Do these verses refer to purgatory?

[RomanCrusader]

Matthew 12:32: Jesus speaks of the sin against the Holy Spirit that will be forgiven *“neither in this world nor in the next.” * This seems to imply another world where sins are forgiven.

Corinthians 3:11-15: Paul means if the work of some Christian worker has been of such low quality that it burns down, he himself will be saved “as through fire.” This seems to imply the cleansing fire of purgatory.

These are two common passages that are used to justify our faith in purgatory. However some talented Catholic apologists themselves (Rev. William G. Most for example) say that these verses do not describe purgatory.

They say that expression quoted in Matthew 12:32 is known in Rabbinic literature, where it means merely “never.” So this would negate purgatory.

They also say that Corinthians 3:11-15 refers to the apocylyptic fire of the last day and not purgatory.

So should we still use these verses to refer to purgatory even if they most likely don’t? Or do they indeed refer to purgatory?

 

[Proeliator]

I say they do refer to purgartory even though I myself am no apologist! Patrick Madrid has referred to these verses when writing about Purtgatory. See for yourself at Planet envoy online (www.envoymagazine.com) . The article is entitled " Purgatory:God’s emergency room for sinners"- He also refers to Luke 16, “Christ mentions a third state after death not heaven not hell where he discussed the temporary fates of Lazarus and the rich man. This glimpse of a third state that exists after death-not heaven or hell” Pg.4

I don’t want to tread dangerous protestant waters by attempting to interpret scripture myself but wonder myself if Matt 5:25-26 refers to purgatory? “settle with your opponent quickly while on the way to court with him. Otherwise your opponent will hand you over to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison. Amen, I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny.”
Is it fair to say that this is referring to making amends prior to judgement? Just like we do here on earth…commit the crime, do the amount of time given by the judge, get released after your crime(s) have been expiated or amended?
My wife is Lutheran and I see for myself how difficult it is for her to refute the verses you mentioned along with a couple of others that have been used. What do you think about the Matt 5:25-26, should I leave that alone?

 

[RomanCrusader]

I totally agree with you about Matthew 5:25-26. If that doesn’t refer to purgatory then I don’t know what does!

 

[water]

Matthew 12:32:
So should we still use these verses to refer to purgatory even if they most likely don’t? Or do they indeed refer to purgatory?

Why shouldn’t we? Rev. Williams G. Most is one person. It was just his own opinion, but then he says

But our belief in Purgatory rests on the tradition and definitions of the Church, at the Councils of Lyons II, Florence, and Trent.

He still listens to saint Paul that we not only keep what it is in the Bible but also the Tradition. It was Tradition that came before the Bible.

If you need more quotes supporting purgatory, then here they are:

Mt 5:48
Heb 12:24
Jam 3:2
Rev 21: 27
1 Jn 5:16-17
Jam 1:14-15
2 Sam 12:13-14
Mt 5:26
Mat 12:32
Mat 12:36
2 Mac 12:44-46
1 Cor 3:15
1 Pet 3:18-20
1 Pet 4:6
2 Tim 1: 16-18
1 Cor 15:29-30

Aren’t these enough?

 

[Proeliator]

Thanks for all of those Scripture verses. Unfortunatly when dealing with a protestant about Purgatory Tradition holds no bearing. When we show them scripture we show them truth. When they open to the truth then we show them tradition.

 

[Proeliator]

Thanks for all of those Scripture verses. Unfortunatly when dealing with a protestant about Purgatory Tradition holds no bearing. When we show them scripture we show them truth. When they open to the truth then we show them tradition.

“it is what it is”

 

[water]

Thanks for all of those Scripture verses. Unfortunatly when dealing with a protestant about Purgatory Tradition holds no bearing. When we show them scripture we show them truth. When they open to the truth then we show them tradition.

You’re welcome. Most of non-catholic Christians I know from my church and from reading on this forum, I’ve realized that those who have converted to Catholic were truly opening their heart to search for the Truth. Praise the Lord, sure they all did. Those who came here because they have a problem not liking Catholic, I can only pray for them first.

 

[Denise_Shae]

I say they do refer to purgartory even though I myself am no apologist! Patrick Madrid has referred to these verses when writing about Purtgatory. See for yourself at Planet envoy online (www.envoymagazine.com) . The article is entitled " Purgatory:God’s emergency room for sinners"- He also refers to Luke 16, “Christ mentions a third state after death not heaven not hell where he discussed the temporary fates of Lazarus and the rich man. This glimpse of a third state that exists after death-not heaven or hell” Pg.4

I don’t want to tread dangerous protestant waters by attempting to interpret scripture myself but wonder myself if Matt 5:25-26 refers to purgatory? “settle with your opponent quickly while on the way to court with him. Otherwise your opponent will hand you over to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison. Amen, I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny.”
Is it fair to say that this is referring to making amends prior to judgement? Just like we do here on earth…commit the crime, do the amount of time given by the judge, get released after your crime(s) have been expiated or amended?
My wife is Lutheran and I see for myself how difficult it is for her to refute the verses you mentioned along with a couple of others that have been used. What do you think about the Matt 5:25-26, should I leave that alone?

Actually Matt 5:25-26 backs up the Church’s teaching on Purgatory.

