The Rapture?

OSV.com ^ | 04-29-16 | Msgr. Charles Pope

[Salvation]

The Rapture?

Q. Many of our Protestant brethren say that, before Jesus comes, there will be a rapture wherein all the faithful will be taken up, I guess, to meet Him in the sky. When I tell them that the Bible says we will “see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of heaven” (Mt 24:30) and “he will send his angels ... and they will gather his elect from the four winds” (Mt 24:31), and then ask them who will be left to “gather” if everyone has previously been “raptured,” they say it will be the Jews. What is the Church’s teaching on this? Will there even be such a thing as the rapture? I’m confused! Any light you can shed on the subject will be greatly appreciated!

Rich Willette, Springfield, Vt.

A. The notion of rapture (a Latin word that means to be snatched away) is a very novel concept among certain (not all) evangelicals. It is a notion less than 150 years old and finds no real support in the biblical text as you point out. Fundamentally, the theory asserts that before the final tribulations of the last times, faithful Christians will be snatched away. Rapture theorists disagree about the exact moment of the snatching. Some say it will be pre-tribulation, others midway through the tribulations, and some even say post-tribulation.

The root text for evangelicals who hold rapture theory is a text from the First Letter to the Thessalonians: “Indeed. we tell you this, on the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will surely not precede those who have fallen asleep. 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. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore, console one another with these words” (4:15-18).

The context is the second coming of Christ. There are not two second comings taught in Scripture, but rapture theory posits two — the one described in First Thessalonians and another one, some 1,000 years later. Note, too, that in First Thessalonians there is no mention of some people being left behind. There is no mention of a 1,000-year reign. Nor does St. Paul indicate that what he is describing here is a different coming of Christ, distinct from other texts in the Gospel wherein Christ describes His own second coming.

Thus we are left with a text that simply does not support what rapture theorists say. They further strive to unnaturally stitch this account with other texts in the Book of Revelation. The result is a highly debatable account of the last days that even rapture theorists hotly debate in terms of the details. The whole enterprise amounts to an attempt to shoehorn biblical passages into rapture theory that more clearly call it into question. To say the “elect” are merely the Jews is speculative at best and fanciful and contrived at worst.

As for Catholic teaching on these matters, the Catechism of the Catholic Church summarizes it as follows: “Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers [see Lk 18:8; Mt 24:12]. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh. [see 2 Thes 2:4-12; 1 Thes 5:2-3; 2 Jn 7; 1 Jn 2:18-22]” (No. 675).

[kindred]

The early church, like the Thessalonian believers, did indeed expect the return of Jesus Christ to the earth and the translation of the saints before the tribulation, this teaching of Paul the Apostle has been undermined by modern Scripture-less Christendom. Search the Scriptures before believing denominational teachings as so many are cults.

[MHGinTN]

From 'Renald E. Showers, Marantha Our Lord, Come (Bellmawr: The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, 1995), 35:

That the Day of the Lord will have a twofold nature and, therefore, two phases. In addition, we should note that the biblical expression “the Day of the Lord” has a double sense (broad and narrow) in relationship to the future. The broad sense refers to an extended period of time involving divine interventions related at least to the 70th week of Daniel and the thousand-year millennium. . . .

Concerning this broad sense, A. B. Davidson wrote, “Though the ‘Day of the Lord,’ as the expression implies, was at first conceived as a definite and brief period of time, being an era of judgment and salvation, it many times broadened out to be an extended period. From being a day it became an epoch.”15 [author’s footnote below] The narrow sense refers to one specific day—the day on which Christ will return to the earth from heaven with His angels. Just as the word “day” in Genesis 1:5 has both a broad sense (a 24-hour day—“and the evening and the morning were the first day”) and a narrow sense (the light part of a 24-hour day in contrast with the darkness part—“And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night”)—so the expression “the Day of the Lord” has both a broad and a narrow sense in relationship to the future ...

