A Response to Arguments for the Invocation of Saints
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 лис 2020
- Our website: www.JustandSinner.org
Publishing house: www.jspublishing.org
Patreon: / justandsinner
This is a continuation of the series we've been doing on prayer to saints. In this program, I answer some of the most common arguments I have heard in support of the practice of the invocation of the saints in response to my previous programs. - Розваги
Your point on Roman apologists using the same arguments from the post-Tridentine period is so spot on. I recently picked up George Salmon's "The Infallibility of the Church" - imho one of the best polemics against general Roman Catholic claims - and I was seriously shocked to see how this over 100 year old book responded almost word for word to arguments I've had levelled at me by traditionalist Catholic friends.
Catholic apologetics really hasn't fundamentally changed in centuries.
Isn't it a good thing that apologetics not change? Doesn't that indicate that the theology has stopped progressing?
(Or are you saying that Roman theologians have not dealt with any of the opposing arguements?)
@@j.g.4942 Its not a good thing IF the arguments of their opponents have progressed, which they have, a lot. They're basically fighting WW2 with muskets at this point.
Apologetic and theological development don't correlate, at least not necessarily. While our theology remains consistent with the ancient witness (notwithstanding new discoveries that prove true), our apologetic must always be evolving with the challenges of the age. At this, the Roman Catholics have failed, in my investigation, imho because their core claims cannot withstand historical/Biblical scrutiny, which is why the greatest recent ("recent" as in 200 years ago) development in Catholic apologetics has been to cede the claim of "universal consent of the fathers" and adopt Newman's Development of Doctrine thesis. But even today, many trad catholics I know don't adopt Newman and still prefer extremely old and long responded to arguments for a Christ-made papacy.
@@TheOtherPaul well at least that makes it easy for us then, hey?
@@TheOtherPaul dang! Awesome summary!
Catholic apologetics has not changed because Catholic apologetics is just as true today as it was in the sixteenth century. Similarly, Catholic doctrines have never changed since the time of Christ because Catholic doctrines are true and perfect.
Really grateful for your work
@Gospel Simplicity I thought you may have been referring to Prof. Cooper’s work in our interaction last night (concerning the validity of Orthodox Tradition)! I also keep up with his videos and saw your comment 😅 Would you say Prof. Cooper’s argumentation provides the basis for the obstacles you find in the Orthodox Tradition?
@@HectorLopez-qb2fj Great question! Not exactly, but I do appreciate his work. I would say the basis for the obstacles is a little deeper than that and goes to my upbringing as a Protestant and I'm currently a Theology Student at an Evangelical school (Moody Bible Institute), so my formal training in theology is, in some ways, fairly different from Orthodoxy.
@@GospelSimplicity I can sympathize. While I was baptized Roman Catholic as I child, I really resonate with the Evangelical perspective since I began placing my trust in Christ because of a ministry called YoungLife. Eventually, I wanted some historical-theological grounding for my faith and wound up listening to learned Christians like Dr. Cooper, Matt Fradd, Ryan Reeves, and the like. I even joined a PCA church and was planning on going to a Reformed seminary after graduating college! Obviously, these plans became complicated when I was exposed to Orthodoxy!
@@HectorLopez-qb2fj Estudia todo, es lo mejor. Compara, en oración, por ti mismo todas las corrientes teológicas. Si te gustan los reformados te lo recomiendo a Paul Washer, Piper, Carson y James White (apologista) y para um profundizaje más grande dále una mirada a unos videos y a unos libros de Kevin Vanhoozer, principalmente si consideras moverte a la ortodoxía. No te lo dejes de assistir y leer Vanhoozer antes, en serio, él es un hombre muy capacitado.
Um abrazo
@@HectorLopez-qb2fj how do you respond to cooper's arguments about saints? I'm a somewhat anglo catholic Anglican and I used to be in favour, but for me Cooper really shuts down the case for prayers to the saints
I hope you don't take offense that this Reformed Baptist finds your work strong and encouraging, Dr. Cooper! I have an Eastern Orthodox colleague who I have been dialoguing at work with and this material is quite helpful. Enjoying your channel!
Thank you for all your videos that really answer some hardball questions that most would dodge given the chance. God's peace be with you.
Really appreciate this entire series on prayer to the saints. This deep-dive does a lot to show, and explain, the serious divisions between the churches--as one example. Doctrines are not like pearls on a string where you can pick and choose the most beautiful ones and ignore the rest. They are interconnected, one builds upon the other. You change churches, you buy the whole bag.
Great video! Looking forward to the next one on this topic.
Nice! Can't wait for your video about Agustine over this topic.
As an ex Roman Catholic here is what I think. Why go to the saints when you can go to Jesus the Christ? Also the saints are only human, so how can they be present in different parts of the world at the same time and understand different languages?
As a lutheran myself I don't understand that reasoning.
The scriptures tells us to pray for each other so if let's say one ask you to pray for him/her will you then ask them why they don't go straight to Jesus?
The idea is that you simply ask for the saints to pray for you like you can ask anyone here on earth and because of the communion of saints we can do this.
Now I'm not claiming whether this is true or false. I just don't understand the reasoning of bringing in our direct relationship to Christ here more than on the occasion of christian praying for each other in general
@@cop2998 it's simple, because in the heavens saints are not omniscient and the Bible doesn't say any word about prayer to the saints who are in heaven.; which is TOTALLY different for asking prayers for saints here on earth, "alive and kicking".
@@josueinhan8436 totally agree with you.
"Why go the saints when you can go to Jesus the Christ?"
This is a bad approach and presents a false dichotomy. People who go to the saints pray to Jesus as well, and the point of going to them is to ask them to pray to Jesus as well. Both ways, the person praying is going to Jesus.
@@r.k8637 Why do you need to commune with the departed to ask them to ask God on your behalf when he already knows what you want before you so much as move your lips? Is it better to ask Mary than to ask God? Is God going to be more swayed if you throw saints into the mix? Why not ask all heaven, earth, and hell to join your cause? The only person going to Jesus is the person, uh, going to Jesus. Everyone else who thinks they can cajole God by other means is going to be very disappointed.
Your point about reading the fathers making you less likely to convert to Rome also holds up for me!
Funny story - my Mum once read the blurb in a church fathers related book I was reading and got a bit concerned (she’s at an independent baptist church). “Aren’t you worried this will make you a Catholic?” I replied that I certainly hoped it would make me more catholic, but that I was very sure it wouldn’t lead me to Rome!
I remember reading about the parable of the persistent woman, and its always her herself who pleas to the judge. She doesn't send other people to intercede on her behalf, much less the dead.
Thankyou Dr.Cooper i'm really grateful for your hard work, I have a suggestions regarding topics of next podcast like continuing critique of papacy series or Methodist doctrine of sanctification.
Frankly, why not just go directly to the Source Himself with prayer?
I mean, if an invocation or intercession from Mary or the saints was so crucial, it seems like Saint Paul or the Gospels would have mentioned it incredibly clearly. I know that's sort of an argument from silence, but nonetheless, neither Mary nor the saints, as honorable as they were, are our advocates. We have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ Who is the propitiation for our sins.
36:04, Cooper telepathically spoke with God
I am looking forward to it. I love the videos you do. Especially of this kind.
