Skip to comments.
Where Does the Bible Say We Should Pray to Dead Saints?
catholic-convert ^
| July 11, 2012
| Steve Ray
Posted on 07/14/2013 3:02:43 PM PDT by NYer
Are saints who have physically died “dead saints” or are they alive with God?
A friend named Leonard Alt got tired of being hammered by anti-Catholic Fundamentalists on this issue so he decided to write this article. I thought you might enjoy it too, so here it goes…
Leonard writes: I wrote this note after several days of frustration with people, on Facebook, saying that saints cant do anything, because they are dead. They seem to be leaving out the fact that the souls live on. ENJOY!
Dead and gone? Where is his soul-his person?
An antagonist named Warren Ritz asked, Who are the “dead in Christ”, if not those who walked with our Lord, but who are now no longer among the living?” He is correct; the dead in Christ are those saints who have physically died. For the Lord himself, with a word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, will come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first (1 Thess 4:16).
THE CONCEPT OF LIVING SAINTS CAN DO HARM TO THE JESUS ALONE DOCTRINE. From some peoples point of view, people who have died are classified as dead saints, who can do nothing. They are no longer a force to reckon with; they can no longer appear; they cannot talk nor do other things. These same people dont want the saints who have died doing anything because this would be another reason why the Protestant doctrine, JESUS ALONE fails. If the so-called dead saints do anything then it is not JESUS ALONE, but Jesus and the saints cooperating. And it would also mean that the so-called dead saints are in fact not dead, but alive with God.
Dead or in paradise?
HIS PHYSICAL BODY DIED BUT HIS SOUL LIVED ON. But, are the Saints who have gone before us alive with God or are they truly dead saints who can do nothing as some would suggest? Yes, their bodies are dead, but their souls live on. For example Jesus said to one of the criminals on the cross next to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise” (Lk 23:43). Yes, that day, this man became the dead in Christ because his physical body died on his cross; however, Jesus said that today, this man would be with Him in paradise. He was no dead saint because his soul was alive in Christ in Paradise.
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob alive and concerned for their descendants
HE IS THE GOD OF THE LIVING. One person alluded to Mark 12:26-27 saying Jesus is the God of the living, not of the dead in an attempt to show that Jesus cannot be the god of those who have died; after all he says Jesus is the god of the living. However, he left out three people who were no longer alive in verse 26; Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. God said that He was their God. And so does that mean that God is the God of the dead? No; He is not God of the dead but of the living.
- “God told him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, (the) God of Isaac, and (the) God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead but of the living. You are greatly misled” (Mk 12: 26-27).
Abraham Isaac and Jacob are physically dead and yet their souls are alive because their God is not God of the dead but of the living and thus do not qualify as dead saints.
Moses was dead and buried. How could he talk to Jesus about future events on earth?
WHEN MOSES AND ELIJAH APPEARED WERE THEY DEAD OR ALIVE? There are those who insist that saints who have died are nothing more than dead saints who can do nothing. I usually ask them this question. When Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration, were they dead or alive? And behold, two men were conversing with him, Moses and Elijah” (Lk 9:30). Not bad for a couple of so-called dead saints; not only did they appear, but they were talking as well. The question that I asked usually goes unanswered.
SORRY LEONARD
YOU HAVE A BAD ARGUMENT. Bill says, As Ecclesiastes says the dead have nothing more to do under the sun…sorry Leonard…you have a bad argument. He is using this as definitive Biblical proof that people on the other side cannot do anything once they have died. After all, Ecclesiastes does say, For them, love and hatred and rivalry have long since perished. They [the dead] will never again have part in anything that is done under the sun (Eccles 9:6).
When a person dies their body is in the grave; it is dead. They can no longer work under the sun, in this world. However, Ecclesiastes 9:6 is not a prohibition against the activity of the persons soul, which lives on. This of course begs the question; is there any indication of personal activity of a soul after death, in Scripture?
