Does purgatory really exist?

[06convert]

I copied the above from one of the websites, I agree that it is through repentance that you recieve grace. But no-one is ever worthy of heaven, thus the point of Christ dying. Plus, as the Old Testament clearly illustrates by way of sacrifice that it is through blood that one is cleansed. Therefore…why is the blood of Christ not good enough, and a further means of purification/punishment is needed,

Heaven wasn’t an option before Christ. We couldn’t of been worthy of something we couldn’t achieve. Christ died to open the gates of heaven, not make us worthy. Through his blood we are free from the slavery of sin. In fact during mass, venial sins can go away. However, the scars don’t go away. Sin is like a disease like a cancer, confession is like surgery to get rid of the cancer. Even though the cancer is gone, you still have a scar from the surgery. This scar leaves us imperfect, that old sin, although forgiven, is still affecting us. So we must be purified by fire:

1 Corinthians 3 10-15:

According to the grace of God which was given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder I laid a foundation; and another buildeth thereon. But let each man take heed how he buildeth thereon. For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. But if any man buildeth on the foundation gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, stubble; each man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it is revealed in fire;** and the fire itself shall prove each man’s work of what sort it is.** If any man’s work shall abide which he built thereon, he shall receive a reward. **If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as through fire. **

I am sorry to be perdantic…but I am writing this for my dissertation, and I have spoken to catholic priests in person and none have given me an authoritive reason why the blood of christ doesn;t cover all sins. Because if he covers all sins…it is sin that makes someone guilty…

Christ’s death opened the gates of Heaven. He freed us from “original sin”. He died so that we can have eternal life. He didn’t die so that we could do whatever we want without consequence. As a kid if you did something wrong did you get forgiven before you said you were sorry? God will always forgive us and is waiting to forgive us, all we have to do is ask for it.

Pillar of Fire Pillar of Truth:

Some people promote an especially attractive idea: All true Christians, regardless of how they live, have an absolute assurance of salvation, once they accept Jesus into their hearts as “their personal Lord and Savior.” The problem is that this belief is contrary to the Bible and constant Christian teaching.

Keep in mind what Paul told the Christians of his day: “If we have died with him [in baptism; see Rom. 6:3–4] we shall also live with him; if we persevere we shall also reign with him” (2 Tim. 2:11–12).

If we do not persevere, we shall not reign with him. In other words, Christians can forfeit heaven (CCC 1861).

The Bible makes it clear that Christians have a moral assurance of salvation (God will be true to his word and will grant salvation to those who have faith in Christ and are obedient to him [1 John 3:19–24]), but the Bible does not teach that Christians have a guarantee of heaven. There can be no absolute assurance of salvation. Writing to Christians, Paul said, “See, then, the kindness and severity of God: severity toward those who fell, but God’s kindness to you, provided you remain in his kindness, otherwise you too will be cut off” (Rom. 11:22–23; Matt. 18:21–35, 1 Cor. 15:1–2, 2 Pet. 2:20–21).

Note that Paul includes an important condition: “provided you remain in his kindness.” He is saying that Christians can lose their salvation by throwing it away. He warns, “Whoever thinks he is standing secure should take care not to fall” (1 Cor. 10:11–12).

If you are Catholic and someone asks you if you have been “saved,” you should say, “I am redeemed by the blood of Christ, I trust in him alone for my salvation, and, as the Bible teaches, I am ‘working out my salvation in fear and trembling’ (Phil. 2:12), knowing that it is God’s gift of grace that is working in me.”

 

[mmmcounts]

Your confusion comes from correctly stating that we must be interiorly changed/transformed/perfected in a process of sanctification but then also thinking that it’s all done right now/my sins are forgiven/there’s nothing more to be done.

Sanctification is one thing. Salvation is another. I think you’re confused.

And if you think that this perfection doesn’t imply something very different from what we are now-a change so complete as to cause us to be totally sold out to God, loving Him with our whole hearts, souls, minds, and strength and our neighbors as ourselves, then you’re limiting Gods’ vision for us.

I haven’t said anything to downplay sanctification. Or God in general. This is a bit of a sidebar.

But it sounds like you might agree with that last paragraph-that our sins must not be merely non-imputed but truly done away with prior to heaven-that our wills must be one with His.

I would agree with the statement that if we confess our sins, He is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. This has happened for me. I am forgiven and cleansed. I am saved, and, as the Bible says, a new creation. Behold, the old has gone and the new has come! Sanctification is ongoing, but the new creation is here right now, and this new creation is forgiven and cleansed right now. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, so you can say whatever you want about that.

If so, then our only dispute lies in how God accomplishes this and Catholics maintain that the refining process to achieve His ends may need to extend past death.

If you don’t mind, it sounds to me like Catholic doctrine equates progressive sanctification with progressive salvation. And even after you die, you’re still not completely saved yet. Read Hebrews 7:24-27. It’s a good little summary of how salvation works under the New Covenant. Here’s some key phrases: "Therefore He is able to save completely those who come to God through Him…Unlike the other high priests, He does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself…the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.

