Is Praying to Saints a Biblical practice?

[concretecamper]

2 Maccabees is actual Scripture. And once more, we do not pray to the dead. If you are definitely saved, you are alive, either in Heaven or in the World to Come, since the eternal nature of God makes it completely possible that the saints, who by grace participate in His divine energies, intercede for us in the World to Come and are thus physically as well as spiritually alive, having been resurrected.

By the way if @prodromos @dzheremi and @concretecamper could give me their thoughts on the theoulougomemnon (theological opinion) I just posted, I would be greatly obliged.

Referring to the story of the Rich man and Lazarus, I thinks it is pretty clear that regardless of the eternal destination, the soul does not die and is capable of refreshment, sorrow, and pain. Why would anyone ever believe that this is not the case within the New Covenant, especially since the Church for it's entire history has reject soul sleep and other similar novel ideas.

Jesus himself affirms in Luke 15:7 that those in Heaven are aware what goes on here on earth. All form 1 Body of Christ. There is no such thing as Jesus having separated Bodies.

 

[The Liturgist]

It was not written by NT Christians - so it is not part of the NT.
Christians have no authority over the OT - and cannot change it.
Josephus informs us that the OT was canonized over 300 years before the time of Christ and kept in the Temple as such.

That makes it difficult to add 2 Maccabees to scripture

Hmm - it is under the title "Communion with the Dead" in the Catechism. Call it what you will.
2 Macc 12 calls it prayers for the dead. But 2 Macc 12 also does not claim to pray TO anyone but God Himself - not the dead.


In 1 Thess 4:13-18 scripture calls them "the dead in Christ"
In John 10 Christ says "Lazarus is dead"

And in the resurrection 1 Thess 4 says "the DEAD in Christ shall rise first".

So there is that.
Is 8 says not to consult the dead on behalf of the living.

We have been over this before - Christians have every authority over the Old Testament, since it attests to Christ, Flavius Josephus is not a reliable source but actively prejudiced against Christians and the Septuagint, the Septuagint includes 2 Maccabees and was the sole Old Testament used by the Early Church prior to the Vulgate, which is a problematic translation, but not to the extent of those relying on the Masoretic Text, and as I said earlier, we are praying to the Risen Saints in the world to come, not to the dead.

I don’t understand why you and other polemicists cannot simply respect the doctrinal differences between your church and the liturgical churches and leave us in peace.

 

[The Liturgist]

Referring to the story of the Rich man and Lazarus, I thinks it is pretty clear that regardless of the eternal destination, the soul does not die and is capable of refreshment, sorrow, and pain. Why would anyone ever believe that this is not the case within the New Covenant, especially since the Church for it's entire history has reject soul sleep and other similar novel ideas.

Jesus himself affirms in Luke 15:7 that those in Heaven are aware what goes on here on earth. All form 1 Body of Christ. There is no such thing as Jesus having separated Bodies.

Exactly; to claim otherwise would amount to Soteriological Nestorianism.

 

[Ceallaigh]

2 Maccabees is actual Scripture. And once more, we do not pray to the dead. If you are definitely saved, you are alive, either in Heaven or in the World to Come, since the eternal nature of God makes it completely possible that the saints, who by grace participate in His divine energies, intercede for us in the World to Come and are thus physically as well as spiritually alive, having been resurrected.

By the way if @prodromos @dzheremi and @concretecamper could give me their thoughts on the theoulougomemnon (theological opinion) I just posted, I would be greatly obliged.

What bothers me about this is 2 Maccabees 15:14-17 is the strongest proof text that's given for praying to dead saints, and the passage is only about a dream a sort of vision someone had.

Praying to dead saints simply is not a Biblical practice. Nowhere anywhere in the Bible are we instructed to do so.

It's purely a post-biblical tradition.

 

[BobRyan]

It was not written by NT Christians - so it is not part of the NT.
Christians have no authority over the OT - and cannot change it.
Josephus informs us that the OT was canonized over 300 years before the time of Christ and kept in the Temple as such.

That makes it difficult to add 2 Maccabees to scripture

Hmm - it is under the title "Communion with the Dead" in the Catechism. Call it what you will.
2 Macc 12 calls it prayers for the dead. But 2 Macc 12 also does not claim to pray TO anyone but God Himself - not the dead.


In 1 Thess 4:13-18 scripture calls them "the dead in Christ"
In John 10 Christ says "Lazarus is dead"

And in the resurrection 1 Thess 4 says "the DEAD in Christ shall rise first".

So there is that.
Is 8 says not to consult the dead on behalf of the living.

Those Bible facts "do not change" just because someone objects to them

The saints aren't dead. They are alive in Christ.

Not a single text calls the "dead in Christ" (as 1 Thess 4 calls them) -- "The Alive in Christ".
I prefer scripture

BTW even the 2 Macc book calls them "the dead".

Notice that in 2 Macc 12 the dead are called "the dead" not "The alive in Christ"

43 And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection,
44 (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,)

We have been over this before

And each time we clearly see - that those facts listed above "do not change" just because someone objects to them.

- Christians have every authority over the Old Testament

Not true. Christians did not write it. Christians were not inspired to write it. Christians did not compile it. All of it was complete for over 300 years prior to the time of Christ as per the custodians of that OT text that were doing that job centuries before Christ.

Flavius Josephus is not a reliable source

He is more Jewish than the late coming groups that rise up centuries after the time of Christ.

but actively prejudiced against Christians

Christians did not author the Septuagint or the Hebrew Bible or the OT. Josephus was not writing his history "to go after Christians".

