Dealing with anti-Catholic stuff.

[Wesrock]

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

Forgiveness of sins after death? What exactly is the point here? Catholics distinguish between eternal and temporal punishment.

Anyway, 2 Maccabees 12: 39 On the next day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kinsmen in the sepulchres of their fathers. 40 Then under the tunic of every one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jam′nia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was why these men had fallen. 41 So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; 42 and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. 43 He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. 44 For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. 45 But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.

Now, second centure BC Judaism had an imperfect understanding of sin and atonement that wouldn’t be fully understood until Christ, but an imperfect understanding is still an understanding.

Quotes from the early church, some more helpful than others, are also available here: catholic.com/tracts/the-roots-of-purgatory

 

[Lenten_ashes]

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

I had posted a newadvent link saying the same, but here’s a explanation from the CCC:

1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:

As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.

 

[Wesrock]

If you make it to Purgatory it means you were forgiven your sins before death.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

If you make it to Purgatory it means you were forgiven your sins before death.

Just means that technically you didn’t break covenant.

But venial sins are still sins that may warrant temporal punishment…

 

[GodsGrace154]

If you make it to Purgatory it means you were forgiven your sins before death.

I have to agree. There’s a new church (independent) one town over where they teach that sin could be forgiven after death (in their declaration of doctrine). I had a talk about this with a priest who lost a parishoner to that church and he confirms that it’s incorrect teaching. In fact, it turned out to be a cult.

But this is why the CCC is so confusing. it does seem to say that sin could be forgiven after death if one reads Lenten Ashes quote from CCC no. 1031.

But then you read no. 1472 and it says:

1. “To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the ‘eternal punishment’ of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the ‘temporal punishment’ of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain. [Cf. Council of Trent (1551): DS 1712-1713; (1563): 1820.]”

This states clearly that it’s the EFFECT of sin that is purged in purgatory, not the actual sin.

GG

 

[Lenten_ashes]

I have to agree. There’s a new church (independent) one town over where they teach that sin could be forgiven after death (in their declaration of doctrine). I had a talk about this with a priest who lost a parishoner to that church and he confirms that it’s incorrect teaching. In fact, it turned out to be a cult.

But this is why the CCC is so confusing. it does seem to say that sin could be forgiven after death if one reads Lenten Ashes quote from CCC no. 1031.

But then you read no. 1472 and it says:

1. “To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the ‘eternal punishment’ of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the ‘temporal punishment’ of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain. [Cf. Council of Trent (1551): DS 1712-1713; (1563): 1820.]”

This states clearly that it’s the EFFECT of sin that is purged in purgatory, not the actual sin.

GG

GG,

Their is still the effect of repented of mortal sin…say something horrible like abortion that may still need to be purged.

I’m not saying the Church is saying that venial sin is ok, it says the opposite. Basically says stay away because it leads to mortal sin that can damn our souls.

Pax

 

[guanophore]

Could we leave the transfiguration out of this? It’s such an unusual account and we know that God can do whatever he wants.

But that is exactly the point, GG. God can do whatever He wants! If he wants those who have passed to communicate with those who have not, they can.

 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

Samuel scolds Saul for “disturbing my rest” by calling upon him to speak to him.

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.

Yes. Abraham’s Bosom. The place of the righteous dead.

They are forever saved from sin, can no longer sin, and cannot cross the chasm into hell. They may still be muddy, though.

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

We don’t think of those in purgatory as “absent” from the Lord, but not yet clean enough for heaven.

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!

This is a very basic and significant difference between modern evangelical thought, and Apostolic thought. You see, the Apostles never taught that our sins are “covered” in the sense that we are snow covered dunghills. This is a concept that emerged during the Reformation. Jesus makes us truly righteous not just “declaring” us righteous. When he makes a deposit to our account, he is not just doctoring the books. We are actually credited with righteousness.

Purgatory is the completion of the sanctification process. We are not responsible for this, God is.

You are right, if we had to depend upon ourselves, none of us would ever ge t to heaven!

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.

Many people have said things like this. It is hard for us to think outside the box.

