Purgatory

[BobRyan]

According to Catholic teaching you cannot go to heaven or purgatory - if you die with mortal sin on your soul - having not been absolved from it in this life.

For example - what some of them call "mild envy" Coveting is a "venial" sin according to Catholic tradition.

Murder and worshiping false gods - a mortal sin.

http://www.followthissite.com/list-of-sins.php

They say that venial sins do not have to be confessed to your priest.

=======================================================
1. These jews died in the mortal sin of idolatry -- idolatry is not a venial sin even by Catholic standards. Worshiping pagan gods is not a "small infraction" in the RCC. And will not earn the people of God - "heaven" even by Catholic standards. These are not pagans that they are trying to get "absolved" but rather - they are Jews, the people of God -- yet worshipping pagan gods!

2. Absolve from sin - is not purgatory. Rather purgatory is paying for temporal suffering owed by venial sins -- not mortal sins. The text does not say anything about purging the dead of a bad character so that while dead - and before their resurrection they can get out of purgatory and go to heaven.

3. the text says that NO BENEFIT at all would be anticipated for the dead -- were it not for the resurrection. So then no focus at all on "while dead the great benefit of getting out of purgatory and going to heaven"[/QUOTE]

 

[herbert]

BobRyan-

I am not sure what it is that you're getting at by quoting this Priest. As far as this excerpt from his response goes, despite the highlighting, etc. I don't see what specific point you're speaking to:

"I answer that, nothing is clearly stated in Scripture about the situation of Purgatory, nor is it possible to offer convincing arguments on this question. It is probable, however, and more in keeping with the statements of holy men and the revelations made to many, that there is a twofold place of Purgatory. One, according to the common law; and thus the place of Purgatory is situated below and in proximity to hell, so that it is the same fire which torments the damned in hell and cleanses the just in Purgatory; although the damned being lower in merit, are to be consigned to a lower place. Another place of Purgatory is according to dispensation: and thus sometimes, as we read, some are punished in various places, either that the living may learn, or that the dead may be succored, seeing that their punishment being made known to the living may be mitigated through the prayers of the Church."

There are many Catholics who are the first to admit that Scripture is not explicit in teaching Purgatory. Rather, Catholics see what we know of God's salvific work as compatible with the doctrine of Purgatory, maybe even hinted at... As I said, though, even CS Lewis went so far as to say our souls demanded Purgatory. And in contrast to what Ellen G. White suggests, saying:

"Then the way was prepared for the introduction of still another invention of paganism, which Rome named purgatory, and employed to terrify the credulous and superstitious multitudes. By this heresy is affirmed the existence of a place of torment, in which the souls of such as have not merited eternal damnation are to suffer punishment for their sins, and from which, when freed from impurity, they are admitted to heaven." (The Great Controversy 58.3)

The reality of things isn't so outrageous as she suggests. Going as far back as to appeal to Tertullian, writing from the 150s to the 240s, we find a concept known as the refrigerium interim which was, itself somewhat of a variation of the Hebrew understanding of Sheol, imagined as a place of temporary repose for souls bound for Heaven.

Ellen G. White suggests elsewhere in The Great Controversy that the Church fabricated various practices for profit's sake. To that charge, Tertullian offers the following:

"We make oblations for the deceased on the anniversary of their death... If you look in Scripture for a formal law governing these and similar practices you will find none. It is tradition that justifies them, custom that confirms them, and faith that observes them." (De corona militis 3.2-3)

The conceptual seeds, therefore, which developed into this broad and rather undeveloped concept we now refer to as Purgatory, rather than being some novel invention of the Medieval Catholic Church, are found early in the history of the Catholic Church. We don't know too much about this place, or transitory state of existence or whatever it is. What we do believe is this:

Bound for Heaven, souls may experience a “final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.” This final purification is wrought in, through, by, and according to Christ's salvific work. Period.

And though, like any doctrine, teaching, or belief, Purgatory can be used to manipulate, threaten, or otherwise mistreat believers, God is clear that those who are responsible for shepherding the flock will be judged according to their rightful stewardship of that with which they were entrusted.

And we Catholics come to accept this teaching on faith, as a work of God meant to purify us finally and prepare us for Heaven. Is this a place in which we reside for a time? Is it a place which has a temporal duration or is it only an existential transformation? We don't know.

