 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > The raging debate continues here... > E. M. Bounds - An OV understanding of Prayer | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
victoryword
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 1/23/2004 6:32 AM (GMT -6) |   | I am a lover of classic writers, most especially those like R. A. Torrey, A. B. Simpson and several others I could name. E. M. Bounds (1835-1913) is also in that list. For the majority of my Christian life, his books on prayer have been a blessing to me. A couple of days ago while extracting a quote from him on something, I read something in his quote that I have never fully thought about before my OV days. Here it is:
"God makes prayer identical in force and power with himself, and says to those on earth who pray: "You are on the earth to carry on my cause. I am in heaven, the Lord of all, the maker of all, the Holy One of all. Now whatever you need for my cause, ask me and I will do it. Shape the future by your prayers, and all that you need for present supplies, command me. I made heaven and earth, and all things in them. Ask largely. Open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it. It is my work which you are doing. It concerns my cause. Be prompt and full in praying. Do not abate your asking, and I will not wince nor abate in my giving" (from his book The Weapon of Prayer)
When I read that, I thought, wow! I used to take statements like this for granted before I became an OVer. So last night I decided to break out my One Volume "The Complete Works of E. M. Bounds on Prayer" to see just how close he was to the OV. In chapter two of one of his books, Purpose in Prayer, this chapter sounds like a defense of the OV prayer model.
Thankfully, this book is in the Public Domain and I was able to find a copy of the book on line. I am reluctant to paste the whole chapter here, though it is short, and doing individual quotes from the chapter won't do it justice. So here is a link:
http://www.gregwolf.com/bounds/purposeinprayer.htm#Heading2
This is not the only webpage that has the book but I like the formatting on this page. If you read it you see how close to the OV model of prayer that Bounds was. As a matter of fact, in my book, the editor titled chapter two, Prayer Can Change The Purposes of God. I do not see these same Chapter headings in the online books.
In chapter nine of this same book, Bounds makes this statement:
The possibilities of prayer are found in its allying itself with the purposes of God, for God’s purposes and man’s praying are the combination of all potent and omnipotent forces. More than this, the possibilities of prayer are seen in the fact that it changes the purposes of God. It is in the very nature of prayer to plead and give directions. Prayer is not a negation. It is a positive force. It never rebels against the will of God, never comes into conflict with that will, but that it does seek to change God’s purpose is evident.
He then goes on to give an explanation of this statement from Scripture that would make an OVer proud. He even talks about how Jesus tried to get the Father to change his purposes in the cup that He must drink of.
I still have more to look into with Bounds and his teachings in this area, but so far it seems to me that he did not believe in a settled future.
If your beliefs cannot be supported by Scripture, they ain't worth supporting
http://www.victoryword.100megspop2.com | | Back to Top | | |
 |
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 1/26/2004 12:36 PM (GMT -6) | | Thanks for posting this, VW. I have often been struck at how irrational the fear of some has seemed, as if believing in the Open View somehow is blasphemous or somehow inherently un-Christian. Of course, having myself been raised on authors such as you mention (including E.M. Bounds), the Open View was a natural fit for me when I first read about it. I remember thinking, "Well of course the future's not completely settled yet. What's so revolutionary about that?! It's what the Bible plainly says and implies over and over."
Studying the Open View writings by Drs. Boyd, Pinnock, and Sanders has generally simply helped polish a few rough edges in my theology (especially the unhelpful "eternal now" concept I had been taught in conjunction with "prayer changes things.")
Anyway, thanks again for posting this. In my experience, when we approach the issue from the perspective of the possibilities and power of prayer, the Open View seems to create much less resistance in people's minds.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
victoryword
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 1/27/2004 5:55 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by John Earp
Thanks for posting this, VW. I have often been struck at how irrational the fear of some has seemed, as if believing in the Open View somehow is blasphemous or somehow inherently un-Christian. Of course, having myself been raised on authors such as you mention (including E.M. Bounds), the Open View was a natural fit for me when I first read about it. I remember thinking, "Well of course the future's not completely settled yet. What's so revolutionary about that?! It's what the Bible plainly says and implies over and over."
