As a teenager, I lived in New York City. In the late sixties the winds of doctrine blew like tornadoes in the minds of youth. Eastern religions entertained many with a paralyzing grip. The praises of the Eastern Mystics reverberated in the streets of Greenage Village. These, spiritual leaders claimed great accomplishments. By getting in touch, with their inner self, through meditation, chanting, or other practices, they promised many benefits. Abilities of all sorts were alleged and sometimes even physical, testable, abilities were demonstrated. The ability to melt 14 frozen blankets, with the naked body, on top of a high mountain, without catching a vicious flu, spinal disability or a ruptured kidney, is amazing by all standards--useless, but truly amazing.

Having grown up in an Adventist home, it was difficult for me to dissociate these claims from the works of Satan. People seeking power from within, were people who replaced God's place in the heart with their own wisdom. Yet, over the years, the expression "Prayer is power" kept troubling me. I heard explanations like, "the mystics use meditation, but we (Christians) use prayer to gain power from God." These ideas sounded interesting, but in my young mind I could not gain full grasp of what they may be saying. Because of the context in which they were often used, I felt that there was more to these simple words. The suggestion of some unclear implications always hung around like the foul exhaust you catch when you just miss the bus.

What is implied by "prayer is power"? Power over sin, maybe? Sounds good to me, but as you will shortly see, the meaning of this expression is often taken differently, very differently. To some it implies raw, unintelligent power available for our use. Some put one or more constraints on it and the varieties of constraints sometimes seem endless. Others yet, constrain it with the Holy Spirit. Finally, there are those who do not view power as a central asset in prayer. They believe that we are instrumental for the Holy Spirit to exercise His influence through us and man is not positioned as governor in the avenue of power.

These three ideas or groups are usually easy to categorize, their views are distinct and lend themselves to analysis. Their polemics are well-defined and known by many.

Another group, worth mentioning, however, does not fit any of the aforementioned ones. Their tenets and opinions often shift with the type of question they are asked. In their view, sooner or later, all aforementioned views find their expression and yet, at other times we find denial of such by implication or outright statement. Common reason has difficulties with such encounters. This way of rationalizing is slippery ground for sound reasoning. It brings in a horde of apparent possibilities, which fascinate the young, the new and the inexperienced. It also brings in errors and a host of difficulties, which ravage the tenets of Christianity. This group is of primary concern to us because it has evolved into a veritable force in the Christian community. We will define and discuss its ideas in great detail. The intellectual difficulties, that this group’s ideas have introduced, are such that we need to form a clear and coherent plan to unveil the subtleties that go unnoticed.

We could probably make a list of other rights and privileges, and build idea upon idea ad infinitum to present all the rights and sub-rights, privileges and sub-privileges that we could think of. As a consequence individuals would be encouraged to reach out and find the help they need. Examples of answered prayers, also, are encouraging and stimulating to read about. Many books on prayer are written this way.

Unfortunately, though there is much good in citing examples and personal interpretations, there are adverse aspects in them as well. The difficulty is not recognized readily. Focusing and relying on what we think is going on in our prayer relationship does not reveal some vital aspects of prayer. Optimism is good, hope is vital for man’s survival, but the nature of man’s fallen character is such that man often may hope and be optimistic for the wrong things. Through wishful thinking, new rights and privileges are added one to another until the entire aggregate of what prayer is and how it really works becomes unwieldy and confusing. The sum total, of what prayer really is, seems to slowly shift and take on a new look.

Overexciting the expectations like over-tightening violin strings can cause serious confusion about prayer. Unexpected practices tend to closely follow exaggerated expectations. They creep in unaware and after a while what once seemed preposterous becomes the norm. Individuals become obsessed with power and think nothing of doing things that are not within their jurisdiction. Some undertake to cast out demons from their furniture, pets, and engage in verbal fights, with demons, while defending, with seemingly good reasons, their rights and privileges to do so! Though these may be extreme examples, many Christians engage in less noticeable prayer practices that violate the rights of others, offend and abuse the privilege of approaching the Almighty, and other. And to exacerbate this difficult situation further, they eagerly undertake to educate others in their fallen ways.