And as Fr. Echert says "...nothing is clearly stated in Scripture about the situation in Purgatory." What we do is affirm the teaching that God finally purifies the Elect before they enter into Heaven. As Fr. Echert also says, many Christians have speculated about the conditions, location, etc. of this place we call Purgatory (if it is indeed a place at all). Some recent Catholics writers and teachers (one of whom was a Pope) have imagined it simply as an encounter with Christ which is itself purifying and cleansing... and which prepares us for our final homecoming.

And again, without something more of a direct challenge or point regarding something in the quote, I don't know exactly what it is you're getting at. But thanks for chiming in! I always enjoy your input.

Herbert

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan-

I am not sure what it is that you're getting at by quoting this Priest. As far as this excerpt from his response goes, despite the highlighting, etc. I don't see what specific point you're speaking to:

"I answer that, nothing is clearly stated in Scripture about the situation of Purgatory, nor is it possible to offer convincing arguments on this question. It is probable, however, and more in keeping with the statements of holy men and the revelations made to many, that there is a twofold place of Purgatory. One, according to the common law; and thus the place of Purgatory is situated below and in proximity to hell, so that it is the same fire which torments the damned in hell and cleanses the just in Purgatory

a. Not in the Bible even by their own admission.
b. The fires of hell are what are torturing the saints in purgatory.

"nothing is clearly stated in Scripture about the situation of Purgatory,

So then all the sidetracking about the Jewish apocrypha is not getting us anywhere.

 

[BobRyan]

the place of Purgatory is situated below and in proximity to hell, so that it is the same fire which torments the damned in hell ...

There are many Catholics who are the first to admit that Scripture is not explicit in teaching Purgatory. Rather, Catholics see what we know of God's salvific work as compatible with the doctrine of Purgatory, .... And in contrast to what Ellen G. White suggests, saying:

"Then the way was prepared for the introduction of still another invention of paganism, which Rome named purgatory, and employed to terrify the credulous and superstitious multitudes. By this heresy is affirmed the existence of a place of torment, in which the souls of such as have not merited eternal damnation are to suffer punishment for their sins, and from which, when freed from impurity, they are admitted to heaven." (The Great Controversy 58.3)

...
We don't know too much about this place, or transitory state of existence or whatever it is. What we do believe is this:

Bound for Heaven, souls may experience a “final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.”

Not sure if you are making your point or mine.

"There are many Catholics who are the first to admit that Scripture is not explicit in teaching Purgatory."

"the place of Purgatory is situated below and in proximity to hell, so that it is the same fire which torments the damned in hell ..."

And

"Bound for Heaven, souls may experience a “final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.”

------- tell it all when it comes to illustrating the problem of making stuff up in contradiction to what the Bible says on this subject.

 

[herbert]

BobRyan-

Fr. Echert lays out the fact that we don't have explicit teaching concerning Purgatory. He also says, specifically, that his sources for these various possibilities are not Scriptural. Essentially, what he appeals to are various conjectural and uninspired ideas as to what Purgatory is about.

These references are by no means "Magisterial." They are speculative, suggestive possibilities. We have "nothing is clearly stated in Scripture about the situation of Purgatory." This statement is perfectly in line with Magisterial teaching concerning Purgatory.

Again, though, coming from a man who accepts the teachings of a 19th (and early 20th Century) American visionary as genuinely prophetic, it is hard to see where you are, in principle, taking issue with what the Church teaches concerning Purgatory. And I don't say this to change the subject, but instead, to shine the light on the failure of you or anybody else to present consistent principles to which all Christians are bound (as a matter of faith) and by which we may all come to recognize our common authority instituted by Christ concerning the question of Purgatory.

For it is my belief that the "principle" in question is the very one, holy, apostolic, and catholic Church which safeguards the Holy Scriptures and which is itself Christ's provision through which He intended to deliver His Gospel message according to the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

As far as the "making stuff up in contradiction to what the Bible says" charge is concerned:

I'd ask that if you are going to make this charge that you'd please identify specifically what "Biblical teaching" the doctrine of Purgatory contradicts.

Herbert

 

[Revmitchell]

"According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1030, "All who die in Gods grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation, but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven."

"The Second Vatican Council, p. 63, says, "The truth has been divinely revealed that sins are followed by punishments. Gods holiness and justice inflict them. Sins must be expiated. This may be done on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and trials of this life and, above all, through death. Otherwise the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments."