Studying the Open View writings by Drs. Boyd, Pinnock, and Sanders has generally simply helped polish a few rough edges in my theology (especially the unhelpful "eternal now" concept I had been taught in conjunction with "prayer changes things.")
Anyway, thanks again for posting this. In my experience, when we approach the issue from the perspective of the possibilities and power of prayer, the Open View seems to create much less resistance in people's minds.
John
I agree. It is difficult to understand logically how you can "change" or "shape" the future with your prayers but then be told that the future is pretty much settled in God's mind. I figured at one time that this is just one of those "paradoxes" that one must accept. Thankfully, when praying I was able to put away theology and just focus on Him.
Unfortunately, not everyone is able to do that. They sometimes allow their theology to influence the FERVENCY of their prayer. If I pray then God already knew it and if He answers He already knew from eternity past that I was going to pray and that He was going to answer. If I do not pray then He already knew that from eternity past too. These things can effect the minds of some people and hurt their praying. It caused me a theological crisis later when I was challenged on a related subject about God and faith. I could not provide the answer - at least, not until I decided to embrace the OV.
Well, enough of my ramblings for now, let me leave you with a quote from E. M. Bounds, excellent book, Prayer and Praying Men. This is his comments on Hezekiah's prayer when God declared that he would die:
The prayer was to God. It was that God should reconsider and change His mind. Doubtless Isaiah returned to his house with a lighter heart than he did when he delivered his original message. God had been prayed to by this sick king, and had been asked to revoke His decree, and God had condescended to grant the request. God sometimes changes His mind. He has a right to do so. The reasons for Him to change His mind are strong reasons. His servant Hezekiah wants it done. Hezekiah had been a dutiful servant and had done much for God. Truth, perfection and goodness have been the elements of Hezekiah’s service and the rule of his life. Hezekiah’s tears and prayer are in the way of God’s executing His decree to take away the life of His servant. Prayer and tears are mighty things with God. They are to Him much more than consistency and much more to Him than decrees. “I have heard thy prayer; I have seen thy tears; behold I will heal thee.”
If your beliefs cannot be supported by Scripture, they ain't worth supporting
http://www.victoryword.100megspop2.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
Matthew Timothy Short
Huh?
Date Joined Apr 2002
Total Posts : 635
| Posted 1/29/2004 1:42 AM (GMT -6) | | victoryword: "He even talks about how Jesus tried to get the Father to change his purposes in the cup that He must drink of."
Jhn 14:10Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Are the words Jesus spoke unto the Father in prayer spoke of himself?
Jhn 14:20At that day ye shall know that I [am] in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
Jhn 1:1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word (including Jesus prayer?) was God.
Jhn 10:30I and [my] Father are one.
Jhn 17:21That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Jhn 5:19Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself (including prayer?), but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
Jhn 6:38For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will (and prayer?) of him that sent me.
Jhn 7:16Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
Jhn 8:28Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am [he] (Who?), and [that] I do nothing (including prayer?) of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
Jhn 12:49For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
Jhn 17:8For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received [them], and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.
Col 1:19For it pleased [the Father] that in him should all fulness dwell;
Col 2:9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Jhn 17:8For I have given unto them (Who, also me?) the words (both to speak and to pray?) which thou gavest me . . .