The difficulty of dealing with individuals of this kind is that they have many explanations and rationalizations. Often life seems to be a short period to give them to cite and recite their explanations. Many good Christians have fallen prey to their persistent endeavors to build an entourage of followers who would help them confirm their self-centered religion. For them it is an experiment, but more often than not, they convey it to others with a fanatical confidence. This book is written to expose some common rationalizations and logical ambiguities and find points of reference that will help the Christian to penetrate into the miasma of confusion with a "Thus sayeth the Lord".

Adam was instructed to offer a sacrificial offering and as time passed, through aggregate rationalizations, men began to offer their first born to fulfill the original commandment. In reply to this perversion God reiterated. "Thou shalt not kill". Similarly, the original invitation to prayer has been greatly altered over the years. The ideas that God may have had are not the same as men claim them to be today. To unveil these alterations we will face difficulties, but like the "Thou shalt not kill" commandment, we can explore prayer without weeding through every rationalization. By asking a few simple questions we can define a perimeter or reasonability. Once established this perimeter will help us to see when our rationalizations cross it, so we can tell where we are and turn back.

Since most books on prayer seem to discuss ideas of what prayer is, it may prove more useful to ask some questions concerning what prayer is not! In doing this, we will outline the perimeter we mentioned, which, as you will see, will greatly help us when we begin to study what prayer really is. In a sense we can call our findings "The ‘thou shall nots’ of prayer". Though possibly simple, the answers to these questions will give us the confidence of being within the bounds of reason and better equipped to explore what prayer really is. Once we are in the forest of deep thought and complex ideas, the knowledge of what prayer is not, as you will see, will prove to be a faithful guide.

To begin our study, let’s ask some simple yet pertinent questions:

We really have 4 questions here. Question #2 applies to each listed example. Those give use three references to question #2. Thus we have 1, 2a, 2b, and 2c.

Let’s begin by thinking about question #1. Does man have power over God, in some abstract or direct way? Reading the Scriptures we are compelled to believe that man & woman were made by God and were meant to be subject to Him. Our subordination to God is clearly taught, yet, strangely enough it does not make us into slaves. That is one of the great things we love about God. God refers to us as sons and daughters. Unlike Lucifer’s way of ruling subjects, God has endowed man with the power of choice. Self-determination or free will is extended so that man could become a responsible, accountable moral agent.

This freedom, great as it is, however, has certain limits. Self-determination, we need to understand clearly, does not imply unlimited freedom and unlimited power to do according to one’s whim. It also does not imply that man was endowed with power over God. Some individuals cite the idea that man’s need is an imposition on God and His time. To them, this imposition opens a door for man to coerce God into action and reaction. Through perverse reasoning, they conclude that this defines a point of authority over God.

To advance in this line of thought we need to keep in mind that God is not quite like man. Many errors are entertained because the tutor forgets in what ways God is different from man. God’s resources are not limited like that of man. Furthermore, our need may recommend us to God, but it does not force God to act in certain requested or specified ways. God's love, and mercy are great, yet they are not remote control buttons--as many may have discovered. God looks at the heart carefully, and His reactions or responses are not as predictable as many would have it. The only predictable aspect and assurance that a man may have is that God loves man. God chooses to care for us. Yet, man has the freedom to walk out from within that perimeter. The assurance of love and this realization place a large enough gap between man’s wants, needs and God’s submission to his whims.

From this passage and reasoning it out, we can deduce that Man's position was not designed to be that over God. We also note that, God is upset at this individual who aspires to rise above Him, in the seat of power and authority. This verse helps us to conclude that God is sovereign and protective of His position. Keep this in mind as we continue, because as you will see later, there are some well recognized Christian teachers who do not quite go along with this, and their arguments are well suited to confuse and lead their followers to other conclusions. They often do not consider the implications of conflicting requests, which different men may impose on God, with perfectly good reasons and arguments. Enamoured with power they make everything possible and available at their disposal. The real culprit, for these beliefs may be the difficulties we all have with humility.

In summary, the first question helps us to recognize God’s sovereignty and our position in the realm of creation. No matter what sort of prayer man may offer, it can never be rationalized to position man into the seat of power and authority above God. Neither man nor angel was created for that purpose.

Question #1 was:

The answer is ‘No!’ Converting this conclusion to a rule, we could say:

Thinking about this a little it is not hard to connect this rule to the first commandment "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me." Self is not excluded from this commandment. It is refreshing to realize that this new rule is not quite so new, after all. God anticipated it long time ago. This commandment was designed with the intent to unseat pride and want from the set of power.