Showers goes on to say that both Joel 2:31 and Malachi 4:5 are referring to the narrow sense of the Day of the Lord. He says, “we should note that the Scriptures apply the expression ‘the great and terrible Day of the Lord’ to the narrow Day, not the broad Day. The implication is that the narrow Day will differ from the rest of the broad Day, not only in duration, but also in significance.”

[MHGinTN]

For believers the sequence is first the Christ, then the antichrist. To gave the day of the lord already happening and the ekklesia still on Earth would be ‘first the antichrist then the Christ.’

[af_vet_1981]

When Proverbs was written, the fullness of God's revelation through Jesus Christ had not yet occurred. You're using that verse almost to deny Scripture as a matter of General Revelation (i.e., Truth revealed to all).

When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey.

Acts, Catholic chapter one, Protestant verses six to twelve,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James,
boldness mine

[daniel1212]

Gee, I don't red it that way. Paul no where in 1 Thess mentions the lawless one, yet he refers his readers back to what he had told them about their being gathered to Jesus. Further, it is the Day of The Lord which will not arrive unless the 'falling away'/departure and the revealing of the lawless one be revealed. Paul did not teach the folks to look for the arrival of antichrist.

Well, the Day of The Lord in this contexts is used with being gathered to Jesus. We will find out which position is True, while the main issue is to keep looking to Christ, and "Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God." (Acts 14:22)it

[MHGinTN]

Your perspective seems to still be tinted greatly by a past in Catholicism. I do not agree with your assessment, but this is not the place to argue these issues. I would offer to you a video series on Matthew 24, however: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waJR5E-JZDI&list=PLUY4A37zNdFtqJeRmtNnJKShCEyJ3RX3A

[MHGinTN]

And if you have time, here is a presentation from Dr. Tommy Ice differentiating the Rapture and the Second Coming of The Christ to rescue the Jews and end the Tribulation and bring the institution of the Kingdom: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NTWbk5yv9E&index=8&list=PLUY4A37zNdFtqJeRmtNnJKShCEyJ3RX3A

[daniel1212]

Your perspective seems to still be tinted greatly by a past in Catholicism. I do not agree with your assessment, but this is not the place to argue these issues. I would offer to you a video series on Matthew 24, however: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waJR5E-JZDI&list=PLUY4A37zNdFtqJeRmtNnJKShCEyJ3RX3A

That is an absurd charge, as instead of being motivated by tradition (which i was not aware of growing up) and not examining things objectively, my position as i see it (and am open to correction), rests upon what i see Scripture most plainly teaching overall, while not becoming so preoccupied with the issue that I pursue it as a major issue of contention, and resort to personal attacks when faced with even mild disagreement. Which is all too Catholic.

[MHGinTN]

Please forgive me if I have offended you ... I see many aspects of catholic teaching in the confusion of what is taught in Matthew 24 and the differences in Luke 21. These 'confusions' lead to placing the Rapture of the church/the ekklesia at different temporal points.

There is a Rapture of Jews described in Matt 24 when the Angels supernaturally gather the Jews from across the globe, yet there is a Rapture/supernatural event which gathers the Ekklesia to Him before the wrath is poured out during the Tribulation. But that distinction is incomprehensible if the contexts are not discerned differently from what catholiciism teaches its adherents.

[daniel1212]

Bigger fish to fry: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3433430/posts

[CpnHook]

No, it is not rooted principally in the faith and practice of the early church,

It is, despite your reflexive denials.

Prayers to the saints and martyrs are recorded on the walls of the Catachombs in Rome (the place where early Christians sought refuges from the persecutions). We have other early evidence that the practice existed in other parts of the Christian world. Both the Orthodox and Roman churches concur this is an ancient and widespread practice. (For an Orthodox perspective, see On the Intercession and Invocation of the Saints

) Your appeal to the OT misses the mark. Intercessory prayer proceeds from the belief that within the Body of Christ (the Church) there are some who are present with Jesus Christ in the Heavenly realm. That was not true during OT days.

