Dealing with anti-Catholic stuff.

[Church_Militant]

I’m sorry if I don’t understand. I’ve written to 3 different persons (and much more before those) and then I get a quote with one particular poster and I cannot speak only to that poster.

You don’t have much experience with online message boards do you?

Biblical truth is biblical truth - it doesn’t matter who you’re speaking to.

But that’s not how n-C Christianity works is it? It does indeed vary from person to person. I doubt that you agree with the interpretations of other “mainline” n-Cs very much do you?

There are some strange ideas out there and the CC is not free of them I’m afraid.

True, except that we Catholics actually have a God given authority in place to speak to such issues. It is possible to speak as an individual Catholic and be in error and that is why the church teaches the way it does and a large part of why CAF exists.

Just because an individual Catholic is wrong by no means invalidates the teachings of the Catholic Church but you n-Cs have no such divinely established authority to teach and correct errors. All of you claim to preach and teach from the Bible only but according to the New Testament in 1st Corinthians 14:33 God cannot be the source of that since He is not the God of disorder. so then we know that from the Bible what teh source of that is.

One should be able to distinguish between biblical truth and garbage. For instance, I think Lenten Ashes does.

But that’s just your fallible opinion…how is that more valid and correct that LA’s or even my own fallible opinion? And who is in authority to discern and defend the truth?

Thank you for recommending the CCC. I believe I know it inside out. As I stated to a poster,

I doubt that since you clearly do not hold to what it says or even understand Catholic teachings. Perhaps you should try to read and study it again. You plainly did not come to any real understanding of what the church teaches.

I liked Mere Christianity better by C.S. Lewis.

I too am a fan of Lewis’ writings, however, he held many beliefs that I am sure you do not , such a Purgatory, and that Jesus and the apostles mistakenly thought he would return in their generation. This is a fine example of exactly what I am talking about. N-C Christianity is terribly hit or miss. No wonder you folks are always so confused.

I find the CCC to be a bit confusing for a normal person. But I truly doubt normal people read it. Only those seeking “deep” knowledge such as ourselves.

I’m sorry, but I just find that kind of funny because most of us are just ordinary people and having read it I didn’t find it that difficult and there’s a metric boatload of scripture citations as well as early church citations that really helped me.

If there’s something I don’t know about Catholicism I’d like to know. Have I demonstrated ignorance till now?? What have I said to confirm this?

The very fact that you have chosen to remain outside of the Catholic Faith and that you adhere to the fundamental error of Sola Scriptura clearly indicates that you do not know and comprehend Catholic teaching.

Do you think the CC is the same as in the times of Ignatius, Anselm, Augustine, Aquinas? How long did it take to get to confession as it is today? How long did it take for purgatory to become doctrine?

Rather than derail this discussion with those issues I suggest that you comply with the forum rules and open a new thread here in apologetics on each one and we’ll happily deal with it.

I’ll get out of the way if I disturb you so much.

You don’t disturb me at all. My faith is about as rock solid as God has been able to make it as I “carefully study to show myself approved unto God…rightly dividing the word of truth”.

I leave you with this:
John 13:35

I have seen no one on here be uncharitable to you and I certainly have not been. Since you like scriptures I will respond with one as well.*** “Am I then become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” (Galatians 4:15)***

Good Evening
GG

Pax tecum

 

[Church_Militant]

GG, biblical truth is biblical truth but requires correct interpretation.

And books do not interpret themselves, I’m afraid. This is why we have the supreme court to correctly interpret the Constitution.

We all have a certain filter in which we interpret things and this filter is dependent upon our background, educational level and life experiences. This is why there are so many denominations teaching conflicting doctrines, some subtle, some not so subtle. Some people’s filters are dirtier than others.

Saying the CC has some strange ideas is a rather subjective and unfounded opinion.There is truth outside the bible. 2+9 is 11 even though the bible doesn’t tell me that. No Catholic teaching contradicts the Word of God.

Pax

Well said !

 

[fisherman_carl]

All of the above is correct. Except that I’d add that the first Chriistians were first called The Way.
Acts 9:2

Also, we can say that it was probably a derogatory name, meaning Little Christs. The early Christians were much persecuted, as you know.

Again, I agree. Notice that you always used the term “Christian”. I’d also add that the Jew could not accept Jesus easily because by this time they had been steeped in legalism by the Pharisees and no longer sought a Spiritual God.

Yes. This is a core belief of Catholicism. They were 12 chosen to represent the 12 tribes of Israel. Just as Moses chose 12 to judge his people.
Right again.

The term “catholic” means universal. It was the ONLY church and became called that because of this reason and because it was “worldwide.” As far as the world was known in the years 120 (about) and on.

it’s kind of like calling Peter the first Pope. There was no first Pope called Peter. The first Pope was proclaimed in the 300’s. Now, if you want to go back and say that every BISHOP that led the Christian community should receive the title of Pope, I’m good with that, but let’s at least understand that this is what happened. There was no Pope in the year 37 AD which is about when Christ died.

And I think I should leave here because it’s becoming an US against THEM and that’s not what I’m here for. This is simple history and it’s not to be argued.

We should also consider that the worship was different than it is today. So many layers have been added on. Good layers, but it’s not as simple as it used to be. Sometimes I think that maybe these layers cause a separation between the people and God - other times I think the worship is beautiful and helps to cement our relationship.

