From the Onion, some years back:
Crippled boy’s prayer answered.
“No,” says God.
God’s still mad about what we did to his son.
So, you’re saying that we are to pray for God’s will to be done. Uh huh… right…
So, essentially, you’re are praying for things to turn out the way they are going to turn out anyway? Seriously? If you believe in God, why do you need to pray for his plan to work out? Surely, the most powerful being in the universe can handle it on his own without anyone praying for him to do it.
Again, this is an argument that PRAYER is useless.
No, God allows people to have free will. So while God might conceivably have wanted McCain and Palin to win the election, he wouldn’t hypnotize the voters and mind control them into voting Republican. People can choose to do something other than what God wants.
So a devout person would be praying that other people see the light and choose to do God’s will.
I am going to go with: B God wanted Barak to win. God is sovereign.
That’s a severe mischaracterization of what it means to pray for God’s will. It assumes that God will only allow one set of possible events to occur, and that’s not how things work.
There is God’s moral will (what he deems to be morally acceptable) and his sovereign will – what he allows. Everything that does occur is ultimately God’s sovereign will, insofar as he does allow it. That’s not to say that everything which he allows to occur is part of his moral will – or even that it reflects wisdom on the part of mankind. Nevertheless, Christianity teaches that when those evil things do occur, God can still allow these events (thus permitting the exercise of free will) and use them for an ultimate and perhaps non-obvious purpose, such as when Joseph was sold into slavery.
When people pray for God’s will in an election, they could be praying for a moral and wise choice to occur. The more prudent believers will also pray that, if mankind chooses to reject moral choices or act without wisdom, that God will exact the maximum amount of good – an ultimate greater purpose – from these events.
“In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong.” -Abraham Lincoln
Since there is no “God,” I’m going to have to go with A.
It is a good argument that God is not a Cubs fan, though. 
This would be the ineffable will we can’t possibly know and would be arrogant to pretend to know, yes?
First, there’s a difference between comprehending God’s entire being and knowing some part of it. People are never going to understand everything God does but there are supposedly signs that indicates God’s desires on specific issues.
Second, even in complete ignorance of God’s will, a person could still pray that God’s will would be carried out. A devout person would trust God’s will should come to be even if he didn’t know what it was.
So, if these prudent believers don’t pray for this, God many choose not to exact the maximum amount of good?
Is this supposed to be an acceptable thing?
Agreed. But it’s interesting that usually people on both sides of the issue see themselves as following God’s signs.
That’s not what was said, though.
Which goes back to the question: How do we know God’s will? That statement seems a little smug. It implies that the devout person knows God’s will far better than those with whom he disagrees, even if those people believe and pray too.
No, that doesn’t automatically follow. A father can choose to give his child a present, for example, even when the child does not ask. While asking for the maximum good is encouraged, it does not automatically follow that God would always withhold the maximum amount of good if no such petition is rendered.
Why might God choose to withhold a certain amount of good unless asked? I won’t claim to know all the reasons; however, it’s not unlike a parent actually wanting a chid to ask for something instead of giving it automatically. If we think of God as a cosmic vending machine – or worse, an automated food dispenser with which we require no interaction – then that’s hardly a good thing either. In fact, theologians would argue that the maximum good includes being in regular communion with God. In a world when people have free will and a sinful nature, it may even be necessary to withhold a certain amount of goodness lest people fall into the greater evil of wandering away from God and feeling that they no longer have any practical need for him.
So… you’re saying that God may choose not to exact the maximum amount of good. I didn’t say anything about “always.” I said “may.” (Well, it looks like I said “many” but I think you got that was a typo.)
You’re right; you didn’t say “always” and I interpreted your statement too hastily.
Yes, in Christian theology, God might not choose to dole out the maximum amount of good if not asked for. Why? I’m sure that would be a long theological discussion in and of itself, but many would agree that the act of asking – of building communion with the creator – is itself part of that greatest good.
I can’t help but suggest that given the eminent role of black churches in the black community, and given that the stakes for blacks is much higher than for white evangelists that the fervour and greater faith of black prayers won the day.
MLK = Moses
Obama = Joshua
So God is a Magic 8 Ball?
God helps the bad guys when they outnumber the good guys.
There’s an old baseball story about a batter who crossed himself as he stepped into the batter’s box. The catcher called time, then crossed himself.
“There,” the catcher said to the batter. “We’re even with God. Now let’s play ball.”