Communion of Saints Prayers to the Dead

I am a little confused.
Didn't Jesus say to pray to our Heavenly Father?

Where in the Bible are we told to pray to the saints?

We are to come boldly to the throne of grace.
We are the children of God and the only intercessor we need is Jesus.

And praying for someone after they have died is in vain.
As a tree falls, there shall it lie. It's too late after one has died, either they were born again before death and are in heaven or they went to hell. You cannot pray anyone into heaven after death.
If a person dies in corruption, they will be raised in corruption.

I would much rather pray to my personal savior, Jesus Christ, than to some saint I have never met.
I KNOW Jesus hears prayers.

Susan

 

Hi RyanBob,

Praying to saints is not necromancy, which Is 8:19 forbids. What God has forbidden is the necromantic practice of conjuring up spirits, which is first stated in the Second Law at Dt. 18:10–15.

"There shall not be found among you any one who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, any one who practices divination, a soothsayer, or an augur, or a sorcerer, or a charmer, or a medium, or a wizard, or a necromancer. . . . For these nations, which you are about to dispossess, give heed to soothsayers and to diviners; but as for you, the Lord your God has not allowed you so to do. The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brethren—him you shall heed" (Deut. 18:10–15).

God thus indicates that one is not to conjure the dead for purposes of gaining information; one is to look to God’s prophets instead. Thus one is not to hold a seance. But anyone with an ounce of common sense can discern the vast qualitative difference between holding a seance to have the dead speak through you and a son humbly saying at his mother’s grave, "Mom, please pray to Jesus for me; I’m having a real problem right now."

The difference between the two is the difference between night and day. One is an occult practice bent on getting secret information; the other is a humble request for a loved one to pray to God on one’s behalf.

God bless,

Carson

 

How come nobody in the New Testament ever prayed to Stephen or any of the other New Testament martyrs?

 

DualHunter,

I'm sorry to say, but the truths contained in the Bible are not self-evident. Things that are self-evident are not debated. And yet half the world debates what the Bible is really saying. Some things in the Bible are quite explicit (Jesus died for the salvation of the whole world), while other things are not so explicit (do we have free will, or are some of us truly predestined to eternal life while others are predestined to damnation?). This is why the debates rage on, and final, absolute answers will never be reached.

Is there an absolute truth? I believe so, because Christ is absolute, and Christ is Truth. But this truth is not self-evident. Some things require a lot of interpretation on many different levels.

Catholics interpret parts of the Bible to say that it is okay to have the saints in Heaven pray for us, even though this is not mentioned explicitly.

Non-Catholics (most, anyway) can't find this connection, and thus refute it. They even call it UNBiblical, though this is never proven.

The fact of the matter is that neither side offers self evident answers. They are both answers accepted by faith of the believer.

My point? Why are we trying to prove something that can't be proven? I think it would be much more beneficial to really and simply try to capture what the other side believes, and take it at face value. Learn about the belief, and pray about it. What you feel is right is what God needs you to feel at this moment at time. If you can't believe our point of view, fine and dandy. We aren't going to persecute you for it!

Did saints in the New Testament pray to Stephen? WE DON'T KNOW. It doesn't say either way. You can't say no, because you don't know. We can't say they did, because we don't know. It's not a fruitful question. Why bother with unfruitful questions?

 

Grace Saves,
Your post, for a Catholic, seems to contain a number of contradictions.

You said, “some things require a lot of interpretation on many different levels,” something that a Catholic does not have the privilege of doing since the Biblical interpretation is already done for him by the magisterium. It seems odd that you would even be talking of interpreting the Bible instead of just quoting the Catholic's official interpretation of the Bible. Or have you now come to the place where you are now speculating on some things in the Bible, (that are not self-evident) and then turn around and accuse Baptists or non-Catholics for believing in doctrines such as: soul liberty, the priesthood of the believer, sola scriptura (Bible as our final authority). These things you are putting into practice right now, are you not?

The truths of the Bible are evident for those who will believe them. What hinders people from knowing the truth is sin. The reason that there is many different denominations in the world today is sin, or lack of obedience to the Bible. I dare say that if all spent time in the Word of God, rather than their catechisms, creeds, church fathers, traditions, etc., and then understand and obey what they have understood, they would all be much closer to the Baptist position.

It is not mentioned explicitly or implicitly to pray to the saints in Heaven, and it is quite UNbiblical, as you have observed. Sound Biblical evidence must be given to prove that this most heretical doctrine is taught in Scripture. It is not taught in Scripture. And until you provide the burden of proof that it is, it will remain an unbiblical and heretical doctrine. Praying to the dead is a form of necromancy.

I have learned about Catholic doctrine, and I certainly don't need to pray about it. "What you feel is right" I don't run my life by my feelings, I run my life by the Word of God, and the Holy Spirit that guides me. My feelings have nothing to do with this. What does God say? That is what matters.

