Am not sure calling this "my" or "your" interpretation is accurate and certainly not what I wrote.
You said it was "someone's interpretation". Who's interpretation did you mean if not the one who cited the verses? And what interpretation were you referring to, as none was offered?
Yes, I hold the view but so have thousands of years of people, so it is more proper to call it the Church's.
Which Church? There's no evidence in any of the historic creeds, confessions, or catechisms of Christianity that we are to pray to the dead.
There's no example in the Bible or the Didache of anyone praying to the dead or being instructed to pray for the dead or being told that the prohibition of praying to the dead does not apply.
The counter point was made that scripture forbids our asking Saints to pray for us, to intercede.
The point is that all contact with the dead is prohibited. The "saints", being dead, are included in this.
Obviously our individual understanding of those scriptures would have to be different, otherwise there would be conflict between our understanding of scripture and this practice. That is not the case. And as we differ and both have the same verses, I find it rather unproductive to focus there.
That's seems a little like a cop-out to me. To first impugn my "interpretation", even though no interpretation was given, and then to simply dismiss it by saying that we have a different understanding is a cop out.
I really don't mind criticism. In fact, if it's criticism based in scripture, I would welcome it gratefully. But just repeating "you're wrong" over and over, even as politely as you've put it, isn't criticism and it certainly isn't correction. It's not even dialogue. It's just contradiction for contradiction's sake.
Setting those differences aside, I simply pointed out the it would not be possible for early Christians, especially with predominately Jewish leadership quite familiar with those same verses to have people asking martyrs to pray for them if their understanding of those verses matched those opposed to this practice today.
And that's the part where I asked you where we see early Christians praying to the dead? In the Bible? In the Didache? Where?
I'm still waiting for that answer.
Am not ignoring it, simply think it is rather an obvious no brainer that we do NOT agree on what those verses mean in regards/or as it applies to asking Saints to pray for us.
And yet, you still have not addressed any of those verses or explained what you believe they mean or why you believe your belief of what they mean is correct.
This suggests Catholics do not consider what scriptures say and do not base our beliefs on them. Which besides being untrue and baiting, it goes off topic.
I don't believe it is untrue or baiting. To the contrary, I believe your dismissal of the verses I cited (upon your request, no less) without even addressing them demonstrates what I said to be true.
How could asking in what reasonable world Saint John could allow his flock to ask martyrs to pray for them IF Saint John understood those scriptures as forbidding that practice be looked at as dismissive?
That goes to John's frame of mind and motives, not the substance of the verses, themselves.
It's also what is referred to as "assuming facts not in evidence", as you still have not demonstrated that John asked anyone to pray to the dead.
Maybe I should tell the judge that less than 30 years after the law was established and taught, it was completely corrupted and from that point on no lawyer or judge had any "first hand knowledge" and that all I have to do is read the law and I know myself what it means.
I'd be curious to know how you came to the conclusion that traffic laws concerning stop signals have become "corrupted".
Then we would have to assume Saint John knew this and would have corrected this "error" that had "immediately moved in". Instead he depicts something in his vision which, no matter what one believes it shows, would be supportive of people holding this "error" rather than correcting them.
Can you cite a source for this claim?
The point was that they were doing the very thing being claimed here as wrong according to scripture AND YET they knew these scriptures as Jews first and then Christians, yet are still asking for the prayers of martyrs in Heaven to intercede on their behalf to the Lord. That would make no sense at all if they understood those scriptures as forbidding those prayers.
Why not? People do things contrary to scripture all the time. Even Christians. (Not that you've shown any evidence that they did these things.)
Except we have the Apostles not only not "correcting" something already being done
Again, this is what is commonly referred to as "assuming facts not in evidence" (that is, the assumption that a claim is true before any evidence to support the truthfulness of the claim has been presented).
Where do we see this being done? In the Bible? In the Didache?
but Saint John if not depicting it being done in his vision, depicting what would represent it to those already doing it.
Where in scripture do we see John depicting prayer to the dead?
It is simple really. No one is claiming that ONLY the prayers of the righteous are efficacious, clearly God can answer the prayers of any one.
Actually, you did claim that prayer is made more efficacious both by the righteousness and the proximity of the one praying.
But "availeth much" does mean if one had a choice of Prayer Warriors, a righteous person would be a good one to have on your team.
And what makes a person more righteous than another? Where does the Bible say that different amounts of righteousness are imputed to different believers?
And yes we could say some very righteous people have walked among us.
And Jesus would disagree with you, as He has already declared that there is none righteous but God alone.
But certainly those in Heaven just by their presence there are undoubtedly righteous.
So, presence in a place makes one righteous? Did Jesus know this when He declared that there are none righteous but God alone?
So without question those in Heaven would make great Prayer Warriors because without question their prayers would "availeth much".
How do you know? Where in scripture are we told that prayer is any more or less efficacious based on the proximity of the one praying? Why, then, does scripture always describe prayer as being based on the will of God, not the righteousness or proximity of the one praying?
Because they are in Heaven and a person could not be there and not be righteous.
And the Bible says that they are not there because of their own righteousness.
They are accounted as righteous, just as the saints here on Earth are accounted as righteous in Christ.
No my logic was that the early Church asking martyrs to intercede with the Lord...
...which you still have not demonstrated...
on their behalf during their regular worship would not be able to do that if the Apostles and the predominately Jewish leadership immediately replacing them understood those OT verses as meaning "don't pray to the dead" and applied that to asking martyrs for something.
Why not?
If the Apostles and the leadership they installed thought those verses applied to asking the martyrs to put in a good word for us, how could they participate and sanction those prayers in worship?
Where is the evidence that they did?