Biblical Defense of Purgatory

[kaycee]

RyanL:

5 or 6 verses? Here’s over 30. Enjoy.

Are you arguing for a minimalist / reductionist theory of salvation? Because your list is shorter does that make you right? What kind of system is that? How about “God saves all”? Isn’t that even shorter than yours? The Unitarians believe it, and call it “bible-based”…

Well, I was arguing for the Gospel. John 3:16, Acts 2:38, the Philipian jailer. You know the Gospel, the Good News, the forgiveness of sin.

Could it also be that your list is shorter because there are implicit assumptions that fill volumes underlying your “simple gospel”? Why do you think the Apostles were so incompetant that they couldn’t pass on your “simple gospel”?

Thought Acts 2:38 was fairly straight forward, not much underlying there. When the Philipian jailer asks “what must i do to be saved?” The answer was short and succinct, again. Do you see a practical Gospel from the Mouth of the Apostles in Scripture that imply additional unspoken volumes?

P.S.
Pre 200 A.D. Purgatory…
“And after the exhibition, Tryphaena again receives her. For her daughter Falconilla had died, and said to her in a dream: Mother, thou shaft have this stranger Thecla in my place, in order that she may pray concerning me, and that I may be transferred to the place of the just.” Acts of Paul and Thecla (A.D. 160).

Sorry, file under fiction and forgeries. "Tertullian is severe in his judgment against the Asiatic presbyter who acknowledged that he had written the Acts of Paul and Thecla. The author defended himself at his trial by pleading that it was because of his love for the great Apostle that he had composed the account. His plea, however, was unavailing, and he was deposed from the ministry–and rightly so, Tertullian implies, because in the book the author made Paul guilty of allowing a woman to preach and to baptize! christianism.com/html/add36.html

“Abercius by name, I am a disciple of the chaste shepherd…He taught me…faithful writings…These words, I, Abercius, standing by, ordered to be inscribed. In truth, I was in the course of my seventy-second year. Let him who understands and believes this pray for Abercius.” *Inscription of Abercius (A.D. 190). *

This inscription falls in line with the early church praying for those in heaven to have greater Joy! This says nothing about suffering or purgatory. see below.

The Church of Rome at the Bar of History (Carlisle, Pennsylvania: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1995):

For at least the first two centuries there was no mention of purgatory in the Church. In all the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, Irenaeus and Justin Martyr there is not the slightest allusion to the idea of purgatory. Rome claims that the early Church nevertheless believed in purgatory because it prayed for the dead. This was becoming a common practice by the beginning of the third century but it does not, in itself, prove that the early Church believed in the existence of a purgatory. The written prayers which have survived, and the evidence from the catacombs and burial inscriptions indicate that the early Church viewed deceased Christians as residing in peace and happiness and the prayers offered were for them to have a greater experience of these. As early as Tertullian, in the late second and beginning of the third century, these prayers often use the Latin term refrigerium as a request of God on behalf of departed Christians, a term which means ‘refreshment’ or ‘to refresh’ and came to embody the concept of heavenly happiness. So the fact that the early Church prayed for the dead does not support the teaching of purgatory for the nature of the prayers themselves indicate the Church did not view the dead as residing in a place of suffering. (p. 114)

I will be somewhat slow in catching up on my replies as time is short this week.

Peace<><

 

[crk312]

Jesus states “God is Spirit” which implies those in Spirit exist in another state of existence,life or being apart from the “Flesh”. In reading the works of JOSEPHUS,Jewish Historian, one can get a clearer understanding of the concept of the abode of the dead during the time of Jesus. The after life was divided into paradise and torments, where-in a person existed in a spiritual state based on his spiritual condition at death. This place was apart from the 3rd heaven which Paul visited. Scripture tells us Jesus visited this place for 3 days. The concept of Hell spoken of by Protestants is really the Torments as described by Josephus, thus leaving out the other level, which is as I understand, the Catholic Purgatory.
Needless to say, Life in a Spiritual Form,continues after physical death in a different dimension and is evident throughout scripture.

 

[uther]

kaycee:

Please cite anyone in the first 200 years of the church who believed in a suffering purgatory.

Actually, the onus is on you, as part of the reformation theology, having rejected the doctrine of purgatory some 500 years ago.

The question for you is; Please cite anyone in the first 200 years of the church who did not believe in a suffering purgatory.

(That first 200 years was Catholic, by the way)

 

[RyanL]

kaycee:

…Thought Acts 2:38 was fairly straight forward, not much underlying there. When the Philipian jailer asks “what must i do to be saved?” The answer was short and succinct, again.

