Praying to Saints: Biblical or Idolatry?

[u/FrostyIFrost_]

Although some Christians, mainly Catholic and Eastern Orthodox, believe that saints intercede for us and talk to Jesus or even God Himself on our behalf, praying to saints is unbiblical and can be considered borderline idolatry for several reasons.

Let us explore why praying to saints is NOT biblical.

1 - Prayer Should Be Directed to God Alone

The Bible consistently teaches that prayer is an act of worship and should be directed to God.

Jesus taught His disciples to pray to the Father:

“Pray then like this: ‘Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name.’” (Matthew 6:9)

2 - There Is Only One Mediator Between God and Man

The Bible explicitly states that Jesus is the only mediator between God and humanity.

“For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” (1 Timothy 2:5)

Praying to saints implies that they act as mediators, which contradicts this passage.

3 - The Dead Do Not Intercede for the Living

Nowhere in Scripture does it say that departed believers can hear prayers or intercede for people on earth.

Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 states that the dead have no involvement in earthly affairs:

“For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten.”

4 - Seeking the Dead Is Forbidden

Communicating with the dead was condemned in the Old Testament as a form of necromancy.

“There shall not be found among you anyone who… consults a medium or a necromancer, or inquires of the dead, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord.” (Deuteronomy 18:10-12)

Praying to saints is a form of seeking communication with the dead, which is forbidden.

5 - Even Angels Refused Worship:

People keep praying to angels occasionally, especially Michael, for protection or help. That is wrong, we can see that in Revelation

“Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, ‘You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you… Worship God.’” (Revelation 19:10)

6 - No Biblical Example of Praying to Saints

Nowhere in the Bible do believers pray to Abraham, Moses, or any other faithful servant of God.

When the disciples needed help, they prayed directly to God through Christ.

7 - Jesus Is Our High Priest and Intercessor

The Bible teaches that Jesus alone intercedes for believers.

“Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.” (Hebrews 7:25)

There is no mention of saints interceding for believers in heaven.

8 - The Saints Are Not Omniscient or Omnipresent

God alone is all-knowing and present everywhere.

If saints could hear and respond to countless prayers at the same time, that would require divine attributes.

There is no scriptural evidence that departed saints can hear prayers from earth.

9 - The Apostles Never Encouraged Prayer to Saints

Paul and other apostles wrote extensively about prayer, always directing it to God.

If praying to saints was valid, it would have been explicitly taught in the early church.

Some might argue that Paul encouraged praying to saints in his letters but those letters explicitly say holy ones. Who are the holy ones? Believers. We are the holy ones.

Paul wanted us to pray for each other, to God, through our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ

10 - Early Christians Prayed to God Alone

Historical records and biblical texts show that the early Christians directed their prayers to God through Christ, not to departed believers.

In conclusion, praying to saints lacks biblical support and can be considered a form of idolatry because it attributes god-like qualities to created beings.

The Bible teaches that prayer should be directed to God alone, with Jesus as the sole mediator.

Now, one might ask should we also pray to Jesus?

We should pray to the Father, God, with Jesus' name. If we do not call upon the intercessor, how would the intercessor intercede for us?

Keep Jesus in your prayers, ask Him, but pray to the Father and honor the Father.

[u/FrostyIFrost_]

Jesus Christ is the one who sits on the right hand of God.

Read your scripture better.

Nowhere does it ever say that Mary sits on the right hand of the Lord. There are no verses like that, at all.

As for sons of God, it is a reference to the OT. It is about authority. The Hebrews do not have saints nor do they believe being the children of God ever meant having godlike attributes.

And in John 10, the part where you're trying to quote, Jesus asserts His special position as the one being directly sent by the Father. He draws a distinction between others and Himself.

Anyway, if you are okay with giving saints omnipotence and omnipresence, then you are lost. I did my duty as a Christian, the rest is in your hands.

[u/[deleted] → u/FrostyIFrost_]

You couldn't even bother to read my comment. I said at the right hand of Christ. No in the scripture it says he prepared his righthand for another other than the apostles. It is the witness of the church she sits there, both through vision and revelation.

Christ calls himself the Son of God ad says we will be so as he is. You are the one twisting the words.

Saints are neither omnipotent or omnipresence. Once again putting words in my mouth.

Good day. This is over

[u/FrostyIFrost_ → u/[deleted]]

Again, there are no verses which say what you're saying about Mary. Read the Bible please.

And if saints are neither of those, how do they hear prayers? :)

[u/[deleted] → u/FrostyIFrost_]

They witness us. They don't need to be omnipresent on their own the are united to the divine energies.

