Why do you pray to dead people?!

  • Thread starter Thread starter JoyToTheWhirled
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PRmerger said:
Objector: (grudgingly) Yeah. But they’re dead. They can’t hear you. That makes them omniscient.
Click to expand...
This prompts 2 responses:

-what Bible verse says that the dead can’t hear us?

-how does this make them omniscient? Doesn’t the Bible say “What eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and what has not entered the human heart, what God has prepared for those who love him"?

Couldn’t God give them the ability to hear prayers without that making them “omniscient”, which means “able to know all things that are knowable in creation”? Clearly, hearing the prayers of some folks on earth doesn’t give them knowledge of* all things possible* in the universe.

Heck, you and I are communicating without hearing each other, but that doesn’t make us omniscient, right?
 
Yup, it went to one mediator, which I countered with “we don’t ask them to mediate salvation to us, we ask for their intercession”. Which got ignored and I was told it was like I was asking my friends to speak to my husband for me.

I really wanted to gently bring up that, as Christians, we are all part of the bride, so when any of us speak to Jesus it is the bride speaking to her husband, but the conversation drew to a close. Thanks for the encouragement everyone! At the very least it confirmed to me what I actually believe.
 
Church_Militant said:
I do have a blog post that will help you with this and it covers passages that n-Cs take for granted and then just sort of read around
The Intercession & Communion of Saints

I also found all these links up in the Ask an Apologist forum. It’s become a pretty handy place to search for just about anything that you can encounter. 🙂
Well done Brother! This is found in 3 different passages in the Gospels.
Matthew 22:32, Mark 12:27, and Luke 20:38.
Ask 'em how they missed that?😃
Click to expand...
Michael,
It perplexes me that Catholics do not use Luke 15:7, "Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.", in their defense of invocation of the saints. This seems an obvious confirmation that the saints in Heaven are aware of events on Earth.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Michael,
It perplexes me that Catholics do not use Luke 15:7, "Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.", in their defense of invocation of the saints. This seems an obvious confirmation that the saints in Heaven are aware of events on Earth.

Jon
Click to expand...
:eek: Y’know I have never thought of that before, but I think you have a very valid point.

Thank you very much for bringing that up Jon! 👍
 
JonNC said:
Michael,
It perplexes me that Catholics do not use Luke 15:7, "Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.", in their defense of invocation of the saints. This seems an obvious confirmation that the saints in Heaven are aware of events on Earth.

Jon
Click to expand...
The standard anti-communion of saints answer we used to use in the Assemblies of God was the joy experienced in heaven meant only by the angels since t"he dead cannot hear us." We based our assumption on OT verses prohibiting necromancy. We were very OT-oriented in our thinking, and very anti-Catholic in our bones. 😛
 
Della said:
The standard anti-communion of saints answer we used to use in the Assemblies of God was the joy experienced in heaven meant only by the angels since t"he dead cannot hear us." We based our assumption on OT verses prohibiting necromancy. We were very OT-oriented in our thinking, and very anti-Catholic in our bones. 😛
Click to expand...
Is there a verse that states that the dead can’t hear us?
 
Della said:
Not explicitly, no.
Click to expand...
Ah.

I was wondering if maybe there was an OT verse or something that, if taken oh-so-literally, could be construed as stating that the dead don’t hear us.
 
PRmerger said:
Ah.

I was wondering if maybe there was an OT verse or something that, if taken oh-so-literally, could be construed as stating that the dead don’t hear us.
Click to expand...
It would be helpful one way or the other, wouldn’t it? But like other issues the Bible isn’t explicit because some things were assumed or simply part of the culture.

When one writes about any topic one assumes the readers know certain things. If I were to write a story that mentions the White House in a modern story, I wouldn’t have to describe how it came to be the home of the president, who built it, when and why, etc. American readers would have sufficient information about it for me to merely mention it without being overly explicit or descriptive. Of course, the WH will most likely never be a matter for discussion in a theological context, but just about everything is when it is put into that context. Haydock’s Catholic Bible commentary is filled with historical notes because people have made issues based on such innocent things as where an incident took place.

It’s my opinion that when people won’t/can’t accept the fact that God gave his authority to certain people and not others, they will try to find reasons to question everything said or done by those few people with that authority. It was true in OT times and it’s still true today. Such folks nitpick Scriptures in an effort to deny the Church’s teachings and/or justify their own ideas. They want the Bible to be the end all and be all of everything theological precisely so they can be their own authorities and thus do/practice/believe as they please.
 
Della said:
It would be helpful one way or the other, wouldn’t it? But like other issues the Bible isn’t explicit because some things were assumed or simply part of the culture.

When one writes about any topic one assumes the readers know certain things. If I were to write a story that mentions the White House in a modern story, I wouldn’t have to describe how it came to be the home of the president, who built it, when and why, etc. American readers would have sufficient information about it for me to merely mention it without being overly explicit or descriptive. Of course, the WH will most likely never be a matter for discussion in a theological context, but just about everything is when it is put into that context. Haydock’s Catholic Bible commentary is filled with historical notes because people have made issues based on such innocent things as where an incident took place.

It’s my opinion that when people won’t/can’t accept the fact that God gave his authority to certain people and not others, they will try to find reasons to question everything said or done by those few people with that authority. It was true in OT times and it’s still true today. Such folks nitpick Scriptures in an effort to deny the Church’s teachings and/or justify their own ideas. They want the Bible to be the end all and be all of everything theological precisely so they can be their own authorities and thus do/practice/believe as they please.
Click to expand...
👍
 
Della said:
The standard anti-communion of saints answer we used to use in the Assemblies of God was the joy experienced in heaven meant only by the angels since t"he dead cannot hear us." We based our assumption on OT verses prohibiting necromancy. We were very OT-oriented in our thinking, and very anti-Catholic in our bones. 😛
Click to expand...
How do they account for Moses at the Transfiguration?