How did the bones of a dead guy bring another dead guy back to life?
Yes, there are a number of examples and here is one of them. Elisha after dying performed marvelous deeds. In life he [Elisha] performed wonders, and after death, marvelous deeds (Sir 48:14). Elisha died and was buried. At the time, bands of Moabites used to raid the land each year. Once some people were burying a man, when suddenly they spied such a raiding band. So they cast the dead man into the grave of Elisha, and everyone went off. But when the man came in contact with the bones of Elisha, he came back to life and rose to his feet (Kings 13:20-21).
Using, Ecclesiastes 9:6 as a prohibition against all soul activity after death is to use the verse out of context and at odds with other parts of the Bible. Ecclesiastes 9:6 is referring to the physical body that has died, not the soul that lives on. Elisha, after death performed marvelous deeds. It cant be much clearer than that!
The saints are not dead but alive in the presence of their Lord Jesus and part of the praying Mystical Body of Christ
JESUS NEVER CLAIMED THAT THOSE WHO HAVE DIED ARE DEAD SAINTS. Jesus understood well that when someone dies, they will live and in fact those who live and believe in him WILL NEVER DIE.
“Jesus told her, “I am the resurrection and the life; whoever believes in me, even if he dies, will live, and everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this” (Jn 11:23-26)?
This union, with the saints on this side and the saints on the other side is referred to as the communion of saints in the Apostles Creed. Those who insist that dead saints cant do anything because their bodies have physically died seem not to understand that their souls live on and are very involved.
So, where does the Bible say we should pray to dead saints? I would ask, Where does the Bible say saints are dead?
TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Ministry/Outreach
KEYWORDS: catholic; deadsaints; doctrine; prayer; scripture
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,481-1,500, 1,501-1,520, 1,521-1,540 ... 1,621-1,636 next last
To: Iscool
Only a Church Council, or the pope, had the authority to determine the canon of Scripture.And just who decided THAT?
A Church Council and the popes...LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL...
As opposed to... who?
You?
Martin Luther? The man who wanted to remove the book of James from his Bible?
Who infallibly determined which books would constitute the New Testament? The Old Testament? And by what authority?
The Authority that determined the canon of Scripture has to have been divinely inspired, otherwise, as R.C. Sproul said, "we have a fallible collection of infallible books."
Maybe that makes sense to you and other Protestants. It doesn't make sense to me.
This is a simple, logical question.
What authority infallibly canonized the Bible?
______________________________________________________
It's very telling that you seem to reflexively despise the Church of Christ, "the pillar and foundation of truth," to which Christ commanded us to take our disagreements, and which "the gates of hell" would not prevail against.
To: boatbums
Did Luther act infallibly in determining his collection of books?
The so-called council of Jamnia?
You?
Who?
It's clear that you reject the authority of the Catholic Church to do so, so we need an alternative.
What is that authority?
To: BlueDragon; verga; boatbums; Elsie
We have a volunteer? Upset for not being pinged to loose mention of hypocrisy? This is rich! Taking easy offense shows that people really do know what they're about.
Now there's a guilty conscience.
1,503
posted on
07/21/2013 5:00:05 AM PDT
by
metmom
(rFor freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
To: stonehouse01; aMorePerfectUnion; Colofornian; boatbums
Upon what authority was Martin Luther suddenly qualifed to not include 2 Maccabees because it alludes to purgatory and praying for the dead because it didnt fit in with his theology? By what authority did the Catholic church include that which the Jews did not accept as Scripture?
If the OT that is in the Protestant Bible is what the Jews recognize as Scripture, then the Apocrypha was added to the Catholic Bible. Why?
1,504
posted on
07/21/2013 5:02:43 AM PDT
by
metmom
(rFor freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
To: Iscool
I’m not impressed with self-proclaimed authority.
1,505
posted on
07/21/2013 5:07:13 AM PDT
by
metmom
(rFor freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
To: daniel1212; stonehouse01; bkaycee; 1000 silverlings; boatbums; CynicalBear; Alex Murphy; ...