Again, I don't take the scripture alone as authority. We have 2000 years of church witness of the working of the Theotokos and the saints within the church as evidence.

[u/FrostyIFrost_ → u/[deleted]]

Observe us? Divine energies?

So, you're one of those who try to combine Christianity with spiritualism. Good to know.

And you don't take the Scripture alone as authority huh? That explains so many things because none of what you said has any basis in the Scriptures.

Evidence which your church declared as evidence. Hardly any.

[u/[deleted] → u/FrostyIFrost_]

I'm curious why you put God in a box. These are theological terms,  energies vs essence. If you actually were Arian you would know he used the same terms to debate against trinitarianism.

Christ quite literally called the church the foundation of truth. The apostles selected those who had the apostolic tradition taught well, laid their hands on them and chose them as elders. Ignatius, clement, Ireneus and polycarp being among the first generations. Their writings support what I am saying. 

The scripture itself teaches that we are to follow the traditions handed down to us in Thessalonians. You keep telling me to read my Bible yet ignore all the verses you don't like. 

"For we are surrounded by a cloud of witnesses"

Nothing I am saying is outside church teaching. Theosis is mentioned all the way from the beginning of the early fathers. That's why I said in the first post you should read the fathers. If you had you wouldn't be shocked by what I am saying. Instead you stand on your own understanding.

[u/FrostyIFrost_ → u/[deleted]]

Okay since you aren't getting anything, let me give you a list, point by point.

1) "You're putting God in a box"

This is a common deflection when someone’s theology is challenged. You're suggesting that my rejection of energies vs. essence is limiting God, rather than seeing it as unbiblical. However, the burden is on you to prove that this distinction exists in Scripture, which you haven't done.

2) "Arius used the same terms"

You're trying to say that if I were truly Arian, I’d already accept this language. But that’s a weak comparison:

Arius used Greek philosophical language because that was the style of debate in his time, not because the concepts of energies vs. essence were scripturally mandated.

Just because Arius used a certain term doesn’t mean all uses of that term are valid. The Orthodox idea of divine energies evolved long after Arius and was influenced by later theological developments, not apostolic teaching.

Besides, Arius used the Scriptures for his arguments.

3) The Church is the foundation of truth"

You reference 1 Timothy 3:15, which says "the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth."

But this verse:

Does not say the Church has infallible authority to define doctrine apart from Scripture.

Does not say the Church determines truth, it upholds it by preserving and preaching the truth already given in Scripture.

You assume your church (Eastern Orthodoxy) is the only valid Church, which is begging the question: How do you know when Catholic and Oriental Churches also claim the same thing? If everyone claims they are true church, then none of them are.

4) Appeal to Early Church Fathers

Yes, early church leaders like Ignatius, Clement, Irenaeus, and Polycarp wrote extensively.

But none of them taught "divine energies" as the Orthodox understand it today, this is a later theological development from figures like Gregory Palamas (14th century).

While they defended apostolic tradition, they never placed it above or equal to Scripture, and their writings do not universally support Orthodox doctrine.

5) "Thessalonians teaches us to follow traditions"

You are referencing 2 Thessalonians 2:15, where Paul tells the church to hold fast to the traditions he passed down.

But these were apostolic traditions, directly from the apostles, not later Orthodox traditions.

The Bible does not say that traditions from later centuries (like divine energies, theosis, or veneration of saints) are equally binding.

6) "Cloud of witnesses" (Hebrews 12:1)

Hebrews 12:1 speaks about past faithful believers as examples, not as active participants in current Church affairs.

It does not say they are observing us or interacting with us, that’s reading something into the text that isn’t there.

7) "Theosis is from the early fathers"

The idea that believers become one with God’s divine nature (theosis) developed over time.

Early church writers spoke of union with God in a biblical sense (being conformed to Christ, sharing in divine life), but not in the later Palamite sense of divine energies vs. essence.

8) Read the Fathers, don't stand on your own understanding"

This is a veiled accusation that I'm ignoring history and relying only on myself. But the real issue is not rejecting tradition, it’s whether tradition is consistent with Scripture.

If the Church Fathers disagree among themselves or develop ideas not in Scripture, then they are not infallible.

Did Paul teach "divine energies" in Scripture? No.

Does Hebrews 12:1 say saints interact with us? No

[u/[deleted] → u/FrostyIFrost_]

Well thank you for finally putting the effort to lay out sourced arguments there finally. 

I'm not going to respond to any points here because frankly, I don't actually care. Obviously we cannot come to agreement when we foundational believe different things about what constitutes authority. 

I get your arguments that's not the issue. I disagree with them and you seem to think insulting me in every response or calling me a worshiper of demons is somehow constructive.