Thanks for posting Psalm 55. This is one of the reasons I’m here - so I don’t forget.

GG

I understand your preference to the word Christian since you do not consider yourself to be a Catholic. The term Catholic has a lot of baggage associated with it for some people. Yet, all it means is the universal Church. Paul talks about this Church in Ephesians 4, one Lord, one faith, one Baptism, one Body of believers.

While we don’t see these NT Christians calling the Church, the Catholic Church, since that term hadn’t come into use yet, we do see the beginnings of the universal Church. If I use the word universal, meaning the entire body of Christ, I don’t think you would have any objection to the above statement. We don’t see any denominations starting at this time. We just see the Church that the Apostles started, who were all under their authority. Certainly not under the authority of Scripture alone as the Scriptures were still not finished, and many people could not read or have access to hand written copies of books.

Thus, we read about bishops, deacons, and even priests in the NT who would oversee the needs of the Church. And, if we go to some of the early writings of Christians like Clement of Rome writing in the first century we see that these Apostles appointed bishops to succeed them when they were gone. Then fast forward to Irenaeus, Bishop of now Lyons France, writing in the second century he gives a list of all the bishops who have sat in the ‘chair of Peter’ which he considers to be preeminent authority among the bishops because it was founded by Peter and Paul.

So while yes the terms Catholic or Pope may not have been used in the first century, we see what they describe developing. Just like we don’t see the word Trinity either in the first century. Yet we see different elements of what the word described being believed by Christians from the first century onwards.

 

[guanophore]

I agree. I thank the Catholic Church for our bible. And as far as McCabees is concerned - it speaks about the dead and speaking to them and praying for them.

I don’t think there is any attempts to speak to those who have passed. The message in Macabees is that prayers and sacrifices for those who have gone before us in the Lord are efficacious.

i can’t find any other place in the whole bible where this is spoken of.

Two examples come immediately to mind. One is the p[rophet Samuel coming to Saul](1 Samuel 28:15) and speaking to him. This passage shows several things:

1. Those who have died in the Lord may be permitted to interact with those still alive on earth
2. Those who die in the Lord are aware of events here, and can see what will happen (Samuel fortells the death of Saul and his sons)
3. Those who die in the Lord prior to the opening of the gates of heaven were “at rest” and waiting for Jesus to come and take them out of “prison”.

The other example is the transfiguration, where Moses and Elijah had a little chat with Jesus. This passage also shows that the souls who are departed can converse with those here on earth, and that they know what is happening here (they are not in some sort of “soul sleep” where they “know nothing”.) They speak to Jesus of his upcoming “departure” that he was to accomplish in Jerusalem.

There are a lot more biblical passages that support the Catholic concept of the communion of saints, but these are two examples.

In fact, some Jews didn’t even believe in the afterlife. Like the Sadducees for instance. And when the O.T. spoke of “sleeping” or the dead, it was always in the context that they were not “living.”

Well, the Sadducees were “sad, you see” for a number of reasons, this being only one. They also did not believe in the Angels, and rejected everything but the Torah. Surely we do not want to follow their example!

You are right, all are alive unto God, and though people “fall asleep” physically in this world, their souls are awake to Him. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

Everyone has an eternal soul, so all are awake unto God. Some of those souls will be with him in eternity, and some will not.

IF purgatory exists, and I doubt it does, eventually all will get out. We don’t even know what it’s really like. A Monsignor near here says it’ll only last a second or two.

Yes, eventually all those destined for heaven will be purified completely, for nothing unclean can enter heaven. It is not helpful to think of purgatory in terms of the space time continuum, since it is outside of it. This is very hard for our minds to do, since we are so captive by those parameters.

Also, did you know that kids are more afraid of purgatory than of hell? This is because they feel they won’t go to hell because they won’t be that “bad”, but they think EVERYBODY is going to have to do purgatory time so they think about it a lot. This takes away from the knowledge of the love that God has for them and interferes with getting to know God. IOW, it’s a stumbling block.

I agree. I think this is a place where much catechesis is needed. There are plenty of adult Catholics too who think that they can get to heaven by “living a good life” and have not grasped that we are not saved by being “good” or doing"good". We are saved by grace, through faith, not of works, lest any boast.

People also need to understand that purgatory is part of God’s love for us, burning away all that which is not of Him, and purifying us so we are fit to be with Him for eternity.

I think there is also a need to focus on doing purgatory here and now. There is no reason people need to wait until later to be purged of sin, and sinful desires. We can be purified with HIs fire every day of our lives, if we are willing.

As far as consequences, don’t worry. It’s not about ignorance of scripture - it’s about not being able to find purgatory in there. Anyway, I do believe we are saved by Jesus and not any one doctrine.

That being said, Jesus is not separated from His teaching. It is all One Faith, one teaching, one Lord. Jesus does not teach opposing views.

Believing in the Assumption is a dogma.  You MUST believe it to be Catholic.  Also, I'd like to advise you that if you checked with someone knowledgeable, you'd know that you CAN assume you are saved as long as you're trusting Jesus at the foot of the cross.

We would not call it ‘assume you are saved’. We call it the hope of salvation. We cannot judge ourselves, as we cannot know all the secret places of the heart as God does, so we defer to His judgment, but we can have hopeful expectation as we remain in Him.

I’m not sure I know what you mean by “dividing the Word of God”. ALL of the Word of God is useful, although not all of it is still practicable since Jesus did away with ceremonial and civil Law but retained and fulfilled Moral Law.

15Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth." 2 Tim 2:15

The word “handling” is also sometimes translated “dividing”. It is ὀρθοτομοῦντα which means to cut in a straight line.

 

[GodsGrace154]

Yes, I think this passage Matt 12:32 means after you die. Many translations say in the world to come. Once you pass, you are not part of this “world” anymore. You become part of another “world”

And absolutely, venial sin can be forgiven when you die. That is what the Church teaches.

We are judged after we die, Amen.

I’m well aware of the differences in Mortal and Venial sin and the ramifications therein

But I’m not sure you are understanding what I am saying and maybe I’m not being clear… Confessed Mortal sin, may still lead to temporal punishment in purgatory.

GG, That’s a overhyped generalization.

And most protestants think that Paul was president of the first Baptist Church and have little to no understanding on Church history, councils or patristic writings.

It’s good to know and read your bible, but you should also know where that book came from and have a understanding of our rich history in Christianity. Perhaps you do, but I think most protestants do not and that is sad.

So both sides have some flaws, but only one has been given a promise of infallibility from the Lord… Doesn’t mean protestant churches are bad are worthless or anything like that, just means they aren’t necessarily protected from teaching error. And we see this time and time again with each wild Westboro Baptist sect that emerges.

Don’t want to derail the OP’s thread but the concept is definitely there.

Start with 2nd Sam 12:13-18

We see ^^^ there can be a consequence or punishment for sin even AFTER it is forgiven.

Nothing unclean enters heaven Revelation 21:27

Most people are unclean no matter how holy they try to be and have some sort of attachment to some sort of sin. We don’t subscribe to Luther’s modern invention that we are dung covered in snow. If you aren’t cleaned up totally in this life, yet die a faithful and fearful friend of God, you can be cleaned up and enter heaven in the next.

Next look at Hebrews 12:22-23 it says…“the spirits of just men made perfect”…Did you catch that? SPIRITS of the just being made perfect. That would be CHRISTIANS who leave this temporal body.

And this coincides with 1 Corinthians 3:13-15

Where is this place that a man after he dies suffers loss, yet is still saved? Hell? No you suffer loss in hell but aren’t saved, ever. Heaven? No, you don’t suffer loss in heaven.

And so the concept is there and it’s implicit biblically. And the same trustworthy Church that gave us the bible teaches it, so we can trust in her in other matters as well.

GG, if you really think about it, you are in a form of purgatory right now. God is purging us from sin right now, the Holy Spirit is guiding us right now and throughout our walk as Christians this is taking place. So the Church is telling is this purging may need to be finished when we pass.

I really didn’t want to go into a detailed explanation about purgatory because it’s a lot to digest and most wont except it even if it starts to make sense to them. However, if it does exist then it proves the point that doctrine does matter and what we don’t know can hurt us…even if we are still heaven bound.

ONE

 

[GodsGrace154]

TWO FOR LENTEN ASHES

No need to go into a detailed explanation of purgatory. it’s not a lot to digest, BTW.
Do you realize that to believe in purgatory is to believe that the sacrifice of Jesus was not sufficient? IOW, His sacrifice alone is not enough to get us to heaven. We also need to spend some time in purgatory. Either Jesus is getting us to heaven, OR we’re getting ourselves there. If I have to purge myself in purgatory, it means I’m getting myself there through my own efforts and when they fail, I have to “pay” for it and be made clean. Jesus is our cleanliness. Have you read Hebrews?

Here is something from gci.org, which would be like you posting something from EWTN:
The Author is :
Michael Morrison has a PhD from Fuller Theological Seminary. He is Dean of Faculty and Instructor in New Testament for Grace Communion Seminary(link is external). He is the author of Sabbath, Circumcision and Tithing and Who Needs a New Covenant? The Rhetorical Function of the Covenant Motif in the Argument of Hebrews.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

Jesus Christ entered the reality, not the imitation, and he did it by a better sacrifice: “He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption.” By dying for us, the Son of God was able to redeem us once for all. It was a perfect, sinless sacrifice, presented in the heavenly holy place, fully effective, never needing to be done again. This was a sharp contrast with the Levitical rituals, which were repeated continually yet never bringing the people closer to God.

Referring to Hebrews 9:11-25

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
If Jesus was not a perfect sarcrifice, then, yes, we’ll have to be spending some time in purgatory. But I believe HE WAS the PERFECT sacrifice.

So you think sin could be forgiven after death? This is not Catholic theology. Please look into it. Could you provide some scripture? I’ve already said what Mathew 12:32 means. It’s impossible for it to mean that you will be forgiven in the next life. It’s TOO LATE in the next life - you must be forigiven BEFORE you die. What do you think Last Rites are for?? I would appreciate your showing me this in the CCC. I dear say you will not find it.

As far as infallibility, you know full well that the Catholic Church is only infallible when the Pope is speaking ex-cathedra. Otherwise it’s as fallible as any other. Are you aware of everything that goes on in the CC?? Do you know that the Pope has made a change in doctrine? Have you read Amoris Laetitia? Was the church right before or is it right now?
Before 1917 divorced people were not allowed into church. Now they are. Was it right before or is it right now? D and R could not receive communion till now. Now they can. Was the church right before or is it right now? Yes. We all have a filter. You should consider the above. There’s enough flaw to go around for everybody. There are many sects even in the CC, it’s just that we don’t hear about them. Did you know that some priests believe in annihilation? Did you know that some believe that everyone will be saved? Strange isn’t it. It’s nice to stay home and read the CCC - try leaving the house every now and then and find out what really is going on.