Father Andrew Apostoli explains it quite clearly on an episode of “Sunday Night Live_with Fr. Benedict Groeschel”, titled “Purgartory and the Holy Souls”.

If you click on the episode title, the audio file will open.

However, if you want to download the file to your computer, click on the above Sunday Night Live link and scroll down to episode #4.

Hope this helps.

God Bless!

 

[Marnica01]

One thing that we need to keep in mind when we read the New Testament scriptures is that they were written 2000 years ago in a completely different culture than ours. Imagine that someone 2000 years in the future found a 21st letter referring to a “wardrobe malfunction”. Would they automatically know what that was referring to? Would they immediately think of Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl half-time performance? Of course not. If they knew that a wardrobe was a closet or a piece of furniture in which to hang clothing, they might think the malfunction had something to do with the wardrobe door being broken, or the rod collapsing and all the nice clothes falling to the floor.

Now imagine that the word “wardrobe” will have a completely different meaning 2000 years from now than it has today. (Look at how much the word “gay” has changed its meaning in less than a century!) What hope would a future reader have of ever making sense of the letter they had found? Rather, they would be very likely to misunderstand the letter and to not know that they had misunderstood it.

This is exactly the problem we have today in interpreting any of the Scriptures. If we want to know what Scripture in Matthew or 1 Corinthians means, then we need to hear it the way that Matthew’s or Paul’s readers would have heard it.

The problem with much Protestant biblical interpretation is that it interprets Scripture as if it were written by 16th century people for other 16th century people. That is changing, fortunately. In recent years, the New Testament scholar N. T. Wright (Anglican) has shown that the Protestant reformers completely misunderstood Paul on grace and justification.

Of course, Catholics are also perfectly capable of misunderstanding Scripture by being ignorant of what it would have meant to the original audience. One of the best examples of this arises in the application of Aristotelian philosophy to Scripture as if Matthew or Paul had been writing to Greek followers of Aristotle. Matthew’s Jewish audience certainly would not have understood scripture that way. As for pagan converts to Christianity, they would have been more likely to be influenced by the Stoics or the Epicureans than by Aristotle. And, in any case, Paul wrote from a Jewish point of view, not a pagan one.

Some of the problems that Protestants have with Catholic theology are not with our beliefs but with how those beliefs are explained. For example, the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation is an explanation of the Real Presence in terms of Aristotle’s distinction between “substance” and “accidents.” I have found that many Protestants believe in the Real Presence even though they might reject the particular way it is explained using Aristotle’s categories.

The solution, it seems to me, is for all of us to go back to the actual audiences for whom the scriptures were originally written, and to learn how those audiences would have understood Matthew, Paul, or any of the other writers of Scripture. So if Matthew would have understood “not in this life, nor in the next” to be a rabbinical idiom for “never”, then so be it. If Paul would have understood the fire in 1 Corinthians 3 to be the fire of the last judgment, then we must accept that too.

But then I would add this: Because the Catechism (para 1031) specifically references these passages in the context of Purgatory, we should be sure that our understanding of Purgatory is consistent with these passages. That is, (1) whatever Purgatory is about, it cannot be about the forgiveness of sins; and (2) whatever Purgatory is, it must be associated with the final judgment. Actually, I think we can say both of these things without contradicting anything actually taught by the Church about Purgatory…although it might contradict the beliefs of some Catholics who believe more than the Church has ever really taught.

 

[Marnica01]

I saw the brief article by William G. Most on the ETWN website where he says that 1 Corinthians 3:12-15 is not referring to Purgatory but to final judgment. But it is interesting to note that Anglican theologian N. T. Wright has this to say about the passage: “Some leading Roman Catholic theologians have recently…declared that the idea of single moment of judgment, in which all the remaining impurities are burned up is perhaps what the old doctrine of Purgatory ‘really meant’. If that had been said 500 years ago, then the Reformation might not have been necessary, because the Reformers too believed that death itself…finished the job of purifying the Christian from remaining sin. Paul’s imagery here can fit with that pretty well.” (Paul for Everyone: 1 Corinthians, p. 39)

There you have it…a major Protestant theologian favorably quoting Catholic theologians who see 1 Corinthians 3:12-15 as a reference to our final purification.

Can re-union be that far off?

 

[fcfahs]

What do you think about the Matt 5:25-26, should I leave that alone?

If we suppose that Matthew 5:25-26 is referring to purgatory, does that not also fly in the face of the Catholic doctrine on indulgences?

That is, verse 26 clearly says that "you shalt by no means come out thence, till you have paid the last farthing." emphasis mine**.] **And, yet, our church doctrine on indulgences is telling us that OTHERS (here on earth) can, through their works and prayers, pay those farthings FOR that indited soul (not only partially, but completely).

Also, if purgatory is a place where one’s soul must undergo a final purification process, to cleanse it of any residual attachment to wickedness, how can anything WE do (here on earth) serve to expedite that process? I see no indication of any such “helper out” option in these passages.

Besides, I’m inclined to think that a person (here on earth) who is sentence to (say) 90 days in jail for violent behavior would be be no less “violent of heart” if he were to be bailed out by one of his friends, after having served only a few days of his jail sentence.

Just my thoughts,
Frank