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

I will go look for it. We are cleansed by the blood of the Lamb, having washed our robes. Yet being justified does not mean we are alltogether sanctified.

 

[GodsGrace154]

GG,

Their is still the effect of repented of mortal sin…say something horrible like abortion that may still need to be purged.

I’m not saying the Church is saying that venial sin is ok, it says the opposite. Basically says stay away because it leads to mortal sin that can damn our souls.

Pax

We’re speaking past each other LA.
It’s okay.

Shalom
GG

 

[Lenten_ashes]

GG,

My whole point was not to try and prove purgatory or any other Church teaching to you.

The point was, let’s just say each REPENTED of mortal sin is a year in purgatory(like i said earlier if you scroll back) But protestants didn’t believe in it, yet it didn’t matter because reality asserted itself at the time of their death. Well, what they didn’t know did hurt them, GREATLY.

This is just a hypothetical for point of discussion. And it hammers home the point that doctrine DOES matter. Because, what if the Catholic church is right?

 

[GodsGrace154]

GG,

My whole point was not to try and prove purgatory or any other Church teaching to you.

The point was, let’s just say each REPENTED of mortal sin is a year in purgatory(like i said earlier if you scroll back) But protestants didn’t believe in it, yet it didn’t matter because reality asserted itself at the time of their death. Well, what they didn’t know did hurt them, GREATLY.

This is just a hypothetical for point of discussion. And it hammers home the point that doctrine DOES matter. Because, what if the Catholic church is right?

LA
We’re not supposed to sin, mortal, or venial. So if purgatory is there when I die, I won’t have sinned anymore than if I believed in it. See? So if I’m supposed to spend years there, then that’s how it’ll have to be.

I NEVER said doctrine doesn’t matter - I said doctrine does not SAVE you. Doctrine matters - some doctrine is wrong. It’s just that you trust the church for everything, and this is okay, some of us have to understand everything and we search and seek and study and MUST understand. We don’t agree on 1 Corinthians. Have you really studied this or do you depend on the Catholic commentary of church or a theologian? I need to understand everything myself. But I’ve been guided by a church at every moment of my life. It used to be the Catholic church. But I don’t agree with too much of what it teaches. God will have to judge me accordingly. My conscience is clear.
So I’ve told you some pretty personal stuff. Hope you keep it safe.

GG

 

[guanophore]

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?

You seem to have a misunderstanding about out beliefs on purgatory. On the contrary, it is Jesus sacrifice that makes this purging possible. We don’t spend “time” in purgatory. It is a state or an experience of cleansing, which we all need after we are saved.

Nothing about purgatory has anything to do with “getting ourselves there”. We cannot cleanse ourselves!

Purgatory is about being separated from sin, and the effects of sin. Maybe you have not had a specific torturing sin so you do not realize how strong an attachment to sin may be?

 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.

It sounds like he has retained the Apostolic faith in this area.

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.

This is false. We are purged BECAUSE His sacrifice was perfect. It is He who enables us to be cleansed, and made fit for heaven.

So you think sin could be forgiven after death?

Not mortal sins, no. The cleansing is for sins that have already been forgiven.

  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.

Yes. Those who die in a state of grace will be eligible for purgation.

 As far as infallibility, you know full well that the Catholic Church is only infallible when the Pope is speaking ex-cathedra.

No, GG, this is not the case.

Otherwise it's as fallible as any other.  Are you aware of everything that goes on in the CC??

No, GG, the CC is not fallible in holding the One Faith. Jesus promised that he would not allow the Church to fall into error. It is He who preserves her through the gift of infalliblity.

You mean, do I know there are Catholics who sin? of course.

Do you know that the Pope has made a change in doctrine?  Have you read Amoris Laetitia?

I think you are confused, GG. No one, including the Pope, has the authority to change the doctrine of the Church. The Doctrine was given by Christ,through the Apostles. It is immutable.

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.

This is a pastoral matter of disciplines. The Church has not changed it’s doctrine about divorce. God hates divorce. He has hated it since before Christ came.

You sound very hurt and angry. Perhaps this pastoral letter came to late for you?

   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.