Is there maybe any way you can publish Chemnitz on Trent in German? I know its a very weird request, but there are literially 0 publishing Houses in Germany that would do such a thing and as antiquate you have to pay like 800€ for one volume from the 18 hundrets for example.
Oh wow. I didn't realize that nothing was available in German.
@@DrJordanBCooper Yes, sadly thats the case. I already talked to one publishing house, which atleast published the Enchiridion of Chemnitz and Johann Gerhards "about the Holy Scripture" aswell as his Holy Meditations. But I got no answer. Apparently thats the only works that got a republish and are available.
You could get it from a library and use an optical scanner, then format it for print on demand.
Thank you for this work!
Great video Dr. Cooper, I'm thankful for your work! There is actually one quote that I found from Ambrose where he seems to commends praying to the saints, could you interact with it in an upcoming video or in the comment section?
“When Simon’s mother-in-law was lying sick with violent fever, Peter and Andrew besought the Lord for her: ‘And He stood over her and commanded the fever and it left her, and immediately she arose and ministered unto them’..So Peter and Andrew prayed for the widow. Would that there were some one who could so quickly pray for us, or better still, they who prayed for the mother-in-law - Peter and Andrew his brother. Then they could pray for one related to them, now they are able to pray for us and for all. For you see that one bound by great sin is less fit to pray for herself, certainly less likely to obtain for herself. Let her then make use of others to pray for her to the Physician [Christ]. For the sick, unless the Physician be called to them by the prayers of others, cannot pray for themselves. The flesh is weak, the soul is sick, and hindered by the chains of sins, and cannot direct its feeble steps to the throne of that great Physician. The angels must be entreated for us, who have been to us as guardians; the martyrs must be entreated whose patronage we seem to claim by a sort of pledge, the possession of their body. They can entreat for our sins, who, if they had any sins, washed them in their own blood; for they are the martyrs of God, our leaders, the beholders of our life and of our actions. Let us not be ashamed to take them as intercessors for our weakness, for they themselves knew the weakness of the body, even when they overcame” - (St. Ambrose, De Viduis, Ch. 9 [MSL, 16:264], taken from A Source Book for Ancient Church History: From the Apostolic Age to the Close of the Conciliar Period by Joseph Cullen Ayer, Jr., Ph.D., page 397)
Thank you so much for an another episode on this topic, dr Cooper! Just one question: What do you think about this early instance of prayer directed to Peter and Paul? - csla.history.ox.ac.uk/record.php?recid=E05087 - It seems that it is the earliest evidence we have and there are hundreds of prayers written in catacombs by pilgrims from Christian ecumene.
Excellent, thank you.
This is so rad!
I'd like more talk about a way to relate to the saints in a practical way that is not getting in the way of putting ones trust in God alone. What practical way do I bring life to that part of the creed "communion of the saints". It feels kind of dead in day to day life and worship. We sometimes talk about saints, but everyone talks about their dead heroes. Can we actually have community with them? And how about my grandparents? Is it detrimental if I sometimes hope they can hear me?
I'd like more talk about this, too. At least in Anglican and Lutheran contexts, they allow images of the saints to be used in church decoration, and sometimes memorialize various saints at certain points in the liturgical year. In my low church evangelical context, there's really only some talk about famous theologians or missionaries here and there, nothing much about them still being alive in heaven and participating in the great worship of the ages. We could do more, I think.
By trusting the saints you are trusting God, because the saints are God's saints.
Honey, I'm not feeling well. When you go to church, tell the priest to tell Mary to tell Jesus to tell the Father that I'm not feeling well.
When you were reading those mediaeval quotes in Chemnitz, your exasperation was palpable lol
Augustine does directly invoke Paul and Stephen.
Augustine sermon on the feast of Stephen the Martyr:
"you are read everywhere [Saul], chanted everywhere, everywhere you are converting to Christ the hearts that oppose him, everywhere as a good shepherd you are gathering huge flocks. You are reigning with the one you stoned, reigning with Christ. *There you can both see each other, can both now hear my sermon; both of you please pray for us. He will listen to you both.'* "
And Chrysostom, writing from antioch in April of 391 says:
"Perhaps you have developed a great love for those holy women. So then, with this ardor let us throw ourselves on their relics. Let us embrace their chests. For the martyrs’ chests too can contain much power, just as the martyrs’ bones, then, too hold great strength. Indeed, not just on the day of this festival, but on other days too let us sit beside them, *let us entreat them, let us ask them to be our patrons* ".
And as you mentioned Augustine also notes in City of God (22.8), recording the miracles that are being performed at the shrines and memoriams of the martyrs, writes:
"There was a fellow-townsman of ours at Hippo, Florentius, an old man, religious and poor, who supported himself as a tailor. Having lost his coat, and not having means to buy another, *he prayed to the Twenty Martyrs* who have a very celebrated memorial shrine (memoria) in our town, begging in a clear voice that he might be clothed."
He then goes on to explain the miracle that occurred for the man:
"Young people mock at Florentinus' prayer. Yet the old man finds on the seashore a fish, still alive, and sells it to a chef. The latter finds in the fish a golden ring which he gives to Florentinus, saying that it was the Twenty Martyrs who clothed him in this way."
If this man's miracle was fulfilled, is it unlikely that other Christians would not have followed suit in this practice? Not to mention the fact that the man himself would probably have seen other Christians doing the same practice and their requests being fulfilled. Also it is important to note, that Augustine in his commentary on these events never once denounces the practice of this man here. I know that's not evidence for his affirming it (though as I showed above he himself publicly invoked dead saints), he certainly had a perfect opportunity to correct any misapprehensions.
Gregory of Nyssa, writing on March 9 of 379 says this:
"Now one of his legs was unwell, and he limped, and his suffering was chronic and difficult to cure. When he entered the shrine (martyrion) and the resting place (anapausis) of the saints, he prayed to God and *invoked the intercession of the saints.* "
You could read this as indirect invocation, but note the formula for directly invoking the prayers of specific saints was being utilized here. Nevertheless, the prayers being directed towards God (which I will allow from this text), were done to invoke the intercessions of the saints themselves, and God would make known to the saints that their prayers were being requested. Now if you will allow this (and I think it reasonable) to be *direct* invocation of saints, then there is an example of a very early practice of invoking saints for intercession. We should also note that Gregory nowhere condemns this practice.
Not saying that makes invoking saints right, but it is there in the 4th and 5th century.
Two instances in the New Testament where people prayed to saints: one, the rich man in the Lazarus/rich man parable prays to his spiritual father Abraham, and two, Jesus Himself prays to Moses and Elijah at His transfiguration.
Question, would it be right to say that those in Heaven know what is happening on earth if God reveals it to them (the lost coin)?
I'm supposed to be debating an Orthodox Christian on the subject and so I was watching your video to see if there's anything I need to know. And I'm kind of surprised that it's the same old arguments that they were telling me that you already exposed three years ago
I have prayed to St. Anthony of Padua for the finding of lost articles and it works at least ninety percent of the time. I have prayed to St. Jude for the resolution of two seemingly hopeless situations in my life and on both occasions he came through for me. I once was flat broke with tons of bills due and prayed a rosary to the Blessed Mother and within an hour made a huge sale (I was in sales at the time). I have had many, many, many prayers to saints answered. No one can tell me prayers to the saints aren't of God.