And much the same can be said as the NT. Some of the earliest known examples of intercessory prayer were to the martyred apostles. Obviously, that practice didn't exist while the Apostles (they who composted the NT books) were still alive.

Not even the book of Hebrews with its details of the better covenant, and priestly functions, nor any other book, teaches prayer to created beings in Heaven.

Your reference to Hebrews only serves to underscore the historicity of the practice. Hebrews was one of the last books of the NT to gain universal acceptance. It's authenticity was dispute into the 4th Century. By that point in time, intercessory prayer was already an established (and seemingly non-disputed) practice.

No one around 300 A.D. was apt to look at Hebrews and find your "argument from silence." You again miss the mark.

Upthread, St. Ephraim the Syrian was cited as a supposed example of a Pre-Trib Rapture (though he was not the author of the document attributed to him). But he does speak on the present topic. From the cited source:

"Ye victorious martyrs who endured torments gladly for the sake of the God and Saviour; ye who have boldness of speech towards the Lord Himself; ye saints, intercede for us who are timid and sinful men, full of sloth, that the grace of Christ may come upon us, and enlighten the hearts of all of us that so we may love him.[vii]

Amen.

[CpnHook]

That's not a fair assessment since there were likely millions of Christian who refused to bow to the Catholic religion and who were as a result pretty much wiped off the face of the earth while their scriptures were confiscated and burned...The world was left with mostly Catholic teaching while for Centuries scriptures were kept from the lay Catholic...

LOL. As laughable, unsubstantiated claims go, you've made a good one here.

I know asking you for proof of these supposed "Millions" who perished is pointless, as I know from experience people will believe the myth when it suits them, and the lack of evidence simply doesn't bother them.

But before 325 C.E., when Constantine legalized the practice of Christianty, the Church was poor and persecuted. Your laughable explanation grows even more pathetic when one realizes there is not support for the PTR among the Christians existing before then. (And you can spare us your Scriptural misreadings; the point being that if Paul or anyone explained there is some pre-trib "rapture" to any of the communities in which he lived and taught, that knowledge didn't pass into the next generations of Christians.)

[daniel1212]

No, it is not rooted principally in the faith and practice of the early church, that of the NT church, in which, as with the entire OT, praying to anyone else but God is utterly absent, with the Holy Spirit inspiring appox. 200 prayers to Heaven, but absolutely none by believers to anyone else but God. Only pagans are described as praying to created beings.

It is, despite your reflexive denials.

It absolutely is not despite your reflexive assertion to the contrary. Prayers to the saints and martyrs or any created beings are NOWHERE recorded on the pages of Scripture, which is the uniquely wholly inspired substantive body of Truth that the church doctrinally and prophetically (OT) began under, and added to, and which wholly inspired-of-God is the judge of various practices such as the Catacombs example.

Both the Orthodox and Roman churches concur this is an ancient and widespread practice. Which means that are wrong, as they are in a multitude of other things that the NT church did not manifestly believe .

) Your appeal to the OT misses the mark. Intercessory prayer proceeds from the belief that within the Body of Christ (the Church) there are some who are present with Jesus Christ in the Heavenly realm. That was not true during OT days.

Wrong. Intercessory prayer includes prayers to angels, as well as to Elijah and Enoch, but prayer to which the Holy Spirit nowhere records or sanctions by believers. Nor teaches that they are able to constantly hear all the prayers directed to them, which is a privilege and power only God is shown to have, which two-way communication between created beings required both to somehow be in the same realm, and was personal, oral and by visible heavenly beings.

. Some of the earliest known examples of intercessory prayer were to the martyred apostles.

Wrong, as your source is not that of the only wholly inspired substantive body of Truth, but it that of uninspired tradition and Catholic teaching, by which errors are perpetuated.

