Where Does the Bible Say We Should Pray to Dead Saints?

catholic-convert ^ | July 11, 2012 | Steve Ray

[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 can’t 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 people’s 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 don’t 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 person’s 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 can’t 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” can’t 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?

[.45 Long Colt]

So what you are saying is those Catholic commenters are wrong who have been bashing Luther on the basis that only a pope or church council have the authority to alter the canon, never mind that Luther did no such thing.

And you said it was crazy to ask if a council could alter the canon. Perhaps you forgot the Apocrypha was never officially recognized until the Council of Trent.

I don’t have any questions about the catechism, so I won’t bother reading F.A.Q. I asked the question because I am curious how modern Catholics feel about it, particularly paragraph 841 pertaining to Muslims. I want to know if Catholics stand by the declaration that Muslims are included in the plan of salvation. I wonder if Catholic soldiers in Afghanistan have read that paragraph. And if they have what they understand it to mean.

841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

[.45 Long Colt]

They assumed it for themselves, just as the papacy has assumed the titles and perogatives of the godhead, even going so far as to place the pope above God.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

I think Balaam could make just as good a claim of infallibility for his donkey as you just did!

The World's ONLY Infallible Donkey© for Sale. Has spoken when moved by G-d. Has seen angelic visitations. Slightly abused by current owner, but was a misunderstanding. Do not be tricked by other claims of infallibility! Don't be an as*! Buy my as* instead! $1.5 million firm. I am also open to offers of stud service so that your future donkeys can lay claim to being infallible. There are so many donkey's making so many claims these days, but I tell you they are all false!!! Breed your donkey to the Infallible Donkey and you will also be able to claim infallibility for your donkey through generations! The fee is steep. The value is unending. Contact me at: Balaam@My.Donkey-Is-the-Only-Infallible-Donkey.com

I have received questions about my infallible donkey. I will answer.

Q: How do I know he is infallible?

A: First, I will consider the Bible as a historical document. Even non-Jews or non-Christians can agree that the Bible is the best attested-to historical document of its era. If we begin by treating the New Testament as a historical document, we notice that God claimed divinity, claimed to establish a nation, and that He made several predictions, including the prediction that the descendants of our Fathers would be as numerous as the sand.

Simply by examining history, we see in the nation an unparalleled earthly institution, in terms of organization and continuity of leadership. Moreover, the nation possesses an unparalleled, non-contradictory body of teaching, in keeping with It being God's People.

Additionally, countless public miracles are associated with this same nation - do I need to remind you of the whole Escape from Egypt Miracle that starred Mr. Heston, including extant, persistent, public miracles, that can be subjected to scientific examination (Creation, Prophets, Law, Captivity, Exile, Red Sea - too many to number, unlike those who point to supposed burial shrouds). These facts, and this simple argument, demonstrate, with extreme probability, that the Jewish Nation is of divine origin. This confirms God's prophecy, and thus, His divinity as well, again with extreme probability.

Since we now know, again, with high probability, that God is Who He claimed to be, and that the Jews are His People, we can be sure that Israel has the authority to determine the canon of Scripture.

And your alternative authority is... who? Religious Leaders dressed in silk and funny hats?

[CynicalBear]

>>The Bible calls the Catholic Church, "the pillar and foundation of truth.",<<

Book, chapter and verse please.

[CynicalBear]

>>Religious Leaders dressed in silk and funny hats?<<

Do some research on the priests of Dagon the fish god and see the hats they wore and you will see where the RCC got the design. Incorporating paganism anyone?

[.45 Long Colt]

What’s the background of the pompous scarlet slippers? Other than prophecy fulfillment (Rev 17:4) that is?

[CynicalBear]

Don’t you wish that those who follow the Catholic Church would understand those passages? I fear for those people. It does warn to “come out of her” “that ye receive not of her plagues.

[metmom]

And your alternative authority is... who? King James? Martin Luther?

Jesus.

If you are using Scripture as a historical account to give it divine authority, then you have completely undermined any defense you have for claiming your church's spiritual authority.

[boatbums]

The two theologies I'm talking about there are two of the opposing Protestant theologies which completely and irreconcilably conflict with each other, and are actually diametrically opposed to each other. (This pits Presbyterians, Congregationalists, various "Reformed" churches, some Baptists, etc., AGAINST Methodists, Lutherans, certain other Baptists (Free Will Baptists, for example), Seventh-day Adventists, Assemblies of God, certain other Pentecostal churches, etc., regarding one of the most important questions any Christian can ask -- do they have "eternal security"/"perseverance of the saints"/a "once saved, always saved" unbreakable protection, or can they really, truly lose their salvation.)

