The scriptures do not tell us to pray to saints!

[Phil12123]

“Resting”. Resting from the labors. Phil12123, you even compared these labors to the “deeds done in the body”. You clearly believe, as do we that we will no longer labor for the race, because we have already won.

But I do not believe that will find it hard or call it labor when we worship and pray to our God when we kneel in His presence do you?

**You’re quite correct, our worship will certainly not be “labor” which would indeed refer only to deeds done in the body. I was making the statement re. resting from labors when answering a post by someone who said members of the Body continue in heaven the gifts and callings they had on earth. Would you not agree that is erroneous or unscriptural?

As far as saints in heaven interceding for saints on earth, can you think of any scripture that supports that? Rev. 6:9-10 has the souls under the altar asking God, "How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?’’ But they don’t seem to be praying for believers still on earth.**

You also seem to be mistaken about the nature of the “communion of Saints”. It is not that we look to the saints instead of Jesus, or even look to the saints in the same manner as we do God. We just treat them as if they were still alive and part of the body of Christ, which scripture tells us they are.

Perhaps, but do we know where that expression came from and what was originally meant by it? It is not a biblical expression, as such. Could it not have meant simply the communion or fellowship that believers have between and among themselves HERE while still in the body (the physical body), with no reference whatever to those who have left the body and are now in heaven? It seems the “communion” or fellowship of those in heaven would be more between themselves there, not with us here. Though they may be cheering us on, in our race, their state there is distinctly different, with angels and the very throne of God Himself.

As for it not being in scripture, again, only if you discard the same books Luther did. And incidently, the REASON he discarded them was the same one that the Jews in 70AD used, it was not written origninally in Hebrew. But we now know that that is incorrect, and in fact there are fragments from the dead sea scrolls with those books written in Hebrew. So the REASON the were discarded was faulty.

Would you do me a favor and give me the exact quote of whatever verses you think were discarded but that show clearly and unambiguously that praying to deceased saints is proper or encouraged by God?

As far as the scripture Phil 4, again, our requests are made known to God. How? Through prayer? How? Directly to God and through the prayers of the Saints.

**Phil 4 does not mention “through the prayers of the Saints” so why throw it in there? I think you have a preconceived idea and you want to see it where it does not really exist. **

Why do you divide the body of Christ?

We believe God answers prayers through saints (don’t you?), that all glory and honor belong to God. Our confidence is in God. But we do not divide the body of Christ and realize that we can ask for the prayers of all those alive in Christ.

**As I said before, it’s not a matter of “dividing” the Body. It is simply a matter of recognizing that what the Holy Spirit inspired the various writers to say is for the benefit of those in the Body who are still here looking through a glass darkly and functioning here on earth using their various gifts and callings as the Spirit intended them to be used, to edify or build up each member still running the race and still dealing with the world, the flesh, and the devil.

Also, I truly wonder whether ALL glory and honor goes to God alone when a prayer to a deceased saint gets answered, at least for some Catholics. In Latin America I read where when they did not get their prayer to a particular saint answered, they would put the saint’s image in a shoe box, as a sort of punishment. So, I can imagine how they acted when a prayer was answered, exalting the saint, not glorifying God. You must admit that is a possible danger when instead of praying to God, someone prays to a saint. If you ONLY pray to God, there is no danger of anyone else getting any glory.

Peace**

 

[Calvinator]

Not so. If necromancy was an “abomination” to God then, i.e., something He detests, did God change and now it’s fine and dandy and not sinful? The homosexuals might try to use such an argument but it’s not valid. Other such prohibitions which God called abomination include bestiality, listed in the same passage with homosexuality. Would you say that too is “as dead as the mosaic dietary laws”?

While I am no friend of Catholic theology your argument is flawed.

I believe the OT records the eating of shellfish as being an abomination. Obviously, that is no longer the case.