Our first question was discussed within a few paragraphs and we found a fairly reasonable answer quickly. The three parts of the second question, however, are not as easy to deal with. I wish that they were, but many difficulties come up by asking this question. It may seem otherwise to some, but I invite you to put on your seatbelt and thinking cap and consider the surprising difficulties that come up. This question has become so complex that it will exhaust the rest of this chapter. In the same way, the last 2 questions will each have their own chapter.

The second question is 2.a:

We ask this question in order to help us understand how we relate to God and what our rights are. But this question involves equally well our relationship with others. Whatever your opinion may be, on this question, you may feel confident that you are on the side of reason. You may feel that most if not all people feel the way you do. Yet, on this question, people's views differ widely. Often, this question provokes counter-questions to confirm proper understanding. Rewording the question may even provoke a different response from the same individual.

In the end, however, we want to find out what influence a petitioner may have on God, regarding other people's sins. To be sure that this is clear, these are not sins of the petitioner or sins against the petitioner by a third party. These are personal sins of a third party, which do not relate to the petitioner. In essence, among other things, this question involves the central ministration of intercession in the heavenly sanctuary. It involves God’s established mechanisms for the disposition of sin.

To study this question we will need some help. The best help on this subject comes from the Scriptures, since they seem to converge on the issue of forgiveness almost exclusively. The ideas of forgiveness, responsibility coupled with privacy on the road to righteousness engages our attention like few others. Since the apple bite, these ideas have often consumed and/or elated thinkers and sinners.

To engage this subject let’s start where God starts this issue. When Adam and Eve sinned, God was very disappointed, but He was prepared. He knew that sin might invade planet earth. God made a provision and after man’s fall, He carefully educated Adam and Eve concerning how sin was to be dealt with. God killed two animals and introduced the first pair to the first insight of how sin was to be disposed.

The idea of the sacrificial lamb had an early start. This ministration is one of the oldest institutions of humanity. Prior to Calvary, all God’s children practiced it. Though not called that way, by name in Adam’s time, it was really a precursor of the "Daily ministration", which was later given to Israel on mount Sinai. For many years Israel was burdened to practice it. God’s desire was that men would not forget their great need for restoration. An entire tribe was set apart for the sole purpose of ministering in the earthly sanctuary. On daily basis, an offering was made in the morning and in the evening. God desired to impress an important lesson on the Israelites. The ‘daily sacrifice’ ministration is positioned as the right arm of faith. God found it necessary to illustrate certain aspects of the plan of salvation, theatrically. Although not in full understanding, through the ceremonial exercises the believer could perceive that God was concerned with the restoration of humanity. This understanding was meant to encourage the individual to think and bring him to repentance.

This ceremonial practice, however, was not meant to go on forever. When Christ passed the test and accomplished His goals on Calvary, the types met the anti-types.

As Adventists, we need to remember that the Sanctuary ministrations have by no means ended. At the Cross-, the veil was torn and the earthly ministrations were no longer acceptable. The reason was not that they were no longer needed, but that they were to be overtaken by the true Lamb of the Sanctuary. The heavenly ministrations replaced the earthly ministrations, though they clearly do not consist of animal sacrificing. The earthly ministrations were a shadow of heavenly things to come. Christ went into the heavenly Sanctuary and embraced His heavenly duties.

This fact is not a fabrication of someone's fertile imagination. The prophets as well as the Savior discussed ideas concerning the future ministrations in the heavenly Sanctuary.

At Calvary, the ceremonial ministrations had come to an end, but it was not really an end. It was the beginning of the reality that they pointed to. The reality of these ministrations began in the heavenly Sanctuary's ministrations. This was the plan all along. The ceremonial ministrations were not superstitious practices to keep the people busy. The Savior planed to embrace these duties even before the creation of this world, should sin emerge. These ministrations had great significance. Their value is greatly underestimated because men do not take time to study their meaning. The victory on the cross, enabled Christ to engage this unique and holy responsibility. The great sacrifice of the Savior initiated the entire process of ministrations that followed.