It seems the answer was short here as well…

Matthew 19:17
… if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

…and here…

1 Corinthians 7:19
Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

…and here…

1 John 2:4
He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the** truth is not in him. **

…if Jesus is Truth, and the Truth isn’t in someone who breaks the commandments…[insert logical inference here]

And it just goes on and on and on in the same way. Believe and be saved, with no regard to the commandments of God? I don’t think so.

Simple Gospel? Yes. It is this:

1. **Believe in Jesus **(including the Sacriments He gave us)
2. **Love Him **(and by extention, love others)
3. Embrace Him (and by extention, His body, the Church)
4. Serve Him (by serving others and obeying His commands)
5. Trust Him (believe in His words and the words of proper authority)
   Do these, and you shall be saved. Not that hard. In fact, pretty simple. Furthermore, this has been the constant teachings of the Church for the last 2000 years.

kaycee:

Do you see a practical Gospel from the Mouth of the Apostles in Scripture that imply additional unspoken volumes?

What I see is Apostolic Teaching as evidenced by the writings of the Early Church Fathers. The men who learned from the Apostles learned an entirely different Gospel than the Gospel you preach. Perhaps you should read their writings without prejudice, so that you can learn to worship like the first, second, and third century Christians (who didn’t have a bound bible, BTW).

kaycee:

Sorry, file under fiction and forgeries. "Tertullian is severe in his judgment against the Asiatic presbyter who acknowledged that he had written the Acts of Paul and Thecla.… .

1. Your source is so muddled that I can’t read the footnotes. Give it a shot, and you’ll see that there’s no way from what you linked to tell if the guy is making things up or not.
2. Tertullian may in fact have been severe and may have condemned a forgery (a fact which remains to be proven). Does that mean that the beliefs found in the alleged forgery are incorrect, or even condemnable? Might all of the beliefs be orthodox, and it still be condemned as a forgery?
3. In an era when heresies are violently protested, there are never objections to praying for the dead. Why are prayers for the dead never condemned?
4. What about your beloved Tertullian? What did he think about praying for the dead?

“We offer sacrifices for the dead on their birthday anniversaries [the date of death—birth into eternal life]” (*The Crown *3:3 [A.D. 211]).

“A woman, after the death of her husband . . . prays for his soul and asks that he may, while waiting, find rest; and that he may share in the first resurrection. And each year, on the anniversary of his death, she offers the sacrifice” (*Monogamy *10:1–2 [A.D. 216]).

1. How about another pre-200 A.D. quote?

“The citizen of a prominent city, I erected this while I lived, that I might have a resting place for my body. Abercius is my name, a disciple of the chaste Shepherd who feeds his sheep on the mountains and in the fields, who has great eyes surveying everywhere, who taught me the faithful writings of life. Standing by, I, Abercius, ordered this to be inscribed: Truly, I was in my seventy-second year. May everyone who is in accord with this and who understands it pray for Abercius” (*Epitaph of Abercius *[A.D. 190]).

You have yet to show anyone who agrees with you here. A quote from the first millenium that condemns prayers for the dead would be nice.

…cont’d…

 

[RyanL]

…cont’d…

kaycee:

This was becoming a common practice by the beginning of the third century but it does not, in itself, prove that the early Church believed in the existence of a purgatory…

True. It does not, in itself, prove Purgatory. Neither does it disprove it. It does, however, show that the evidence among the early Church writings is unanimous in their understanding of life after death. This doesn’t mean that everyone speaks on it, but rather that every time it’s mentioned it is supported, and it is never condemned.

Fortunately, this is not, in itself, our only justification for the doctrine. As has been shown, the Scriptures attest to the belief, as well as the understanding (even if not in surviving writings) that has survived the ages.

Again, I have shown my cards. Where are yours? Where are the people from the early Church who agree with you? Your contention is that you would be more comfortable worshiping among them than a Catholic - prove it. Show some evidence, and please provide an online reference with footnotes that are findable.

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[RyanL]

kaycee:

For at least the first two centuries there was no mention of ______ in the Church. In all the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, Irenaeus and Justin Martyr there is not the slightest allusion to the idea of ______. Rome claims that the early Church nevertheless believed in ______… This was becoming a common [belief] by the beginning of the third century but it does not, in itself, prove that the early Church believed in the existence of _______.