Yes, there are enough flaws to go around. Catholics are not any more immune to sins than anyone else. But there are no “sects” in the CC. Those who do not accept the One Faith have fallen from it.They are heretics, or apostates. Priests that believe in these errant doctrines included. Yes there are priests who have become heretics.

You sound very angry.

 

[Wesrock]

LA
We’re not supposed to sin, mortal, or venial. So if purgatory is there when I die, I won’t have sinned anymore than if I believed in it. See? So if I’m supposed to spend years there, then that’s how it’ll have to be.

I NEVER said doctrine doesn’t matter - I said doctrine does not SAVE you. Doctrine matters - some doctrine is wrong. It’s just that you trust the church for everything, and this is okay, some of us have to understand everything and we search and seek and study and MUST understand. We don’t agree on 1 Corinthians. Have you really studied this or do you depend on the Catholic commentary of church or a theologian? I need to understand everything myself. But I’ve been guided by a church at every moment of my life. It used to be the Catholic church. But I don’t agree with too much of what it teaches. God will have to judge me accordingly. My conscience is clear.
So I’ve told you some pretty personal stuff. Hope you keep it safe.

GG

Jesus asked that we believe in Him. That includes all of his teachings that come from him, handed down by apostolic tradition, and listening to him through his body, the Church.

 

[guanophore]

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?

Some people are perfectly purified before leaving this life, and do not need any further sanctification. Those who have been purified and made perfect are in heaven. It is not “some other place” it is a state of being.

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!

It is an example of the temporal punishment for sins. God forgave the sin, but the consequence of the sin was that the child died. It is the temporal consquences of sin that still need to be “paid”.

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.

Yes. This is how we understand purgatory. All that is not of God is purged/purified. We suffer loss.

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 3:2 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. **

Yes ,this is how we understand purgatory.

 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.

Yes it is things in the heart and soul that are not of God, anything impure or lacking in consecration to HIm. Anything of the “old man” that remains is purged.

  Is there fire in purgatory??

only the figurative kind you already mentioned. It is not a physical place.It is a spiritual state.

Are rewards given in purgatory or in heaven?

GG

Heaven.

 

[GodsGrace154]

But that is exactly the point, GG. God can do whatever He wants! If he wants those who have passed to communicate with those who have not, they can.

Oh my gosh Guanophore. I’ve lost my whole reply to you and I have to leave. Quick:
Of course God can do whatever He wants to!

Samuel scolds Saul for “disturbing my rest” by calling upon him to speak to him.

Yes. Abraham’s Bosom. The place of the righteous dead.

They are forever saved from sin, can no longer sin, and cannot cross the chasm into hell. They may still be muddy, though. I liked your muddy comment and wondered what some theologian might think!

We don’t think of those in purgatory as “absent” from the Lord, but not yet clean enough for heaven.I think they are absent from the Lord. If they were with Him wouldn’t that be heaven??

This is a very basic and significant difference between modern evangelical thought, and Apostolic thought. You see, the Apostles never taught that our sins are “covered” in the sense that we are snow covered dunghills. This is a concept that emerged during the Reformation. Jesus makes us truly righteous not just “declaring” us righteous. When he makes a deposit to our account, he is not just doctoring the books. We are actually credited with righteousness. I said that you might be getting me mixed up with the Calvinist crowd. I don’t believe in Total Depravity. I said that God lloves Jesus more than He hates our sin and that Jesus is covering, or protecting, us. If you can see the difference…

Purgatory is the completion of the sanctification process. We are not responsible for this, God is.

You are right, if we had to depend upon ourselves, none of us would ever ge t to heaven!

Many people have said things like this. It is hard for us to think outside the box.

I will go look for it. We are cleansed by the blood of the Lamb, having washed our robes. Yet being justified does not mean we are alltogether sanctified.

I asked you if you’d care to check out Rev. 21:27 (my comments to L.A.) and also 1 Corinthians 3:11-15. I’ve studied this a lot and cannot come to understand how it is taken to mean purgatory. If you could use the Greek language and check out the words “fire” in each case. I think you’ll find that they have different meanings. Especially the second word “fire” in verse 13. It’s referring to a work of Jesus and I did state the reference back in L.A.'s response. Must go. Tomorrow…

 

[GodsGrace154]

Jesus asked that we believe in Him. That includes all of his teachings that come from him, handed down by apostolic tradition, and listening to him through his body, the Church.