Centuries after Calvary, in fulfillment of the Savior’s prophetic words, the issue of the heavenly Sanctuary and its ministrations surfaced. It was the beginning of unprecedented spiritual darkness. History characterizes this time as the Dark Ages. The great light that shone from Calvary was beclouded with novel human improvisations of how God relates to man. Reaching out boldly to our heavenly Father was no longer encouraged. A new order of religious practices was introduced. The Church, backed with political support, disseminated and enforced humanly contrived practices with overwhelming force. Men arose with strange claims, assuming Christ's mediatorial or intercessory ministration. Absolution from sin was offered through the mediation of simple men.

Chapter 54 of Isaiah portrays the future church, which will bring in the Gentiles who did not espouse the truth of the married wife, Israel, in the past. In prophetic allegory, God refers to these as "the Desolate". Without God man is truly desolate, but the Savior came and brought the Desolate to Himself. This was a plan for Israel to carry out, but Israel failed in that mission. Yet, the compassionate Savior loved those people. He brought them in on His own.

Not all would follow His leading, however. Some of those, whom prophecy describes as "desolate", were married to error. To help us understand His sentiments about this category of individuals, God adds a condemning adjective. The "Abominable" Desolate was a prophetic reference to these lost souls. Under the influence of Satan many corrupt individuals stood to counter the Christian movement. After all else failed, invasion from within remained as the last option. A church evolved, whose influence became great, but whose leadership was married to error. It came to be known as the Church for all religions.

Some men like Tetzel [time of Martin Luther] promised blessings from God for material offerings, and blessings were not only extended to oneself, but to others as well, whether dead or alive. Both, favors and forgiveness of sins, were bundled together. Tetzel would cry out, while riding through the town, "No sooner does the coin hit the pot that the soul is set free [from hell]."

A guilt-ridden man is an easy target for abusers. The desire to be forgiven is still a part of man’s nature. God made guilt as a provision for the restoration of His creatures, but men inspired with satanic goals saw a great opportunity in the exploitation of guilt. Exploitation of guilt is a miraculous tool, which attracts and unifies many heresies. Men have dealt, with the subject of guilt, for thousands of years. The mystics worked out a sin economy named Karma to appease their conscience. The threat of recycling seemed to them as a sufficient threat to change behavior. The heathen, on the other hand, solved the problem by denying the need of living a holy life. The conscience, however, would not keep quiet and the pressure along with a perverted heart compelled the sinner to invent strange and dubious beliefs. The agony of guilt was blamed on devils. Rather than trying to appease God with repentance, they went on to appease the devils themselves. By purchasing golden protective medallions from the priests, protections from various types of devils were obtained. There were also practices like the self-cutting, sacrificing children, and a horde of others to sicken anyone with a conscience.

The exploitation of guilt serves wicked individuals well, but it also accommodates the satanic host. In this schema, they share a symbiotic relationship. The main avenue, for man, to regain peace is to come to the conqueror of sin and ask for help. The great benefit in approaching the Savior is that He helps us to get rid of both sin and guilt. Being bent on man's destruction, the satanic host engineers ways to disrupt the vital link between God and man, and pay his employees. Men sell absolution of sins for money while the satanic host accomplishes its goals. In their perverted ways they become creative. Rather than getting rid of sin, the enemy compels man to get rid of guilt and get paid for a job no half done. The Sacrament of Reconciliation has been used as such by many. Regretfully, in this process, the individual is left in a state of rebellion and though the conscience is soothed with anesthetics, sin remains.

The Dark Ages came and went. The great success of distracting people from God was not to last forever. The Reformation came and men began to realize the great disparity between truth and error. Great strides were taken and many aspects of the heavenly, "Daily ministrations", became an issue. Many reformers realized these errors and placed themselves in opposition of the massive errors. Some lost their lives in the process. Nevertheless, light increased on the subject of the only Intercessor and the daily ministrations. Little by little God led His people to the realization of the great Priest in heaven ministering for the sinner. In 1844, Adventism was born. In the nexus of this truth, God brought out a humble group of believers to re-emphasize to the world the one and only, living Intercessor. The beams of the sunlight of truth shone as never before. It was a time long sought for. As a brilliant light in pitch darkness, Adventism shone its glorious message.