You know what I just realized? You could just as easily fill in the blanks with the word “Trinity”. Guess we should scrap that idea as well…

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[RyanL]

crk312:

… In reading the works of JOSEPHUS,** Jewish Historian**, one can get a clearer understanding of the concept of the abode of the dead… as described by Josephus, thus leaving out the other level…

crk312,

To see what the Jews believe, read post #8. Unless your contention is that the Catholics made the Jews believe in praying for the dead…

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[Scott_Waddell]

RyanL:

You know what I just realized? You could just as easily fill in the blanks with the word “Trinity”. Guess we should scrap that idea as well…

God Bless,
RyanL

I was waiting for someone to get around to that. Also, it seems that if a inconclusive amount of 1st and 2nd century evidence for x Catholic doctrine disproves that doctrine, then the fact that no one correctly identified all the books of Scripture until the 4th century goes a long way toward disproving Sola Scriptura.

Scott

 

[bob]

TNT:

…Oh, and where is YOUR biblical defense for dragging Hebrews into your so-called bible?
Like I’ve said many times:
Protestant: One who memorizes 1/3 of the Bible, denies 1/3 of the Bible, and never reads 1/3 of the bible.

What a beautiful definition! Will commit that into memory.

 

[TNT]

Scott Waddell:

I was waiting for someone to get around to that. Also, it seems that if a inconclusive amount of 1st and 2nd century evidence for x Catholic doctrine disproves that doctrine, then the fact that no one correctly identified all the books of Scripture until the 4th century goes a long way toward disproving Sola Scriptura.

Scott

Glad we all think logically alike…See Post 31.

 

[big_guy144]

Hey guys,

I am not a Catholic, however I do believe in Purgatory. But, my purgatory is different than your Purgatory.

You see, in Luke 16:19-31, Jesus Christ told of the rich man and Lazarus. The rich man died and went to hell (vs. 22-23)… However, Lazarus went to Abraham’s bosom (his side). Notice the Bible states that the rich man could physically see Lazarus and Abraham. And Abraham said that “there is a great gulf fixed (vs. 26)” between the rich man and Lazarus.

Now comes the differences. Lazarus was not tormented in a flame as was the rich man, but was rather COMFORTED. This purgatory was not a place of purification, but rather a place of comfort until Christ came unto those who died in faith (Hebrews 11:13) to preach the gospel (Matt. 12:40). The skewed belief in a temporary place of TORMENT was created to further gain wealth from the common person. The common person believed purgatory was a real place for all their family members (Christian, Catholic, or not) and that money could be paid to the priests in order to get them out. However, this ransom was already paid through the Lord Jesus Christ (Mark 10:45). Questions? Comments? Take Care.

-Brian

 

[Pax]

big_guy144:

Hey guys,

I am not a Catholic, however I do believe in Purgatory. But, my purgatory is different than your Purgatory.

You see, in Luke 16:19-31, Jesus Christ told of the rich man and Lazarus. The rich man died and went to hell (vs. 22-23)… However, Lazarus went to Abraham’s bosom (his side). Notice the Bible states that the rich man could physically see Lazarus and Abraham. And Abraham said that “there is a great gulf fixed (vs. 26)” between the rich man and Lazarus.

Now comes the differences. Lazarus was not tormented in a flame as was the rich man, but was rather COMFORTED. This purgatory was not a place of purification, but rather a place of comfort until Christ came unto those who died in faith (Hebrews 11:13) to preach the gospel (Matt. 12:40). The skewed belief in a temporary place of TORMENT was created to further gain wealth from the common person. The common person believed purgatory was a real place for all their family members (Christian, Catholic, or not) and that money could be paid to the priests in order to get them out. However, this ransom was already paid through the Lord Jesus Christ (Mark 10:45). Questions? Comments? Take Care.

-Brian

You need to do some research on this. You are confusing the “abuse” of indulgences with actual church teaching. The church condemned abusive practices before Luther did. Unfortunately, some of this was difficult to rein in. The abuses arose rather late in history, while the teaching on purgatory has been part of the body of Christian belief from the earliest times. This latter point has been demonstrated rather well in this thread. You have put the cart before the horse.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

TNT:

Glad we all think logically alike…See Post 31.

My bad. TNT got it first.

On the pain of puragtory, here is a link that may have already been brought up here: How to Explain Purgatory to Protestants with this:

The Joys of Purgatory

To further break down the Protestant’s barrier to comprehending the doctrine, point out that the Church in no way teaches that purgatory is all pain. In fact, some of the greatest saints and theologians have stressed that since the soul is in closer union with God than it is here on earth, one experiences correspondingly greater joys. Thus St. Catherine of Genoa wrote:

“God inspires the soul in Purgatory with so ardent a movement of devoted love that it would be sufficient to annihilate her were she not immortal. Illumined and inflamed by this pure charity, the more she loves God, the more she detests the least stain that displeases him, the least hindrance that prevents her union with him.”