Good on first sentence.
Good on second sentence.
Problem is that some stuff came much later and not directly from the Apostles.
Purgatory is one of them.
Do you know when it was first presented as a teaching?
I think it was hundreds of years.
Cannot remember and no time to check, it might even have been around the year 1,000 AD.

GG

 

[Wesrock]

Good on first sentence.
Good on second sentence.
Problem is that some stuff came much later and not directly from the Apostles.
Purgatory is one of them.
Do you know when it was first presented as a teaching?
I think it was hundreds of years.
Cannot remember and no time to check, it might even have been around the year 1,000 AD.

GG

Nonsense. The need for further sanctification of the dead after death, including the faithful dead, was a teaching present throughout the early church, as was the idea that there was additional suffering (in some sense) after death for our sins, even for those who weren’t damned. Also present in 2 Maccabees.

Part of the cult of the martyrs, and the early understanding of sainthood, was that their earthly sufferings had made them perfect in Christ, with no need for any more purgation after death.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

LA
We’re not supposed to sin, mortal, or venial. So if purgatory is there when I die, I won’t have sinned anymore than if I believed in it. See? So if I’m supposed to spend years there, then that’s how it’ll have to be.

I NEVER said doctrine doesn’t matter - I said doctrine does not SAVE you. Doctrine matters - some doctrine is wrong. It’s just that you trust the church for everything, and this is okay, some of us have to understand everything and we search and seek and study and MUST understand. We don’t agree on 1 Corinthians. Have you really studied this or do you depend on the Catholic commentary of church or a theologian? I need to understand everything myself. But I’ve been guided by a church at every moment of my life. It used to be the Catholic church. But I don’t agree with too much of what it teaches. God will have to judge me accordingly. My conscience is clear.
So I’ve told you some pretty personal stuff. Hope you keep it safe.

GG

GG,

I have studied 1 Corinthians 3 and in fact, studied the Catholic Church, each and every belief for almost 10 years before I converted. Because as a Fundamentalist protestant( at least initially), the Catholic church appeared to be totally pagan and, in fact, anti-Christ to me.

But as I educated myself, found much truth within the Church. And one-by-one, the myths were all dispelled. The Church added 7 books to the OT…wrong. The Church says you have to work your way into heaven…wrong. The Church made a deity out of Mary…wrong. The CC chained bibles to keep the masses ignorant, WRONG. So many misconceptions I had heard that needed to be addressed.

I’m sorry that the CCC is confusing to you, it makes perfect sense to me and has put together pieces to the puzzle that i wondered about as a protestant.

I know it’s tough being on a Catholic forum as a protestant answering everyone’s posts. Thank you for attempting to.

I would just encourage you to raise all your objections here one by one. Each one can be dissected in a separate thread. We may still disagree but at least a better understanding can be provided.

Pax

 

[Bestil_Andno]

Bestil Andno;13835601:

My goodness Bestil, I think we need to meet!

We’d have a great conversation, I bet!

I said - Everyone who knows Jesus has the full faith.

Teaching, for example - and I think teaching is VERY important to understand your faith.

So, we could say that every church will have its problems. BUT any church that is biblically based and teaches what the Lord taught will be a good church and will have the FULLNESS of the faith because JESUS IS THE FULLNESS of the faith.

For argument let’s just use abortion.Let’s say one church teaches abortion is wrong… as in murder, wrong. Let’s say another teaches that it isn’t wrong. Let’s also say both use the Bible and Jesus’ name extensively. I guess I don’t understand how they both can be called a good church that contains the fullness of the faith. One of them (at least) is wrong. Aren’t they?

I am all thumbs trying to navigate around here so I’m gonna have to just do a brief response to the 3 (I think) posts you sent back my way.

Sorry. I don’t know how to multiquote posts or whatever you call it.