How do you know God gave these things to you--and not the prince of this world? A burglar might think his new-found riches are from God. But when you consider the commandments against stealing and coveting, you realize God cannot be the source.
Is it possible that the reference to prayer to saints are textual interpolations?
What you present here also applies to the Eastern Church in principle, and the claims made were the same (as I considered Orthodoxy for a long time, but then decided to remain Lutheran). The test was for me, what are the actual prayers offered to Mary for example. Is it merely a case of asking any saint to pray for you, as they claim? Upon exploring that, one discovers that the prayers in prayer books and various ceremonies are far and away beyond what would be requested of any created sentient being - for the Holy Spirit, for salvation, forgiveness of sins, etc., things for which we petition God alone. That and the idea that prayer is not worship in their mind or the Roman church kind of blew me away. A part of the liturgy sung each Sunday at my husband's Orthodox parish also calls out to Mary as Mediatrix. Yet if you ask an Orthodox if Jesus is the only Mediator, they will tell you yes. There were many points of contradiction like that which were never clarified. This is a helpful video. Thanks!
As an Orthodox Christian convert from Lutheranism who attends an OCA parish weekly, could you point out where in the Divine Liturgy she is referred to as Mediatrix? I've yet to hear this in the DL.
@@r.k8637 Obviously depends on the kalendar, recension, etc. etc. but references to Mary as Mediatrix (or mediatress as it is bizarrely rendered in what I can only presume is an attempt to soften the term) are easily found in your liturgy: "the haven unto those that flee to thee, mediatress and salvation of our souls" in a setting in the general menaion for Marian feasts, "O protection of Christians that cannot be put to shame, you are the most constant mediation to the Creator" (μεσιτεία προς τον Ποιητήν αμετάθετε), "I have you as Mediatress with the manbefriending God" (μεσίτριαν έχω, προς τον φιλάνθρωπον Θεόν), among others in the paraklesis, and others you can find for yourself because it is tedious enough to meticulously check these things. And of course for every reference to Mary as Mediatrix there are a hundred desperate pleas to Mary for salvation. Suffice it to say your church is well up there with Rome with the Mariolatry even as your priests love to present themselves as the golden median between the two sides of the Tiber.
@@r.k8637 I am a convert to Eastern Orthodoxy and a member of the OCA jurisdiction also. I was raised Southern Baptist became Roman Catholic in college and then about 40 years ago became Eastern Orthodox. I have seen some Marian prayers that I believe go a bit too far. However while I usually enjoy Dr Cooper's videos I do not believe he was careful enough to draw a distinction between general prayers to the saints and questionable attributes of salvific powers. Because he did not do this sufficiently I think it encouraged a number of commentators to really trash Roman Catholicism and to some extent also Eastern Orthodoxy. As the old saying goes we can agree to disagree but we should not be disagreeable. I hope you are not too Disturbed by some of the examples of Marian prayers that you may find problematic. I am in a parish in Jacksonville and even the cradle Orthodox I believe take those types of Marion prayers as more of a historical thing than anything else. There is way too much correct about Orthodoxy in general for me to be dissuaded by the occasional excess of spirituality.
Coloca legensa Dr. Preciso traduzir para a a lingua portuguesa.
Dear brother Dr. Cooper, we need URGENTLY to subtitle your videos in portuguese. Brazilian audience need to watch this.
Btw, My hats off for your video.
God bless you more and more! 🙏👍👊
Não necessariamente. O que o brasileiro ou português precisa aprender, é de fato o inglês pois há muita informações da era patrística disponível gratuitamente. O que eles encontrarão, será uma evidência totalmente avassaladora em prol da intercessão dos santos.
Penso eu, que a tua única opção será se sustentar sob a tão famosa "sola scriptura", o que levanta uma proposição implícita de apostasia da Igreja Católica ( Estou aqui me referindo a igreja anterior a divisão entre Ocidente e Oriente; não sou católico romano) coisa que eu não estou disposto a aceitar porquê tal argumento possuí um elemento de blasfêmia ao assertar que o Espírito Santo não operou durante os séculos. Logo, se você estiver com este tipo de mentalidade, saiba que você advoga um deismo eclesiástico; consequentemente ateísmo. Não é de estranhar que homens como Bart Erhman, que se descreviam como fiéis ao dogma da "sola scriptura", ao se debruçar sobre a formação das Escrituras e se deparar com a divergência entre os manuscritos, acabam se tornando agnósticos ou ateus porquê não tem fé em uma autoridade externa as Escríturas.
@@heinrich3088 Isso é problema deles, meu caro. Há vários outros que se debruçam e não se tornaram nem um pouco ateus, inclusive os maiores doutores em crítica textual são protestantes. A fidelização ao Sola Scriptura é o melhor antídoto a toda sorte de desvios e "Folk Religion" a que se sujeitaram tanto o Catolicismo Romano como o Oriental. A propósito já estou mergulhando na Patrística, mas não a leio como fonte impoluta de autoridade, nesse sentido concordo com os Pais (com qualquer outro teólogo protestante) quando este concorda com a bíblia. Sendo assim, devemos nos perguntar, a Palavra de Deus apoia a intercessão aos santos?
@@josueinhan8436 Não faça dicotomia. Novamente, é o tipo de crítica textual, que leva muitos para o niilismo. (Nem digo aqueles que negam os finais versos de Mateus porque não encontram grande paridade entre os antigos manuscritos.) Tua posição como a minha está baseada em pressuposicões. Eu tomo a seguinte asserção: Cristo, a eterna Palavra de Deus, nascido da substância do Pai antes de todos séculos, fundou uma Igreja visível na qual ele a chama de noiva? Ou ele simplesmente estabeleceu um conjunto de textos para que os "eleitos" iluminados com ferramentas exegéticas possam ser salvos?
Se "sola scriptura" é o melhor remédio, eu nem gastarei meu tempo discursando sobre as inúmeras visões que os seguimentos protestantes tem sobre a famosa Súplica do Senhor ( Lord's Supper). Então qual é a doutrina correta Eucarístia: a) A transubstanciação do Católicismo Romano desenvolvida pelo Escolásticos Medievais( Desenvolvida, neste caso, estou utilizando como um aprimoramento de linguagem utilizando as categorias aristotélicas; a "transubstanciação" pode ser encontrada explicitamente no livro "Sobre os Mistérios" de Santo Ambrósio. Vide "Patrística" vol.5, Paulus); b) a expressão está "está em" que os luteranos atribuem a Eucarística; c) um sacramento que "significa" coisas celestes, portanto tendo uma semelhança com sacrifício de Cristo na cruz, logo trazendo graças para os fiéis como enfatiza a visão calvinista; d) Ou a visão zwingliana que afirma que nós recebemos Cristo como Cordeiro Pascal pela "Fé"?.