 

[guanophore]

Jesus spoke with the dead–who cares about the Old Testament prohibition against it? That prohibition is as dead as the mosaic dietary laws!

I don’t agree with that. Jesus affirmed the validity of the Ten Commandments. One should not seek guidance and direction apart from God. Yes, Jesus spoke to those alive on the other side of the veil of flesh, but he always did so according to the Father’s will.

**

** What happened in the Transfiguration cannot be compared with anything we do in praying, or not praying, to deceased saints. Jesus is God. Furthermore, Moses and Elijah were talking to Him, not vice versa. And if He did say anything to them it was not to get them to pray for Him, etc., as you see the purpose of praying to saints. He was showing the disciples who witnessed it a brief look at and preview of “the Son of man coming in His Kingdom” (Matt. 16:28).****

Exactly! Just as he said, some will not taste death before they see that coming. Jesus was showing us that all are alive unto Him, and that we are all part of a great cloud of witnesses, the communion of saints, within which communication does occur.
Jerry-Jet;2445039:

And you don’t see that it is a bit of a stretch to assume that St. Barnabas, for example, can hear a billion people all over the world praying to him all at once and know what each is praying, including the specific details of each prayer, to then pray for each of those people praying to him, to God. Two things come to mind. First, he would have to be omniscient, and secondly, he becomes a mediator between God and man, contrary to 1 Tim. 2:5.

Such things can only be done by Christ’s omniscience. It is hard for us to understand heavenly communication, because they don’t “know” things in the same way we do. Most of us are limited by the five senses, but they are not.

Jesus made us partakers in the ministry of mediation. Just has he has made us a kingdom of priest and kings, so we are able to assist in the reconciliation of the world to Christ.

Finally, the context of James 5:16 is as follows:

James 5:
14. Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.
15. And the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.
16. Confess your trespasses to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much.
17. Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed earnestly that it would not rain; and it did not rain on the land for three years and six months.
18. And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth produced its fruit.

Clearly, you have Body ministry here, but it is all confined to members of the Body who are here “among you,” not departed and in heaven. Pray for one another, that you may be healed. Then it says, the effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much. Much what? Much results in someone’s being healed. Clearly this is not a verse that’s intended to have us pray to someone in heaven simply because someone there is righteous. The context dictates otherwise.

It certainly does not limit us to using only heavenly resources, but also the ones in front of us. We just think that the spiritual abilities of the effectual fervent prayers don’t diminish when they go to heaven. If anything, not hindered by the flesh,the are even more powerful.

And it’s not a matter of “dividing” the Body. It is simply a matter of recognizing that what the Holy Spirit inspired the various writers to say is for the benefit of those in the Body who are still here looking through a glass darkly and functioning here on earth using their various gifts and callings as the Spirit intended them to be used, to edify or build up each member still running the race and still dealing with the world, the flesh, and the devil.

Peace

No argument with that. The saints who are not looking through a glass darkly even more clearly perceive our needs,a nd intercede before the throne of grace on our behalf. The body is not divided. All are alive unto HIm.

 

[TOP]

Didn’t the parents of the little girl ask Jesus to heal her?
Didn’t Mary ask Jesus for more wine at Cana?
What you think they are dead now?

 

[Jerry-Jet]

I didn’t post some of the quotations that were attributed to me–I don’t know how to use blue letters!

 

[DanteAlighieri]

That’s true, but is that what you mean by “inspired Truth” ---- what side of the road we should drive on, or how to brush our teeth? Does God have to tell us that, i.e., inspire someone to write it? Would not our common sense suffice there? Could it be that He has inspired the biblical authors to write precisely what HE wants, and nothing more. Remember what John said, There are many other things that Christ did, but these are written because… why? That you may believe Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. If the Holy Spirit of God inspired the writers, He told them exactly what to write and nothing more, for a reason. If we should be praying to anyone other than God, would not the Holy Spirit have inspired at least one NT author to validate in clear language that practice, so there would be no disputing it?