And rather than the reality RCs paint as being the result of not infallible magisterium determining the canon, the 66 book Prot canon has seen overall acceptance since early in the Reformation, and Catholicism does not see one identical canon. What's interesting is that the debate is over books the RCC chose to include, as opposed to non-Catholics choosing to add books.
The biggest criticism that can be offered to non-Catholics in their acceptance of the Protestant Bible is that it does not include enough, that it is more conservative if you will, than what the Catholic Bible contains.
In essence, non-Catholics are being criticized and condemned for not going far enough even though what they reject was never recognized as Scripture by the Jews.
1,506
posted on
07/21/2013 5:13:20 AM PDT
by
metmom
(rFor freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
To: verga; BlueDragon
Talk to metmom, she is the current courtesy nazi. Way to forfeit an argument.
1,507
posted on
07/21/2013 5:16:43 AM PDT
by
metmom
(rFor freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
To: St_Thomas_Aquinas; Iscool
Jesus is quoted directly in the Gospels. Does that constitute a significant distinction to you? And?
OK, let me see if I have this right.
Catholics believe that Jesus is God. Right?
Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit is God. Right?
Then what makes the words of Jesus more significant than the words of the Holy Spirit?
God is God, is He not? Would God the Holy Spirit contradict anything said by God the Son? Is the Holy Spirit less important than the Son?
Luke 4:1-2 And Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness 2 for forty days, being tempted by the devil.
Luke 4:14-15 14 And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee, and a report about him went out through all the surrounding country. 15 And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified by all.
Jesus - full of the Holy Spirit. Went about teaching.
Whose words was He speaking?
1,508
posted on
07/21/2013 5:24:55 AM PDT
by
metmom
(rFor freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
To: metmom
Jesus is quoted directly in the Gospels. Does that constitute a significant distinction to you?And?
Does that constitute a significant distinction to you?
That's what I meant.
If that's unclear, let me try it another way.
The Gospels are accounts of Jesus' life and ministry. The Epistles are letters, explicating Jesus' teachings and Church doctrine.
Do you see the distinction? Yet both the Gospels and Epistles constitute Sacred Scripture.
Similarly, the deuterocanonical (literally, "second canon") books are distinct from the protocanonical books of the Bible, yet both canons constitute Sacred Scripture.
_____________________________________________________
And while I have you, what person or group of persons had, or has, the authority to infallibly determine what books constitute Sacred Scripture?
You?
Luther?
Who?
Why won't any Protestants answer?
It's a simple question.
To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
Jesus is quoted directly in the Gospels. Does that constitute a significant distinction to you?
As far as importance and authority, no...
In the Gospels Jesus showed up to teach his chosen, the Jews, about him...Jesus taught about his coming Kingdom of Heaven, His earthly rule as the King...
God's chosen rejected Jesus as a whole...Jesus then turned to Paul...Jesus spent about 3 years with Paul teaching Paul about the Kingdom of God and how that Kingdom would be offered to the Gentiles...Jesus revealed to Paul the doctrine of grace thru faith without works...Jesus revealed to Paul how he wanted his church set up...Jesus revealed to Paul the resurrection of the saints...
Without Paul's teaching that Jesus revealed to him about the church, there wouldn't be much of a legitimate church today...Only so called churches similar to the Catholic church who pretty much twist, pervert and ignore what Jesus had Paul teach us...
All of scripture is equally important...It is all the counsel of God...
To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
“has, the authority to infallibly determine “
As a former Catholic who came to trust Christ, I’ll answer your question...
GOD HIMSELF worked through history and people to infallibly deliver His Word.
That he uses a person or group of people to accomplish His will doesn’t make the people infallible. He alone is infallible.
He used Balaam’s ass too. Was the ass infallible? Or was it simply an ass that HE used?
