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?

[JCBreckenridge]

The dead presumably killed during the Tribulation?

[JCBreckenridge]

Because Peter was the leader of the apostles?

[piusv]

Many have not been officially canonized.

[JCBreckenridge]

Except for all those nasty books that aren’t the word of God in Luther’s abridged version.

[piusv]

Bernadette Soubirous

[.45 Long Colt]

“The question I have for you - is if you sincerely believe that the children of God would not be left leaderless, how do you cross that 15 hundred year gap between Christ and Luther? I’m curious.”

Surely you aren’t suggesting there were no Christians outside of the Roman church before Luther’s biblical separation. I assure you from the time of Christ to Luther there were millions. If you aren’t aware of them perhaps it’s because the popes drenched the soil of Europe with so much of their blood. So it’s not surprising Rome has worked to extinguish their memory, particularly from those trapped in her apostasy. To this day Rome efforts to hide her sins, both of today and yesterday. We need look no further than the molestation scandal for proof that Rome still hides her many sins.

“And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.”

That word admiration connotes astonishment.

[metmom]

Does an All-Powerful God have enough power to choose to enable some of His creatures to hear as many prayers as God wants them to hear, or does an All-Powerful God NOT have enough power to enable that?

Is an all powerful God not all powerful enough to do it Himself, without the "help" of others?

[Salvation]

Being Catholic: Sacred Things, Relics and the Incorruptibles

[metmom]

To seek ‘something more’ in the spiritual realm is to accuse Christ of being insufficient to meet our needs....and defying Him for doing what He has clearly said not to do.

That's right and to seek something more in the spiritual realm is to invite demonic activity.

[MayflowerMadam]

“Are there any ‘living saints’?”

All born-again believers are “saints”, according to the Bible. When an epistle was written to a Christian church, it was written to “the saints who are in _____”. Sadly, many of the “saints” being prayed to today weren’t even born again.

The Bible strongly prohibits connecting with, or trying to connect with, the dead.

[metmom]

So the bible says nothing of the sort until you interpolate it in. Interesting. What other interpolations have been inserted?

Now, THAT'S funny, coming from a Catholic.

Catholicism teaches all sorts of things that are not mentioned by name, specific wording of which Catholics approve, and yet when a non-Catholic believes something that is not specifically spelled out the way a Catholic wants it to be, then suddenly the Bible doesn't teach it all all but rather it's the non-Catholics own personal errant interpretation.

The hypocrisy abounds.

[piusv]

You’re missing the point. We aren’t ones saying that all HAS to be in the Bible. So, no, we’re not being hypocritical.

[.45 Long Colt]

Hahaha...a kindergarten graduation certificate has more value than canonization.

[piusv]

Did the all-powerful God *have* to use a human vessel to come to Earth?

I think there are other examples where our all-powerful God chooses to enlist the help of others who are not all-powerful. He is all-powerful, but also humble.

[piusv]

My post did not deserve your belittling remark. You asked whether the Church said all popes are in Heaven. My response explained that it does not. I answered your question.

But perhaps that wasn’t the answer you were looking for. I’m guessing from your belittling response to me that you would much prefer if my response agreed with your incorrect assumption that the Church teaches that all popes are in Heaven.

[BlueDragon]

To this day Rome efforts to hide her sins, both of today and yesterday.

Uh, I *think* it was JPII who ventured some acknowledgement of those past sins you speak towards. But it does seem that here on these pages, there can be from a few, instead of acknowledgement...some mixture of denial or justification, many times argued on the barest technical [wording] grounds.

It is frustrating, and does come across as less than honest. The shame of that, is that many of these same who justify or deny, are the very same people who most vociferously insist that it is the the RCC and none other, which is "the church", thus dragging the beauty of Christ again through the mud.

Instead of fully top-down hierarchical, presided over by men & "councils" of men, I say the original structure was meant to be much more horizontal. But for the sins of man, and the wickedness of the human heart, it would be so. Yet--- that sort of failing is not limited to the RCC.

What do we see continually referenced on these pages, but alleged "proof" that all should be centered at the Latin church alone --- since no one else [in their view] can be trusted?

"Just look at those sinners --- over there! We are not them". "This proves God is found only here!", if not the lesser version "God is only found over there just barely, when He is at all, and only lightly, not in fullness" they do seem to be saying.

How would they know what others experience with the Lord, by way of Spirit? They see some of their own number whom they like to think have it all together, so reassure themselves they are in the "right place" even as they themselves may not much hear His voice --- mistaking the "voice" of "the church" as being the very voice of God. That can be fully the way of the worst cults, AND THEY KNOW THAT! But somehow...think the corruption of the human heart will not contaminate themselves, or their church --- only all those others.

The double standards must cease. Eventually they will. When we are all passed from this world...

[Heart-Rest]

"MY question is WHY would HE need to do that? "

I (of course) did not say that He NEEDS to do that. He does not need ANYBODY to ever pray ANYTHING for that matter.    (He knows everything we pray already.)

However, in His Sovereign, Holy Will, He CHOOSES to have us pray for things, and He CHOOSES to have certain things done through humans (such as writing the books of the Bible).

(You do believe that God chose human beings as instruments to physically write every single word in every single book in the Bible, don't you?)

God could have wrote those things directly Himself, or He could also have just imparted all that knowledge and spiritual wisdom to each of us directly by infusing it all into our hearts, or by some other means, but He CHOSE to make use of human beings to do that.    (Do you approve of God's choice to use human beings as go-betweens to write the Bible for the rest of us human beings, even though HE did not really need to do that?)

[Heart-Rest]

"Is an all powerful God not all powerful enough to do it Himself, without the "help" of others?"

Of course He is, just like He is powerful enough to write every single word in every single book in the Bible by Himself, or impart all that knowledge and wisdom in some other way, but He chose to use human beings as go-betweens to write those words and books of the Bible for other human beings.    (See post #537.)

However, God freely chooses to use human beings as go-betweens with other human beings for lots of things, including physically writing every single word in the Bible.

(You do agree that God did actually, truly use human go-betweens to physically write every single word in every single book in the Bible, don't you?)

[JCBreckenridge]

“Now, THAT’S funny, coming from a Catholic.”

We weren’t the ones who inserted ‘alone’, etc. Very often you’ll find protestants turning a something that is both/neither into either/or where it is entirely inappropriate. Scripture OR Tradition. Faith OR works,

[JCBreckenridge]

“Surely you aren’t suggesting there were no Christians outside of the Roman church”

Surely you aren’t claiming they were protestant.

“If you aren’t aware of them perhaps it’s because the popes drenched the soil of Europe with so much of their blood.”

[[Citation needed]]

Were these the same popes of whom the first twenty five were martyred?

“So it’s not surprising Rome has worked to extinguish their memory”

Are you saying that Protestants are the modern Nestorians?

“We need look no further than the molestation scandal for proof that Rome still hides her many sins.”

Oh wow. Something nobody’s ever brought up. Unfortunately for you, molestation is actually less frequent in the Catholic church than in a secular environment (schools) or with pastors (since our standards are more stringent).