The heretical doctrine of purgatory is contrary to the only word of God as it ignores that Jesus sacrifice for our sin was sufficient for all of them and no more sacrifice or suffering is necessary. Hebrews 7:7

There is nothing we can do to contribute to our purity or righteousness. Ephesians 2:8-9

Jesus is the propitiation for our sins not us, not priests of any religion. I John 2:2

 

[herbert]

Revmitchell,

Thanks for chiming in! I do appreciate you.

You wrote:

"According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1030, "All who die in Gods grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation, but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven."

Yes, indeed. We are impure here on Earth. Some of us (most of us, I'd guess) die while clinging to various sins, while clutching to various temporal things. God, in His grace, though, cleanses us of these weaknesses and impurities and prepares us for Heaven. Amen.

"The Second Vatican Council, p. 63, says, "The truth has been divinely revealed that sins are followed by punishments. Gods holiness and justice inflict them. Sins must be expiated. This may be done on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and trials of this life and, above all, through death. Otherwise the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments."

Just as I may be forgiven if I break a window (but still must face the "temporal" effects of my carelessness- which led to my breaking it), so might I see my sin as, though forgiven in eternity, still somehow, by my fallen nature, binding me down. Christ indeed frees me from this weight of sin, but not in a manner out of accord with my nature but, as the great scholastics said, according to a manner which could be seen as "grace perfecting" my human nature. It was, then, through my sin, just as it was through Adam's fault, that the Savior saw it fit to bring about my redemption. This, therefore, entails a certain "participation by grace" on the part of the sinner in the process of His redemption which is wrought through Christ yet in his heart. So it is that the "me" and the "He" mustn't be viewed in the terms of a zero-sum game, but according to the terms of a non-zero-sum game through which I am made a beneficiary of His work not by my own merit but by Grace alone which results in and effects a change in me through grace so that it is not "of works" lest I be tempted to boast.

The heretical doctrine of purgatory is contrary to the only word of God as it ignores that Jesus sacrifice for our sin was sufficient for all of them and no more sacrifice or suffering is necessary. Hebrews 7:7

I was saved as a child and was baptized at the age of twelve. Still, I suffer. I suffer when my children suffer. I suffer when my students suffer. I suffer when my friends suffer. And Christ, though sinless, suffered greatly. The propitiation of sin does not entail the freedom from suffering. If anything, it guarantees a deeper participation in the suffering of Christ. Purgatory, by acknowledging the insufficiency in man to thoroughly participate in the sufferings of Christ, which are, incidentally, the very atoning sufferings by which a man must be saved, grants for us a glimpse into the means by which God will Himself see to it that we are prepared for Heaven. Far from suggesting that the Sacrifice of Christ is "insufficient" for the atonement of all human sin, the doctrine of Purgatory reveals the fact that we are forever incapable in our nature, to fully attain to the goods which God has in store for us in the righting of Adam and Eve's wrong. So it is that God will, He promises, see to it that we are made pure, cleansed, as it were, for eternity, for entrance into our Heavenly home. For as the Scriptures say "Nothing impure will ever enter it... (Heaven)." So it is that, in Christ, we suffer. St. Paul was so up front with the reality of Christian suffering that he said "Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church..." Colossians 1:24

There is nothing we can do to contribute to our purity or righteousness. Ephesians 2:8-9

Without further appeal to what St. Paul suggests in Colossians 1:24, I will say that the doctrine of Purgatory doesn't imply such a thing. If anything, it suggest the opposite: Though we are, during this earthly race, being sanctified in Christ, we are still imperfect in our human nature, though redeemed, though made new in Him, we suffer from the effects of our fallen nature. When we die, we are yet stained in some unknown way and it is then that Christ sees to it that we are "finally purified" and ushered into our eternal home.

Jesus is the propitiation for our sins not us, not priests of any religion. I John 2:2

Yes, Jesus is the propitiation. As a Catholic I 100% agree. Where we disagree, it seems, is in the mode by which we are (or aren't) made to participate in Christ's life. Where 2nd Peter 1:4 speaks of our participation in the divine nature, some Christians affirm a certiain "monergism" that makes us out to be, for the sake of a few verses, uncooperative agents in our redemption. It was St. Paul, though, who said we are co-laborers with Christ. So it is according to drastically different paradigms of Biblical interpretation that it seems we have landed in two very different places. Our hearts, though, are united in Him and we still share in His life as followers of Him, Our Lord, though with minds at odds.

Thanks again for chiming in. I truly appreciate the engagement.
God Bless you.