She also wrote:

“Apart from the happiness of the saints in heaven, I think there is no joy comparable to that of the souls in purgatory. An incessant communication with God renders their happiness daily more intense, and this union with God grows more and more intimate, according as the impediments to that union, which exist in the soul, are consumed. These obstacles . . . are the rust and the remains, as it were, of sin; and the fire continues to consume them, and thus the soul gradually expands under the divine influence. Thus, according as the rust diminishes and the soul is laid bare to the divine rays, happiness is augmented. The one grows and the other wanes until the time of trial is elapsed . . . With regard to the will of these souls, they can never say that these pains are pains, so great is their contentment with the ordinance of God, with which their wills are united in perfect charity.”

In fact, the souls in purgatory have a large number of reasons for joy: (a) freedom from the committing of sin, (b) freedom from the desire to sin, (c) closer unity with God and Christ, (d) certainty of one’s final salvation in a way not possible in this life, (e) a final and full appreciation of just how gracious God has been to one, (f) a final and full appreciation of just how much God loves one, (g) the at last unencumbered and pure love we will feel for God and for others, (h) partial rewards which may be given in anticipation of one’s entrance into the full glory of heaven at the end of purgatory.

What’s more, there is no teaching that the pains of purgatory outweigh the joys of purgatory. As St. Catherine says, “they can never say that these pains are pains, so great is their contentment with the ordinance of God, with which their will are united in perfect charity.” It may (and in my view, it is quite likely) that the pain of seeing some of one’s works go up in smoke is more than overbalanced by the joy of seeing some of them remain and inwardly hearing, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant,” from the ever-loving and infinitely good Source of our redemption, our life, and our very existence.

Scott

 

[crk312]

Has anyonre come back from Purgatory to describe what goes on there or is it pure speculation of the writers ?

 

[TNT]

crk312:

Has anyonre come back from Purgatory to describe what goes on there or is it pure speculation of the writers ?

YES. MARTHA STEWART.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

crk312:

Has anyonre come back from Purgatory to describe what goes on there or is it pure speculation of the writers ?

I don’t know, but I believe there are saints who have had visions of purgatory. These I imagine would have Church approval (if any) in the sense of “worthy of belief” rather than of binding teaching.

Scott

 

[AquinasXVI]

Scott:

Been looking for that Tolkien quote for ages!!! Glad you have it as your post script. Thanks.

in XT

 

[marvin]

Scott Waddell:

I don’t know, but I believe there are saints who have had visions of purgatory. These I imagine would have Church approval (if any) in the sense of “worthy of belief” rather than of binding teaching.

Scott/QUOT

Scott,

FYI, Saint Faustina communicated with souls in Purgatory. At least one of these communications is documented in her diary.

 

[Knight4God]

TNT:

Just some friendly advise:
You might not want to pick a debate with CM. He is hard core catholic and has more time than money.
Plus he has a backup crew bigger than Michael Jacskon’s.

You could spend months just trying to convince him that you are anything close to a knight 4 God.
Oh, and respectfully to you, if you can’t prove or even declare that your interpretations are infallible, they are worth…how much? If they have a possiblity of being erroneous, then why would anyone take them seriously? If they could contain error ie fallible, then why would I or any sane person bet their soul on it?

Worth as much as anyone else’s. If I declare the sky to be blue it’s not infallible on the same level as revelation. Scripture is infallible, I believe we all are fallible in our interpretations to some degree, and do not believe there is an infallible interpreter. It doesn’t destroy certain truth, it just means like a lot of other things, the science of biblical interpretation requires debate and the (name removed by moderator)ut of lots of people. But we can still determine a valid real meaning from the text, same as I can interpret a valid real meaning from any other book I read, regardless of whither or not I have there is an infallible interpreter. I believe there is an objective meaning ins scripture that can be discovered, if I have objectively misinterpreted the passages then I am wrong, but I don’t think we can say the Bible cannot be interpreted on the same level as other books, in that we need some other authority to interpret it for us infallibly. So i’m not really sure what the objection is…I don’t see a need for an infallible interpreter.

 

[crk312]

TNT:

YES. MARTHA STEWART.

Come on TNT. I ask a very logical question. If there is another existance outside the flesh, is it not logical to ask of those who have experienced the same. If you have ever known people who have had near death experiences they all speak of a spiritual experience. Those I have known state flatly they met Jesus and were shown some rather interesting things…