 

[GodsGrace154]

THREE AND LAST FOR LENTEN ASHES

HEBREWS 12:22-23
This is comparing Mt. Zion with Mt. Sinai which is spoken of in Hebrews 12:18-22
It’s saying that we’re not on Mt. Sinai but on Mt. Zion, the mount of the Living God and the angels - the heavenly Jerusalem. And the church which is comprised of all those who are registered in heaven (saved).
The heavenly Jerusalem means the new church - the church under the New Covenant, which is far superior to the Old Covenant or the Mosaic Covenant.
God, of course, will be judge of all.
In verse 22 the already redeemed in heaven are spoken of. Already redeemed AND MADE PERFECT. it doesn’t say they had to pass thru some other place first. Please show me a verse that says you have to stop off somewhere before going to heaven. It seems important enough, don’t you thinkj?

REVELATION 21:27
Yes. So? It’s saying that no one who is immoral, evil or dishonest will be allowed into heaven. Only those whose name is in the Book of Life will be let in. This is correct. What does it have to do with purgatory? Does it mention purgatory? It seems to me that it’s speaking of only one place: Heaven. verses 16-25
Sorry, I don’t see purgatory here either.

Could you please interpret 2nd SAMUEL 12:13-18
God makes a child die. It says while the child was still alive the servants spoke to him.
I’m sorry - I don’t understand.
Oh. I see. The child’s death is a punishment for sin. I sure hope you never use this scripture with an atheist - they’ll NEVER become Christian!

1 CORIINTHIANS 3:13-15

verse 13: At the time of the judgement seat of Christ, every man’s work will be made known. It’ll be revealed by fire - God’s word. How else could we know if the work is a good work except through God’s Word?

And the fire will try every man’s work and what type of work it is. THIS particular fire in Greek is “puri” and speaks to the ability of Christ, who is the judge and sees through everything we do (Rev. 2:18 - He has eyes of fire).

verse 14: If the man’s work is built upon the right material he will get his pay (gold, silver and jewels, see verse 12) The pay is a heavenly reward, but no one knows what that will be.

verse 15: If the man’s work is burned (sticks, hay, or straw - see verse 12) he shall suffer loss. Instead of a reward as in verse 14, he will suffer loss of a reward. Not his salvation. God will burn up his improper works, but the man’s salvation will not be touched.

This is another way of saying it:

It is not a literal fire, but a figurative fire that will try men. It is spoken of in Malachi 3:1-3;

Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord (Yeshua), whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith YHWH of hosts.
Mal 3:2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap:
**Mal 3:3 And he (Yeshua) shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver (by using a figurative fire of tribulation, affliction, chastening, etc): and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto YHWH an offering in righteousness. **

The “work” in 1 Co 3:13 is not material things like buildings, etc., but things such as greed, love, idolatry, walking in the Spirit, etc.

(this is from my study notes)

I don’t see purgatory in there either - it’s quite a jump to get there, If you could explain it to me, I’d appreciate it. Is there fire in purgatory?? Are rewards given in purgatory or in heaven?

GG

 

[GodsGrace154]

You don’t have much experience with online message boards do you?
But that’s not how n-C Christianity works is it? It does indeed vary from person to person. I doubt that you agree with the interpretations of other “mainline” n-Cs very much do you?
True, except that we Catholics actually have a God given authority in place to speak to such issues. It is possible to speak as an individual Catholic and be in error and that is why the church teaches the way it does and a large part of why CAF exists.

Just because an individual Catholic is wrong by no means invalidates the teachings of the Catholic Church but you n-Cs have no such divinely established authority to teach and correct errors. All of you claim to preach and teach from the Bible only but according to the New Testament in 1st Corinthians 14:33 God cannot be the source of that since He is not the God of disorder. so then we know that from the Bible what teh source of that is.
But that’s just your fallible opinion…how is that more valid and correct that LA’s or even my own fallible opinion? And who is in authority to discern and defend the truth?
I doubt that since you clearly do not hold to what it says or even understand Catholic teachings. Perhaps you should try to read and study it again. You plainly did not come to any real understanding of what the church teaches.I too am a fan of Lewis’ writings, however, he held many beliefs that I am sure you do not , such a Purgatory, and that Jesus and the apostles mistakenly thought he would return in their generation. This is a fine example of exactly what I am talking about. N-C Christianity is terribly hit or miss. No wonder you folks are always so confused.
I’m sorry, but I just find that kind of funny because most of us are just ordinary people and having read it I didn’t find it that difficult and there’s a metric boatload of scripture citations as well as early church citations that really helped me.
The very fact that you have chosen to remain outside of the Catholic Faith and that you adhere to the fundamental error of Sola Scriptura clearly indicates that you do not know and comprehend Catholic teaching.
Rather than derail this discussion with those issues I suggest that you comply with the forum rules and open a new thread here in apologetics on each one and we’ll happily deal with it.
You don’t disturb me at all. My faith is about as rock solid as God has been able to make it as I “carefully study to show myself approved unto God…rightly dividing the word of truth”.
I have seen no one on here be uncharitable to you and I certainly have not been. Since you like scriptures I will respond with one as well.*** “Am I then become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” (Galatians 4:15)***
Pax tecum

I will not respond to “we” and “you”.
I’m glad you believe you have the truth.
There is only ONE truth.
His name is JESUS.