Peace

My point is that, just as many uninspired truths are not contained in the Bible, so are many inspired Truths found elsewhere – i.e., in the Sacred Tradition of the Church.

Peace,
Dante

 

[onenow1]

John 11:26 and whoever lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this? Quote ]= Jesus

Comment: I’m sure it does not offend God, to ask those in heaven to pray for us ! Bedside that, God knows all things and therefore hears the requests from us first, or do you deny the omnipotence of God ?

Peace, OneNow1, :coffeeread:

 

[Phil12123]

My point is that, just as many uninspired truths are not contained in the Bible, so are many inspired Truths found elsewhere – i.e., in the Sacred Tradition of the Church.

Didn’t what you call “the Sacred Tradition of the Church” consist of oral apostolic teachings? If so, was that ever reduced to writing, and if so, do we have it to read now? If not, how can you know what it consisted of? How can you know if it contained any particular teaching, such as praying to deceased saints?

 

[Phil12123]

Comment: I’m sure it does not offend God, to ask those in heaven to pray for us! Beside that, God knows all things and therefore hears the requests from us first, or do you deny the omnipotence of God?

**Yes, of course I believe in God’s omnipotence, although I think it might be His omniscience that you’re referring to.

But perhaps you’re missing the point. For example, are we supposed to pray to angels? What if I prayed to an angel and, for example, asked Gabriel to give God a message from me. I could argue, Gabriel brought a message to Mary, so why can’t I give Gabriel a message to give to God? God would still know and hear the request from me first, because of His omniscience. Does that mean it’s right to pray to an angel, just because God knows and hears it from me first? My point is, could it not be that God wants Himself to be the first to hear it, not second hand. And if He is a loving, heavenly Father Who delights in hearing the prayers of His children, why not go directly to Him and present your petitions to HIM?

The other thing is that, many of the prayers to saints do not stop at, pray for me. They end up asking the saint for things that only God should be asked for, whether it’s strength to endure or healing a sickness or whatever. Sure, you might ask a saint to ask God to heal you, but is it right to ask the saint to heal you, or strengthen you or come to your aid or whatever? Should we ask St. Christopher to protect us on the highway, or God to do that? Is the prayer to St. Christopher, “Pray to God for my safety on the highway,” or is it, “Protect me, St. Christopher, on the highway”? Do you see the difference?**

 

[Phil12123]

While I am no friend of Catholic theology your argument is flawed.

I believe the OT records the eating of shellfish as being an abomination. Obviously, that is no longer the case.

**Thanks for your post. I checked it out, and have come to the conclusion that my argument is not flawed. That is because what you are referring to is Lev. 11:10-12, and that dietary law says the people were to consider shellfish (or whatever it was) an “abomination unto you.” In other words, they were to detest the shellfish as far as it being something to eat. Obviously, an animal, which God created, is not an abomination to God. Homosexual acts, on the other hand, are detested by God, just as necromancy is, and both remain an abomination to HIM.

Also, for the Jews, that dietary law remains in force. For Christians, who are under the New Covenant, we have new instructions, namely, 1 Tim. 4:1-5.

Peace**

 

[Milliardo]

How about the prohibition against communicating with the dead? I realize the souls of the deceased saints are alive in heaven, but so were the souls of the deceased OT saints, and yet God’s people were forbidden to communicate with them, right?

Necromancy is the one used by the medium of Endor with Samuel. No Catholic I know asks the saints to foretell the future, nor do any use the means done by the medium to contact Samuel. So, as you can see, this only fails your notion. I see you also danced around that point of Jesus talking to Moses and Elijah; it’s interesting how you went around that issue without directly addressing it.

 

[Phil12123]

Didn’t the parents of the little girl ask Jesus to heal her?
Didn’t Mary ask Jesus for more wine at Cana?
What you think they are dead now?