Like you replied to another post, there IS only ONE truth regarding the gospel. Scripture teaches, and the assembly of believers uphold and support, that we are saved by the grace of God through faith and not of our works. Do some denominations teach we are saved by grace AND works? Yes, they do and they did - even in the Apostles' lifetime. Does that negate the truth of the gospel? No. It doesn't change, it has ALWAYS been by grace through faith apart from works. People have always tried to pervert the gospel and they are refuted BY Scripture.

No matter what a church/assembly calls itself, if it perverts the gospel, it cannot be the bulwark of the faith, can it? How do we know if a congregation teaches and believes the gospel? Look at what they preach and compare it to Scripture - which is the authority ALL of us should be measured against. On the subject of OSAS/Perseverance of the saints VS sin committed after belief can lose your salvation should be decided based upon who has the better Scriptural argument as well as what was the historical belief of the Christian church. The church "fathers" can be looked at to see what they professed, but they are still bound by Scripture, which is the ONLY infallible and objective source we have been given by God.

At one time, even the Roman Catholic Church believed in justification by faith apart from works. You can look at the writings of Ireaneus, Origen, Athanasius, Jerome, Augustine and others to see that they were pretty straight on the gospel. Over time, though, we can see subtle changes creep in and a departure from that simple truth as well as additional dogmas introduced that had no ancient witness nor Scriptural warrant. A big reason for the Reformation was the Catholic Church's negligence and perversion of the gospel and justification by faith AND works became the dogma and Christians who believed in the gospel of Scripture were persecuted as heretics when only a few centuries previously the heretics were the ones who taught what the Catholic Church now espoused. The Reformers wanted the church to RETURN to the ancient faith.

So, getting back to your question, the various denominations under the umbrella called "Protestant" at one time MAY have believed and preached the identical gospel to the Apostles and the early church. Where they have remained faithful to that, they continue to support the truth. Where they have strayed away from it, they cease being the "church of the living God". It's no more complicated than that.

The "diametrically opposed" theologies you claim disqualifies any Protestant denomination from equality with "your" church is really a smoke screen. That's because it doesn't matter what a church calls itself, it isn't a church of Christ if it preaches an accursed gospel. There CAN be differences on non-essential doctrines and there's nothing wrong with that as long as the gospel remains faithful to Scripture and the major doctrines that accompany the gospel are believed. The theology of once saved/always saved (OSAS) is the true gospel because it acknowledges that we can do nothing to merit the grace of God that brings salvation. Since we do not earn our salvation by our deeds, then we sure don't have to do deeds to "keep" it. It is grace all the way to heaven. THAT is the truth and believers must agree on that to be Christians. Belonging to a church is not what saves. It is receiving and trusting in Christ who saves us by his blood. The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

[boatbums]

The "Our Father" was an example Jesus gave his disciples, he never told them pray this prayer. He said pray in this manner. If praying TO departed saints was a doctrine the Christian church was expected to follow, then the epistles would have mentioned it. If the last NT book was written SIXTY years after Christ's ascension, then it should be reasonable to expect some sort of teaching about it - yet there IS none. That's the point.

[metmom]

Perhaps you forgot the Apocrypha was never officially recognized until the Council of Trent.

Now, what's this about a continuous, non-contradictory body of teaching?

So now non-Catholics are being condemned for adhering to the same OT canon as the Catholic church held to for about 1500 years until the Council of Trent?

I guess that answers the question of what would happen if the current pope decided to change the canon.

[Colofornian]

Now, what's this about a continuous, non-contradictory body of teaching? So now non-Catholics are being condemned for adhering to the same OT canon as the Catholic church held to for about 1500 years until the Council of Trent?

Well, it's not ONLY non-Catholics you reference here, Metmom.

Without conducting "careful" research as to exactly when the term "Catholic Christians" came into vogue...but let's say it 'twas in the late 4th century... THEN we'd be talking about 1,150 years or so of "Catholics" who also didn't uphold the Apocrypha as "official" canonized "Scripture"...who then contemporary Catholics likewise need to condemn.