Herbert

 

[Revmitchell]

Revmitchell,

Just as I may be forgiven if I break a window (but still must face the "temporal" effects of my carelessness- which led to my breaking it), so might I see my sin as, though forgiven in eternity, still somehow, by my fallen nature, binding me down. Christ indeed frees me from this weight of sin, but not in a manner out of accord with my nature but, as the great scholastics said, according to a manner which could be seen as "grace perfecting" my human nature. It was, then, through my sin, just as it was through Adam's fault, that the Savior saw it fit to bring about my redemption. This, therefore, entails a certain "participation by grace" on the part of the sinner in the process of His redemption which is wrought through Christ yet in his heart. So it is that the "me" and the "He" mustn't be viewed in the terms of a zero-sum game, but according to the terms of a non-zero-sum game through which I am made a beneficiary of His work not by my own merit but by Grace alone which results in and effects a change in me through grace so that it is not "of works" lest I be tempted to boast.

Ok no scripture here.

I was saved as a child and was baptized at the age of twelve. Still, I suffer. I suffer when my children suffer. I suffer when my students suffer. I suffer when my friends suffer. And Christ, though sinless, suffered greatly. The propitiation of sin does not entail the freedom from suffering. If anything, it guarantees a deeper participation in the suffering of Christ. Purgatory, by acknowledging the insufficiency in man to thoroughly participate in the sufferings of Christ, which are, incidentally, the very atoning sufferings by which a man must be saved, grants for us a glimpse into the means by which God will Himself see to it that we are prepared for Heaven. Far from suggesting that the Sacrifice of Christ is "insufficient" for the atonement of all human sin, the doctrine of Purgatory reveals the fact that we are forever incapable in our nature, to fully attain to the goods which God has in store for us in the righting of Adam and Eve's wrong. So it is that God will, He promises, see to it that we are made pure, cleansed, as it were, for eternity, for entrance into our Heavenly home. For as the Scriptures say "Nothing impure will ever enter it... (Heaven)." So it is that, in Christ, we suffer. St. Paul was so up front with the reality of Christian suffering that he said "Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church..." Colossians 1:24

Our purity is based on the righteousness of Christ not on anything we do. Ephesians 2:8-9 That which is not pure and will not enter heaven are those who have not been redeemed by Christ.

Without further appeal to what St. Paul suggests in Colossians 1:24, I will say that the doctrine of Purgatory doesn't imply such a thing. If anything, it suggest the opposite: Though we are, during this earthly race, being sanctified in Christ, we are still imperfect in our human nature, though redeemed, though made new in Him, we suffer from the effects of our fallen nature. When we die, we are yet stained in some unknown way and it is then that Christ sees to it that we are "finally purified" and ushered into our eternal home.

Our redemption is only a promise of the future and has not been realized yet. I Peter 1:3-5

Yes, Jesus is the propitiation. As a Catholic I 100% agree. Where we disagree, it seems, is in the mode by which we are (or aren't) made to participate in Christ's life. Where 2nd Peter 1:4 speaks of our participation in the divine nature, some Christians affirm a certiain "monergism" that makes us out to be, for the sake of a few verses, uncooperative agents in our redemption. It was St. Paul, though, who said we are co-laborers with Christ. So it is according to drastically different paradigms of Biblical interpretation that it seems we have landed in two very different places. Our hearts, though, are united in Him and we still share in His life as followers of Him, Our Lord, though with minds at odds.

Thanks again for chiming in. I truly appreciate the engagement.
God Bless you.

Herbert

This is where the inability to understand context comes into play for Catholics. Being co[laborers in Christ in no way means we earn out purity with Christ. That is an absurd understanding of that passage. Context is king.

 

[BobRyan]

"There are many Catholics who are the first to admit that Scripture is not explicit in teaching Purgatory."

"the place of Purgatory is situated below and in proximity to hell, so that it is the same fire which torments the damned in hell ..."

And

"Bound for Heaven, souls may experience a “final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.”

------- tells it all when it comes to illustrating the problem of making stuff up in contradiction to what the Bible says on this subject

BobRyan-
Fr. Echert lays out the fact that we don't have explicit teaching concerning Purgatory.

as in ""There are many Catholics who are the first to admit that Scripture is not explicit in teaching Purgatory."?

He also says, specifically, that his sources for these various possibilities are not Scriptural.

I think we would all agree with him on that point.

Essentially, what he appeals to are various conjectural and uninspired ideas as to what Purgatory is about.

Agreed - no argument from me on that point.

These references are by no means "Magisterial." They are speculative, suggestive possibilities. We have "nothing is clearly stated in Scripture about the situation of Purgatory." This statement is perfectly in line with Magisterial teaching concerning Purgatory.

agreed. Again I think everyone on this thread cvan sign up with that statement if by Magisterial - you mean the RCC magisterium - which I think you do mean.


in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Again, though, coming from a man who accepts the teachings of a 19th (and early 20th Century) American visionary as genuinely prophetic, it is hard to see where you are, in principle, taking issue with what the Church teaches concerning Purgatory. And I don't say this to change the subject, but instead, to shine the light on the failure of you or anybody else to present consistent principles to which all Christians are bound (as a matter of faith) and by which we may all come to recognize our common authority instituted by Christ concerning the question of Purgatory.

How is it that acceptance of the Bible doctrine on gifts of the Spirit and prophecy in 1 Cor 12 and Ephesians 4 -- is opening the door to making stuff up like Purgatory when we are told repeatedly in 1 John 4 to test the spirits and so also in Matt 7 and in Gal 1:6-9 that "though WE (Apostles) or an Angel from heaven should preach to you a different Gospel let him be accursed" such that "they studied the scriptures to SEE IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - were SO" Acts 17:11 -- how is that to turn into a "make up anything you want that does not fit with the Bible" as you seem to suggest? how do you think we got the Bible in the first place ???

For it is my belief that the "principle" in question is the very one, holy, apostolic, and catholic Church which safeguards the Holy Scriptures

The RCC evolved into being over time - it then burned the scriptures and burned those that read it in their own language. How does this qualify them to make up a doctrine like Purgatory and then be taken seriously? There is no "burning the scriptures" in Acts - in the NT - in the first 100 years. There is no burning any Christians or torturing Christians at all going on by the Apostolic church of the first 100 years.

There is Christ hammering the nation-church magisterium of his day - "sola scriptura" in Mark 7:6-13

As far as the "making stuff up in contradiction to what the Bible says" charge is concerned:

I'd ask that if you are going to make this charge that you'd please identify specifically what "Biblical teaching" the doctrine of Purgatory contradicts.

Herbert

It is the "doctrines and commandments of men" condemned by Christ in Mark 7:6-13 that "makes up" the idea of Christ forgiving all sins - but then having "punishment for sin left over" in which the saints must suffer 'the SAME fire and torture that afflicts the damned in hell" -

Heb 9 "it is appointed unto man ONCE to die and THEN comes the judgment" -- if the argument is to be "Condemned in the judgment means HEAVEN plus some purgatory" you will need to find that in the actual Bible.

Because that is a "different gospel" and Gal 1:6-9 condemns supposed Apostles that would dare teach "a different Gospel".

RCC makes up a story of the form "Sure Christ may have saved you from the fires of hell - but we make up a story where you get those same fires of hell on your way to heaven- even so... and only WE can get you out of them -- we can write the check against a made-up spiritual bank of excess suffering and get you out... so fear us -- do as WE say. And God being LESS inclined, less merciful than we are - may not endorse that check- so you must get us to write multiple checks for the SAME loved one - as some better insurance that God might accept one of those checks"

 

[herbert]

Revmitchell.

Ok no scripture here.

I am confused by a few things:

a) You stated that "Anything not found in scripture is automatically controversial." And when I pointed out the fact that the statement "Anything not found in scripture is automatically controversial" was itself not found in Scripture and should thus be considered controversial, you didn't address my point. It seems that now you're attempting to hold me to that same unScriptural standard without having taken the time to explain why it is that your test for a doctrine's validity doesn't fall short of its own standard.

b) Although I often refrain from citing the various Scriptural passages upon which I base my positions, that doesn't mean that the ideas that I attempt to relay are themselves not found in Scripture either conceptually or quite explicitly. Allow me to present various Scriptural passages with which my comments are in harmony:

Consider 1st Peter 3-6, Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 2:10, 2nd Corinthians 5:17, Romans 6:4, Romans 5:17, 1st John 2:3::

"Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade. This inheritance is kept in heaven for you, who through faith are shielded by God’s power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. In all this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials."

"I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me."

"For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."

"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come."

"We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life."

"By this we can be sure that we have come to know Him: if we keep His commandments."

I see these verses as being in harmony with everything I said.