History does not change just because someone objects to it.

I don’t understand why you and other polemicists cannot simply respect the doctrinal differences between your church and the liturgical churches and leave us in peace.

It is your claim that you don't have "peace" when you find out that someone differs with your suggestions? seriously?

 

[BobRyan]

Referring to the story of the Rich man and Lazarus, I thinks it is pretty clear that regardless of the eternal destination, the soul does not die and is capable of refreshment, sorrow, and pain. Why would anyone ever believe that this is not the case within the New Covenant, especially since the Church for it's entire history has reject soul sleep and other similar novel ideas.

R.C. Sproul - (who believed in the immortality of the soul) freely admits that the rich man and lazarus parable with its prayers to the dead instead of prayers t God - is a parable and cannot be used to argue real life situations. Many other Bible scholars join him in that regard.

 

[The Liturgist]

And each time we clearly see - that those facts listed above "do not change" just because someone objects to them.

Respectfully, you haven’t provided facts, you have provided a mix of your personal opinions and SDA dogma.

I have provided facts, based on Scriptural references and the history of the Christian Church, and its Scriptural canons and use of the Bible and interpretations of Judaism.

This is a subject where it should be stressed that EGW demonstrated a substantial lack of full awareness of in The Great Controversy, in particular, a seemingly complete ignorance of the various Eastern churches. A deep understanding of the history of Eastern Christianity is vital to escaping the distorted perspective that the false dichotomy of Catholicism vs. Protestantism brings.

 

[The Liturgist]

It is your claim that you don't have "peace" when you find out that someone differs with your suggestions? seriously?

No, what I am requesting is that rather than criticizing the liturgical churches, non-liturgical members leave us alone, so likewise we won’t have to respond by criticizing their doctrinal errors. This is how things at present stand between most denominations. You don’t see Presbyterians posting in threads attacking Methodists or vice versa.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Respectfully, you haven’t provided facts, you have provided a mix of your personal opinions and SDA dogma.

I hate to say this but quite frankly when it comes threads about Mariology and praying to the saints, it quite honestly reminds me of arguments I got from SDA regarding their theology. Poor scriptural backing and dogma.

 

[concretecamper]

R.C. Sproul - (who believed in the immortality of the soul) freely admits that the rich man and lazarus parable with its prayers to the dead instead of prayers t God - is a parable and cannot be used to argue real life situations. Many other Bible scholars join him in that regard.

I don't care what R.C. Sproul says.

I gave it as an example that souls of the departed have awarenesses.

 

[BobRyan]

What bothers me about this is 2 Maccabees 15:14-17 is the strongest proof text that's given for praying to dead saints, and the passage is only about a dream a sort of vision someone had.

Indeed they dream about someone who had died praying and then talking to a prophet who had died. This is the weakest possible substance one could imagine.

Notice that in 2 Macc 12 the dead are called "the dead"

43 And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection,
44 (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,)

That is the very language that "some" on this thread complain that I use and that I should take my direction from the book of 2 Macc instead. And yet....

You see? the logic being used here is the very thinnest one could imagine.

 

[BobRyan]

The OT - was not written by NT Christians nor was 2 Maccabees - so it is not part of the NT.
Christians have no authority over the OT - and cannot change it.
Josephus informs us that the OT was canonized over 300 years before the time of Christ and kept in the Temple as such.

That makes it difficult to add 2 Maccabees to scripture


Hmm - it is under the title "Communion with the Dead" in the Catechism. Call it what you will.
2 Macc 12 calls it prayers for the dead. But 2 Macc 12 also does not claim to pray TO anyone but God Himself - not the dead.


Not a single text calls the "dead in Christ" (as 1 Thess 4 calls them) -- "The Alive in Christ".
I prefer scripture

Even the 2 Macc book calls them "the dead".

Notice that in 2 Macc 12 the dead are called "the dead" not "The alive in Christ"

43 And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection,
44 (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,)


In 1 Thess 4:13-18 scripture calls them "the dead in Christ"
In John 10 Christ says "Lazarus is dead"

And in the resurrection 1 Thess 4 says "the DEAD in Christ shall rise first".

So there is that.
Is 8 says not to consult the dead on behalf of the living.

Is 8:19 And when they say to you, “Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter,” should not a people seek their God? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living?

You have to ignore a lot of scripture to recast my position here is "nothing but my opinion"

Respectfully, you haven’t provided facts, you have provided a mix of your personal opinions and SDA dogma.

I have provided facts, based on Scriptural references

-- you just ignored every single scriptural reference in my post and re-cast scripture itself as "my personal opinion and SDA dogma" -- since when did scripture turn into "SDA dogman" in your view?

I find that a little bit surprising coming from a non-SDA

 

[BobRyan]

I don't care what R.C. Sproul says.

I gave it as an example that souls of the departed have awarenesses.

My point is that a lot of Bible scholars (not just R.C. Sproul) see details in that dead-praying-to-the-dead example in Luke 16 where God is not prayed to at all -- and no living person is praying - only what the Bible calls "the dead" is seen praying in Luke 16 where we are told that all the saints are in Abraham's lap and he alone is sovereign to decide who should be resurrected and allowed to communicate with the living. And they can't be dismissed with the simplistic 'they must not believe in an immortal soul" because as we see in the case of R.C. Sproul they do believe it - but they know a parable when they see one.