No. This is where many disagreements lie. However, if the rule is, “If Scripture doesn’t explicitly command something, Christians cannot practice it,” then the Protestant has adopted a particular doctrine of biblical authority. But that doctrine itself needs to be demonstrated from Scripture. Scripture does not say, “Only practices explicitly commanded in Scripture are permissible.” Instead, Scripture itself speaks positively about apostolic tradition. Paul says, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15). Paul here identifies two forms: traditions taught by word and traditions taught by letter. These are oral and written apostolic teachings. It is not possible for every belief, every sermon, and every tradition to have been written down. That is difficult to reconcile with the idea that everything Christians must believe exists only in written Scripture. And this matters enormously for Orthodoxy. The Orthodox Church isn’t saying, “We invented praying to saints, and Scripture doesn’t matter.” It is saying “The Church received the apostolic faith through Scripture and Holy Tradition, and Scripture itself was preserved, read, interpreted, and lived within that Church.” Consider 2 Thessalonians 2:15 again. Paul doesn’t say, “Hold only to what I have written.” He says, “whether by word or our epistle.” That means the apostolic deposit was not exhausted by the written text. And this is important because the earliest Christians didn’t have a completed New Testament. For decades, Christians preached the Gospel orally. Bishops taught Christians. Apostles transmitted doctrine. Churches celebrated the Eucharist. Christians baptized converts. Christians prayed together. Christians preserved apostolic practices. The New Testament itself emerged within that apostolic Church. So what does Orthodoxy actually claim? Note “Tradition can contradict Scripture.” It cannot. Instead, it teaches “Authentic Holy Tradition is the living transmission of the apostolic faith, and Scripture is its central written witness.” If a later practice contradicted Scripture, Orthodox Christians would have a problem with it. But if a practice is compatible with Scripture, fits the biblical understanding of the Church, fits the biblical understanding of the departed, fits the biblical understanding of intercession, and is consistently witnessed in the early Church, then the Orthodox position is that its absence from an explicit command or Scripture does not automatically make it illegitimate.
This is where the early Christians become extremely important. If the early Christians—who walked closely with the disciples and their disciples—in the first few centuries had universally believed, “Christians must never ask departed Christians for intercession,” we would expect the early Christian record to reflect that. Instead, we find very early evidence of Christians asking for the prayers of departed saints and honoring martyrs. For example, the Martyrdom of Polycarp, from the second century, describes Christians honoring Polycarp’s remains and distinguishing their reverence for him from worship of Christ. The catacombs also contain early Christian inscriptions asking for prayers for the departed. That doesn’t automatically prove every Orthodox practice. But it makes it much harder to argue, “The saints were only invented as intercessors during medieval Catholicism.” They weren’t. This practice is extremely ancient.