I’m not sure I understand your question. Neither of the cases you ask about involve anyone praying to saints. So how do they relate to the subject of this thread?

 

[Milliardo]

Thanks for your post. I checked it out, and have come to the conclusion that my argument is not flawed. That is because what you are referring to is Lev. 11:10-12, and that dietary law says the people were to consider shellfish (or whatever it was) an “abomination unto you.” In other words, they were to detest the shellfish as far as it being something to eat. Obviously, an animal, which God created, is not an abomination to God.

It is amazing how you danced around that point about eating shellfish–the Mosaic Law is clear about not eating shellfish. We’re not talking of shellfish per se; it’s not said shellfish is an abomination, but the eating of shellfish is, which was part of the Mosaic Law. Please do not confuse the two, as the Mosaic Law never said shellfishes were an abomination. You still have to justify that point.

 

[Phil12123]

Necromancy is the one used by the medium of Endor with Samuel. No Catholic I know asks the saints to foretell the future, nor do any use the means done by the medium to contact Samuel. So, as you can see, this only fails your notion.

The point is, communication with the dead was forbidden. Period. You do not find other passages where Moses instructed the Israelites to communicate with the dead, such as Samuel, in a proper manner, i.e., not using a medium. God had left Saul because of Saul’s disobedience and after seeking God in the proper way and getting nowhere, Saul sought the deceased Samuel, through the medium. Do you think it would have been proper for Saul to simply pray to Samuel and ask Samuel to pray to God for Saul? Would Samuel have heard that prayer? Samuel was righteous, so would he have prayed an effectual, fervent prayer for Saul? Would God have heard Samuel’s prayer?

I see you also danced around that point of Jesus talking to Moses and Elijah; it’s interesting how you went around that issue without directly addressing it.

Danced around it? Let’s see what I said.

What happened in the Transfiguration cannot be compared with anything we do in praying, or not praying, to deceased saints. Jesus is God. Furthermore, Moses and Elijah were talking to Him, not vice versa. And if He did say anything to them it was not to get them to pray for Him, etc., as you see the purpose of praying to saints. He was showing the disciples who witnessed it a brief look at and preview of “the Son of man coming in His Kingdom” (Matt. 16:28).

How did I not directly address it? I just didn’t agree with whoever tried to use it to justify praying to deceased saints, because it simply does not support that practice.

 

[Milliardo]

The point is, communication with the dead was forbidden. Period.

You will still have to justify where Catholics use the same way the medium of Endor used. Let us step back a bit and see what necromancy is–it is the calling of the dead through magical means in order to foretell something. So, there are two things you will have to justify: Catholics use magic, and they want their future foretold. If you cannot find evidence for both, then it’s no go–it’s not necromancy, plain and simple.
**
**

What happened in the Transfiguration cannot be compared with anything we do in praying, or not praying, to deceased saints. Jesus is God.

**

**Which is precisely the point: as Lord of all, He is first and foremost subject to His very own proclamations, or else He is a liar. Jesus Himself affirmed: “I did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it.” So with that, as you stated above, communication to dead people is forbidden, period. As Lord of all, He must thus be the example paramount of such a thing, yet here is another that you would have to justify: He broke His own proclamation, and your only justification is He is God. Not good enough, I am afraid to say, since there is still no doubt He talked to Moses and Elijah.

Furthermore, Moses and Elijah were talking to Him, not vice versa.

**

**This would not wash, since He is in communion with them–they were talking to one another. To make such a statement is downright funny.

And if He did say anything to them it was not to get them to pray for Him, etc., as you see the purpose of praying to saints.

**

**This is where you fail and dance around–you said so yourself, talking to dead people is forbidden, period, yet now try to quantify by saying He is not praying to them. I find no good reasoning in what you stated in light of what you just said, that talking to dead people is forbidden.