1,511
posted on
07/21/2013 6:03:22 AM PDT
by
aMorePerfectUnion
( The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. - Tacituss)
To: aMorePerfectUnion
GOD HIMSELF worked through history and people to infallibly deliver His Word. Which Bible?
Can you tell me, infallibly?
To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
What authority infallibly canonized the Bible?It certainly wasn't your religion...
Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
That statement excludes anyone in your religion from having any authority dealing with what is or what isn't scripture...We can be sure we have the scriptures in spite of your religion...
To: aMorePerfectUnion
A good point. Surely if His spirit could guide a group of men to write down His word He could by that same spirit guide the collection of those writings over a period of time.
1,514
posted on
07/21/2013 6:23:50 AM PDT
by
count-your-change
(you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough)
To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
It's very telling that you seem to reflexively despise the Church of Christ, "the pillar and foundation of truth," to which Christ commanded us to take our disagreements, and which "the gates of hell" would not prevail against.
Look at your religion...If the gates of hell aren't prevailing against it, I don't know what is...
Yours is not the Church of Christ...The bible condemns your religions practices all thru out the scriptures...The words of God are available to everyone...He says no one is infallible and he condemns your religion...
To: St_Thomas_Aquinas
One Infallible Donkey for Sale. Has spoken when moved by G-d. Can see angelic visitations. Slightly abused. Do not be tricked by other claims of infallibility! Don't be an as*! Buy my as* instead! $1.5 million firm. Contact me at: Balaam@My.Donkey-Is-the-Only-Infallible-Donkey.com
1,516
posted on
07/21/2013 6:32:54 AM PDT
by
aMorePerfectUnion
( The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. - Tacituss)
To: metmom
Im not impressed with self-proclaimed authority.Me neither...And neither is God...
To: Elsie
I agree. The argument concerning the Gospels being more esteemed than the Epistles was made by several Roman Catholics in the past Not only, but only the priest can read the gospels in the Mass. It is true that some texts can be broadly weightier in application than others, John 3 and Romans 8 versus Numbers 7 perhaps, and also can reflect the differences in character and anointing of the one speaking it, with the Lord being more supreme.
Yet this does not warrant the degree of elevation given to gospels among RCs, as they are incomplete as a source of Christian doctrine, containing little about the nature of the body of Christ, "which is the church: Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God. " (Colossians 1:24-25)
And it is the same Spirit of Christ who inspired the writers of the gospels to pen the Lord's words, and which are sometimes somewhat different is duplicate accounts, such as in the Lord's words in His trial, which evidences that these are not always the verbatim words of Christ, but as in quoting OT prophecy, that Spirit can expand or recast what was said in order to provide a fuller revelation of God's truth.
In addition, the gospels depends upon the promised (Jn. 16:12-14) revelation of the rest of the NT, as in providing a basic clear gospel message with its theology, and of which Paul said, "I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." (Galatians 1:12)
I like the classification that the OT is The Preparation;" the Gospels are The Presentation; the Book of Acts is the Propagation;" the Letters and Epistles The Explanation; Revelation is the "Consummation."
1,518
posted on
07/21/2013 6:42:18 AM PDT
by
daniel1212
(Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
To: Iscool
.We can be sure we have the scriptures in spite of your religion... Because you say so?
Still no answer from any Protestant regarding the authority that acted infallibly in canonizing the Scriptures.
Unless you think that you're that source.
To: aMorePerfectUnion
One Infallible Donkey for Sale. Has spoken when moved by G-d. Can see angelic visitations. Slightly abused. Do not be tricked by other claims of infallibility! Don't be an as*! Buy my as* instead! $1.5 million firm. Contact me at: Balaam@My.Donkey-Is-the-Only-Infallible-Donkey.com I think this is called a "red herring."
Still no answer from any Protestant regarding the authority that acted infallibly in determining the canon of Scripture.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,481-1,500, 1,501-1,520, 1,521-1,540 ... 1,621-1,636 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson