If the Saints are Alive, then who are the DEAD?

[Guardian]

Who are the “DEAD?”

I know most of the Catholic defense for the intercession of the Saints, however it seems to be more of a redirection than a head-on defense.

Isaiah 8:19: “When they say to you, “Consult the mediums and the spiritists who whisper and mutter,” should not a people consult their God? Should they consult the dead on behalf of the living?” (NASB)

Deuteronomy 18:10-11:“There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices witchcraft, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, or one who casts a spell, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead.” (NASB)

I want to know who exactly the “dead” are in reference to Isaiah 8:19 and Deut 18:11. Is it the damned? If so, then why was Saul punished for communicating with Samuel in 1 Samuel 28, who was definitely not damned?

I have a strong feeling that this somehow goes deep into theology about the existence of the place of the dead (Hades) prior to the Resurrection, but I don’t know. Right now, I don’t know the answer.

By the way, yes I know that Jesus talked to Moses and Elijah on the Mount, but He’s God, so it doesn’t apply as smoothly to the defense of purely mortal man contacting the dead.

 

[mosher]

It can be argued that prior to the opening of heaven that even those in Sheol would be considered “the dead” and hence it would not be inappropriate to communicate with them. It is only the saints who are living truly.

Also, the restriction is against a particular type of speaking with the dead called necromancy. Necromancy is the communication with the dead or the work to control the dead in order to gain secret knowledge. This is a topic well discussed in many scholarly works.

 

[Black_Knight_MI]

You really don’t get the Communion of Saints, do you? Please click that link and listen to the Bible study by John Martignoni. HERE are the notes.

There’s a big difference between this and necromancy that the Bible forbids. The most glaring difference is that Catholics do not consult the saints concerning future events, which would indeed be wrong.
God bless.
**Blackie **

 

[Guardian]

It can be argued that prior to the opening of heaven that even those in Sheol would be considered “the dead” and hence it would not be inappropriate to communicate with them. It is only the saints who are living truly.

Now that is what I’m talking about! Would you please expand on this, please?

 

[mosher]

Now that is what I’m talking about! Would you please expand on this, please?

First the post needs to be edited as I intended to say “inappropriate to communicate with them.” But what exactly do you want me to expand upon as the statement that I made was very broad.

 

[Guardian]

First the post needs to be edited as I intended to say “inappropriate to communicate with them.” But what exactly do you want me to expand upon as the statement that I made was very broad.

Can you give me the evidence for the existence, purpose and characteristics of Sheol?

 

[levi86]

It can be argued that prior to the opening of heaven that even those in Sheol would be considered “the dead” and hence it would not be inappropriate to communicate with them. It is only the saints who are living truly.

Also, the restriction is against a particular type of speaking with the dead called necromancy. Necromancy is the communication with the dead or the work to control the dead in order to gain secret knowledge. This is a topic well discussed in many scholarly works.

You could be on to something. As I understand it The Church also considers it inappropriate to communicate with those in Limbo (if it indeed exists), these people are not “born again” and are by implication dead. Limbo could be considered equivalent to Shoel/Hades in this case. Therefore the command against communication with the dead is still taught by The RCC. Only those in Heaven/purgatory can be asked for intersession as they are “alive in Christ”.

 

[Guardian]

I found the following here:

The Apostles’ Creed contains this line in Latin: descendit ad inferos. In older English translations the word inferos was rendered as “hell,” but it was understood not to mean the place of the damned. The term actually refers to “those below”—that is, to the dead. It thus signified that he descended to visit the just who died in pre-Christian times and were waiting for heaven to be opened to them. This place is commonly called the limbo of the Fathers.

Jesus referred to this place when he said, “As Jonah was in the whale’s belly for three days and three nights, so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the Earth three days and three nights” (Matt. 12:40).

The expression “heart of the Earth” doesn’t mean the grave, but the underworld, what the Jews called sheol, which was thought to be located at the center of the Earth. Sheol wasn’t a place of the damned but a place of departed souls both good and bad. It appears from the parable of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:19–31) that there was a place within sheol where the wicked were punished and another place where the righteous awaiting heaven were comforted. Jesus went to the latter.

Thus, it is quite feasible, if not probable, that prior to the resurrection the saints of the Old Testament were considered “dead” as well as the damned.

 

[mosher]

You could be on to something. As I understand it The Church also considers it inappropriate to communicate with those in Limbo (if it indeed exists), these people are not “born again” and are by implication dead. Limbo could be considered equivalent to Shoel/Hades in this case. Therefore the command against communication with the dead is still taught by The RCC. Only those in Heaven/purgatory can be asked for intersession as they are “alive in Christ”.

Well to put it quite frankly that is because Limbo is a “part” of hell and not some other place. However, limbo does not include the punishment of the senses but only the punishment of damni which is generally understood as separation from the direct experience of the Beatific Vision.

Can you give me the evidence for the existence, purpose and characteristics of Sheol?

I found the following here:

Thus, it is quite feasible, if not probable, that prior to the resurrection the saints of the Old Testament were considered “dead” as well as the damned.

I think you answered your own question.

So, then I will pose a further question. If this is so as has been the belief of the Church since the beginning then how is it that the account in Maccabees concerning prayer for the dead can be justified and in turn help justify the Catholic position on the Communion of Saints? I think that this is a much better question.