But, what does all this have to do with prayer? Interestingly enough, prayer has everything to do with the heavenly Sanctuary issue. Our prayers are directly related with Christ's ministrations in the heavenly Sanctuary. They are inseparably entwined in a tender, heavenly relationship. Prayer, repentance, the Holy Spirit and Christ’s ministrations all interact within the plan of salvation. Prayer is the very avenue to the Sanctuary. As we pray and communicate with our Father, Christ and the Holy Spirit fulfill their functional part in aiding humanity to some day return to the very presence of the Father. Prayer is the first step of the struggling sinner.

After the dark ages, the truth advanced, but not all Protestant bodies followed. Though many of the traditions of the Roman church were rejected, to make way for the heavenly light, some old practices remained. Among others, the method for absolution from sin, though changed in appearance, remained the same for many Protestants. The sacrament of reconciliation was transformed into a mode of prayer called "Intercessory prayer". Many concluded that this new practice was very distant from the Roman practices. Years piled on and this practice steadily increased in popularity. With the advent of faster communications, however, the intercessory prayer movement caught on like wild fire. From pulpits, telephones, through books, the Internet, this form of prayer is preached and advertised with great and uncommon zeal.

Many prayer books explore prayer by studying all the qualities and capabilities of prayer. The intercessory method of praying extends prayer into a new dimension. Before we discuss it, however, I would like to point out that the term "Intercessory prayer" is a very loose term. It is understood differently by different individuals, though there are distinct groups, which defend clearly defined positions. As we will see shortly, the details of these ideas will be separated and studied carefully. Intercessory praying is an evolutionary novelty in Protestantism. Its roots are not recent, but its fruit is.

The "Intercessory prayers" term is sometimes used to describe prayers of individuals that have a genuine concern for their fellow man. Their desire to help their neighbors is expressed on their knees in private hours with God asking for light or insight on how to help others. These individuals pray in ways that Christ taught the disciples. For such, it seems that no matter what they are taught, they always end up praying without presumption. These individuals, I believe are God's people and though they may refer to their method of praying as "Intercessory prayers" they are far from the central aspect of what today’s "Intercessory prayers" involve.

Intercessory prayers involve issues that go well beyond the boundaries we have suggested in this first group. Consequently, though it may not please everyone, we will not refer to the aforementioned group as "Intercessors". The mere word "Intercessor" bears implications, which relate to the ministration of the great and only Intercessor in heaven. The whole idea of sole Mediator or intercessor is displaced with the introduction of new intercessors. Consequently, for the sake of clarity, in this chapter, we will tighten the sense and usage of this word. The word "Intercessors" will refer to individuals, which engage in activities, and doctrines that include handling Christ's daily ministration of securing forgiveness of sins for others.

Though strongly resistant and well armed with the Sanctuary truth, Adventism was not spared from the onslaught of this heretical practice. In the last few decades many Adventists have embraced this strange doctrine from Rome. Our versions of this practice are slightly modified to accommodate our special beliefs but the central idea of interceding is the same. In one of the Adventist versions, the praying Christian is invited to visualize himself as the high priest in the sanctuary and different activities of Christ’s ministrations are ascribed and interwoven into prayer. As they pray in the visualization of the Sanctuary, they move from one place to another in order to fulfill certain specified priestly tasks. In the end they reach the Holy place. There, they are taught to perform reconciliatory intercession on the behalf of others. Other versions bypass the Sanctuary and license individuals to ascertain absolution of sins for others. This practice is of particular concern to us as Adventists. The birth of Adventism has been closely associated with the Sanctuary and we are keenly aware of the ministrations performed there.

Some of you may be surprised to learn of the presence of these ideas in our midst. Many may think it preposterous that Christ's ministrations have been reduced to common things. Other Adventists, however, feel that it is proper and befitting for man to solicit confession from man. Others, yet, insist that the human "intercessor" can, confess and intercede before God for the forgiveness of their fellow man’s sins. The rationalization varieties of the self appointed intercessors vary greatly. Some will concede that they are not equivalent to the Only Intercessor, but still claim that their ministrations and prayers are critical in another man’s salvation. Many Scriptural texts are presented as evidence and defense for these views. Sometimes, this practice is explained away with the assertion that it is our obligation to exercise it.

Having discussed these two groups I hope you will be able to understand the radical difference of their mind-set. With this in mind, and for the sake of clarity, I will refer to the latter group as "Intercessors" and refrain from referring to the first group as "Intercessors".

