[OBW]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

2 Cor 13:1 “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.”

Sys nothing about a specific number nor anything about prayer. It does not limit the number of witnesses

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The frequency can establish things in some cases but in this case it is more about the significance of the number 3 rather than how many examples we can find of people praying more than 3 times.

And I agree. In this case it is clearly showing that Jesus' prayer was complete in all ways. But it makes no comment on any other prayer. And it would appear that the rest of Jesus' prayers were sufficient at 1. Yet he chose to advise a form of prayer for "when you pray" that repeats the same basic prayers over and over, day after day.

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It is significant that the Son of God, who gave a parable about persisting many times in prayer, prayed only three times and then stopped, surrendering to the Father's will.

And there you have your answer. We should persist in prayer, but when the will of God is known, the purpose of prayer is over. Yet the most insidious thing about this all is that you have not said that we should pray until we get an answer, but that because it would appear that on one occasion Jesus prayed three times and had an answer, that our commendable persistence should end at three because that was all it took for Jesus.

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Having no reply to his request after the third time, Christ became certain that the Father's will was that He should go to the cross.

And in this statement you have undercut your own argument. You are saying that Jesus received no answer, but rather that he already knew God's will. If that is the case, then according to your definition of "vain repetition," Jesus engaged in vain repetition because he knew the answer and did not need to receive another, yet prayed three times anyway.

Based upon the parable of the persistent widow, Christ should have persisted until God gave an answer. So what is so special about the number 3?

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Rather than simply count the number of examples, we should consider why they prayed 3 times only. If we consider the additional information regarding their customs and principles, we will find that it weights the argument towards my view rather than yours.

And despite your commentary references, we really don't know why he prayed 3 times, or at all. Was it because his human body and all that he got at birth sought to avoid the pain? Maybe. Not unthinkable, even for the God-man. But is this the reason? Not stated.

Or it could be that it was because it was Jewish custom to pray three times for anything that was of importance. Yet there is a cloud there because it would mean that Jesus prayed three times concerning an issue that already had an answer that he knew and further knew it would not change.

But if it is about some principle that is so overarching that violating it results in vain prayer, then it 1) deserves more than a hint buried in the ancient traditions of Jews, and 2) would stand as a kind of law, the very thing that Jesus supposedly came to end (according to your teachings). And I agree that Jesus did end the law. But not the law of righteousness. Just the law or rituals. Of actions of form. That does not mean we cannot engage in ritual or form, but we must understand that they are not the reason that we worship, or pray, or arbiters of our status as sons of God. And a form such as this is not a definer of vanity without something more solid than a single hint that is so vague and not on point that it would be ignored as such by everyone until now.

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Albert Barne's in his Notes on the Bible reveals that praying 3 times was a Jewish principle that Paul and Christ followed. Therefore hundreds of thousands of Jewish converts to Christianity would have prayed in like manner. Gentiles possibly as well, following Christ and Paul as their examples.

But a claim by a modern writer about unspecified and undocumented "hundreds of thousands" of converts does not a scriptural "principle" make.

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Here is what Barne's has to say:

It will be recollected that the Lord Jesus prayed three times in the garden of Gethsemane that the cup might be removed from him, Matthew 26:44. At the third time he ceased, and submitted to what was the will of God. There is some reason to suppose that the Jews were in the habit of praying three times for any important blessing or for the removal of any calamity; and Paul in this would not only conform to the usual custom, but especially he would he disposed to imitate the example of the Lord Jesus. Among the Jews three was a sacred number, and repeated instances occur where an important transaction is mentioned as having been done thrice; see Numbers 22:28; Numbers 24:10; 1 Samuel 3:8; 1 Samuel 20:41; 1 Kings 18:44; Proverbs 22:20; Jeremiah 7:4; Jeremiah 22:29; John 21:17.

This does not prove that we should be limited to exactly this number in our petitions; but it proves that there should be a limit;

The passage proves that it is right to pray earnestly and repeatedly for the removal of any calamity. The Saviour so prayed in the garden; and Paul so prayed here. Yet it also proves that there should be a limit to such prayers.

So there is sufficient evidence based upon the two examples presented, and the knowledge of Jewish customs at the time, to conclude that praying three times for a matter is a biblical principle. The bible does not teach or show prayer ad nauseam.

Only someone set to create a sect would refer to prayer as "to sickness." Especially since the Bible makes no such statement — not even a hint.

I do note that you found a sympathetic voice in the writings of one that was party to a split in the Presbyterian church in America and because of some of the charges at that time by those he did not side with, would appear to have been part of the widening of the breach between the two.

But even taking his word as being meaningful, he did not say that three was the limit. Only that there should be a limit. And if the one praying has an answer, then it is reasonable to say that it should define the limit. But without an answer, on what do we base a limit? Even Mr. Barnes does not say it is three. You just have a bur in your saddle driving you toward reasons to reject Christians. Just as Barnes did when he joined in separating into the "New School" of American Presbyterianism.

Last. Other than claiming that some unstated (in the Bible) tradition of Jews praying no more than three times would mean that many had done it, you have said that there were many times that it happened. You said just a few posts back "We have recorded instances of many people including Christ praying no more than three times." And when you only have an account of a prayer and not its repetition, if any, you have nothing. You have no evidence of anything. And none of it supports a limit of three. Not even your commentator claims or defends a limit of three.

So, despite one commentator who was party to a somewhat acrimonious split in the church and was embittered by it, you have nothing except speculation to arrive at a weak principle of praying only three times.

Yet you persist. I will just have to assume that the other readers here as smarter than you think they are.