Death is not our natural state. Death is unnatural because God did not create us to be mortal; we became mortal through fault of our own.
When Adam and Eve were created, they were without sin and therefore immortal. The state humanity was created in is our "natural" state. Our fallen state is not our natural state, separated from God.
A bulb disconnected form the electrical source is a dead bulb. What good is a bulb if light doesn't shine through it? Adam and Eve were alive in God, Who is our sole source of existence. Separated from God, who is Life, our light went out, as we died unto sin.
Restoring manking to its original state is the only "natural" state of man. I don't know of any unnatural condition that is pleasant. Do you? If you do, then my example is bad, but it's late so I can't think of any other examples. Nonetheless, you get my drift.
Yes, but as is often said, you do pray "to" the saints. This is a major issue of contention between Catholics and Protestants
I know and I have to give it to you for having taken the time to learn the subtle difference. In fact your summary "prayer for a prayer" is quite good. Most Protestants, except Calvinists, admit that the Saints (in heaven, the "famous" ones) prey on our behalf along with angels. Most Protestants except some Anglicans do not accept prayers (as requests) to the saints. Yet, early Church records show that this was the practice and understanding of early Christianity.
I mean, if we can accept such complex things as the Holy Trinity, one essence and three persons, or Christ, fully God and fully Man, accepting requests for prayers is not such a foreign idea. Also, remember that Holy Trinity, as understood by the Church and accepted by most Protestants, as well as the duality of nature of Christ in one Person is not exactly word-by-word in the Scriptures either.
The Church really has no "hard evidence" to prove it, but then again +Paul tells us we believe things by faith and not by provable evidence. (cf Heb 11:1)
"Sin, Gehenna, and death do not exist at all with God, for they are effects, not substances. Sin is the fruit of free will. There was a time when sin did not exist, and there will be a time when it will not exist. Gehenna is the fruit of sin. At some point in time it had a beginning, but its end is not known. Death, however, is a dispensation of the wisdom of the Creator. It will rule only a short time over nature; then it will be totally abolished." +Isaac the Syrian
Tomorrow, interestingly enough, is the feast of +Isaac the Syrian.
If God created Adam and Eve sinless, and immortal, would you "equate" this to the incarnation of Christ? I might make a distinction that Adam was created with the potential to sin (you would call free will), because he did, while Christ did not sin. Did Christ have free will? By this line, it appears that Adam was born with a "flaw" that Jesus did not have. Where did this flaw come from? Even before the first sin was committed, wasn't our natural state inclusive of this flaw of potential to sin? Therefore, didn't our natural state dramatically change for the worse after the first sin (the flaw multiplied by being realized)?
Restoring mankind to its original state is the only "natural" state of man.
As above, is not this natural state flawed?
Most Protestants, except Calvinists, admit that the Saints (in heaven, the "famous" ones) pray on our behalf along with angels. Most Protestants except some Anglicans do not accept prayers (as requests) to the saints.
(First, thanks for the kind words.) I was unaware of this distinction across (generally) Protestantism. That's very interesting. Could you name any specific denominations? Even in my own church, I know there is a generally accepted belief that angels are fully real and "do" things on our behalf, but I have never heard that intercessory prayer is among them (even if we do not ask). As far as I know, in my church, and among non-physically-living humans, it is only the Spirit Who prays on our behalf.
Also, remember that Holy Trinity, as understood by the Church and accepted by most Protestants, as well as the duality of nature of Christ in one Person is not exactly word-by-word in the Scriptures either.
I agree that the Holy Trinity is a difficult concept to understand, especially explain, and does require interpretation. That immediately reminded me of the references earlier in this thread to the filioque (sp?). Before this thread, I had never heard the term in my life. Out of curiosity back then, I looked it up and got a dictionary sense of the views of the procession of the Holy Spirit. But, what I didn't catch was why this apparently was such a big deal. It appeared to be a major reason for the schism, but I don't see why that would be.
(To be honest, I don't even know what I'm "supposed" to believe on this. We've never had a single lesson on it in Sunday school. I've always thought that all three persons were co-existent and co-equal from the beginning.) Anyway, why is it such a big thing whether the HS proceeds from just the Father or from the Father and Jesus?
Oh, and here's a weird one for you. Would you tell me how to pronounce filioque? I searched the net for 20 minutes and couldn't find it. It drove me crazy :)