Hebrews was one of the last books of the NT to gain universal acceptance. It's authenticity was dispute into the 4th Century. By that point in time, intercessory prayer was already an established (and seemingly non-disputed) practice.

Irrelevant. Both men and writings of God are what they are regardless of the recognition or non-recognition by men. The words of God are the standard even before men recognize them. But OT itself provides for common soul recognizing both men and writings of God are being so, even in dissent from the magisterium, and thus it provides for a canon.

No one around 300 A.D. was apt to look at Hebrews and find your "argument from silence." You again miss the mark.

Irrelevant, for as is abundantly evidenced, they did look to what was written as the standard for obedience and testing truth claims, and oral preaching was established upon Scriptural substantiation, and nothing that was recognized as Scripture or would be testifies to or teaches prayer to created beings in Heaven.Which is inexplicable in the light of prayer being a most fundamental practice, and with prayer to created beings in Heaven being so greatly depended upon by Catholics.

Nor is my argument only based on silence where there should be revelation, as it also rests upon who Scripture teaches we are to prayer to (not such as "our mother who are in Heaven")./i>

You again miss the mark.

Upthread, St. Ephraim the Syrian...does speak on the present topic...intercede for us

Pious (I assume) Ephraim the Syrian was in error, as are all who do what no believer in Scripture manifestly did.

[CpnHook]

Prayers to the saints and martyrs or any created beings are NOWHERE recorded on the pages of Scripture,

Well, duh, since there were no persons in heaven during the OT period, and since the Apostles writing the NT books had, in the main, yet to die or be martyred, it's not a practice necessarily expected to be found in the Scriptures.

Which means that are wrong,

Rather, I think the fact that intercessory prayer was practiced among the churches known to have had succession of teachers going back to their Apostolic foundation is STRONG evidence of its propriety.

Intercessory prayer includes prayers to angels, as well as to Elijah and Enoch, but prayer to which the Holy Spirit nowhere records or sanctions by believers.

Well, it's good you brought up angels, as Scripture does record the intercession of angels in receiving prayers and placing them before the Lord. Tobit 12:12. Oh, wait, I can hear it already. You don't think the church of the first centuries knew what books were Scripture either.

Wrong, as your source is not that of the only wholly inspired substantive body of Truth, but it that of uninspired tradition and Catholic teaching,

My source is the church founded by Jesus Christ, which he commissioned to go and teach throughout the world, and which He promised the Holy Spirit to lead into all truth. When that church in the world agrees that the practice of intercessory prayer is right and good, then I have a Divine source teaching me.

**No one around 300 A.D. was apt to look at Hebrews and find your "argument from silence." You again miss the mark.**

Irrelevant,

It's very relevant as you're trying to build your "argument from silence" off a book that then didn't then have universal recognition. Your historical illiteracy is tripping you up.

for as is abundantly evidenced, they did look to what was written as the standard for obedience and testing truth claims, and oral preaching was established upon Scriptural substantiation,

Great. So then we know that when it came to intercessory prayer they either 1) found Scriptural sanction directly (e.g., Tobit) or indirectly (e.g., the teaching on the Body of Christ) or 2) founded it on oral tradition passed on from the Apostles. I'm good either way. :)

What we do know is this generation of Christians -- upon whose determinations we rely as to the scope of the NT canon (including you, whether you admit it or not) -- found the practice salutary and unobjectionable.

Nor is my argument only based on silence where there should be revelation,

Here's where your argument collapses, as it is very much the argument from silence I've been calling it.

The Apostles lived within the NT communities for years at a time. Yet, Scripture records virtually nothing of their prayer life or how they lived and reacted within those communities. Much of the NT (esp. Paul's letters) were written AFTER he had moved on in order to address various issues that had arisen since his departure. You're noting that the NT books don't explicitly record an illustration of intercessory prayer, but they don't much record the private prayer of ANYONE. Apart from Jesus's words in Gethsemene, we lack much of a description of the words and actions used in private prayer. And general descriptions exhorting people to pray "to God" don't provide an answer for you, as intercessory prayer is still "to God" as the object of receipt.