@@heinrich3088 querido irmão, o que o texto sagrado nos diz? "Isto é o meu corpo que é dado por vós", noutra parte: "isto é o meu sangue". Quando Jesus disse estas palavras Ele já havia sido morto? Não. Portanto, a referência era espiritual. Nesse sentido a Ceia do Senhor é um banquete memorial (",fazei isto em memória de mim"), anunciativo (",pois fazendo isto anunciais a morte do Senhor até que Ele venha") e com presença espiritual, pois Ele também disse que estaria conosco até o fim dos tempos e não nos deixaria órfãos, enviando-nos o Seu paráclito.
Portanto a ceia é um alimento espiritual, com a presença espiritual de Jesus, memorial e anunciativa de Sua 2a Vinda. Simples.
Caríssimo, Jesus fundou a Sua Igreja desde Israel. Soprou sua palavra aos profetas e depois aos apóstolos. Nesse sentido, concordo com vc que Ele deu autoridade à Sua Igreja para que esta reconhecesse e pusesse em ordem os escritos verdadeiramenre apostólicos, visto que a igreja é iluminada pelo Espírito Santo para fazer essa distinção. Nós, como protestantes, não negamos este papel da igreja na distinção e formação do cânon. É preciso lembrar que havia, nos primeiros séculos, muitos escritos apócrifos, mas a igreja estudou cada um deles em busca de uma prova de apostolicidade e coerência com o todo harmônico bíblico.
@@josueinhan8436 um pequeno "florigelium" dos Padres:
Does the bishop of Rome do wrong when he offers sacrifices to the Lord over the venerable bones of the dead men Peter and Paul, as we should say, but according to you, over a worthless bit of dust, and judges their tombs worthy to be Christ's altars? And not only is the bishop of one city in error, but the bishops of the whole world, who, despite the tavern-keeper Vigilantius, enter the basilicas of the dead, in which a worthless bit of dust and ashes lies wrapped up in a cloth, defiled and defiling all else. Thus, according to you, the sacred buildings are like the sepulchres of the Pharisees, whitened without, while within they have filthy remains, and are full of foul smells and uncleanliness. And then he dares to expectorate his filth upon the subject and to say: Is it the case that the souls of the martyrs love their ashes, and hover round them, and are always present, lest haply if any one come to pray and they were absent, they could not hear?
www.newadvent.org/fathers/3010.htm ( Against Vigilantius, São Jerõnimo)
7. Then having sanctified ourselves by these spiritual Hymns, we beseech the merciful God to send forth His Holy Spirit upon the gifts lying before Him; that He may make the Bread the Body of Christ, and the Wine the Blood of Christ ; for whatsoever the Holy Ghost has touched, is surely sanctified and changed.
8. Then, after the spiritual sacrifice, the bloodless service, is completed, over that sacrifice of propitiation we entreat God for the common peace of the Churches, for the welfare of the world ; for kings; for soldiers and allies; for the sick; for the afflicted; and, in a word, for all who stand in need of succour we all pray and offer this sacrifice.
9. Then we commemorate also those who have fallen asleep before us, first Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, Martyrs, that at their prayers and intercessions God would receive our petition. Then on behalf also of the Holy Fathers and Bishops who have fallen asleep before us, and in a word of all who in past years have fallen asleep among us, believing that it will be a very great benefit to the souls , for whom the supplication is put up, while that holy and most awful sacrifice is set forth.
www.newadvent.org/fathers/310123.htm ( São Cirílo de Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures)
Great work. And I'd like to know if these catholic arguments are the same that Eastern Orthodox uses?
Some but not all. Like there is no repository of merit, just asking for intercession...I'm trying to figure that out myself.
@@johnathanrhoades7751 Have you figured it out?
@@MrBattlestar10 for myself, yeah, I’ve been Orthodox for a year this weekend. I haven’t done a deep dive into the differences between Orthodox and Catholic views of intercession of the saints. They do seem very similar in that regard.
Can you address Psalm 103 and the addresses to the Angels, to worship God?
The exhortation in Ps. 103 and a few other places for angels or the whole host of heaven to praise God have to be understood as a poetic device. The angels already pray unceasingly to God (Rev 4:8), and we surely do not imagine that we mean to rouse some slacking cherub into getting back to work. Even less plausible is to suppose that this implies seeking their intercession by the mere fact of mentioning them as though "pray for me" can stand in for "Bless YHVH". It is an exhortation really for us to lift our soul heavenward and pray as the angels do.
The doctrine of the Treasury of Merit presents a blatant contradiction to the reality of grace as the means of salvation.
I have a question. I just started to engage in the writings of John Chrysostom. I red his commentary on the book of colossians. In the ninth homily (on Colossians 3:17) he basicly says that one must NOT pray to any other than God. He especially criticizes the prayer to angels.
"If you eat, if you drink, if you marry, if you travel, *do all in the Name of God, that is, calling Him to aid you:* in everything first *praying to Him,* so take hold of your business. (...) after God say ye and do everything, do not introduce the Angels besides.* Do you eat? Give thanks to God both before and afterwards. Do you sleep? Give thanks to God both before and afterwards. (...) As honored then by being called upon, He will in turn honor by making their business easy. *Invoke the Son, give thanks to the Father.* (...) Nothing is equal to this Name, marvelous is it everywhere. (...) *Therefore the devil introduced those of the Angels, envying us the honor. Such incantations are for the demons. Even if it be Angel, even if it be Archangel, even if it be Cherubim, allow it not; for neither will these Powers accept such addresses, but will even toss them away from them, when they have beheld their Master dishonored.* I have honored you, He says, and have said, *Call upon Me;* and do you dishonor Him?"
Do I understand Chrysostom right on this issue? Does he condemn the prayer to saints and angels?
I’ve thought of reading Chrysostom but I just haven’t out of ignorance of his teachings. What of his would you recommend starting with?
Because I love pop culture, I keep finding these references to tie points in the discussion to; all I could think of when you said (roughly paraphrasing) "Jesus and Moses, therefore, prayer to the saints is real and you're wrong" was Edward Norton's character in Rounders right before he gets out of prison when he's like "that's your big finishing move?!" The other is more recent: Ollie from @Jolly said something along the lines of "I prefer it like this; everyone else is Hitler."
You deal with argumentative folks way better and more gracefully than I do!
edit: if dead saints appear to you, you should talk to them; it's probably important is one of the most savage finishing moves yet. That was cold blooded! (think Rick James)
I always thought it has to be wrong to pray to Saints because Daniel wouldn't even prayed to who own friend the king. And another thing that just hit me is Jehovah Witnesses will not pray to Jesus prayer is a form of worship.
Would you ever go on the Reason and Theology show?
That would be great
Yeah. When I'm done with this series I'll do it.
@@GospelSimplicity I have been enjoying your videos lately, godspeed and God's peace be with you.
@@lc-mschristian5717 Thanks!
@@DrJordanBCooper Still happening? (If not,) it would also be nice to see you dialogue on presbyteral succession on someone not holding to that. This latter subject is not covered a lot within online apologetics. (I mentioned it to Erick Ybarra, who I know is familiar with Cirlot's "Apostolic Succession - Is it True?".)
Thanks again, Dr. Cooper!
Last Sunday during church I had a thought, and feel free to start a firestorm with it:
Would the Parable of the Ten Virgins be a good text against prayer to the saints and the treasury of merit (specifically Matt. 25:5-10)?