Jon
 
PRmerger said:
Ah.

I was wondering if maybe there was an OT verse or something that, if taken oh-so-literally, could be construed as stating that the dead don’t hear us.
Click to expand...
I believe there’s something in Ecclesiastes to the effect of “The dead know not any thing,” which is used by groups that champion “soul sleep” until the Judgment.
 
Della said:
Not explicitly, no.
Click to expand...
Della said:
The standard anti-communion of saints answer we used to use in the Assemblies of God was the joy experienced in heaven meant only by the angels since t"he dead cannot hear us." We based our assumption on OT verses prohibiting necromancy. We were very OT-oriented in our thinking, and very anti-Catholic in our bones. 😛
Click to expand...
Usagi said:
I believe there’s something in Ecclesiastes to the effect of “The dead know not any thing,” which is used by groups that champion “soul sleep” until the Judgment.
Click to expand...
That would be ***Ecclesiastes 9:5 " For the living know that they are to die, but the dead no longer know anything. There is no further recompense for them, because all memory of them is lost."

***But it’s really pretty weak because the 2nd part of the verse tells you that it’s based upon the living remembrance of the dead which is a pretty essential part of OT thinking about death.

I agree that it also fails to account of the transfiguration appearances of Moses and Elijah.
 
Church_Militant said:
That would be ***Ecclesiastes 9:5 " For the living know that they are to die, but the dead no longer know anything. There is no further recompense for them, because all memory of them is lost."

***But it’s really pretty weak because the 2nd part of the verse tells you that it’s based upon the living remembrance of the dead which is a pretty essential part of OT thinking about death.

I agree that it also fails to account of the transfiguration appearances of Moses and Elijah.
Click to expand...
I thought Ecclesiastes was a set of philosophical ponderings rather than a teaching manual anyway.
 
JonNC said:
How do they account for Moses at the Transfiguration?

Jon
Click to expand...
They usually don’t. I don’t think most even consider it in the light of the Communion of Saints. If you raise this point with most, they’ll have no answer, but it won’t budge them from their position, either. It’s too deeply engrained that the dead are simply dead.

For those who have considered it, they gloss over it by saying it was a one time event in which God allowed these persons appear. Moses because no one ever found his body so he may still be alive in the flesh and Elijah because he was taken up into heaven without dying. Oddly enough, they won’t allow this option for Mary since there is no scriptural reference to her having been assumed. They will not believe anything they cannot find a verse to back it up. And they will string verses together to make them say what they want them to. It may make no logical sense, but then they reject “man’s logic” which they accuse those who are not sola scriptura of employing. It works for them–at least they believe it does. It wasn’t sufficient for me, which is why I moved on.
 
JoyToTheWhirled said:
I thought Ecclesiastes was a set of philosophical ponderings rather than a teaching manual anyway.
Click to expand...
That won’t wash as an apologetics argument with n-Cs since they consider it all ultimate authority. If you use it they will immediately accuse you of not believing the Bible, (something they already pretty much “know” about us Catholics). Naturally that is not at all true…

Ecclesiastes is one of my favorite reads. It’s a mystical book that covers so much more than just philosophical musings, though they are also there.

It is full of insights into Jewish thinking.

Here’s an personal example.

Many years ago I had a wealthy Jewish friend whom I trained privately in Karate and we often chatted all kinds of things. One day we somehow got on the subject of the messiah and his coming and I mentioned that Muslims in Jerusalem had buried their dead outside the Eastern gate intentionally because of OT prophecy is that the messiah will enter that way and Jews cannot pass through a graveyard.

So I asked him if Jews believe in a resurrection of the dead (thinking about the resurrection at Christ’s return would make that a moot point) and his answer was no.

See how that passage shapes and sums up their thinking?🙂
 
Yeah, I kind of figured that a literalist interpretation of scripture would pretty much torpedo my argument. I used to be involved with the JWs, so am very familiar with the pattern of thinking. It’s kind of maddening, tbh. Thankfully my main source of need for apologetic argument comes from my husband and I’ve already convinced him about the communion of the saints so that is a small victory and a great relief!🙂
 
JoyToTheWhirled said:
Yeah, I kind of figured that a literalist interpretation of scripture would pretty much torpedo my argument. I used to be involved with the JWs, so am very familiar with the pattern of thinking. It’s kind of maddening, tbh. Thankfully my main source of need for apologetic argument comes from my husband and I’ve already convinced him about the communion of the saints so that is a small victory and a great relief!🙂
Click to expand...
👍 Praying for you as you go.
 
JoyToTheWhirled said:
So here I am, minding my own business and a fairly anti Catholic acquaintance brusquely asks me why I would pray to dead people, and isn’t that mediumship.

My response is that I am asking for their prayers, being close to God, the same way I ask my earthly friends to pray for me. I added that as far as I understood it, there are no dead people in heaven, as God is a God of the living, not of the dead.

Pretty new to apologetics, how did I do?
Click to expand...
There are already lots of great responses about the communion of saints.

I also like to think of the annunciation.

If Gabriel, a messenger of God, knew where to find Mary through the power of God, and both angels and saints are in heaven, why cannot the saints in heaven pray for us and hear our prayer requests? Do they not also share the same privileges as the angels in heaven?

The bible says that the saints are greater than the angels.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top