[CpnHook]

(This appears originally to have gone to a "Daniel12." Some truncation error along the way occurred.)

Prayers to the saints and martyrs or any created beings are NOWHERE recorded on the pages of Scripture,

Well, duh, since there were no persons in heaven during the OT period, and since the Apostles writing the NT books had, in the main, yet to die or be martyred, it's not a practice necessarily expected to be found in the Scriptures.

Which means that are wrong,

Rather, I think the fact that intercessory prayer was practiced among the churches known to have had succession of teachers going back to their Apostolic foundation is STRONG evidence of its propriety.

Intercessory prayer includes prayers to angels, as well as to Elijah and Enoch, but prayer to which the Holy Spirit nowhere records or sanctions by believers.

Well, it's good you brought up angels, as Scripture does record the intercession of angels in receiving prayers and placing them before the Lord. Tobit 12:12. Oh, wait, I can hear it already. You don't think the church of the first centuries knew what books were Scripture either.

Wrong, as your source is not that of the only wholly inspired substantive body of Truth, but it that of uninspired tradition and Catholic teaching,

My source is the church founded by Jesus Christ, which he commissioned to go and teach throughout the world, and which He promised the Holy Spirit to lead into all truth. When that church in the world agrees that the practice of intercessory prayer is right and good, then I have a Divine source teaching me.

**No one around 300 A.D. was apt to look at Hebrews and find your "argument from silence." You again miss the mark.**

Irrelevant,

It's very relevant as you're trying to build your "argument from silence" off a book that then didn't then have universal recognition. Your historical illiteracy is tripping you up.

for as is abundantly evidenced, they did look to what was written as the standard for obedience and testing truth claims, and oral preaching was established upon Scriptural substantiation,

Great. So then we know that when it came to intercessory prayer they either 1) found Scriptural sanction directly (e.g., Tobit) or indirectly (e.g., the teaching on the Body of Christ) or 2) founded it on oral tradition passed on from the Apostles. I'm good either way. :)

What we do know is this generation of Christians -- upon whose determinations we rely as to the scope of the NT canon (including you, whether you admit it or not) -- found the practice salutary and unobjectionable.

Nor is my argument only based on silence where there should be revelation,

Here's where your argument collapses, as it is very much the argument from silence I've been calling it.

The Apostles lived within the NT communities for years at a time. Yet, Scripture records virtually nothing of their prayer life or how they lived and reacted within those communities. Much of the NT (esp. Paul's letters) were written AFTER he had moved on in order to address various issues that had arisen since his departure. You're noting that the NT books don't explicitly record an illustration of intercessory prayer, but they don't much record the private prayer of ANYONE. Apart from Jesus's words in Gethsemene, we lack much of a description of the words and actions used in private prayer. And general descriptions exhorting people to pray "to God" don't provide an answer for you, as intercessory prayer is still "to God" as the object of receipt.

[daniel1212]

Prayers to the saints and martyrs or any created beings are NOWHERE recorded on the pages of Scripture,

Well, duh, since there were no persons in heaven during the OT period, and since the Apostles writing the NT books had, in the main, yet to die or be martyred, it's not a practice necessarily expected to be found in the Scriptures.

Well, duh? As said, created beings were indeed in Heaven (and lots of them) in the OT era, and later many saints and martyrs after the Lord's resurrection, yet we have zero prayers to any, either to angels in the OT or to saints in glory in the New, And which is despite prayer being a most basic practice with approx. 200 recorded prayers in Scripture.

It is simply untenable that prayer to created beings in Heaven was taking place in the light of that absence alone, unless Scripture is superfluous, while instructions on prayer to Heaven were also never taught as to created beings in Heaven, versus to the Lord.

Rather, I think the fact that intercessory prayer was practiced among the churches known to have had succession of teachers going back to their Apostolic foundation is STRONG evidence of its propriety.