Since the wise virgins say outright that there would not be enough oil for themselves and the foolish ones, I thought it was a rather interesting point. But, I’m probably reading too much into the text. Like I said, feel free to debate- I’ll get the popcorn.
Those are some mighty mental gymnastic feats you got there.
The martyrs in Revelation are under the throne of the Lamb, sooooo they aren't the elders bringing the prayers.
To clarify, does the Lutheran church hold to Mary's "perpetual virginity"? I am hoping not, but I think some Lutheran churches might hold to that. Please clarify.
Sorry to dissappoint, but it's something that would be regarded as not vital to the faith and yet it is mentioned in the BoC (the ever-virgin Mary). So you'll find many lutherans believing the same as most Christians in history, many rejecting her perpetual virginity, and most probably haven't thought about it.
@@j.g.4942 I guess technically the Bible never states "Mary had sexual relations after Jesus was born and that is why Jesus had brothers (though some call them cousins, etc.)." I think we have to reasonably deduce this truth. Anyway, I am surmising that this was not an issue when the BoC was put together. Anyway, thank you for the response.
@@matt8637 yeah, I think we have pretty early references to them being the children of Clopas, Joseph's brother. They're early so you think they would know, but then again I don't really understand why Rome gets upset about it.
@@matt8637 The scriptures literally said "Joseph knew Mary not until after their firstborn"
That is as close as its gets. If it isn't proof, I don't know what is
@@j.g.4942 Do you believe Mary had marital sexual relations with Joseph and bore children with him? Just trying to clarify your position.
PLS HELP ME , WHICH OF THESE CHURCH FATHERS U KEPT RANTING ABOUT THAT ARE LUTHERAN ....?
Ambrose:
Lord Jesus Christ,
I approach your banquet table in fear and trembling,
for I am a sinner,
and dare not rely on my own worth,
but only on your goodness and mercy.
I am defiled by many sins in body and soul,
and by my unguarded thoughts and words.
Gracious God of majesty and awe,
I seek your protection,
I look for your healing.
Poor troubled sinner that I am,
I appeal to you, the fountain of all mercy.
I cannot bear your judgment,
but I trust in your salvation.
Lord, I show my wounds to you and uncover my shame before you.
I know my sins are many and great,
and they fill me with fear,
but I hope in your mercies,
for they cannot be numbered.
Lord Jesus Christ, eternal king, God and man,
crucified for mankind,
look upon me with mercy and hear my prayer,
for I trust in you.
Have mercy on me,
full of sorrow and sin,
for the depth of your compassion never ends.
Praise to you, saving sacrfice,
offered on the wood of the cross for me and for all mankind.
Praise to the noble and precious blood,
flowing from the wounds of the my crucified Lord Jesus Christ and washing away the sins of the whole world.
Remember, Lord your creature,
whom you have redeemed with your blood;
I repent my sins,
and I long to put right what I have done. Merciful Father, take away all my offenses and sins;
purify me in body and soul,
and make me worthy to taste the holy of holies.
May your body and blood,
which I intend to receive, although I am unworthy,
be for me the remission of my sins,
the washing away of my guilt,
the end of my evil thoughts,
and the rebirth of my better instincts.
May it incite me to do the works pleasing to you and profitable to my health in body and soul,
and be a firm defense against the wiles of my enemies. Amen.
Which believe medieval or modern RCC theology? NONE!! 😂
@@CCiPencilespecially hippy pope Frank.😂
It could be me, but i think I missed one thing.
Is asking the saints to pray for you allowed or not?
BOC Defense of Augsburg Confession Art. XXI snippets:
"invocation, which, even though it would have no danger, nevertheless is not necessary."
Asking the saints to pray for you is not forbidden in the Lutheran confessions. Requiring it (e.g. making it part of publicly prayed liturgy) is forbidden.
"Although concerning the saints we concede that, just as, when alive, they pray for the Church universal in general, so in heaven they pray for the Church in general, albeit no testimony concerning the praying of the dead is extant in the Scriptures, except the dream taken from the Second Book of Maccabees, 15:14. Moreover, even supposing that the saints pray for the Church ever so much, yet it does not follow that they are to be invoked; although our Confession affirms only this, that Scripture does not teach the invocation of the saints, or that we are to ask the saints for aid. But since neither a command, nor a promise, nor an example can be produced from the Scriptures concerning the invocation of saints, it follows that conscience can have nothing concerning this invocation that is certain. And since prayer ought to be made from faith, how do we know that God approves this invocation?"
To summarize,
Scripture has no command, promise, or example concerning asking saints to pray for you.
Prayer ought to be made from faith.
Therefore, asking saints to pray for you is a doubtful prayer, which is an oxymoron.
@@Mygoalwogel Thank you for your response!
Don’t pray to anything or anyone other than God
@Mygoalwogel Good stuff! Catholics like to quote James to say that faith without works is dead. True enough. But James (1:6-7) also says that prayer without confidence is worthless. As the Lutherans pointed out, true, confident prayer must be based on God's command and promise--if you don't have those for a prayer to Mary, what are you doing?
i still find it hard not to conclude that invocation of the saints is necromancy.
Are you ready to accept the Catholic faith if Jesus appears to you and tells you it is the true Church that he founded?
I’m not well acquainted with Roman polemics on this issue; other than pop-apologetics. But I am familiar with the Orthodox perspective, which was mostly insulated from Protestant/Catholic disputes.
In Orthodoxy, there isn’t a distinction between justification and sanctification/theosis. That’s because God’s objective in creation is to actually bring man up into His divine life. And if it’s true that those joined to Christ have “become partakers of the Divine Nature,” such that their life is now participating and joined in the Divine Life, and they have actually been made anew, then it stands to reason that we become more like Him and begin to share in His attributes. As Paul says: “though He was rich, for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich,” or, as Athanasius put it, “to become by grace what God is by nature.”
In that sense, I don’t find it hard to believe that our departed brethren, that now live with God in His throne room, become *more* omniscient, so to speak. Not because they are God, but because they are so intimately joined to His life.
The second question is whether asking for Saint’s intercession is taking something away from God. I don’t think that follows for a couple reasons. The first is the popular defense, namely, that requesting intercession from family or friends isn’t taking away from God. The second is this: honoring the type transfers to the archetype. To honor our earthy fathers is to honor our Heavenly Father, because the former is an image of the latter.
And finally, why does Paul say there is one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus? In context, he’s instructing Timothy to make intercession for kings and those in authority *because* there is one mediator. So, far from excluding intercession, Christ’s mediation is the *reason* for it, because again, we participate in His divine life as new creatures.
Combining this with the passages in Revelation, and the appearance of Moses and Elijah on the mount of transfiguration, I find it very compelling.