GG

 

[GodsGrace154]

I understand your preference to the word Christian since you do not consider yourself to be a Catholic. The term Catholic has a lot of baggage associated with it for some people. Yet, all it means is the universal Church. Paul talks about this Church in Ephesians 4, one Lord, one faith, one Baptism, one Body of believers.

While we don’t see these NT Christians calling the Church, the Catholic Church, since that term hadn’t come into use yet, we do see the beginnings of the universal Church. If I use the word universal, meaning the entire body of Christ, I don’t think you would have any objection to the above statement. We don’t see any denominations starting at this time. We just see the Church that the Apostles started, who were all under their authority. Certainly not under the authority of Scripture alone as the Scriptures were still not finished, and many people could not read or have access to hand written copies of books.

Thus, we read about bishops, deacons, and even priests in the NT who would oversee the needs of the Church. And, if we go to some of the early writings of Christians like Clement of Rome writing in the first century we see that these Apostles appointed bishops to succeed them when they were gone. Then fast forward to Irenaeus, Bishop of now Lyons France, writing in the second century he gives a list of all the bishops who have sat in the ‘chair of Peter’ which he considers to be preeminent authority among the bishops because it was founded by Peter and Paul.

So while yes the terms Catholic or Pope may not have been used in the first century, we see what they describe developing. Just like we don’t see the word Trinity either in the first century. Yet we see different elements of what the word described being believed by Christians from the first century onwards.

Fisherman Carl,
I agree with all of the above.

But why couldn’t we say that Peter was the first Bishop?
You know, it really doesn’t matter. It’s a title.
Do you know what the Pope’s office is called in Italian?
Pontefice.
Ponte means bridge.
The Pope is a bridge between the people and God.

The Catholic Church has held everything together from the beginning. It saved the church from heresies and developed doctrine. I think it got a little mixed up as it went along, but I thank God for the Catholic Church.

I’m sorry some here feel animosity toward those “outside”. I think the “us” and “them” mentality is very wrong on both sides of the isle. Catholic theologians are very good; this would include Pope Benedict and I love Scott Hahn, but Protestant ones are not dumb and have studied scripture profoundly. It is them we are to look to, not each individual person, just as one poster here was saying that I shouldn’t do with Catholics. People, individually, have strange ideas that do not represent the church they attend, or in some cases ANY church.

I don’t have any objection to any statement or any word as long as it is historically correct. One cannot deny history.

Thanks for your post - it puts everything in order.

GG

 

[guanophore]

As far as consequences, don’t worry. It’s not about ignorance of scripture - it’s about not being able to find purgatory in there.

how do you interpret the passage in Corinthians that the Apostles taught was about purgatory?

As far as authority, there are many Protestant Theologians. It’s just that you don’t agree with them.

This is true. We are not at liberty to jettison anything that was handed down to us from the Apostles. We cannot accept a “different gospel” that was developed 1500 years after the One Faith was committed to the Church.

They use the bible in a more simple way and use exegesis differently because they don't try to read anything into the bible.  Although, yes, the bible could be used to prove almost anything so it's necessary to study it with an open heart and a simple mind and a good soul.

Eisegesis is a problem no matter who is doing it. The difference in approach is that Catholics read scripture through the lens of the Apostolic faith. When we look at it, we are looking through what they believed and taught, so we understand the text differently. We read it from the point of view from which it was written. Modern evangelical theologians approach it from the point of view of the Reformation, at which time many Christians became separated from the Aposto lic faith.

Thanks for the welcome. I hope I’m not making too much trouble.
And peace to you too dear sister in Christ.

GG

You are the reason we are here!

 

[guanophore]

So this person thinks that books and documents interpret themselves?

Ask him/her why we have to have a extremely qualified supreme court to interpret the constitution.

Yes, it is true that many evangelicals believe this, but the principle of exegesis is used by Catholics and Protestants alike. It is not the only exegetical or hermeneutic principle, but certainly if we have the interpretation correct then it will square with all the other passages referencing that same subject. It will not contradict itself, so one passage will shed light on another.

 

[Church_Militant]

I will not respond to “we” and “you”.
I’m glad you believe you have the truth.
There is only ONE truth.
His name is JESUS.

GG

I don’t know why you are so almighty hostile. It’s not my fault…or that of the Catholic Church that you believe the things that you do…or don’t.

You act like we are all ignorant when in fact most of us have read the Bible and and put much study into the truths that make up Christian doctrine.

If you cannot question what you have been taught then how is that truly seeking the truth?

Of course Jesus is the Truth… but that by no means infers that we should be afraid of better understanding the truth we have and especially with the benefit of the early church’s perspectives on what they received from the apostles.

If you want to put forth your issues with our most holy faith then by all means feel free to open a new threads on each one and make your case…but for Heaven’s sake don’t get all mad and run away just because some of us point out why we disagree with what you believe.

By all means read it over and jump into It’s NOT in the Bible, okay? (Part II) with me and let’s see if SS (for example) is really a Biblical Christian doctrine. Let’s see if it’s true so that we can all grow closer to the truth which is our personal relationships with Jesus Christ.