 

[Phil12123]

It is amazing how you danced around that point about eating shellfish–the Mosaic Law is clear about not eating shellfish. We’re not talking of shellfish per se; it’s not said shellfish is an abomination, but the eating of shellfish is, which was part of the Mosaic Law. Please do not confuse the two, as the Mosaic Law never said shellfishes were an abomination. You still have to justify that point.

Did you read the passage? Let’s look at it, since you apparently did NOT read it. I will include some extra verses to get the context:

**Leviticus 11:
10. But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you. 11. They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination.
12. Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales that shall be an abomination to you. 13. And these you shall regard as an abomination among the birds; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, the vulture, the buzzard,
14. the kite, and the falcon after its kind; 15. every raven after its kind,
16. the ostrich, the short-eared owl, the seagull, and the hawk after its kind; 17. the little owl, the fisher owl, and the screech owl;
18. the white owl, the jackdaw, and the carrion vulture; 19. the stork, the heron after its kind, the hoopoe, and the bat.
20. `All flying insects that creep on all fours shall be an abomination to you. **

Notice it doesn’t say eating is the abomination. It says the people were to consider certain animals abomination to them. Not to God, but to them. An abomination is something detested. The people were to detest certain animals, so that they would not eat them. It does not say that if you eat the animal you have committed an abomination, like it says for homosexual acts:

**Leviticus 20:13 — `If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. **

**Don’t you see the difference? Why are you being so obstinate, accusing me of dancing around stuff? Do I need to give any further explanation? Or do you understand now? You seem to persist in dancing around my explanations.
**

 

[Milliardo]

Did you read the passage? Let’s look at it, since you apparently did NOT read it. I will include some extra verses to get the context:

**Leviticus 11:
10. But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you**. 11. They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination.
12. Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales that shall be an abomination to you. 13. And these you shall regard as an abomination among the birds; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, the vulture, the buzzard,
14. the kite, and the falcon after its kind; 15. every raven after its kind,
16. the ostrich, the short-eared owl, the seagull, and the hawk after its kind; 17. the little owl, the fisher owl, and the screech owl;
18. the white owl, the jackdaw, and the carrion vulture; 19. the stork, the heron after its kind, the hoopoe, and the bat.
20. `All flying insects that creep on all fours shall be an abomination to you.

**Notice it doesn’t say eating is the abomination. It says the people were to consider certain animals abomination to them. Not to God, but to them. **

**

**You obviously did not include the preceding verses, of which I shall quote:

The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, 2 "Speak to the Israelites and tell them: Of all land animals these are the ones you may eat: 3 any animal that has hoofs you may eat, provided it is cloven-footed and chews the cud. 4 But you shall not eat any of the following that only chew the cud or only have hoofs: the camel, which indeed chews the cud, but does not have hoofs and is therefore unclean for you; 5 2 the rock badger, which indeed chews the cud, but does not have hoofs and is therefore unclean for you; 6 the hare, which indeed chews the cud, but does not have hoofs and is therefore unclean for you; and the pig, 7 which does indeed have hoofs and is cloven-footed, but does not chew the cud and is therefore unclean for you. 8 Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall not touch; they are unclean for you. 9 "Of the various creatures that live in the water, you may eat the following: whatever in the seas or in river waters has both fins and scales you may eat. 10 But of the various creatures that crawl or swim in the water, whether in the sea or in the rivers, all those that lack either fins or scales are loathsome for you,

Note that this forms the part of which the Israelites might eat; in which now we shall see what are forbidden to eat:

and you shall treat them as loathsome. Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall loathe. 12 Every water creature that lacks fins or scales is loathsome for you. 13 3 "Of the birds, these you shall loathe and, as loathsome, they shall not be eaten: the eagle, the vulture, the osprey, 14 the kite, the various species of falcons, 15 the various species of crows, 16 the ostrich, the nightjar, the gull, the various species of hawks, 17 the owl, the cormorant, the screech owl, 18 the barn owl, the desert owl, the buzzard, 19 4 the stork, the various species of herons, the hoopoe, and the bat. 20 "The various winged insects that walk on all fours are loathsome for you. 21 But of the various winged insects that walk on all fours you may eat those that have jointed legs for leaping on the ground; 22 5 hence of these you may eat the following: the various kinds of locusts, the various kinds of grasshoppers, the various kinds of katydids, and the various kinds of crickets.