No it is not, as the extraScriptural record of what they practiced is not the wholly inspired word of God, and in which there is no evidence for this common practice, but that of teaching that directly addresses the Lord. Nor is it promised to the church that errors will not arise, as in fact the opposite is promised "of your own selves." (Acts 20:30)

Well, it's good you brought up angels, as Scripture does record the intercession of angels in receiving prayers and placing them before the Lord.

Actually, what I brought up was "prayers to angels," not your goal post moving, and "Now therefore, when thou didst pray, and Sara thy daughter in law, I did bring the remembrance of your prayers before the Holy One: and when thou didst bury the dead, I was with thee likewise," (Tobit 12:12) is not praying to angels which is the issue, nor is it actually that that of an angelic postal service, that of receiving prayers arriving first to them and then brought to God, as bringing the remembrance of their prayers before the Holy One is akin to Rv. 5:8; 8:4, that of bringing prayers as a memorial. (cf. Lv. 2:2,15,16; 24:7; Num. 5:15) Neither that nor even if angels may pray is not in debate, but that of them being the object of prayer to Heaven, and able to hear all such from Heaven, a privileged an attribute only God is shown to have.

Oh, wait, I can hear it already. You don't think the church of the first centuries knew what books were Scripture either.

It is a testimony to the propaganda of Rome if you think that the canon was truly all settled early one, versus substantial scholarly doubt and disagreement about books - mainly apocrypha - continuing down thru the centuries and right into Trent, which provided the first "infallible," indisputable canon for RCS - after the death of Luther, who was at freedom to join other RC scholars in marginalizing certain books as not being Scripture proper. That is actual history.

As for Tobit, that is such a book of fables that it should not even be in the running, as it provides a spurious fantastic tale, with a a women, Sarah, who has lost seven husbands because Asmodeus, the demon of lust, and "the worst of demons," abducts and kills every man she marries on their wedding night before the marriage can be consummated!

And about a man, Tobias, who was sleeping with his eyes open while birds dropped dung into in his eyes (sound sleeper!) and blinded him. And who later is attacked by a fish leaping out of the river to devour him! But Raphael has him capture it and later he burns the fish’s liver and heart to drive away the demon Asmodeus away to Upper Egypt, enabling him and Sarah to finally consummate his marriage.

The officially RC approved NAB Bible says in its intro to Tobit that it is folklore, as if that was not obvious, and in rejecting this as SCripture, we have not followed "cunningly devised fables", thank God, and which reads like so much of the nonsense in the Talmud, "Not giving heed to Jewish fables..." (Titus 1:14)

My source is the church founded by Jesus Christ, which he commissioned to go and teach throughout the world, and which He promised the Holy Spirit to lead into all truth.

Which is simply begging the question, an argument by assertion, while the Scriptures simply do not testify to that assertion, but render the church of Rome to be largely invisible and the largest deformation of the NT church!

When that church in the world agrees that the practice of intercessory prayer is right and good, then I have a Divine source teaching me.

Which is mere propaganda, but it is actually refreshing when a RC finally forsakes attempting to argue as if Scripture actually supports prayer to created beings in Heaven, and resort to his/her real basis for assurance of Truth claims, which is faith in their church, and with her novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome (and basically in primary cults).

It's very relevant as you're trying to build your "argument from silence" off a book that then didn't then have universal recognition. Your historical illiteracy is tripping you up.

So much for your argument for the church knowing what was Scripture, and if universal recognition was needful for a source to have authority then we could not quote Christ as an authority until He realized such, but what is of God is so regardless of what men may say, and it is not surprising you try to exclude Hebrews seeing that with its emphasis on intercession and access to God and the aspects of how the new covenant prayer is better, then praying to those in Heaven should be taught, but immediate access into the holy of holies by the blood of Christ, and who is the only heavenly and all sufficient intercessor. (Heb. 2,4; 7:25; 10:19 cf. 1Tim. 2:5) And no, being rhetorically surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses is not teaching praying to them either.