 

[GodsGrace154]

I don’t think there is any attempts to speak to those who have passed. The message in Macabees is that prayers and sacrifices for those who have gone before us in the Lord are efficacious.

Yes. I’m sorry, I misspoke. Of course we don’t speak to the dead!

Two examples come immediately to mind. One is the p[rophet Samuel coming to Saul](1 Samuel 28:15) and speaking to him. This passage shows several things:

1. Those who have died in the Lord may be permitted to interact with those still alive on earth
2. Those who die in the Lord are aware of events here, and can see what will happen (Samuel fortells the death of Saul and his sons)
3. Those who die in the Lord prior to the opening of the gates of heaven were “at rest” and waiting for Jesus to come and take them out of “prison”.

The other example is the transfiguration, where Moses and Elijah had a little chat with Jesus. This passage also shows that the souls who are departed can converse with those here on earth, and that they know what is happening here (they are not in some sort of “soul sleep” where they “know nothing”.) They speak to Jesus of his upcoming “departure” that he was to accomplish in Jerusalem.

There are a lot more biblical passages that support the Catholic concept of the communion of saints, but these are two examples.

Could we leave the transfiguration out of this? It’s such an unusual account and we know that God can do whatever he wants. And, of course, I agree that the dead do not “sleep” but are alive with God.

I have a problem (this is not my idea but a Protestant belief) thinking that those in heaven could see us. How could they be happy if they could !!

Regarding what you wrote above, I’m not sure why you included your number 3. You must be referring to Luke 16:19-31

Of course Jesus had not died yet here and the saved were waiting in Abraham’s Bossom, as you stated above. But the persons on either side of the chasm did not see those still living. Lazarus just asks that Abraham send a messenger to his brothers’ house to warn them.

Well, the Sadducees were “sad, you see” for a number of reasons, this being only one. They also did not believe in the Angels, and rejected everything but the Torah. Surely we do not want to follow their example!

Sad, you see. That’s cute. Good point. Who can even remember what I said! But I agree with you here.

You are right, all are alive unto God, and though people “fall asleep” physically in this world, their souls are awake to Him. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

Everyone has an eternal soul, so all are awake unto God. Some of those souls will be with him in eternity, and some will not.

Amen. To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord…

Yes, eventually all those destined for heaven will be purified completely, for nothing unclean can enter heaven. It is not helpful to think of purgatory in terms of the space time continuum, since it is outside of it. This is very hard for our minds to do, since we are so captive by those parameters.

Dear Guanophore, I don’t think of purgatory at all. I don’t believe it exists. I’m trusting on Jesus to cover for me and get me to heaven. If it depends on me, I’m in big trouble! But, yes, I understand that it’s out of the time/space continuum. Did I say previously that some priests think it only lasts a few seconds. But, yes, we shouldn’t concentrate on this.

But regarding not entering heaven unless we’re clean: Did you read my reply to Lenten Ashes re Revelation 21:17. Any comment?

ONE

 

[Lenten_ashes]

TWO FOR LENTEN ASHES

No need to go into a detailed explanation of purgatory. it’s not a lot to digest, BTW.
Do you realize that to believe in purgatory is to believe that the sacrifice of Jesus was not sufficient? IOW, His sacrifice alone is not enough to get us to heaven. We also need to spend some time in purgatory. Either Jesus is getting us to heaven, OR we’re getting ourselves there. If I have to purge myself in purgatory, it means I’m getting myself there through my own efforts and when they fail, I have to “pay” for it and be made clean. Jesus is our cleanliness. Have you read Hebrews?

Here is something from gci.org, which would be like you posting something from EWTN:
The Author is :
Michael Morrison has a PhD from Fuller Theological Seminary. He is Dean of Faculty and Instructor in New Testament for Grace Communion Seminary(link is external). He is the author of Sabbath, Circumcision and Tithing and Who Needs a New Covenant? The Rhetorical Function of the Covenant Motif in the Argument of Hebrews.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

Jesus Christ entered the reality, not the imitation, and he did it by a better sacrifice: “He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption.” By dying for us, the Son of God was able to redeem us once for all. It was a perfect, sinless sacrifice, presented in the heavenly holy place, fully effective, never needing to be done again. This was a sharp contrast with the Levitical rituals, which were repeated continually yet never bringing the people closer to God.

Referring to Hebrews 9:11-25

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
If Jesus was not a perfect sarcrifice, then, yes, we’ll have to be spending some time in purgatory. But I believe HE WAS the PERFECT sacrifice.

So you think sin could be forgiven after death? This is not Catholic theology. Please look into it. Could you provide some scripture? I’ve already said what Mathew 12:32 means. It’s impossible for it to mean that you will be forgiven in the next life. It’s TOO LATE in the next life - you must be forigiven BEFORE you die. What do you think Last Rites are for?? I would appreciate your showing me this in the CCC. I dear say you will not find it.

As far as infallibility, you know full well that the Catholic Church is only infallible when the Pope is speaking ex-cathedra. Otherwise it’s as fallible as any other. Are you aware of everything that goes on in the CC?? Do you know that the Pope has made a change in doctrine? Have you read Amoris Laetitia? Was the church right before or is it right now?
Before 1917 divorced people were not allowed into church. Now they are. Was it right before or is it right now? D and R could not receive communion till now. Now they can. Was the church right before or is it right now? Yes. We all have a filter. You should consider the above. There’s enough flaw to go around for everybody. There are many sects even in the CC, it’s just that we don’t hear about them. Did you know that some priests believe in annihilation? Did you know that some believe that everyone will be saved? Strange isn’t it. It’s nice to stay home and read the CCC - try leaving the house every now and then and find out what really is going on.