One may imagine that suggestions to engage in securing forgiveness, like the Roman priests, for our fellow man, would strike fear in any Adventist, but such is not the case. The truth is that Adventism has been exposed to this practice and many, small, and some with great influence, are advocating it. The issue of supplanting Christ's ministration has taken on a new form and approached Christianity with a new look and bolder claims than ever.

As it has been since the 6^th century, Christ's ministration is still under fire. Think about this for a moment. Most Protestants claim it to be a figment of the imagination that Christ is in any sanctuary performing the anti-typical ministrations conveyed to Moses. This belief clearly undermines the Adventist position. The claim "Once saved always saved" is preached by many. It, also, creates another complex disqualification of the need of Christ's continual ministration. Some claim anew the actual power of His ministration. If you think about it, there is a common thread in all three of these ideas and there are many, many more whose target is the very Sanctuary of Heaven.

Today, in the information age, where many are learning to manage guilt on their own, it is difficult to intimidate man and make him feel bad about himself. Having seen so many scandals and betrayals of the public trust, the world is fast losing respect for self-appointed authorities of any type. More than loss of respect, many have developed contempt for the authorities and the law. In times like these, and especially having a background in Protestantism, it has become difficult to revive the "confess to a fallible man" era. Error, nevertheless, needs to grow, to survive. Consequently, the delusions adapt to the times, but the attack remains in the same area.

Christ's ministrations have been and will remain the battleground until the return of the Savior. In the past many were deceived into believing that they should reach out to fallen man or mythical figures, (the priest, Mary or saints, instead of, or in conjunction with, Christ), for help with their sins. For those that cannot be deceived thus, one can introduce the flattering idea that, they are capable of performing such a function themselves. The natural aversion, associated with contempt for authorities, does not surface in this situation. Today’s wondrous age of self-love invokes tender tones of euphoria as we contemplate our elected position as intercessors for those that are lesser. Somehow, the ball of wax suddenly seems easier to swallow. This new look has charm and personal appeal. Furthermore, if it is performed privately it might pass unnoticed by those sensitized to detect perversions of Sanctuary truths.

In the past, men were required to come forward, confess their sins and ask a man, dead or alive, for forgiveness--"father bless me for I have sinned." At this time, however, sins can be removed by an even more efficient intercessor. As we will see later, sins can be removed without the knowledge, confession or repentance of the sinner. In fact, what was so objectionable about the confessional booths, anyway? And what was it that Martin Luther objected to in Tetzel’s solicitations? Many Reformers recognized and opposed the Sacrament of Reconciliation. They took this stand and some lost their lives.

In the seventies, we all gasped upon learning about subliminal suggestions in music. We felt sorry for the unsuspecting victims. Maybe we prayed "thank you Lord that such things do not happen to me." Can we feel so safe? Will Satan leave prayer alone? Maybe there is an unwritten rule that forbids him to tamper in that area. Apparently prayer is a fundamental that makes Satan quite nervous. He persists and remains on the front line and deals with the critical issues. Distorting and interfering in this domain seems paramount to him. More so than music, prayer is an area that has been ravaged by him over the millennia.

Consider the Wailing Wall in Israel filled with little scrolls of prayers and supplications. Let's remember the Islamic method, of bowing and chanting while facing the East. We also know about the vowel babbling mantras and fruit offerings of the eastern religions. There are also the incantations and invocations of some African tribes that require cutting oneself, etc. Let's not forget the Hail Marys and praying to the saints. Though not called prayer, some of these methods are used to reach the higher powers. In Christianity, personal relationship, to a loving God, is implied and, therefore, the prayer takes a special form of communication. The less the personal relationship is emphasized, the more crude and public the form becomes. Nevertheless all those forms gravitate around the same idea of communing with the higher powers. More importantly, however, they all have deteriorated to the level of impeding and perverting Christ's heavenly Ministrations.

If the Savior had not given us the simple prayer instructions, we wonder what form Christian prayer would have taken, by now. Finally, the method of prayer says a lot about a man's view of God. As the individual engages into the diverse forms of prayers, the mind questions the intentions of a god that requires the specific rituals to hear the pleas of the suppliant. This aspect also defines God in the view of the student.

It is with much interest and hope, that I found myself reading and reviewing ideas on the subject of "Intercessory prayer" recently. At first, I was fascinated with the possibilities. At some point, however, I began to realize the foundation of this material. I made my views clear, to my Adventist friends, who were deeply involved in this practice, but I quickly realized the extent and paralyzing power this novelty wielded. Subsequently I learned that this teaching has been circulated widely, among Adventists. Many Adventist tutors are involved in training people in the profession of interceding. This novel belief has gained many adherents.