Our purity is based on the righteousness of Christ not on anything we do. Ephesians 2:8-9

What did I say which, to you, indicated that our purity was based upon (or that it originated in) anything other than Christ's righteousness?

That which is not pure and will not enter heaven are those who have not been redeemed by Christ.

Yes. But such a fact does not preclude the possibility of a soul being "finally purified" prior to entrance into Heaven.

Ultimately, the question of Purgatory doesn't challenge the Source of righteousness and purity (which is Christ) of which we are beneficiaries. The doctrine of Purgatory address God's chosen plan and method for the cleansing and purification of the human soul.

Our redemption is only a promise of the future and has not been realized yet. I Peter 1:3-5

This statement is not just perfectly compatible with an affirmation of the doctrine of Purgatory, it's right in line with it. This is, it seems, the very point of acknowledgement which led CS Lewis to state that "Our souls demand Purgatory" even though he was not a Catholic. For if the promise "has not been realized yet" then there must be some future event or experience through which we will come to realize this promise which is yet to be realized. The Church describes that very thing, saying:

"All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven... The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, Paragraphs 1030, 1031)

This is where the inability to understand context comes into play for Catholics. Being co[laborers in Christ in no way means we earn out purity with Christ. That is an absurd understanding of that passage. Context is king.

What you've shared here is an ad hominem attack. You are not arguing a point. You are criticizing the intelligence (the inability to understand) of others.

One way you could help us would be to, for example, explain how it is that you've come to conclude that the statement "Anything not found in scripture is automatically controversial" is itself not controversial despite the fact that it is nowhere found in Scripture.

Thanks for the continued engagement!

Herbert

 

[Revmitchell]

Revmitchell.



I am confused by a few things:

a) You stated that "Anything not found in scripture is automatically controversial." And when I pointed out the fact that the statement "Anything not found in scripture is automatically controversial" was itself not found in Scripture and should thus be considered controversial, you didn't address my point. It seems that now you're attempting to hold me to that same unScriptural standard without having taken the time to explain why it is that your test for a doctrine's validity doesn't fall short of its own standard.

Actually scripture holds itself to that standard. In fact we find it in 2 Peter 3:16-17. Further other places like Psalm 119 talk about the reliability of God's word. No where do we find God telling us that there is any other standard to live by. Not even the church.

b) Although I often refrain from citing the various Scriptural passages upon which I base my positions, that doesn't mean that the ideas that I attempt to relay are themselves not found in Scripture either conceptually or quite explicitly. Allow me to present various Scriptural passages with which my comments are in harmony:

Consider 1st Peter 3-6, Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 2:10, 2nd Corinthians 5:17, Romans 6:4, Romans 5:17, 1st John 2:3::

"Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade. This inheritance is kept in heaven for you, who through faith are shielded by God’s power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. In all this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials."

"I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me."

"For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."

"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come."

"We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life."

"By this we can be sure that we have come to know Him: if we keep His commandments."

I see these verses as being in harmony with everything I said.

Ok well I have no way to know which of these prtions of scripture are meant to coincide with any previous statement presented in this manner.

What did I say which, to you, indicated that our purity was based upon (or that it originated in) anything other than Christ's righteousness?

Uh any talk of further need for purification in a purgatory will do it every time.

Yes. But such a fact does not preclude the possibility of a soul being "finally purified" prior to entrance into Heaven.

It is a fallacy to argue from silence.

Ultimately, the question of Purgatory doesn't challenge the Source of righteousness and purity (which is Christ) of which we are beneficiaries. The doctrine of Purgatory address God's chosen plan and method for the cleansing and purification of the human soul.

If it were God's chosen plan it would be clear in scripture. Since it isn't even mentioned in any fashion your claim is false.

This statement is not just perfectly compatible with an affirmation of the doctrine of Purgatory, it's right in line with it. This is, it seems, the very point of acknowledgement which led CS Lewis to state that "Our souls demand Purgatory" even though he was not a Catholic. For if the promise "has not been realized yet" then there must be some future event or experience through which we will come to realize this promise which is yet to be realized. The Church describes that very thing, saying:

"All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven... The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, Paragraphs 1030, 1031)

I don't care what the Catholic church says. It is not an authority.

What you've shared here is an ad hominem attack. You are not arguing a point. You are criticizing the intelligence (the inability to understand) of others.

Actually it is not. I am addressing the poor standard by which Catholics (charismatics as well) work to understand scripture. You guys think you can apply scripture completely divorced from its context.