John 14:6 Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no one comes to the Father, except though me. NKJV
1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; NKJV
Hebrews 7:25 Therefore he is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them. NKJV
Acts 4:11-12(Jesus) has become the chief cornerstone.’ Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
NKJV
John 14:13-14 (Jesus said)
And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything in My name, I will do it. NKJV
Isaiah 8:19-20 And when they say to you, “Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter,” should not a people seek their God? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living? To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. NKJV
The law and testimony were the scriptures of the old testament of that time, and is now both old and new testaments of today. Only Jesus is the way to the Father being our only Mediator, and Advocate between us and God in light of our salvation. Therefore His name is the only name under heaven given to men by which we can be saved. Therefore He can sufficiently save all who go to God through him, through His death and resurrection. And we are to pray always in the name of Jesus, see John 14:13-14, Romans 8:31-39, and 1 John 2:1-2. The Holy Spirit also intercedes for us, see Romans 8:26-27, and we who are alive here on earth pray for each other, see 1 Timothy 2:1-4. There is not one verse in all of scripture that remotely implies or proves that the faithful saints in heaven can directly help us from heaven. It is not to say it is impossible for the saints in the presence of God to be able to pray for the church, and I believe they do. But there is no scriptural evidence they can actually hear us, seeing they would have to be omnipresent (present everwhere at once) and able to hear multiple prayers of millions of people at once. Scripture testifies that only God is omnipresent. And one might wonder, can we pray for those who died? I believe we can pray for the dead, and pray that they are in Gods presence. Nevertheless the actual glorification of the saints, and them reigning with Christ in heaven itself does not occur until the second coming when Christ comes back and raises the dead, and takes his church alive here on earth with the resurrected saints as a whole to heaven on the last day. Then the saints receive their rewards and glorification, see Revelation 20:4-6,
1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, 1 Corinthians 15,
2 Corinthians 5:1-10, John 6:38-40, 11:23-27, Isaiah 40:28-30.
At this time scripture shows that the saints in the presence of God currently, are not bodily resurrected and glorifed as of yet. But are at peace and rest in worship of God in heaven, see Revelation 5:9-11, Hebrews 12:18-24. The saints in heaven at this time are the spirits of just men made perfect in holiness. And as Jesus was raised from the dead, He said He was not a spirit because a spirit does not have flesh and bones, see Luke 24:36-43. Scripture says the saints will be like Jesus in his resurrection and share in his glory and divine nature at His coming see 1 John 3:1-2, Romans 8:17, and 2 Peter 1:3-4, 1 Corinthians 15:42-55, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Daniel 12:1-2, and Malachi 4:1-3. The saints become like the angels of God. They are children of God, and children of the resurrection. And when is the resurrection? At the second coming, and they enter the world to come, see Luke 20:27-38.
Now sure you could argue this is just my interpretation. But i would challenge you to study the scriptures for yourself, and become more thoroughly acquainted with them. Don't believe me, believe the word of God.
Ein feste burg ist unseeeer Gott!!! 🎶🎶🎶
I see your points. But one thing I don't like is, how can you tell someone that they are committing idolatry when you don't know the intent of their heart, only God knows the intent of their heart when they might ask a saint to pray for them. You can't make that statement only God can.
Right? Throwing out words like idolatry so casually is wild. With so much theological background I would hope he would be more careful and kind
I am interested in the topics you address, but lose interest when the pre-topic dialog stretches to five or ten minutes. So I get tired of waiting & move on. Is there some way you can get to the topic more expeditiously?
Revelation 5:8 Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. Nkjv
Revelation 8:2-4
And I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and to them were given seven trumpets. Then another angel, having a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, ascended before God from the angel’s hand. Nkjv
These two readings out of Revelation have been used by catholic apologists to prove that the saints in heaven can hear our prayers, and then in turn offer our prayers to God. First rule is that scripture must interpret scripture, not presumptious ideas from human imagination. First who are the saints? See Romans 1:7,
1 Corinthians 1:2, 2 Corinthians 1:1-2, Ephesians 1:1, Philippians 1:1, and colossians 1:1-2. Paul the Apostle who wrote these letters says that WE HERE ON EARTH WHO ARE ALIVE, and who believe are not only called to be saints, but ARE the saints. Saints simply means those who are called out, the sanctified ones, the holy ones. Holy means called out from the world. So the prayers of the saints are our prayers offered by the angels in heaven. Does this mean that we pray to angels who then in turn offer our prayers to God because we prayed to them? No, Matthew 18:10 says that our angels ( signifying we do have gaurdian angels) always see the face of our Father in heaven. Scripture says angels surround us and hear our prayers to God, then offer them up to God in heaven. Hebrews 1:13-14 says angels are sent to serve us to help us for salvation. Also see Psalm 34:7, Psalm 91:11-12, and Acts 12:11,15, which shows angels encamp around us to deliver us. So they see and hear us pray to God then deliver our prayers upon the alter with incense to God. Does this mean God cannot just hear us himself and he needs angels to help? No because God knows all and and sees all, see Psalm 139:7-12. But God can and does use angels to his own glory, because He does all that he pleases in both heaven and earth, see, psalm 115:1-1-3. But where do i ultimately get this idea altogether? Well my fellow brothers and sisters who are catholic it is in your own bible in the book of Tobit which is rejected by protestants but accepted by YOU as inspired scripture, see Tobit 3 where both Tobit and Sarah both pray TO God, then read Tobit 12:11-22, where the angel Raphael reveals himself to Tobit and to his son Tobias that he was really an angel, and one of the seven angels of Revelation 8:2. The angel Raphael one of the seven angels who stands before the throne reavels that he heard and saw both Sarah and Tobit pray, and then in turn took their prayers before the alter of incense before the Throne of God. Revelation shows us the saints in heaven are at rest, and worship God, but do not seem to have any dealing with those on earth, see Revelation 6:9-11, 7:9-17, 14:13 and Ecclesiastes 9:1-10.
Revelations 5:13
(John, who was in the spirit, who was empowered and enabled by the Holy Spirit to see the heavanly realm)
13 Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth(AE) and on the sea, and all that is in them, saying:
“To him who sits on the throne(AF) and to the Lamb(AG)
be praise and honor and glory and power,
for ever and ever!”(AH)
So to answer yout question, the Saints and all the beings in the heavenly realm can hear ALL the creatures on earth! So you are mistaken and you entire paragraph falls apart.
Most Lutherans don’t honor the saints nowadays though, having been in quite a few Lutheran churches.
I think if you reject Revelations 12 referring to Mary as queen mother, an office with a political role in every King of Judah (each queen mother is identified in the Old Testament), of which Jesus is the final and eternal, then you might also reject her official role as mediatrix in contrast to how nearly 2 billion Christians understand and experience her. As for the other arguments, i don't think they're needed for most folk. And as for psychological reasons folk are more comfortable with mom than dad, i had a good dad here on earth. But i get there are lots of injured folk in this world and it makes sense God would have a plan for that. A moon pointing us toward the sun.
56:00
Hi Dr. Cooper. See I was listening to you but right before 29:22you just said something as an straw man argument. You said Moses and ELijah worship Jesus. And JEsus didn't pray to them. Yes, but us Catholics doesn't worship when we pray to the saints. "pray" here means requests,asks,... So if Jesus can talk to dead saints why can we? He said you will do more then what I did in Jonh?
The Catholic responses to this video (that I’ve read) are so sad. Instead of addressing your arguments they instead just hold to their dogma regardless of the history, Bible, etc. very similar to the way cults hold to their beliefs regardless of what the Bible, history, etc say.
