Once again we have a RC apologist who deletes what refutes him and does not even mention it. By the grace of God I spent some time refuting yet another attempt to provide support from Scripture for what is purely a tradition of men, but which Rome holds to be from God.
Moreover, the validity of such teaching is based upon the novel premise of the presumed ensured veracity of the Roman church, which is yet another tradition of men. However, seeing as RCs attempt (often in condescension to evangelicals) to provide some sort of Scriptural support for such traditions, thus we need to examine her claims in the light of Scripture. In this case it is that of alleged support for a most basic Catholic practice which is utterly absent in Scripture, either in example or exhortation, that of praying to created beings in Heaven.
The following, with a couple or so grammatical corrections, was posted on May 25, 2016 on Armstrong's blog entry (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2016/05/prayer-to-saints-new-biblical-argument.html), and which I found silently deleted the next day.
I absolutely love discovering things like this.
Which
is not a new polemic but a refuted desperate attempt to finally find
some Scriptural support for praying to created beings in Heaven which
is as specious as all others.
This is the same sort of argument as the rich man’s prayer to Abraham in Luke 16
Which
is btwn beings in the same realm, as is always the case with such, not
hearing mental prayers in Heaven addressed to them from those on earth,
an ability only God is said and shown as possessing, as a Divine power
and privilege.
Nor will angels and elders offering up prayers as
a memorial to God before the final judgments provide testimony to
prayer to created beings in Heaven, which is utterly absent in
Scripture, even though prayer is a basic practice, and the Spirit
records approx. 200 prayers to Heaven in Scripture. Which are all
directly to God, except by pagans.
Matthew 27:46-50.The
“bystanders” are presented as allies of Jesus, since one of them gave
Him a drink, in the next verse (Matthew 27:48).
Which
conclusion is hardly warranted, as the bystanders are not said to be
friend or foe, but are in the context of those who mocked the Lord,
saying "Save thyself, and come down from the cross." (Mark 15:30)
Moreover,
what one who offered the Lord to drink was vinegar (and which was also
what the cruel soldiers offered Him, and which He would not drink
after tasting it: Mt. 27:34; Lk. 23:36) and who also (likely in
mocking) was one of those who called for Christ to come down off the
cross. (Mk. 15;36)
The next verse (27:49) again shows that this was common belief at the time
No,
that simply does show that praying to Elijah was a common practice, or
even one at all, and for which you have no evidence at all in
Scripture, and here this is most likely part of the mocking of Christ
which the context shows was going on, in contrast to the centurion, or
they were superstitious.
It shows (in the most plausible
interpretation, though not absolutely so) that the Jews of that time
accepted such petitions as altogether proper and permissible.
Which
insults the Spirit of God, who nowhere records the Jews praying to
anyone else in Heaven but God, leaving Caths to try to extrapolate it of
mere personal exchanges while being in the same realm, not invisible
angels or saints hearing multitudinous mental or oral prayers from earth
in Heaven. As God alone does.
it’s not presented as if they
are wrong, and in light of other related Scriptures it is more likely
that they are correct in thinking that this was a permitted scenario.
Actually, it is far from being presented as if they were right, which
is what you need, and for which there is no precedent in Scripture. No
"other related Scriptures" show any believers at all ever praying to
someone in Heaven besides God, mentally or out loud, which is what you
propose Jews held as a common belief at the time.
Elijah and Moses appeared with Jesus
Which again required the respective parties from both realms to be in the same realm, communicating face to face.
It’s
not required. Once or a few times in Scripture is enough, just as the
virgin birth and original sin are based on just a few passages.
Wrong, as you simply have zero examples of any believers ever praying
to anyone in Heaven but the Lord, or any teaching that they are to be
addressed in prayer to Heaven ("our Mother, who art in Heaven") .
And
which conspicuous absence is all the more inexplicable in light of
prayer being a most basic common practice. Catholics basically infer
the Spirit did not see even one mention of this as warranted, and so
Catholicism must supply what He would not.
Scripture does have quite a bit about praying to angels
Wrong:
Scripture says absolutely nothing about those on earth praying to
angels in Heaven, and with the Divine ability to hear all such
supplications addressed to them, and instead your examples show both
parties being in the same realm and engaging in personal, visible
communications.
Since the dead saints are said to judge the
angels (1 Cor 6:3) and be higher than they are in a sense, then a
deductive argument can be made for praying to saints
But
since no one on earth ever prayed to angels in Heaven, nor are they
shown as able to hear all prayer from Heaven, you are left with no
argument, and having to explain why the Holy Spirit would utterly leave
out this basic, purportedly helpful practice.
The Jewish Encyclopedia of 1906 (“Elijah”) provides an extraordinary summary of Jewish beliefs regarding Elijah
Which also fails to document praying to him, or to any created being,
which was a later, post Biblical and unscriptural development.
The canon of Scripture is nowhere in the Bible at all, yet believed anyway based on tradition.
Which is not analogous, as while we have zero testimony of any believer
(versus pagans) praying to anyone in Heaven but the Lord, despite the
abundance of examples of this basic practice, we do have clear
testimony that common souls correctly discerned both men and writings
of God as being so, and which thus leads to a canon.
Sola Scriptura (in its full epistemological / theological meaning) is never ever taught,
Who knows how you would define this, but unlike prayer to created
beings in Heaven, we abundantly see the written word of God becoming the
supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing Truth
claims, and as providing what is necessary for salvation and growth in
grace, in its formal and material aspects combined. More grace was given
under the New Cov, and more will be revealed at the resurrection,
thanks be to God.
Finally, you may absolutely love to discover
such egregious extrapolation for support for traditions of men as this,
but it simply reveals the manner of desperation some
Caths will sink to, while in reality the basis for the veracity of Cath
teaching does not rest upon the weight of Scriptural warrant anyway,
but the the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual
magisterial infallibility.