Yesterday morning I was listening to a story on NPR about Chinese grocers in the Mississippi Delta region, and caught a moment of family prayer ending “I ask these things in Jesus’ name.” Well, I’ve heard that many times as an end to prayer, but I found myself wondering why we do that? I mean, isn’t Jesus God? So asking something of God in Jesus’ name is kind of like asking something of God in God’s name?
Well, I Googled it and found a lot of sources addressing my exact question. I picked the two that went the deepest into the subject to quote from here, and I’ve linked to both.
My first source was jesus.org, an evangelical Christian website, responding to the question with a video narrated by Don Whitney, a professor at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Dr. Whitney cites John 14:16; in this passage, Jesus and His disciples are at the last supper. Here is an expanded selection, with verse 16 in bold: “And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;” So Jesus is instructing his followers to ask anything in his name, and He will then “Pray the Father” on their behalf.
Dr. Whitney goes on to provide additional background that further explains why Jesus is to be the mediator. In the temple, there was a veil between the people and the altar, and there was a second veil between the alter and the Holy of Holies, where the High Priest would enter the presence of God once a year (after much purification). The book of Hebrews explains that, although the veil in the temple was split, Jesus would be the “veil of flesh” through which we would have access to God. (I’ve reproduced the passage below this post; it makes more sense if you read the whole thing). So, from a ritual perspective, we go to Jesus instead of going to the priest. Dr. Whitney concludes that the phrase “in Jesus’ name” is a sort of “theological shorthand” for the idea that Jesus’ role as mediator replaces the old, priestly role as mediator. That’s actually really interesting, but I’m still wondering why we need a mediator if Jesus IS God? How does that make sense?
My second source is from the Patheos website, the blog of Dr. Mark Roberts of the Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena. Dr. Roberts has a somewhat different view. To be clear, he does not have a different view of Jesus’ role as mediator, but he has a different view specifically about the need to say the words “in Jesus’ name” at the end of a prayer. In short, he points out that Jesus never instructs us to use those words, even when he’s telling us how to pray. He provides very good scriptural support for this, including the Lord’s Prayer, and I appreciate his desire to keep his prayers appropriately generic when providing civic invocations. But what I found really interesting about Dr. Robert’s article was his reasoning in his own words. He believes that by “in my name” Jesus meant “under my authority.” His conclusion: “All Christians pray in Jesus’s name, and only in Jesus’ name, in that we approach God under the authority of Jesus and, if you will, by his permission and because of his effort on our behalf. We come before God’s throne of grace, not in our own merit, but in the merit of Jesus.”
I think I have my answer. Jesus does not mediate as a divine being, as an entity separate from God; rather, his very existence gave us the right to pray to God, just as His sacrifice gives us access to God’s grace. If praying “in Jesus name” means “with the permission and authority given me by my acknowledgment of Christ’s redemptive sacrifice,” I can see how that would make sense to a Christian.
And it occurs to me that I was really tripped up by this word “mediator.” Note that neither of my sources here used the word; I think I first saw it in an unrelated article on jesus.org: “Jesus is the only mediator between God and man.” Anyway, on the subject of prayer (which was not the subject of that unrelated article), I really don’t think “mediator” is the right word. It’s confusing, and I’m not sure if I confused myself or picked up the idea somewhere else. Possibly the correct answer is one that would not naturally suggest itself to the faithless.
Hebrews Chapter 9 (1-21)
1. Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
5 And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.