They are unable to understand the arguments and evidences against RCC because if one infallible doctrine can be proven false then their whole house of cards falls on the sand it’s built upon. Medieval and modern RCC worship and doctrine would be completely foreign to the Apostles and the earliest church fathera
Augustine, City of God, book 1, ch. 11 and 12--a VERY unCatholic view of the bodies of the saints!!!!
Me when someone says that praying to the saints is biblical: 36:04
Its not for u to determine.... The church have spoken , u must follow , unless u are one of the strayed mistakes
Always remember that the church--speaking through the high priest Aaron--said to build a golden calf when Moses was on Mt. Sinai. And to kill Jesus, speaking through one of Aaron's successors.
Why think the Saints in heaven even speak English?
Thanks, this argument is both thought provoking and humorous! Fair point, sir.
They speak Holy Spirit
@@richardsaintjohn8391 that's a good point too. We will find out at the Resurrection.
@@joemen3332 Why should saints possess every power of God? Why attribute to saints such a quantity, magnitude, and variety of miracles that they rival if not best Christ in his prophetic office? Why believe that a man caught faking the miracle he was best known for (his stigmata) could magically be in two places at once as though anybody had heard of such absurdities until a millennium after Christ? There is more to God than we may ever know, but we know for certain that Padre Pio was a mortal man and sinner unworthy of so much as washing the feet of our Lord (and I say this without any particular regard for his character), and there is nothing profitable about believing fables about him or any other man, especially when they are used to bolster the worship of such a man and not God.
The saints in Heaven have the equivalent of instant google translate in that they can now, in their glorified state, understand all languages.
Dr. Cooper, good video, but in my view, you give in too easily on the supposed 3rd century prayer to Mary. This dating is paleographical, which is hardly an exact science, and could be off by a century or more. This dating is also simply the opinion of one scholar; another dates it to the 4th century (which to me seems more likely, since that is when all this stuff really takes off in the church).
I know. I'm going to be delving into the debate regarding the dating in a future podcast.
Catholics don’t worship saints, we know they are in heaven and they can pray for us. The Virgin Mary can’t forgive our sins, but she is the mother of GOD, and prays for us. Please stop saying we worship Mary because we do not. In my 39 years of being Catholic I have not heard a Catholic priest say Mary forgives our sins. Forgiveness of sins is very important in Christianity, if the mother of GOD was able to forgive our sins then our Catholic priests would have to us so. You’re spreading lies!
@@user-ty8zm3zk3x who in this comment field said you worship Mary?
Is Catholicism faithfull ? polytheism ?
The 10 Commandments
1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
...gods is elohim in hebrew which is the spirit world
2. You shall not make idols.
...in heaven or on earth
3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain....(being imagers of God).
.
I really do not understand this idealogy of praying to dead saints as if they are omnipotent and omniscient and can read minds like God. And there billions of souls in heaven,, so billions of omnipotent spirits who know everything ?
And who decides who is in Heaven, a man or the Lord ?
They supposedly have the spirit of Christ indwelling but need to by pass him and go to someone else that will come back to Christ.
This is POLYTHEISM.
.
Lord Lord have we not prophecised in your name..., Jesus answers I never knew you who practice lawlessness. (3 commands not obeyed).
.
You are right about reverence and worship. Using synonyms does not excuse what are the actual actions.
.
Jesus says come to me my yoke is gentle. Advocate, mediator. No one comes to the father but by me.
.
Is Mary's suffering greater than any other mother seeing her child murdered ? Blessed Mary and blessed is he who hears the word...
.
My opinion it is a lack of the fear of God.
Bones are bones. Human bones, horse bones, chicken bones, "saints" bones. Bones.
Elijas bones caused a dead man to be revived.
@@nickandrei51 *Elisha's, but good point.
So Dr. Jordan, I actually am one of those medieval Marian Maximalists that you talk about. I agree with you that many conventional answers actually defend a watered down version of Devotion to saints and the blessed Virgin Mary. But those conventional answers are not in contradiction with the medieval texts you just quoted. The latter is just a development of the former, and a natural consequence of the former. Marian Maximalism can only be understood by someone who agrees on the basics that catholic-answers defends.
I admire how thoroughly you have thought about the catholic perspective, and understand that you are not fully convinced, and I hope and pray that when you are convinced you would be so honest and humble as to convert to Catholocism.
But the point that you overlooked is this: The doctorine of participation, which can be easily deduced from scripture. The saints actualy participate in God's nature, what else do you think heaven is about? And God takes pleasure in letting them act in his place, and he wants us to humble ask for their help. And he wants this in the same way as he wanted to act through Moses. He told Moses that he would as God to pharoah, and Aaron would be as his prophet.
God could have done it directly. But he chose to do it this way. So we learn in the Bible how God is pleased to use mediators, who actually participate in His power and EVEN in his decision making, like when Moses convinced God to spare the israelites, for love of Gods own glory.
Now If we honoured Jupiter as we honor saints, then It would be wrong BECAUSE Jupiter doesnt participate in God, apart from being a demon (according to St. Paul).
Mary's role is something like that of Moses', because she participated in Gods decision making, when she was given the choice to be the Mother of God. God knew that she would accept from all eternity, because he himself prepared her from all eternity for it. She also accepted his death on the Cross, as she Stood beside the cross, without any complaint (The Bible doesnt mention even the slightest resistance of the best of all mothers). So she is the Co-Redemptorix, but not in the sense of a 50/50 partnership with God, but a 100/100 partnership. How is this so? In the Canticle of Mary we read, "My soul magnifies the Lord... ....Since he has looked on his servant in her nothingness/lowliness... This nothingness of Mary proportions for her a 100 percent participation in Her sons redemption, because she was so empy of herself because she was so full of God. God dwelt in her like in no other (completely set apart for God). So she only participated because she was as God before pharoah/devil, and in her insistnece she 'redeemed her people' from slavery to the devil. So this does not in any way diminished the Unique Role of Jesus in redemption, because She participated in the same not as some one apart from Jesus, but as Jesus himself through participation.
I hope I am not throwing my pearls to the swine, If you know what I mean....
How to create theology. Be very liberal and open on positive positions when it comes to scripture and tradition. And when you don’t want something be hyper literal and cherry pick history. Easy peasy
Thanks Cooper. I am convinced, more than ever, to continue as a catholic.
Protestantism is a sin against Jesus, because you are claiming that Jesus abandoned his Church during 1500 years...
🧢
Not buying. Christ never abandons the little flock of those who believe in him--whether they lived in 500 B.C.E., in 1000 A.D. or in 1530 or in 2023. Consider David and the great promises made to him and his successors. Yet not ever king in Juda was a David who faithfully carried out God's will. And consider those who sat on the chair of Moses until the time of Jesus--not all were faithful teachers. Did God abandon his people in the OT after the death of Moses, David or Solomon? No. Time and again, he called them to repentance and faith. God allows institutions and office holders to fail--including councils and popes--to teach us not to trust in men or institutions but in his infallible word. As Paul said, there must be divisions. And as the Bereans, we all must test what our leaders teach by God's prophetic and apostolic Word to test the spirits to see if they are from God.
Good point
The _entire_ apostolic tradition develops into the practice of praying to the saints.
The _Sub Tuum Praesidium_ dates from at least the mid 3rd century.