Meanwhile the fact is that even the OT books which the Lord and NT church invoked as its foundational prophetic and doctrinal foundation provides not even one single supplication to anyone in Heaven but the Lord (except by pagans), even when multitudes of created beings were in Heaven to pray to, while the same Holy Spirit author also provides zero in the NT for what Caths hold to as an essential and common practice, yet Scripture also only instructs us to pray to the Lord in prayer to Heaven, not angels or ascended saints.

Truly it is you who must argue from profound, inexplicable silence, and the burden of proof is on you to provide it. You might as well argue that NT Christians also kneeled or prostrated themselves before a statue in praising the entity it represented in the unseen world, beseeching such for Heavenly help, and giving glory and titles and ascribing attributes to such which are never given in Scripture to created beings (except to false gods). But then i would be describing Catholicism and common "veneration" given to the fabricated Queen of Heaven of it.

Which manner of adulation would constitute worship in Scripture, yet Catholics imagine that by playing word games then they can avoid crossing the invisible line between mere "veneration" and worship.

Moses, put down those rocks! I was only engaging in hyper dulia, not adoring her. Can't you tell the difference?

Here is the clearest example of such in Scripture:

As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes... (Jeremiah 44:16-17)

Great. So then we know that when it came to intercessory prayer they either 1) found Scriptural sanction directly (e.g., Tobit) or indirectly (e.g., the teaching on the Body of Christ) or 2) founded it on oral tradition passed on from the Apostles. I'm good either way. :)

Error proceeding from error. 1) They found NO Scriptural sanction directly or indirectly for praying to created beings in Heaven (Tobit included), as shown.

or indirectly (e.g., the teaching on the Body of Christ)

Which is also desperate extrapolation, as it presumes a correspondence btwn earthly communications btwn created beings and that which is btwn both realms, but which can only be presumed contrary to the evidence. For examples of communications btwn created beings from earth and Heaven was never that of the latter hearing individual or corporate prayers addressed to them in Heaven, but communications btwn both parties was personal, visible, and required both to somehow be in the same realm. Only God is said and shown to be addressed in prayer and who can hear all prayer from Heaven. Which testifies to a boundary btwn realms and a limitation of power and privilege as regards created beings.

or 2) founded it on oral tradition passed on from the Apostles. I'm good either way. :)

Which is also invalid, for it simply does not follow that since some of what Scripture teaches may have first passed down orally then whatever Rome says is apostolic tradition must be so. Which includes her own claim to be able to do so. What was orally preached was subject to testing by Scripture, and not vice versa. The Lord did not quote oral tradition to the devil, (Mt. 4) or in refuting the religious authorities, and their errors, (Mt. 22) nor in teaching the disciples the prophetic basis for His mission, and opening their minds to understand it. (Lk. 24:27,44,45)

You can invoke such text as 2 Thes. 2;15 if care to, but which does not teach what Catholic tradition claims for itself. Obedience can be enjoined to oral preaching of Scriptural truths by SS preachers, even without having a Bible (and the whole church "preached the word"), but which is subject to it. Yet apostolic wholly inspired of God preaching could include new revelation, neither of which does Rome claim her own words are.

What we do know is this generation of Christians -- upon whose determinations we rely as to the scope of the NT canon (including you, whether you admit it or not) -- found the practice salutary and unobjectionable.

As they did other errors, while retaining enough basic truths that a remnant of souls could find Christ amidst her increasing trappings.

Here's where your argument collapses, as it is very much the argument from silence I've been calling it. The Apostles lived within the NT communities for years at a time. Yet, Scripture records virtually nothing of their prayer life or how they lived and reacted within those communities. Much of the NT (esp. Paul's letters) were written AFTER he had moved on in order to address various issues that had arisen since his departure. You're noting that the NT books don't explicitly record an illustration of intercessory prayer, but they don't much record the private prayer of ANYONE.