 

[steaver]

Catholics see what we know of God's salvific work as compatible with the doctrine of Purgatory, maybe even hinted at..

As i said before, for Catholics the blood of Jesus Christ is not sufficient to save the sinner from their sins. Sinners must be punished, God's grace in Christ is not enough, sin must be beaten out with punishing fire. Which is not grace at all.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

1 of 2 to Martin

Martin,

Thanks for the response. Your post is helpful. As a matter of fact, it demonstrates why I worded my request as I did. I asked the following:

And there follows another vast post which I have no time to answer. Briefly:
If the writers of a book make no claim to have written inspired Scripture......
If Jewish writers contemporary to our Lord's time on earth do not believe the books to be Scripture....
If the Jewish Council of Jamnia (AD 79) decrees them not to be Scripture.......
If the Lord Jesus never quotes from them.......
If the Apostles never quote from them (Hebrews refers to an historical event. It does not mention its source)......
If the guy who wrote the Vulgate (Jerome), 'Pope' Gregory I and even 'Cardinal' Cajetan, writing only a few years before Trent (citations available on request) all deny that they're Scripture......
If some of the books contain palpable errors.......

Then I think it is for you to explain why you think they are Scripture. One or two of these facts might be explained away. For example, if our Lord had quoted from the Apocrypha, probably the rest wouldn't matter (though they would be very puzzling!), but when all these facts are adduced together, they make am unanswerable case. 'By the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established' (2 Cor. 13:1 etc.).

The Lord Jesus and the NT writers quote from or allude to the Pentateuch, the historical books, the Psalms, the Wisdom books of the OT. They do not quote from every book, but they don't need to.

 

[SovereignGrace]

"According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1030, "All who die in Gods grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation, but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven."

"The Second Vatican Council, p. 63, says, "The truth has been divinely revealed that sins are followed by punishments. Gods holiness and justice inflict them. Sins must be expiated. This may be done on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and trials of this life and, above all, through death. Otherwise the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments."

The heretical doctrine of purgatory is contrary to the only word of God as it ignores that Jesus sacrifice for our sin was sufficient for all of them and no more sacrifice or suffering is necessary. Hebrews 7:7

There is nothing we can do to contribute to our purity or righteousness. Ephesians 2:8-9

Jesus is the propitiation for our sins not us, not priests of any religion. I John 2:2

Not to hijack this thread(as there is another one going on right now), but these doctrines spring about because of anti-Sola Scriptura stances. Purgatory is not even remotely alluded to in all the scriptures, yet the Catholics proclaim it as a biblical truth. Kudos to this wonderful post Brother!

 

[utilyan]

No one agrees with Catholic misrepresentation.

The bottom line is when you are in heaven your soul is in a state that no longer sins and is cleansed from sin. The means like blood of Christ, as if through fire ect. isn't the point. It merely points out between death and Heaven something happens.

Justification and being pardoned from sins doesn't save you from regeneration and actually being directed into Sainthood.

Justified and pardoned that's fine that's like getting the doctors note for your sinful misbehavior, yes you will be covered in the blood of Christ.

But here is your "problem" the blood of Christ actually heals, actually fixes what is broke. Yeah you might be scott-free by the doctor's note, but not the doctor's needle.


Heaven only has saints. There is no sinning or sinners there.


Revelation 21
27and nothing unclean, and no one who practices abomination and lying, shall ever come into it, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.


So when are you going to stop sinning? You want to kick the blame on GOD. That its GOD's fault you sin. That's not going to fly in heaven.

In a blink of an eye God can press a button where everyone on earth stops sinning and is perfect completely.
God doesn't need to fool around with nothing.

God want YOU to stop sinning. he can have his robot anytime.


You either sinless and perfect now or between now and when you die. or after you die.

If you say well in heaven we still sin, then you have a case against purgatory.

If you say in heaven there is no sin then a purgatory happened. Namely at a point you stop sin.

 

[steaver]

You either sinless and perfect now or between now and when you die. or after you die.

If you say well in heaven we still sin, then you have a case against purgatory.

If you say in heaven there is no sin then a purgatory happened. Namely at a point you stop sin.

You have totally missed the point of the cross. It wasn't to make you sinless. It was to justify the sinner by GRACE through FAITH. It is by God's decree one will enter heaven through faith in Jesus Christ ALONE. I became a saint when Jesus Christ entered into my soul and spirit. If you are not a saint before you die, you will not be a saint after you die, you will have missed out on having received Jesus Christ and being born-again.

