Do you understand what intercessory prayer means? [D-fendr, #474]
Each time I highlight how overfocusing on the "great cloud of witnesses" can possibly crowd out the One who will return on the clouds, I get this same response thrown up: "That I just don't understand intercessory prayer." (A response that Campion and perhaps others kept surfacing earlier in this thread).
So, again, let me highlight what several of us agree/disagree on:
We agree intercessory prayer (having fellow saints lift up your concerns) is vital [tho D-fendr & Campion deem me as "suspect" in this area].
We seem to agree that this complements rather than replaces praying directly to God [we agree on in this in theory; I think we might disagree on how this actually plays itself out in the practice realm].
We agree that heavenly saints intercede on behalf of earthly ones [we disagree on whether they are privvy to all/most of our prayers being lifted up to heaven].
This last point applies to earthly saints as well as heavenly ones! Just because we all agree that it's important for our fellow earthly saints to lift up prayers on our behalf, doesn't mean that 99.9999% of earthly saints have access to them!!! Imagine if you told me that 99.9999% of earthly saints don't access your prayer petitions & I responded the way D-fendr & Campion have responded to me: "You just don't understand intercessory prayer."
It doesn't matter if we each agree of the import of including the saints in intercessory prayer! If saints, whether they be above OR below, can't access those prayers, then it's a mute point [pun unintended].
Our differences of opinion, then, are boiled down primarily to the issue of what dimensional barriers exist--barriers that affect communication access. But the foundation that this difference sits upon is ultimately bigger: Scriptural guidance.
You seem to step out in faith minus Scriptural guidance. And I say, if this was important enough for us to do, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, or the apostles would have guided us to do so in Scripture. The Holy Spirit promised us to "lead us into ALL truth" (John 16).
Well, it seems you have made some progress since last we chatted Colofornian! At least to me. D-fender and Campion can speak for themselves of course but I find it remarkable that now you even admit that the Saints in Heaven offer intecessory prayer for those on Earth!
Our differences of opinion, then, are boiled down primarily to the issue of what dimensional barriers exist--barriers that affect communication access.
Correct! That is where our disagreement comes from.
But the foundation that this difference sits upon is ultimately bigger: Scriptural guidance.
You seem to step out in faith minus Scriptural guidance. And I say, if this was important enough for us to do, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, or the apostles would have guided us to do so in Scripture.
If it was important enough for us to believe, wouldn't the actual word "monotheism" be in the Bible? Do you see where this is going?
Let me digress a bit and make the point this way: We are both conservatives, so let's look at this from a conservative perspective. For 1500 years after our Lord's Death and Ressurection, was it the "rule" to go by "Scripture alone"? If not, then why should we believe God's Plan for His Church changed suddenly because some mere man invented a printing press? Why does the normative process of His Church suddenly change, simply because man stumbled on some technology that made the reproduction of His Written Word easier? Does that make sense, from a conservative standpoint?
You see my friend, that's the central issue here. That's what ALL the disagreements between Catholics/Eastern Orthodox and Protestant Christians comes down to: The issue of "sola scriptura". There is no historical precident for it, and indeed, there are no Scriptural bases for it.
So we come back to history as our guide: What did Christians do for the first 1500 years with regards to the Saints? It's clear that history tells us they believed the Saints to be alive, and able to hear intecessory prayer requests. ALSO, history does NOT record anyone NOT believing this, at least for the first 1500 years. So this "history", which really we call "Tradition", is our guide, and indeed, part of the Word of God. The Word of God is not only written, it is transmitted via His Church, in BOTH written and oral forms, preserved by the Holy Spirit, until the end of time.
Don't limit yourself to the rich history that is our true Christian faith, by only reading the Bible brother! The Bible is the Word of God, but it's not the ENTIRE Word of God. There's so much more to hear and learn, for those with eyes to see and EARS to HEAR!
This is our fundamental (no pun intended) disagreement. Personally, I find it difficult to believe that God would limit Himself to just a book.
By the way, I have not said anywhere in this post that the Word of God is being added to today, nor was it ever "increased"; the canon of Scripture is complete and never to be added to, like say the Mormons have done. Likewise, the Oral Tradition, the Word of God you are missing, was given complete by Jesus, passed on to his Apostles, and via apostolic succession, to us today. What may seem like "doctrinal additions" is actually the journey of discovery Catholics continue today. We continue to learn what the original deposit of faith contains, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit via the Magisterium.
So why be further distracted by praying to spirits who will never answer our prayers! God will!Distracted, spirits who never answer, God will... All seems to either misunderstand intercessory prayer.
You seem to argue back and forth on two points of intercessory prayer. Let's reduce them to two questions: Can we? (with Saints in heaven) and Should we?
You've argue against both those questions in different posts. To be clear, do you answer in the affirmative for "Should we?" (engage in intercessory prayer and ask others to pray for us)? [Excluding for now your objections to the 'can we' part as regards saints in heaven.