Cooper's greatest error is _Sola Scriptura_ , with _Sola Fide_ being a close second. You cannot stand outside of the Church and tell the Church what Scripture means.
If Cooper has a critique of the cult of saints, he can step inside the ark and present it to the Church.
Thats exactly what Luther did and he got kicked out. So if Rome doesn't change, Dr. Cooper would get kicked out too.
@@lutherserbe6435 "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us."
@That Lutheran Guy By what authority does anyone leave the Apostolic Church to create their own communion?
@That Lutheran Guy I don't think you know what that means.
@@Catholic-Perennialist By what authority is any church 'Apostolic'?
Am much OK praying through Mary than going to God directly..... At the end I see the more u want to criticize ,the more u contradict ..... Look why will that b rong, lol , cos u feel so .... Next u are talking about ur feeble mind......
Praying to the saints is not for protestants. Protestants pray to different god that is not the True God of the Catholics, who wants us to pray to the saints, since this True God is not a despotic God. He is a God who wants to glorify his saints, he is a father, and wants all his saints to participate in his trinitarian life as much as is possible to creatures.
Isaiah 42:8
I am the Lord; that is my name.
*I will not give my glory to another* , nor my praise to idols.
@@acs1602 "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:" Jn 17:22
In the passage of Isaiah it is clear that God is taking about his enemies.
You could debate Dyer. Speaking in a monologue form, won't be productive to anybody since you don't have anyone to counteract your claims.
@Arminius I saw a lot of debates of Dyer; and I can assure you that he can maintain a peaceful action during a debate if his opponent argues with cohesive paradigm. The debate therefore, will be not of X,Y or Z, but only about the justification behind the claims.
@@heinrich3088 So instead of dealing with the topic at hand, he'll pivot into the typical sophomoric epistemological arguments against sola scriptura? Has Dyer ever conducted a serious, formal, structured, and moderated debate, or is he the sort who uses debate as a euphemism for a free-for-all shouting match?
@@stallard9256 Far as I know, the debate will be about religion. And religion as you may know, como from the latin " religare" ( reconnection, I think, would be a good translation) ; hence, treating about matters which reconnects the human beings to God, it is useful to approach the question in a holistic sense because every philosophy of science does so. " Sola Scriptura" will be in the painel too, so the reinvidicator of this doctrine will be force to argue using external methods to defend this, as the intercession of the saints uses not only the data of the Bible, but also Christology and metaphysics.
@@heinrich3088 I think you might want to read about the etymological fallacy, because it may as well have been invented for cases like that. "Religion" is not a sufficiently narrow topic to hold an ordered debate about. "Is Scripture the only infallible rule of faith?", or "is the intercession of saints a Christian practice?" would be, but the debate would have to specifically center on one of them. Again, I'm not sure you have ever seen a formal debate. The affirmative side presents a specific thesis, and the negative attempts to disprove it. There is a set order where opening arguments are presented, the sides cross-examine each other, and then they make concluding statements. When properly moderated and conducted, this allows a fair examination of the given topic.
I have no idea what you imagine a holistic treatment looks like, but it again frankly sounds like the "debating" style is a hodgepodge of every which argument that supports you without giving the time to treat any of them in depth, which comes off very poorly in a real debate, but in a free-for-all shouting match can be used to dazzle someone in an argument, particularly when you're commanding enough to force your opponent to follow your flow. Maybe I'm being unfair, but that is the impression I get.
@@stallard9256 You did understand nothing that I said. You can't argue for "sola scriptura" without approaching to another topic. The question: Is the Scripture or not the only rule of faith that a christian should adopt would be useless since the opponents have different pressupotions. The affirmative side will posit that yes, it is a doctrine to accept because it is "God-Breathed; while the side who tooks a negative position will argue that Scripture is indeed a authority, however without a "petitio princippi", using therefore the history of the formation of the canon which uses external sources, hence the ecclesiastical history.
Secondly, I did not bring any "word-concept" fallacy here. I did not pick up a term and iserted a meaning on it to adecquate into any "a posteriori" idea. I just said that if a world-view is true, it must be proved using various systems of beliefs or knowledges.It is better for you to stop using the straw-man fallacy.
Thirdly, I've watched a plethora of debates, principally of James White. At the end of the day, no one can express himself properly because they are blocked by the circumstances of the formal rules.
Prots: The Saints of the Church are nothing more than examples of good Christians throughout history!
Well, they all invoked and prayed to the Saints before them so...
Luther was overweight and mean spirited. He broke his oath of chastity to God, convinced a nun to break hers and turned his monastery into their familial home.
The three “ solas” are cute (how do three ideas stand alone???) and easily refuted.
The natural progression of Lutheranism or any other apostasy results in female clergy w pride vestments.
Wake up.
Lord have mercy.
Someone should tell this guy , that the catholic church is way way bigger than Lutheranism combined ...... U shouldn't waste ur time talking on what u are so so bias , just to suit ur mess ....... I PRAY TO SAINTS AMD MY PRAYERS ARE VERY WELL ANSWERED ..... OUR LADY OF PERPETUAL HELP , HELP UR IGNORANCE ... AND FREE U FROM THE MADNESS OF LUTHER ..,,... THERE ARE NO AMOUNT OF INTELLECTUAL STUFF THAT CAN EVER MAKE U RIGHT...... ITS JUST OBVIOUS U TALK TO SUIT U .,..... SO SO BIAS ......
That doesn’t prove anything.
Wait so the saints answer your prayers and not God ?
@@internautaoriginal9951 😂 spot on
Mary can’t hear your prayers
Now I see why you don't debate.... You'd be forced to deal with the real issues in your arguments. But by doing videos on your own, you can set up all the strawman arguments you'd like.
@Arminius how anyone can objectively make either that distinction or conclusion is beyond me.
@@roymartin1385 A debate at its best is a formalized presentation of arguments that both debaters know ahead of time to be compared. At worst you have people who can't debate either because they're poorly researched, bad rhetoricians, or can't argue level-headedly and on topic. Here Dr. Cooper is outside of a debate format but nevertheless presenting and contrasting his arguments I think very fairly and cautiously, and I have no idea what you'd provide as an example of a strawman.
@@stallard9256 Well, I'm sorry that you aren't able to listen to this argument and critique it properly then. I mean, look at all the time and tangent about martyrs. All strawman.
-SORRY GUYS: “He who has *NO FAITH* is advised to *REFRAIN* from saying the *Hail Mary."* -MARTIN LUTHER (Personal Prayer Book, 1522) -(Means those who don’t say it, are not in the Faith. Luther knows you need to prove your belief in the communion of the Saints. You cant just hear the word, but need to be a doer to prove your faith).
-Modern Lutheran Comment: "I've NEVER SAID a "hail Mary" in my life and don't plan to start either" -(EXACTLY MARTIN LUTHER’S POINT - you are not of the Faith).
-People in the Faith agree to the *Creeds of Faith* in deed and action.
James 1:22 You must be **DOERS** of The WORD, and *NOT* only *HEARERS ONLY* as these people ***DECEIVE THEMSELVES***
@@taylorbarrett1455 Are you sure a out that? My understanding is that Luther kept up Marian devotion until his dying day and firmly believed in her perpetual virginity, immaculate conception, and assumption into Heaven.