 

[steaver]

Heaven only has saints. There is no sinning or sinners there.

It is as though you Catholics haven't even studied or read through a bible. Do you just believe what the RCC tells you to believe? I measure all that I hear from a preacher against what the Scripture says before I say amen.

Let me ask you a question, do you understand from the Scripture that those who have made a covenant with God through faith are viewed and spoken of as saints by God?

Saints are those who believe in God's Promise/Messiah. Saints have walked this earth since the beginning and still to this day. A sinner does not wait until he gets to heaven to be a saint. Sainthood is a position granted to sinners by faith through God's Grace.

Psa16:3 - "But to the saints that are in the earth, and to the excellent, in whom is all my delight"

Psa50:5 - "Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice".

My beliefs/povs are based on Scripture alone. If a preacher or a priest declares something to be a fact it must agree with Scripture or it is to be rejected.

 

[Internet Theologian]

It is as though you Catholics haven't even studied or read through a bible. Do you just believe what the RCC tells you to believe? I measure all that I hear from a preacher against what the Scripture says before I say amen.

Let me ask you a question, do you understand from the Scripture that those who have made a covenant with God through faith are viewed and spoken of as saints by God?

Saints are those who believe in God's Promise/Messiah. Saints have walked this earth since the beginning and still to this day. A sinner does not wait until he gets to heaven to be a saint. Sainthood is a position granted to sinners by faith through God's Grace.

Psa16:3 - "But to the saints that are in the earth, and to the excellent, in whom is all my delight"

Psa50:5 - "Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice".

My beliefs/povs are based on Scripture alone. If a preacher or a priest declares something to be a fact it must agree with Scripture or it is to be rejected.

They're not allowed to believe all that. It's called control. Control the person through an element of fear, control their families, control their pocket books, control their loved ones after a family member has died through fear and intimidation of purgatory, prayers for them and etc. And ultimately, control their minds. The Nicolaitans are alive even today.

By the way, I've never met a Catholic who called themselves a believer, disciple, or Christian. It is always 'I'm a Catholic'.

They are just as indoctrinated and hoodwinked as the JW's and other false groups. Perhaps even moreso.

They also stand on their anathema curse pronounced on all believers outside their apostate grip.

Control.

 

[utilyan]

You have totally missed the point of the cross. It wasn't to make you sinless. It was to justify the sinner by GRACE through FAITH. It is by God's decree one will enter heaven through faith in Jesus Christ ALONE. I became a saint when Jesus Christ entered into my soul and spirit. If you are not a saint before you die, you will not be a saint after you die, you will have missed out on having received Jesus Christ and being born-again.

Steaver it doesn't matter. Justified fine that means you are safe for eternity. But it also points out inevitable perfection of not sinning in heaven.

You are arguing over the minimum cost of entering a boxing match, in the match you still might get punched.

Steaver are you fully regenerated and without sin now? NOPE.


You will not sin in heaven, period. Why? its not because a blind eye is going to be given when you decide to sin. Jesus will heal. Therefore there is a purification, when you are taught, disciplined, chastised into holiness.


Hebrews 12
6FOR THOSE WHOM THE LORD LOVES HE DISCIPLINES,
AND HE SCOURGES EVERY SON WHOM HE RECEIVES.”
7It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline? 8But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. 9Furthermore, we had earthly fathers to discipline us, and we respected them; shall we not much rather be subject to the Father of spirits, and live? 10For they disciplined us for a short time as seemed best to them, but He disciplines us for our good, so that we may share His holiness. 11All discipline for the moment seems not to be joyful, but sorrowful; yet to those who have been trained by it, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness.



A greedy person, realizes he is justified by Jesus. That's fine, That's great. He believes and dies, still dies a greedy person.

No greedy people in heaven. He is going to be taught not to be greedy. That training for you might be a piece of cake even joy. For him it could be as bad as hell.


God is not going to say well this greedy man is in heaven, that's a joke. It wouldn't even be heaven for the guy, it would be hell.



What son is there whom his father does not discipline? Your telling us God doesn't discipline you at all.


Are you perfect now steaver? Tell me what discipline God has put on you? NOTHING?

Why do you suppose God would BOTHER disciplining if your just clean via blood of Christ?

OH NO.......if God loves you....The boot camp is coming!