Deductive Scriptural Argument for CCC 460 and 1030-1031

[Acosmic-Otaku]

The following arguments are designed to help with Protestant objections to the doctrines of Purgatory and Theosis. To that end they are deductive in nature [that is to say, if the premises are true then the conclusions necessarily follow]. The first argument, defending Ratzinger’s view of Purgatory [the doctrine of which is outlined in CCC 1030-1031] is as follows-

P1. Nothing unclean will enter Heaven. (Rev. 21:27)
P2. Sin makes a person unclean. (Hab 1:13; Isa 59:2)
P3. All people are sinners. (1 Jn 1:8, Rom 3:23, 5:19, 7:18-24)
C1. Therefore, all people must be cleansed of their sins in order to enter Heaven. (1 Thess 5:23; Heb. 12:14)
P4. The actions of the saved will be tested by fire. (1 Cor 3:11-15)
P5. An action separate from an actor is impossible.
P6. Actions, no matter how slight, which are bad or impure are sins. (Matt 7:21-23; Jn 8:40; Gal 5:19-21)
P7. Fire can both purify as well as a consume (Mal 3:2-3; Matt 3:11-12; Mk 9:49; 2 Thess 1:7-8).
P8. God is a consuming fire. (Heb 12:29; Deut 4:24)
P9. God is Love. (1 Jn 4:8)
C2. Therefore, God’s love is a consuming and purifying fire.
C3. Therefore, the saved are cleansed by fire. (1 Cor 3:15)
P10. Jesus Christ is the propitiation for our sins. (1 Jn 1:7, 2:1-2)
C4. Therefore, Jesus is the consuming and purifying fire that cleanses sin.
P11. This cleansing by fire is what we call Purgatory. (CCC 1030-1031)
P12. If a man is being purified by the fire of God’s love, he will be saved. (1 Cor 3:15)
C5. Therefore, only the saved will be able enter into Purgatory and only for a time, so that they will be made pure to enter heaven.

Regarding CCC 460 [which outlines the doctrine of Theosis], a defense can be formulated as follows-

P1. God will make good his word. (Num 23:19; 1 Sam 15:29; Ps 92:15; Mal 3:6; Rom 3:4; Tit 1:2; Heb 6:18; Jas 1:17-18)
P2. God promised that we would be gods*, partaking in the divine nature. (Mtt 5:48; Heb 12:22-23; 2 Pet 1:3-4; Ps 82:6; Jn 10:34-36)
C1. Therefore, we will become gods*, partaking in the divine nature.

 

[po18guy]

An excellent, logical argument.

Often countered with: “Wull, my buybull says rat here that…”

Very fortunately, from time to time, we are blessed to encounter an open, seeking heart. Those happy occasions are good for the soul.

 

[Acosmic-Otaku]

Suffering builds character as well.

I’ve had that happen before where air tight logical reasoning is denied [by religious and irreligious persons] with either a bare assertion fallacy, or where they employ a complete non-sequitur or red herring to avoid the reasoning. It doesn’t really bother me, as I tend to hold firm until the reasoning is defeated.

I’ve had my share of difficulties [always conceptual], but even as a nondenominational christian the concepts of Purgatory and Theosis seemed intuitively obvious from the text.

Of course the “My Bible says otherwise” objection raises question such as-

1. “What is the canon of scripture?”
2. “Is the translation reliable or biased?”
3. “On whose authority or what system is it interpreted?”
4. “What genre is the text in question?”

Which opens up a great range of conversational topics, even in the case of the immovable objector.

Arguments such as this aren’t made for the people who want their view to be true. They’re designed to get at truth and demonstrate it to those who seek it, as well as defend why you came to believe what you do (even if the opposition won’t listen).