Luther and Erasmus: The Controversy Concerning the Bondage of the Will

Protestant Reformed Theological Journal ^ | April 1999 | Garrett J. Eriks

[annalex]

5608: How do you speak to the dead?

The saints are not dead, they have everlasting life.

5610, 5612

You have a knack of quoting scripture that you think says what it does not say.

[annalex]

in the icon I saw, along side of the OT righteous in hell were standing Apostles!

They are not in hell. They have been rescued by Christ and welcome Adam and Eve, who are being rescued. The hell is represented by the hole in the ground.

There is is a dispute I had with Kolokotronis once. Have the OT righteous been assumed into Heaven in the similar manner as Elijah, upon their death, or have they been rescued by Christ in the single historical timeline on the Holy Saturday?

[Kolokotronis]

I wouldn't state it any differently at all, but I want to thank-you for the information about the Latin dogma of the Assumption. I always thought that the Latins too agreed that she had died but dogmatized the pious belief that her body had been assumed into heaven.

[Kolokotronis]

"There is is a dispute I had with Kolokotronis once. Have the OT righteous been assumed into Heaven in the similar manner as Elijah, upon their death, or have they been rescued by Christ in the single historical timeline on the Holy Saturday?"

We did? Shows how good my memory is! :) In haste I'll vote for Holy Saturday.

[Forest Keeper]

There is no biblical evidence of any of what the Orthodox call and depict in icons as the Harrowing of Hell, the resurrection of the Dead, the Anastasis. The source is the Apostle's Creed ...

OK, I hadn't read this when I last posted. Thanks for the background.

I looked up 1 Peter 3:19-20 in my Bible and the note does say that some take it as you described. It also said that the "most likely" meaning is that "this is a reference to the preincarnate Christ's preaching through Noah to those who, because they rejected that message, are now spirits in prison."

[blue-duncan]

Alex,

I must have missed some or more likely in my old age forgotten where the scriptures are for intecessory prayer by dead saints. Please, once again, enlighten me.

[jo kus]

The Apostles made decisions based upon – not oral teachings – but on what they received directly from God and from God’s guidance

I know it is hard for you, Harley. But it's OK to admit it! Christ spoke to the Apostles orally. God spoke to the Apostles in the form of the Son's oral teachings.

However, I wouldn’t equate anyone in church history on the same level as the twelve apostles.

Nor does the Church. The writings of even the greatest of Church Fathers, St. Augustine or St. Ambrose, are NOT relegated to the role of Scriptures. Consider the difference between "proving" Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. The demands for the latter are much more strict than the former. IF an Apostle wrote it, it was Scriptures. It takes a more thorough study in determining the content of Apostolic Tradition.

Even the apostles didn’t fully understand God’s hand in their guidance.

I don't think the Pope understands everything, either! Who can know the mind of God? Our understanding is rather limited on this side of death.

yet there is very little mention of Mathias in scripture and even tradition is vague and sketchy on his accomplishments.

Yes, my historically-bent mind would love to have read about Mathias' exploits and the other apostles. Sadly, we don't have much info on them. We rest assured that since God appointed them to spread His Word, they were in virtual agreement in their teachings, as Paul mentions in Galatians - "ours is not a man-made religion"...

If total authority had been given to the Apostles to past down as you suggest, then Matthias would have been God’s messenger to the Gentiles-not Paul.

We presume that wherever Matthias went, he ALSO appointed bishops to continue God's teachings, just as Paul did with Timothy in Ephesus and Titus in Crete, since the Apostles were appointed by God and guided by Him. The Apostles didn't operate in a vacuum.

Regards

[jo kus]

I asked We are sin? After our regeneration? What exactly was "regenerated" if we are still "sin"? Here is the heart of Luther's error.

You responded: Is it also Paul's error?

No, it is merely Luther presuming that man's nature is totally destroyed as a result of Adam's sin. Paul correctly realizes that man is wounded, that we, the flesh, cannot forever avoid sinning. It is only grace-aided man who is able to be consistently righteous in God's eyes, as Paul goes on to relate. Paul doesn't simultaneously call man saved and a lump of manure...!

The sum of Luther's error can be traced to his conception of man before and after the fall of Adam.

Regards

[HarleyD]

I know it is hard for you, Harley. But it's OK to admit it! Christ spoke to the Apostles orally.

That would be a silly thing for me to deny now wouldn't it? He also spoke to Judas orally.

The writings of even the greatest of Church Fathers, St. Augustine or St. Ambrose, are NOT relegated to the role of Scriptures.

Then there is a difference; while Christ might have spoke to the Apostles and they wrote things down, what makes their writings different? It can also be said that Luke was not an Apostle and yet his writings are inspired. There is a distinct difference between Church writings and what was written by the Apostles just as can be said that there was a distinct difference between the oral word of the Apostles and the oral word of anyone else.