To verify my position, I began to collect all books, tapes and literature on this subject. The more I read, the more my conviction grew and though I never imagined myself writing a book, my concern on this subject has grown from concern to alarm.

During my first encounter with "Prayer Intercessors" I was given a copy of Carol Zarska's booklet "In His Presence". I took the advice very seriously and began to pray in the prescribed manner. In this introductory booklet, the instructions suggest to pray by visualizing the office and activities of the High Priest in the Sanctuary. This initial phase is commonly called "the Sanctuary prayer". My rationalizations accepted this little ritual under the umbrella of ‘organizing the mind’. A few weeks went by and we met again. In this encounter, I was introduced to the idea of praying for others, as outlined in a complementary pamphlet, named "Intercessory Prayer." This, second pamphlet, I was instructed, was meant for aiding our friends and family through prayer. I read the pamphlet and wrote down some questions, which concerned me.

Contrary to impressions that we may have, as Adventists, the Church of Rome is very cognizant of the fact that sins are to be absolved in His name only. Today they sing a better tune than Protestants. Let’s read it again, "To recap, then, Jesus Christ is the sole mediator between God and man. No other person in heaven or on earth can take His place." This point is well defended by the Church of Rome. It is inscribed in no less than her "Constitution of the Church."

Are you surprised? As Adventists we need to ask some hard questions. "Are we justified, in tampering with the daily ministration of the Savior?" If yes, then, what is the difference between our view and that of Rome? Do we have a good reason to discredit their practice? What are they doing that is so objectionable? Should we endorse this practice we may as well join the ecumenical movement. Otherwise we could be looked upon as nothing more than fomenters wanting to have things their way!

If, however, they do repent of their sins, what function do the intercessors serve? Will not God immediately forgive those who repent? Who ever heard of truly repenting of sins and still being rejected from on high? Misconceptions are not based on reason, so they do not require derivation. They just require persistence and deception.

Adventists need to meet these false theories. The Scriptural misapplications need to be clarified. People need to see the type of trickery that is often used to deceive them. The trouble is that, by now, the intercessors use any reference to prayer in the Scriptures as clear support of their view. Nevertheless, in this chapter we will discuss some favorite Bible references the intercessors use. Please keep in mind that opinion of what the Scriptures say and what the Scriptures really say are two entirely different things.

Daniel's prayer chapter 9 is an all time favorite of the intercessors. They claim that, since Daniel confesses the sins of his people and asks for their forgiveness, the ministration of Christ's intercession is clearly available to all men.

One would expect something like "Your people’s sins are forgiven you", but that is not what Daniel got. Forgiveness was not implied here, nor is there any allusion, to any such grant, given later. To the contrary, a threat is issued against them. How disconcerting! Israel is given seventy weeks to repent of their sins. If they do not repent they will not understand the vision, nor will they recognize the Messiah. And worst of all, they may not understand the transfer of the earthly ministrations to the heavenly sanctuary "anoint the Most Holy", the only place where they will, then, find a mediator for the forgiveness of their sins. In general, all these threats were fulfilled on them. Daniel's intercession must have been an utter failure, if that is what he was doing.

Daniel obtained no favor, in this so-called "Intercession," though the angel came to him with much sympathy and kindness. It remains for us, now, to rationalize away how to embrace this idea of interceding by looking at an example where intercession failed to get the desired results. We would not extol the virtues of somebody’s driving ability if they smack into a tree after a hot drive. Would we? Yet this failed attempt at intercession is spoken of as evidence of our intercessory rights.

Daniel was afraid that the four beasts the ram and the he-goat prophecies implied impending doom for his nation and they had not even fully moved out of Babylon. Thinking this way he fainted several times. His concern and fear were based on a misunderstanding of God's will.

Daniel was not unique, in this endeavor, nor was he infallible. His heart was in a good place and that was his asset, but it did not seem to affect Israel’s situation. In response to Daniel’s pleas God presented a preformed plan. The plan was not formed on the fly. It was a well thought out prophecy that remains as one of the most impressive prophecies which illustrated God’s plans to help the Israelites.