Which argument is so much nonsense, an appeal to silence that can only presume that the desperately needed missing evidence exists despite the abundant examples of prayer, multitudes of personal prayers in Scripture, and even with instruction on it, while the burden of proof rests on you to provide the evidence that you can only presume exists.

Moreover, there is not reason to exclude the OT, for again, there were/are multitudes of powerful created beings in Heaven to pry to, and in the NT, even and apart from the prayers Christ, while there are fewer records or descriptions of the actual corporate and personal prayers in the NT, where they are then none are said or described as addressed as being to anyone but the Lord, except in the case of the lost.

Apart from Jesus's words in Gethsemene, we lack much of a description of the words and actions used in private prayer.

Really? What is such a lack of description that you can read prayer being addressed to someone else in Heaven? "Apart from Jesus's words in Gethsemene?"

Luke 11:2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.

Mat. 11:25-27 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth..

Jn.11:41-42 Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. 42 And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me.

Jn.17:1-26 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

Lk. 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

Mat. 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Lk. 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Acts 1:24-25 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

And being let go, they went to their own company, and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them. 24 And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is:.. - Acts 4:23,24

And they stoned Stephen, calling upon, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. (Acts 7:59)

Acts 9:6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.

For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ... - Eph. 3:14

And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless.. - 1Thes. 5:23,24

And general descriptions exhorting people to pray "to God" don't provide an answer for you, as intercessory prayer is still "to God" as the object of receipt.

But the Holy Spirit provides both instruction and multitudes of examples of who is to be addressed in prayer to Heaven, even where mention of praying to created beings would be expected, and with God alone shown able to hear all such, and to whom believers have immediate access to, and only presenting Christ as heavenly intercessor (souls also when God will judge the world is not that of making intercession, nor bringing prayers as a memorial before the final judgments), and with the aforementioned evidence of restrictions in communication btwn created beings in their respective realms.

Therefore you are left with the veracity of your substantially invisible (in the NT) church with its accretion of errors as the basis for belief, which is not more Scriptural then her distinctive class of sacerdotal clergy distinctive called "priests," whose primary active ordained function is offering the Lord's supper as a sacrifice to sin, contrary to the NT description. Which also was a post-apostolic development of error.

[daniel1212]

Ping to above

[aMorePerfectUnion]

"Little Children, keep yourselves from idols."

-Apostle John before his death

Angels, Ikons, "Saints", Mary, etc.

[MarchonDC09122009]

Very informative post providing factual origination and problem with born-again Christian escapism mentality.

American evangelical Christians are not seen as rational or constructively engaged in problem solving by much of the world because “the care not about things of this world - give all problems to jesus” didn’t work out so well for hundreds of millions of victims of war, genocide, disease, and starvation.
Living and standing up to violent bullies is hard bloody work.

Europeans ask, where was god when he allowed Nazis and Communists to murder 60+ Million European souls in the 20th century?
They don’t see that their society’s rebellion against god’s moral instruction (not to be confused with corrupt Catholic church dogma and attrocities) resulted in tragic human travesties.

Christians would be better off being constructively engaged seeing to it we have moral governance on earth, rather than erroneously proclaiming they have their own end-game escape ticket.

RE: “A guy by the name of Darby conjured it up using vague references in the NT. Then the Scofield reference Bible enlarged on it. Some churches are so radical on it that to not believe in it you’re banned. The main problem is people are so caught up in the concept they loose focus of Yeshua and His teachings and of Paul’s writings. They feel that why should they bother with anything because they believe the Rapture is imminent.

One of their arguments is that they’ll be caught up in the air and forever be with Christ. If I was coming to someones house and they come out to meet me, we all don’t go back to where I live but to enter their house to where I’m coming.”

[SkyDancer]

"Europeans ask, where was god when he allowed Nazis and Communists to murder 60+ Million European souls in the 20th century?"

And G-d asks "were was man?