[gitmo]

>>Religious Leaders dressed in silk and funny hats?<<
///// Do some research on the priests of Dagon the fish god and see the hats they wore and you will see where the RCC got the design. Incorporating paganism anyone? ///

I was browsing Latest Posts and noticed this comment. I’ve not read the article or the thread, but wanted to comment on this.

I’m a Protestant, and assume you are as well. I used to avoid anything pagan in my Christian walk. In my older days, however, I look at this a little differently.

We see Gideon hiding in his father’s wine press threshing wheat when he was visited by the angel of God.

Judges 6:25.
Now on the same night the Lord said to him, “Take your father’s bull and a second bull seven years old, and pull down the altar of Baal which belongs to your father, and cut down the Asherah that is beside it; and build an altar to the Lord your God on the top of this stronghold in an orderly manner, and take a second bull and offer a burnt offering with the wood of the Asherah which you shall cut down.”

Gideon used a pagan altar and Asherah and made an altar to YHWY.

Young David slew the six fingered giant, took the dead Philistine’s sword and severed the monster’s head from its neck. He kept the sword and whenever Israel was emperiled he led the nation with the enormous sword of that pagan giant.

The Israelites under the leadership of Moses took the plunder off Egypt as their due for their time of slavery. Yet God forbad them to pick up one item from the Amorites when he sent Joshua against them.

Nehemiah solicited gold and silver from King Artaxerxes for rebuilding the holy city. Ezra refused any such pagan assistance in his restoration quest.

Jesus used a pagan execution device for the true sacrifice of The Lamb.

Paul used a pagan idol as a symbol of Jesus the Christ in his Mars Hill sermon, where Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and many others joined the ranks of the church.

I have used Pokemon as the door to talk to a teenaged boy who wouldn’t talk to any adults in the church. His father was a pastor but he had some real wounds in his life. His dad came up to me later asking me about what we talked about. We started out with Pokemon but spent most of our time on Jesus.

There was a time I would have steered wide of Pokemon because of their pagan origins. But I realize we are surrounded by western paganism we are oblivious to. But I don’t think God is afraid to take things from the world.

Likewise I’ve seen clowns, Christmas trees, Santa Clause used as object lessons to help people understand The One who died for their sins.

Now I have to admit the few times I have attended a RCD mass I’ve been astounded at the extrabiblical trappings I saw. I’ve asked God to show me any things in my churches that offend Him. He hasn’t shown me many.

[metmom]

I stand corrected.

[count-your-change]

Then a few questions are in order, I mean if you’re willing to consider them:

Is there any other group of people that had long history, a record of martyrs and miracles, sacred writings that were also historical documents, etc.

[metmom]

OTOH, Catholics claim the Catholic church existed from the time Jesus told Peter He would build the church on him.

So the Catholics claim that everything was Catholic from the get go. That all Christians were Cathlocis and all Catholics were Christians. They claim that the Catholic church wrote the Bible because all the *church fathers* were, by default, Catholic.

So what I was referencing was THEIR argument that the Catholic church existed and believed certain things for 1,500 years.

I myself don’t buy it. I agree with you.

[boatbums]

Hard to argue against that logic! ;o)

[boatbums]

Jesus DID give his opinion about what should be considered Sacred Scripture. He said:

Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. (Matthew 23:34,35)

From Abel to Zachariah, the Pulpit Commentary says:

It seems to be a kind of proverbial saying which the Lord here uses, equivalent to "from the first murdered saint to the last," taking the arrangement of the Hebrew canon of Scripture, and regarding the Books of Chronicles as the conclusion of Jewish history.

[CynicalBear]

>> Gideon used a pagan altar and Asherah and made an altar to YHWY.<<

No he didn’t. The pagan alter was torn down. It says to cut down the Asherah, and build an alter to the Lord but does not say to use the wood of the Asherah to build the alter but does say to burn the wood of the Asherah. The Asherah was to be burned not to be used to build the alter to the Lord.

The whole list you used does not constitute using pagan “ways” to worship God.

Deuteronomy 12:30 Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. 31 Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth,

That is the difference.

[Iscool]

Still no answer from any Protestant regarding the authority that acted infallibly in determining the canon of Scripture.

For me, it is pretty simple...God of course is the authority...God gave his oracles to the Jews, his chosen people...Those Jews, the Levites specifically were charged with safekeeping those oracles...They had the authority you are referring to...Those Jews knew what was from God and what wasn't...Your Catholic bible for example...The Jews wouldn't touch them...

So that eliminates anything Catholic right from the starting line...