GG, I was planning on responding in full to this until I saw last sentence you just posted.

Seriously?

I think you are now being quite condescending and assuming we are all biblically illiterate, ignorant Catholics. I was a bible digesting protestant for 13 years. I wasn’t born yesterday and I saw several flaws within protestant theology and that’s why I’m now Catholic. So perhaps you can stop overgeneralizing us all and have fruitful discussions now?

I wont address all the carpet bombing you did there, but I will say that the argument that purgatory means Jesus sacrifice was insufficient is tired and has been refuted countless times in this forum. It’s the same argument that P’s make that we are supposedly saving ourselves because works are a requirement for salvation. Yet the Church clearly states it’s by the grace of God that we initiate such works.

Whatever is happening to a person in purgatory is done by God. It’s*** not ***done by the individual. As to the nature, God is described as fire on several occasions. We see it at the burning Bush with Moses, we see it again with John Baptist saying Jesus baptizes with Fire, and we see Paul describing it again in 1 Corinthians 3. Is it literal fire? We don’t know, but we trust in the same trustworthy Church that gave us the Word to not lead us into a ditch. You know, the Pillar and foundation of the TRUTH 1 TIM 3:15, the one you take matters to for FINAL decisions MATT 18:17

And for someone who carpet bombs this much, I’m shocked you don’t know what the RCC teaches about Venial sin:

All sins are not equal before God, nor dare anyone assert that the daily faults of human frailty will be punished with the same severity that is meted out to serious violation of God’s law. On the other hand whosoever comes into God’s presence must be perfectly pure for in the strictest sense His “eyes are too pure, to behold evil” (Habakkuk 1:13). For unrepented venial faults for the payment of temporal punishment due to sin at time of death, the Church has always taught the doctrine of purgatory.
newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm

 

[GodsGrace154]

TWO FOR GUANOPHORE

I agree. I think this is a place where much catechesis is needed. There are plenty of adult Catholics too who think that they can get to heaven by “living a good life” and have not grasped that we are not saved by being “good” or doing"good". We are saved by grace, through faith, not of works, lest any boast.

I’m impressed. Not an easy concept to get through. I have a couple of friends working their tail off to be good and they can’t understand that it doesn’t depend on this. Then we have those Christians who feel they’re saved and never have to do anything else. I think they forgot to read Mathew 5, 6, 7…
BUT, if we keep saying the right things, maybe it’ll sink in??

People also need to understand that purgatory is part of God’s love for us, burning away all that which is not of Him, and purifying us so we are fit to be with Him for eternity.

I think there is also a need to focus on doing purgatory here and now. There is no reason people need to wait until later to be purged of sin, and sinful desires. We can be purified with HIs fire every day of our lives, if we are willing.

Yes. I know that purgatory is taught as love from God for us. I’ve thought about it a lot and still don’t get it. I think God’s love is in John 3:16.

Your second paragraph is very beautiful. Is this sanctification? Being put aside for service to God.
Romans 12:1-2

That being said, Jesus is not separated from His teaching. It is all One Faith, one teaching, one Lord. Jesus does not teach opposing views.

A house divided cannot stand - All Christians agree on the basics or they wouldn’t be christian…

We would not call it ‘assume you are saved’. We call it the hope of salvation. We cannot judge ourselves, as we cannot know all the secret places of the heart as God does, so we defer to His judgment, but we can have hopeful expectation as we remain in Him.[7QUOTE]
Call it what makes you happy - I know you’re saved or you wouldn’t be here saying all you do and showing yourself approved.
2 Timothy 2:15

15Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth." 2 Tim 2:15

The word “handling” is also sometimes translated “dividing”. It is ὀρθοτομοῦντα which means to cut in a straight line.

Oops! We had the same thought.
Great minds think alike!

GG

 

[GodsGrace154]

GG, I was planning on responding in full to this until I saw last sentence you just posted.

Seriously?

I think you are now being quite condescending and assuming we are all biblically illiterate, ignorant Catholics. I was a bible digesting protestant for 13 years. I wasn’t born yesterday and I saw several flaws within protestant theology and that’s why I’m now Catholic. So perhaps you can stop overgeneralizing us all and have fruitful discussions now?

I wont address all the carpet bombing you did there, but I will say that the argument that purgatory means Jesus sacrifice was insufficient is tired and has been refuted countless times in this forum. It’s the same argument that P’s make that we are supposedly saving ourselves because works are a requirement for salvation. Yet the Church clearly states it’s by the grace of God that we initiate such works.

Whatever is happening to a person in purgatory is done by God. It’s*** not ***done by the individual. As to the nature, God is described as fire on several occasions. We see it at the burning Bush with Moses, we see it again with John Baptist saying Jesus baptizes with Fire, and we see Paul describing it again in 1 Corinthians 3. Is it literal fire? We don’t know, but we trust in the same trustworthy Church that gave us the Word to not lead us into a ditch. You know, the Pillar and foundation of the TRUTH 1 TIM 3:15, the one you take matters to for FINAL decisions MATT 18:17

And for someone who carpet bombs this much, I’m shocked you don’t know what the RCC teaches about Venial sin:

I know what it teaches. I don’t agree.
Where’s the scripture that says we could be forgiven after death?

