps another, and when differences of opinion arise regarding various translations, Hebrew and Greek sources will have a greater authority.
viewtopic.php?t=11496