Imagination projects unreal images out of the mind and seeks to attach reality to them. Faith creates nothing; it simply reckons upon that which is already there. | | Back to Top | | |
|
jpklcapp
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2003
Total Posts : 3
| Posted 1/29/2004 7:32 AM (GMT -6) | | 
While I appreciate the postings that are above it seems to me that you are not really making any ground - the concept of prayer altering the future and the concept that the future is set and know by Him are not mutually exclusive. I don't understand why this is such a complicated idea - if I read the newspaper today and see all that has happened to the people on the front page that does not mean that they did not have free choice to alter the events that are being reported - nor does it remove the possability that I could have interveined yesterday and altered those events so that it came out the way I wanted them to. SO - WHen God presents through scripture an awareness and a proclamation that all has been written and is known that does not remove the possability of prayer or choice - it simply means that He has already seen all that can and will happen - he has forseen all your choices - the FACT that he knows what you are going to have for lunch tommorrow and if you are going to join HIm at the end of your days or not does not alter the process. Choice still happens / Prayer still happens or more accurately changes have already happened due to our choices, prayer etc. we just have not lived them out yet- things change in our present - but all the changes are already made in the big book - we just have not become aware of them yet. | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 1/29/2004 12:23 PM (GMT -6) | | Actually, if something is definitely going to happen a certain way, no amount of prayer, choice, or whatever is able to change the outcome. In the traditional view of foreknowledge, all that ever will transpire is already a certainty in God's mind. In the traditional view, our prayers don't really effect a change at all, they are merely predetermined links in the causal chain of events.
This is one reason why the Open View really is about the ontological status of the future, not really about whether or not God possesses omniscience or not.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
victoryword
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 1/30/2004 2:57 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by John Earp
Excellent interpretation of 2 Kings 20 by Bounds. Before I ever heard of the Open View, I once preached a message to the congregation where I pastored based on 2 Kings 20 entitled "Prayer Can Change God's Mind!"
I have never strongly considered those passages that speak about God changing His mind before learning about the OV, but I do remember several years ago writing a chapter in a book abou Hezekiah. I now have the unpublished manuscript on line:
http://www.victoryword.100megspop2.com/godisgood/good14.html
My writing probably comes more from a "Word-Faith" perspective, but I am still interested in the fact that even before my OV days I did not fully take the "settled future" into consideration in my writings and teachings.
quote:
Originally posted by John Earp
I will have to dig out some of my E.M. Bounds books. It would be especially interesting to see if he in other places affirmed traditional foreknowledge viewpoint; I have seen several in the pietistic tradition (such as Wesley and Murray) do precisely this. Both Wesley and Murray talk both about prayer having a real effect for change, and then in other places they say that our prayers are merely links in the foreordained causal chain of events, just as the classical Augustinian/Calvinian position maintains. It's enough to make you want to pull your hair out.
Are you talking about Andrew Murray? I never read anything about exhaustive foreknowledge in any of his writings as far as I remember. He actually never seemed to deal to much with theology. Most writings by him seemed to be purely devotional (with the possible exception of his commentary on Hebrews titled "Holiest of All"). I read him and Watchman Nee voraciously back in the late 80s.
Hhhhhhhmmmmmm, I guess you don't notice certain things until you have read another perspective. Ah well. John Wesley, of course, is no surpirse as he was strongly influence by Arminianism. The ironic thing is that it seems that later Wesleyans were those who began planting the seeds for the OV.
quote:
Originally posted by John Earp
Anyway, thanks again for posting this. Great stuff. If you happen to note anywhere that Bonds affirms traditional foreknowledge, please let me know. 
Blessings in Christ,
John
I have looked and searched through the writings of Bounds that I have access to. I can't seem to find anything yet where he deals with God's omniscience or foreknowledge. I will continue to look though and place any findings here. It seems to me at this point that Bounds was more concerned with teaching on prayer than hashing out theological dilemmas.
I was even looking through Brother Andrew's book last night (And God Changed His Mind) and could not find any affirmation or denial by him of exhaustive foreknowledge. There are some who do not sense the need to has these things out I suppose.
If your beliefs cannot be supported by Scripture, they ain't worth supporting
http://www.victoryword.100megspop2.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
victoryword
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 1/30/2004 3:15 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Tim
I understand what you are saying. Good Scripture quotes making your point. I dare not argue with the plain Word of God. I did not mean to present Bounds or the OV as having the all time correct answer on Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane, I just found it interesting that he would say it because it is more consistent with how some OVers view Jesus' prayer in the garden of Gethsemane.