We presume that wherever Matthias went, he ALSO appointed bishops to continue God's teachings

What is neglected is the recognition that Paul was NOT appointed through Apostolic succession. He was appointed by God and this was verified by Ananias in a vision. Now at the very least, if there were an Apostolic succession as you suppose, and Peter was the head of the Church, wouldn’t it make sense that God would have revealed Paul to Peter instead of Ananias, who wasn’t even an apostle? Instead the scriptures states that Ananias was a “disciple”-not even a church leader. And it was Ananias who laid hands on Paul so that he might regain his sight. It was after visiting with Ananias that Paul “immediately when out and preached”. My, my. He didn’t even get blessed by the first Pope.

Sorry, the conversion of Paul in Acts 9 does not square with Apostolic succession as God has recorded the events.

[Forest Keeper]

People may try to justify their actions under the auspice of love, but it is self-love in reality. When someone self-sacrifices, they are loving, and this is NEVER sinful, when done for the love of God and others.

I can agree with the general principle you are stating, but relating back to our discussion of necessity and Christ on the cross, what would you say about a poor man who leaps off a building so that his family can collect on a life insurance policy? Assume he genuinely thought he was doing it out of love. Did he sin?

So when Paul says we are a new creation, and that we have the ability to live in the Spirit, he really means we are puppets and can do no good? Hardly. Paul makes it pretty clear that the old man and the new man in Christ have different capabilities.

I agree with Paul (or is it Luke? :) . I don't think of us as puppets because none of us experiences it like that. After regeneration, we do have new abilities. One is the ability to please God. Another is the ability to be sanctified. I just see it as God working through us, when before regeneration, He did not work through us to please Him or become sanctified. We still experience it as making choices to do so.

[annalex]

Of course there is no direct reference to praying to saints in the Bible, for the simple reason that one must be dead (in the worldly sense of the word) and perform miracles after that, in order to be canonized as saint, which circumstance places us in the patristic period and the age of the martyrs. That is notwithstanding your usage of "saint" as one "who [has] trusted Christ for [his] salvation", which of course is not who Christians generally speaking pray to.

The allusions to intercessory prayer that I was talking about are the wedding at Cana where Mary intercedes to Christ for the head waiter; the intercession of Jairus for his daughter, the Transfiguration, and the rich man talking to Lazarus. None involves a living person talking to the dead person, however these allusions establish the pattern that the Church followed, bearing in mind that the saints have everlasting life and we are in communion with them.

I agree that there is no direct instruction to pray to saints in the Bible; it is a pious practice that the Church developed after the books of the Bible had been written.

[annalex]

Paul was NOT appointed through Apostolic succession.

You should read the Bible every once in a while, Harley.

James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship: that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision

Galatians 2:9

[1000 silverlings]

It is inconceivable that Mary would have carnal relations, or desires after having carried the precious and sacred Child."

. I suppose we will have to give an esoteric meaning now to Matthew 1:25

[Full Court]

If so, I humbly suggest you try it and see for yourself.

I am of the mind that anyone who ascribes humbleness to themselves in any manner is not actually humble.

What say ye?

As far as speaking to the dead goes, why don't you try it and let me know if anyone answers you back.

[Full Court]

You also have Jesus talking to the "dead" in the Transfiguration.

Matthew 28:18  And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto *me
in heaven and in earth.

But you never can find any example of anyone being told to pray to a human being, dead or alive.

[D-fendr]

What say ye?

I hope I try to take people at their word, at least give the benefit of the doubt for a while. There are some things you know in some manner and then, therefore, believe they are true. Some things you believe first and in so doing come to know them as true. Spiritual knowing is often of this type.

As far as speaking to the dead goes, why don't you try it and let me know if anyone answers you back.

I do and yes. The Communion of Saints is real and true. It's the Body of Christ. One. It is a tremendous and awesome gift. And that's why I said not realizing its reality is a loss. It really is.

thanks for your reply.

[D-fendr]

As for the Transfiguration: Where were those whom He was talking to? What of those in Heaven? What is your view of their reality, time/space, perception?

But you never can find any example of anyone being told to pray to a human being, dead or alive.

I think (hope) you know the Catholic view on worship vs. prayer. Pray means ask. Praying to the saints is not to be confused with worship. It's more like asking, or conversation for some.

So asking a saint to pray for us is the most normal use - what you might call "praying to."

As for examples of "anyone being told to pray to a human being, dead or alive," there are many. I think several from Paul.

[HarleyD]

I stand by what I have written. If you will note, Paul states:

Gal 1:15-18 But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went away to Arabia, and returned once more to Damascus. Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days.

Paul preached a full three years before he even met Peter or the rest of the folks. There was no conferring special blessings on him from the Jerusalem Council. Your reference was many years later when Paul turned to the Gentiles (Acts 13)

[annalex]

you never can find any example of anyone being told to pray to a human being, dead or alive.

Prayer to saints is prayer to God.

[annalex]

You said there was no apostolic succession to St. Paul, and I showed you where it is in Galatians. Yes, Paul had preached before he was consecrated by "flesh and blood", -- but after Christ Himself sent him.