Did they pray to Stephen. Yes we do know. The early believers were NOT idolaters. They did not pray to Stephen. They were believers in Christ, not idolaters. Catholicism had not even been invented at that time.
DHK

 

DHK,

You completely missed the point of my post. COMPLETELY. Try rereading it, and stop looking for ways to tear me down, when my goal was to promote unity. Shame on you.

 

You said, “some things require a lot of interpretation on many different levels,” something that a Catholic does not have the privilege of doing since the Biblical interpretation is already done for him by the magisterium.

Uhhh, so Baptists are allowed to interpret Scripture, but Catholics aren't?

If a Baptist feels that Scripture does not need interpretation, then, as you say, why does a Catholic individual need interpretation different from Church tradition?

If a Baptist feels that Sctipture requires interpretation, then, as you say, why is the RCC not allowed to interpret Scripture?

Maybe it's becaus they happen to interpret it diffently than you do. That is and of itself is not wrong.

 

There are no contradictions in what I posted, which I'll clearly show below.

You create a contradiction that I didn't even touch. I said, as you quoted, that "some things require a lot of interpretation..." I never said that "I" was doing the interpretation. I said that things required interpretation. I never said by whom. Your argument is void, because I never argued in opposition.

And for the record, I have the priviledge of a Christ-instituded teaching body to guide me to the Truth that Christ intrusted them with. You call it a curse, I call it a blessing. This gets us nowhere, except more rambling from you about how evil this is. What's new? Nothing.

This makes no sense. I'm not addressing any specific Bible verse here; I'm speaking about general things. This totally proves your lack of sincerity in this whole matter, and that you use everything I say in a manner to tear me down. What exactly would I have been quoting from the Catholic Church? That's not even related to the discussion since my post was not in reference to any Bible verse. Again, there is no contradiction because the subject you're addressing DOESN'T EVEN EXIST IN MY POST.

I have no clue what you're getting at. When did I "accuse" Baptists of anything in my post? If I did, why aren't you quoting me?

So, since you seem to have all the answers, I assume you're without sin, or less of a sinner than myself? Based on your own argument, that's what you're saying. The Truth of the Bible is just as "evident" to me as it is "evident" to you, and yet we both reach different conclusions. Thus, it is not "self" evident. You're only assisting me in my own points here.

Again, you just happen to have stumbled upon the denomination with the least amount of sin and lack of obedience to the Bible? So basically, when I prayed for Christ to lead me to the path of truth, and He on a daily basis reassures me that I'm where I need to be...he's just toying with me? You have no right to proclaim what you proclaim.

Right, instead I'll put my trust in the Bible and my local Baptist preacher...until he says something I don't like, and I move to another church. Until the same thing happens again and I have to go a different church instead. I'm not falling for this trap.

This argument is totally illogical. Something that is not contained in the Bible that does not contradict the Bible is extra Biblical, not un Biblical. In your opinion it is contradictory, but to me it is very much not. Thus it is not self evident, and thus we get nowhere. But you like going nowhere, don't you.

You mean, sound Biblical evidence plus an interpretation of that Biblical evidence that I will agree with. It's a lose-lose situation. No amount of verses in the world will convince you if you do not wish to be convinced.

In your opinion. But I'm not trying to convert you; I'm merely defending my faith against a thread that would challenge it. I have nothing to prove to you, DHK, and I'm not sure why you think I do. It's your job to accept things through faith, not my job to beat it into you. If you reject it, that's your loss. I'm merely keeping it on the table.

So you're prayers go something like, "Thank you Jesus for protecting me from the Catholic lies," instead of "Thank you Jesus, for keeping me in Your Truth and letting me not stray from Your will." You pray biasly.

God gave us emotions for a reason. I didn't realize that the are inheriently contrary to God's will, and that God does not use our emotions as a guide. You're Baptist because you "feel" that this is where God has lead you. He didn't whisper anything in your ear. You're trusting the feeling of peace that he has put in your heart. You can take emotions out of the picture on paper, but in reality it's not possible.

*sigh* Gee, you're not basing your opinions on feelings at all.

 

Your argument falls apart here. Just because some groups agree on it does not mean that it is self evident. Something that is self evident is that we require oxygen to live. Anyone who would debate this is debating something that is self-evident; we can show them physically that this is true. Because two large groups are in agreement on an issue (Catholics and Protestants) does not mean it is self-evident; it simply means they have found common ground in agreeing on what something means. ANYTHING that is taken as truth based on faith is not self-evident. If it was self-evident, then it wouldn't be a matter of FAITH.

As for the rest of the argument...do Catholics consult another human to then mediate for them between the living and the dead? No. So this is not the same argument.

Catholics also do not seek responses. We ask for prayers on our behalf, not consultation or answers from the saints themselves. We seek, as we all do, answers from Christ our savior. The saints are merely extra messengers on our behalf.

There is no consultation, and there is no mediator. Your argument is not relevant to the current topic.