 

[Bestil_Andno]

You have to do some work Bestil. You have to read the whole N.T. You have to know what Jesus wants from you. You have to know when you’re sitting in a church whether or not they are teaching the truth. Not every church does. I can say that although I don’t agree with all of Catholic doctrine, you could feel safe there. There are churches that teach weird things and you would not be safe.

Well, I do like to read the Bible. I am sure the bit I have done is much less than probably almost everyone else here. But it sounds like you are saying that I am the authority to decide if a church is teaching the truth. Correct me if I am wrong but I think I can see a few problems with that idea:

1. I am not a theologian. Some stuff might be hard for me to understand. What do I do then?
2. I don’t think living like that was even a possibility for several hundred years after Christ died. (There were no Bibles, I don’t think.) What did people do back then and when did it switch to me reading and deciding for myself?
3. What do I do if I am illiterate? How can I discern the Truth when I will hear different teachings coming from different churches? Am I just screwed at that point?
4. Isn’t that why there are so many different churches today not teaching the same things?
5. It seems like my ability to discern the truth value of a churches’ teaching would be based on my own private interpretation. What *I *think it should be teaching. Am I really that reliable? (Gulp…)

He has something different for each one of us.

I can agree with that. Like a father that has love for different children.

But aren’t some things the same for all of us? Like…well…back to abortion, I guess. If it is wrong to commit abortion…is it wrong no matter if the church we are in teaches that it is or that it isn’t? I mean, something like that matters, right?

I might still be thinking about your “right and wrong” statement which initially prompted me to post. One of the churches is wrong if two churches teach opposing views on abortion. Correct…or am I missing something?

You must read your bible and not depend on this forum where I see much love for God but also much legalism that could damage you.

I’ve heard that term a few times…mostly, I think (sorry if I offend any Jewish friends) but in terms of some of the Jews of Jesus’ time. Could you give me an example of legalism that you have seen on this forum? I haven’t been here that long.

Thanks, GG.

God bless.

TWO

 

[Bestil_Andno]

The truth matters.

I think so too!

Jesus church will have the right answer to that. But churches see the right answer as being a little differently.

I would think that it would, too. When churches see the right answer as being a little different…that is a screaming red flag to me. Am I wrong about that? I mean, how can churches claim to be led by Jesus…and then teach contradictory things? One church teaching that abortion is ok and another teaching that it is murder…that is more than being a little different. Is Jesus leading both of those churches or not?

It takes study to get to where you want to go.

I just want to know that I am in the Church that He founded. Is it possible to know this or not?

All churches do not teach the same things about everything.

How do we know who has it right, then? I would like to know the right answer to some things.

You need to decide which way makes more sense to you since one way is more biblical and I won’t say which here.

So, I guess your above sentence explains why you earlier said that there is no right or wrong. It looks like you believe that each individual person decides for themselves which makes the most sense.

That doesn’t make sense to me because calling something “more biblical” just means according to “my” interpretation of the bible…Versus the next guys, versus the next gals, etc.

Is that how the Christian church has lived since the time Christ founded it, do you think?

It certainly doesn’t sound to me like a recipe for unity.

Jesus didn’t do a bad job. He made everything simple. Man makes everything difficult and complicated.

Agreed. But isn’t each person relying on themselves to identify correct doctrine an example of man making everything complicated? Isn’t that what has complicated things historically?

And didn’t He promise to protect His church? Did He not protect it? Couldn’t He protect His church from teaching any errors and leading people astray?

The Catholic or Universal Church is the original church.

If that is true…that would seem to make it the Church He founded. That’s the one I would want to belong to, then.

Does it teach error? That depends on what you mean by error. I wouldn’t call it error, I’d call it progression of revelation that has brought it to some places I do not believe are correct.

Well, if it is not error…we should belong to that church. If we don’t believe something is correct…it must be error (even if we call it something else).

Then we must believe that Jesus couldn’t/didn’t protect His Church from teaching error.

But, as I’ve said all along, every church has a problem. How to resolve?

Of course. The ol’ weeds/wheat thing or good fish/bad fish.

I think the resolution is…do I trust Jesus to protect the Church He founded from teaching error (even with the weeds/bad fish in it)…or do I trust that God will guide me in my private readings to figure out for myself when a church is teaching error or not?

THREE