As I said, this is new to me and it would be interesting to see it in black and white. I always back up what I say. Can you do the same? Please.

GG

 

[Lenten_ashes]

I know what it teaches. I don’t agree.
Where’s the scripture that says we could be forgiven after death?

As I said, this is new to me and it would be interesting to see it in black and white. I always back up what I say. Can you do the same? Please.

GG

Your presupposition that there is no truth outside the bible is erroneous.

Sola Scriptura, itself is not scriptural and was foreign to the early Church.

I understand it’s your ‘safeguard’, but it is also a assumption.

 

[guanophore]

What do you think “the age to come” means? You think it means after you die?

No one to date has lived to see the return of Christ, so yes, unless we are alive and remain when He comes, it will be after we die.

The state of the soul after death is outside the space/time continuum.

Do you believe sin could be forgiven after you die?

Although the language seems to imply this (esp. in Macabees) it is actually a purging of sins that have already been forgiven. God does not sanctify those who have not already been redeemed and justified, so one must die in a right relationship with God (what we call the state of grace).

It means either in this age: The age of the Jew
Or the age to come. The age of Christianity.

Well, we read it differently.

It cannot mean that we are forgiven after death. That’s impossible.
Read Luke 16:19-31 The Rich Man and Lazarus
Also: Hebrews 8:27 It says that you die once and then comes the judgement.

Yes. But since Catholics recognize degrees of sins, people sometimes die with venial sins (such would be the case of those written in the book of Macabees). It is more about being cleansed of the effects of those sins on the soul. Purgatory is part of God’s forgiveness to us. He will cleanse us from the sins, as well as forgiving them.

mortal sin is not in purgatory - mortal sin is in hell - in Catholic teaching.

Yes. This is why scripture refers to certain sins as “deadly”. They separate us from God, so we are no longer in right relationship with him.

You can live a pious life all you want to - the church teaches that you end up in purgatory so you can be “purged” of the effect of sins you’ve committed because you have to be perfect to go before God. (I’m not saying you should not live the best way you can).

Actually the Church does not teach this.

Only that any purification that is not completed in this life will be completed after death, since nothing unclean can enter heaven, and not all of us are completely purified at the end of this life. It is difficult, when living in a muddy world, not to get mud on yourself.

Yeah. Read Luke 16. What was going on there anyway?

Jesus was teaching about the afterlife.

It takes the CCC to explain Catholicism. And even that is not easy to understand.
So it has been made too complicated - but most Catholics don’t even really know their faith so I think it doesn’t really matter except for persons such as yourself that are interested in learning about their “religion.”

The problem is, GG, that Christianity is not a “religion” in the sense of having a hobby or something. It is that which is at the center and fulfillment of all of life. If Jesus is really on the throne of our lives, then our whole lives are in service to Him. That means that every moment of every day is centered around Him. The root word of “religion” also is our root word for “relationship”. It is an all encompassing relationship.

But I do agree with you, most Catholics don’t even really know their faith.

And churches should teach the true doctrine and sound doctrine. Question is: Is it?
Where is purgatory in the bible?

I think this was answered elsewhere but if not I am glad to do it.

We have psychological speakers too, like Joyce Meyers.  I agree with you on this.

I love her!

I must be dense. I STILL don’t understand what you mean.
But I agree that Jesus said it is ALL essential.
And with you
GG

“Mere Christianity” is the beginning.

 

[guanophore]

I’m sorry if I don’t understand. I’ve written to 3 different persons (and much more before those) and then I get a quote with one particular poster and I cannot speak only to that poster.

There are two ways to do this. You can answer them on the public thread, where everyone else might read and respond, or you can copy their post into a private message and just respond to them where no one else can read it or respond. You are responding on a discussion board, so anything posted can be responded to by anyone else.

Biblical truth is biblical truth - it doesn't matter who you're speaking to.  There are some strange ideas out there and the CC is not free of them I'm afraid.  One should be able to distinguish between biblical truth and garbage.

Most of what is understood as “biblical truth” is in the eye of the beholder. That is why there are so many different denominations. There are as many interpretations as there are belly buttons.

If there’s something I don’t know about Catholicism I’d like to know. Have I demonstrated ignorance till now?? What have I said to confirm this?

Perhaps you should tell us what the “strange ideas” there are in CC?

Do you think the CC is the same as in the times of Ignatius, Ans[elm, Augustine, Aquinas? How long did it take to get to confession as it is today? How long did it take for purgatory to become doctrine?

Yes. It looks a lot different, but it is the same Church. As much as a mustard seed is different than a large tree…

Doctrines are taught by Jesus through the Apostles. No new doctrine can be added after the death of the last Apostle. Purgatory was a doctrine before Christ was born.

Confession changed (from public to private) when it was discovered that public confession of sins might create more damage than it healed.
[/quote]

 

[GodsGrace154]

Your presupposition that there is no truth outside the bible is erroneous.

Sola Scriptura, itself is not scriptural and was foreign to the early Church.

I understand it’s your ‘safeguard’, but it is also a assumption.

Okay. Can you show me that we could be forgiven for our sins AFTER death
from the CCC ?
Or maybe an encyclical?
Or maybe one of the writings of the early church fathers?

Anything will do. I’m easy.

GG