So as you can see, the Isrealites are called to not eat and loathe the dead bodies of these creatures; where does it say there that they are loathesome per se then? Let us go back to Genesis, and find what God thinks of His creations: He found them all to be good. So as you can see, God does not call them to detest these creatures (or else there are certain creatures that are not good for Him, but that would make problematic the part that all creation is good in His sight), but rather to detest their dead bodies and not eat them.

 

[Phil12123]

**Milliardo, I see you danced around, and did not directly or even indirectly address the following:

You do not find other passages where Moses instructed the Israelites to communicate with the dead, such as Samuel, in a proper manner, i.e., not using a medium. God had left Saul because of Saul’s disobedience and after seeking God in the proper way and getting nowhere, Saul sought the deceased Samuel, through the medium. Do you think it would have been proper for Saul to simply pray to Samuel and ask Samuel to pray to God for Saul? Would Samuel have heard that prayer? Samuel was righteous, so would he have prayed an effectual, fervent prayer for Saul? Would God have heard Samuel’s prayer?**

 

[Milliardo]

You do not find other passages where Moses instructed the Israelites to communicate with the dead, such as Samuel, in a proper manner

Nor do we find any that expressly forbid it. Come, can you honestly show here if Catholics use magic or any other devises to call on the dead? You seem to also have not been able to say of any value why Jesus talked to dead people–Moses and Elijah, yet He is Lord Himself and should be the paramount one to obey His own words, would He not now? You keep coming back to the medium, but could not defend why Christ Himself talked to Moses and Elijah, when they aren’t alive anymore, or are you going to just remain silent on that one?

 

[icxc_nika]

The point is, communication with the dead was forbidden. Period. You do not find other passages where Moses instructed the Israelites to communicate with the dead, such as Samuel, in a proper manner, i.e., not using a medium. God had left Saul because of Saul’s disobedience and after seeking God in the proper way and getting nowhere, Saul sought the deceased Samuel, through the medium. Do you think it would have been proper for Saul to simply pray to Samuel and ask Samuel to pray to God for Saul? Would Samuel have heard that prayer? Samuel was righteous, so would he have prayed an effectual, fervent prayer for Saul? Would God have heard Samuel’s prayer?

I find it interesting that a protestant is attempting to instruct anyone on the practice of worship and proper prayer.

It is laughable to begin with that the OP on this thread needs to pervert scripture in order to make a heretical point.

Scripture clearly tells us to hold fast to oral tradition that was handed down to the Christians. You certainly would not be familiar with the traditions of the church, whether they would be present or not.

Intercessary prayers were clearly reflected in early Christian worship, noted in the liturgies, and passed down to us from the apostles themselves.

Although absent from the church’s teachigs is the abject need to pray to the saints for anything, those of us, in keeping with the traditions, have been witness to the workings of the holy spirit through our saints.

Perhaps incorruptible corpses, countless miracles and, mind boggling events of the Holy Saints is not enough for you. Clearly this is a case where one is blaspheming the Holy Spirit by denying he wonderous miracles of the Saints who worked their powers through God, for us.

This is the outright pathology that has crept into the hearts and minds of the confused souls that hope and pray to be called into heaven. For you pervert the truth and lead others astray.

Naturally we must conclude, that since you have no spiritual food and medicine to help you on your journey in this world, that you would be closed to the presence and understanding of the Holy saints.

The bottom line is that the same people who decided what books are the scriptures, are the same folk who continued to carry the tradition that is scripture. This includes prayers to the St.'s.