Here is what Bounds said:
The possibilities of prayer are found in its allying itself with the purposes of God, for God’s purposes and man’s praying are the combination of all potent and omnipotent forces. More than this, the possibilities of prayer are seen in the fact that it changes the purposes of God. It is in the very nature of prayer to plead and give directions. Prayer is not a negation. It is a positive force. It never rebels against the will of God, never comes into conflict with that will, but that it does seek to change God’s purpose is evident. Christ said, “The cup which My Father hath given Me shall I not drink it?” and yet He had prayed that very night, “If it be possible let this cup pass from Me.” Paul sought to change the purposes of God about the thorn in his flesh. God’s purposes were fixed to destroy Israel, and the prayer of Moses changed the purposes of God and saved Israel. (from Chapter 9 of his book, Purpose of Prayer)
Others take a slightly different view of what happened in the garden. For example, some believe that Jesus was NOT praying for God to find another way to redeem man, but was praying against a premature death. Based on this, they believe that Jesus' prayer was heard and answered:
Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; (Heb. 5:7)
These are things that we could look at and hash out as we study and pray more. At this point, I won't give a dogmatic perspective on this as I am still learning some things.
If your beliefs cannot be supported by Scripture, they ain't worth supporting
http://www.victoryword.100megspop2.com | | Back to Top | | |
|
victoryword
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 1/30/2004 3:30 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by jpklcapp
While I appreciate the postings that are above it seems to me that you are not really making any ground - the concept of prayer altering the future and the concept that the future is set and know by Him are not mutually exclusive. I don't understand why this is such a complicated idea - if I read the newspaper today and see all that has happened to the people on the front page that does not mean that they did not have free choice to alter the events that are being reported - nor does it remove the possability that I could have interveined yesterday and altered those events so that it came out the way I wanted them to. SO - WHen God presents through scripture an awareness and a proclamation that all has been written and is known that does not remove the possability of prayer or choice - it simply means that He has already seen all that can and will happen - he has forseen all your choices - the FACT that he knows what you are going to have for lunch tommorrow and if you are going to join HIm at the end of your days or not does not alter the process. Choice still happens / Prayer still happens or more accurately changes have already happened due to our choices, prayer etc. we just have not lived them out yet- things change in our present - but all the changes are already made in the big book - we just have not become aware of them yet.
Hello jpklcapp
Making ground really was not my intent. I was simply showing that E. M. Bounds had a theology of prayer that was consistent with the OV's view of prayer. It was not meant to imply that because Bounds believed this way, one must accept the OV. Before becoming an OVer, I strongly believed in the power of prayer to change things. I still do. Read the link that I gave to John. That was written long before I embraced OVism.
However, this may not be true of everyone, but for me, I have this problem with the need for CONSISTENCY in the truth, or thruths that I embrace. It is difficult for me to embrace conflicting paradoxes and call them "truth". When they cannot be explained then we consign them to "mysteries."
For example, when first studying the isues of Calvinism, some who taught both an all controlling sovereignty but also taught man's free will teach that both must be embraced (Norman Geisler is one of many examples of this). They believe that every event in the world is the result of God's control, but man is still free to make it happen or not happen. This is supposed to be a "mystery" taught in the Bible. I could not see it. This paradox was too inconsistent. Furthermore, I could not see it in Scripture either, especially in the New Testament. So I rejected it.
The same holds true for the "settled future" and the "prayer can change the future" paradoxes. I have a difficult time embracing both. It could be that I am by trade, a Network Administrator, so I am somewhat analytical. But both just poses a problem for me. I accepted this for a long time because I was taught this way. But my need for consistency sooner or later led me to embrace OV. It took me over two years of reading, researching, and praying (many times I have sought God on the OV issue before I embraced it), so I did not come by this easily.
However, if the paradoxes pose no problem for you and you are still able to pray with fervency then I commend you for that. At this time, I have no intentions of convincing anyone to join the OV, but I do want to dialogue with those for and against it and share my thoughts and ideas.
If your beliefs cannot be supported by Scripture, they ain't worth supporting
http://www.victoryword.100megspop2.com | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 10:54 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|