1. There are no examples at all in Scripture, among the multitude of prayers in the Bible, where any believer prayed to (petitioned to pray) anyone else in heaven but the Lord.
2. There exists no place where exhortations, commands or instruction on prayer directed believers to pray to the departed. “i.e. “Our mother, who art in heaven...”)..
3. In no place is it shown that believers do not have direct access to Christ, or where any insufficiency exists in Christ that would require or advantage another intercessor in heaven between Christ and man.
4. In no place are departed souls in heaven evidenced as hearing prayers and interceding for the supplicants.
5. Supplications to beings in heaven besides God are instead condemned.
5. Communication that took place between earthlings and heavenly beings besides God were in the context of personal visitation, on earth or as in a vision.
7. Believers are not crowned in heaven yet, (2Tim. 4:8; 1Pt. 5:4) and no one is called “Queen of heaven” other than Jer 44:17, (But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven) and who was a heavenly object of devotion and prayer.
Instead, not only is God set forth as the direct object prayer, but Christ alone is declared to be the heavenly intercessor, as He is uniquely qualified to be so, having been the only one who “was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin,” to whom saints can come directly to, and who can help them that are tempted, who alone it declares He “ever liveth to make intercession for them”, (Hebrews 2:18; 4:15,16; 7:25)
Therefore the argument for praying to saints in heaven is derived from analogy, that just as believers ask each other to pray for them on earth, so this must spiritually take place btwn saints in the heavenly and earthly realm. However, besides the utter lack of evidence as referred to in #4, and which is in contrast to God being abundantly affirmed as being so, this analogy would also sanction anything that human interdependence on earth requires, which assumes much.
Multitude of arguments are offered for praying for saints, seeking to extrapolate this out of texts, based upon the aforementioned analogy and premise, without one being able to show that the departed do hear and answer prayer, or any believer praying to them, yet the Bible refers to this as a practice among the pagan, which implicitly charges the Holy Spirit with neglect for not exampling/instruction that for believers. The closest they get is Mat 27:47, when some Judaizers say that Jesus was calling for for Elias, which would be most typically to discredit him, or a reflecting of superstition. Incredibly, in another attempt, 1Tim. 2:1 is actually interpreted to be a request for the departed to to pray! Rev. 5:8 is invoked, even though (for the fallible value it is worth), early patristic commentators on Revelation 5:8 refer to the prayers as being offered to God, not to the elders, (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4:17:6-4:18:1;, Origen, Against Celsus, 8:17;, Methodius, The Banquet of the Ten Virgins, 5:8), and even this is not showing them being objects for intercession, even if they were departed saints, which itself is speculation. Meanwhile, Irenaeus wrote:
“Nor does she [the church] perform anything by means of angelic invocations, or by incantations, or by any other wicked curious art; but, directing her prayers to the Lord, who made all things, in a pure, sincere, and straightforward spirit, and calling upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ..(Against Heresies, 2:32:5, 4:18:60
A further note on this, as regarding that God alone is evidenced to be the heavenly recipient of prayer, and able to be so, and that sanctioned communication between mortals on earth and beings in heaven (besides God) did not take place, is the example of Saul, who wanted to contact Samuel after he died. Rather than praying, he, as others, required a personal encounter, even if he did it thru the occult. However, it is not certain that he actually did see Samuel, though the prophecy came true.
As praying to saints lacks Scriptural evidence or warrant, so the argument for it looks to tradition, though this nor the Assumption enjoyed unanimous consent or assent of the fathers, but its real basis is Rome’s declaration of its supreme authority to teach such, and which effectively rests on itself, not upon the premise that her authority is dependent on demonstrable Scriptural warrant and concurring testimony (as that is held to be untenable, as relying on private interpretation and finite human reasoning). That is, according to our infallible interpenetration (of Scripture, history and tradition) we declare that we are infallible (within a certain infallibly stated formula) and so such an interpretation can be the only right one in any conflict.
Excellant...thank you.