One of the fundamentals in understanding salvation is that it’s not because of who we are or of what we’ve done. It is truly because of Jesus Christ, what He did for us, and who He is in us. We don’t deserve to enter heaven, but because Christ propitiates our sins and stands as our intercessor, we stand forgiven and our debt of sin is paid- by Jesus and no one else- in full. Think of the intercessor image in this way: Suppose God was judging us to determine if we should enter heaven. We would not have a chance, but with Jesus as our intercessor, God looks to His Son instead of us to determine whether we can enter or not. 2 Corinthians 5:17-21 is good to read. I’ve been reconciled to God through Christ, and He does not count my sins against me (yes, it says that). God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, that in Him we might become the righteousness of God. So you see, when I die, I will go to heaven because I have become the righteousness of God. It’s not because of my sinlessness, but because of Jesus’ sinlessness. He has reconciled me to God (this doesn’t happen later, I have already been reconciled), and as a result my sins are not counted against me. Again, just to clarify, in Him I have become the righteousness of God. That’s the deal.

If we’ve already demonstrated the love we’ve gained for Him with the help of His grace but we’re still attached to any ungodly things-if there’s anything left which could stand in the way of us and Him, vying for our attention, then we’re not quite where He wants us-we can’t yet see or experience Him until we’ve exhausted every notion remaining within that anything not Him is worthy of any of our devotion.

It’s not your job to take care of your own sin. It’s not your job to “exhaust every notion remaining within.” Jesus reconciles you to God, and if you’ve believed in Him, He’s done that. You have become the righteousness of God in Him. How could the righteousness of God be judged as anything less than heaven-worthy?

And, being the merciful God that He is, He’s provided a “place” for this final perfecting of our wills and of our love. When you get to heaven you’ll have to ask Him why He did it that way.

When I get to heaven, I’ll be thanking Him for Jesus and the reconciliation that He provides. When you’re asking confused questions about why purgatory didn’t happen, maybe Jesus will explain to you- again- the nature of His forgiveness.

some Protestants I’ve known who believe in OSAS/the non-imputation of sin and then take this to mean they can pretty much sin without hell to pay.

After reading Romans 6, you might be led to conclude that these people are not new creations in Christ. If they were…well, there’s a dual reality of being both forgiven and free. It doesn’t sound like these kinds of people are free- and they don’t even want to be free.

 

[steve_b]

This guy seems really confused about how the Apocryphal books were identified as such. That wasn’t a result of “picking and choosing.” It’s true that Luther wanted to get rid of a few other books just because they didn’t sit well with him, including a lot that started with J, it seems like. However, he didn’t get away with throwing out any books based on his discomfort with them, and the damage done to the Lutheran Bible is minimal.

You are the one who is confused.

Look again at your previous comments that were reformatted
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4668937&postcount=350

You have not addressed the fact that you said

• apostolic tradition is not Holy and was NOT inspired by the Holy Spirit.
• You said and I quote,
• I believe the apostles were Christians who loved God and had the Comforter with them to guide them like all Christians do, but the canon was closed and their writings were not inspired in the same way that the Bible was. don’t keep telling me it has the same authority as the Word of God, because it does not

you are unfamiliar with the canon and when and how it was written, selected, and closed

• You finish by saying
• *God is the only absolutely authoritative source, and everything else is secondary and subordinate *

So how is it 7 books were removed out of your Protestant bible?

As I said before, and I will say again, based on what you’ve said up to this point, you don’t know

• the difference between (T)radition and (t)radition
• you don’t know how we got the bible

m:

I have the ESV, which stands for Extra Special Version. That’s because it’s the divinely inspired translation. (Kidding, only kidding).

I’m glad you said that because at this point I was beginning to take you seriously
m:

There is something unique about the Apocryphal books, though, and Rev. Graham misses it. Do you know what it is? I’ll give you a hint. It has something to do with his description of the Old Testament books that would be accurate if it did not include the Apocrypha, but it is not accurate if it does include the Apocrypha.

sheesh!!!

You don’t know how we got the bible but you know what books are inspired and what ones aren’t!!! Bishop Graham was trying to synthesize in a straight forward easy way alot of history. But here’s a hint for YOU. The Catholic Church was there in the first century you weren’t. The Catholic Church received the deposit of faith from Jesus and the apostles directly.
m:

Here’s one more hint: It’s something that makes these books different from all the other ones included in the Septuagint. You see, the main defense of Catholics for including these books with the rest of them is to pretend that they are exactly the same as all the others (lie number one) and hope that Protestants don’t figure out what’s different. (Can you?)

The second defense is to present the Protestant rationale as one of “picking and choosing” based on their whims, on weak/unspecified rationale, or on nothing at all. This is a straw man, and I’m going to call itlie number two.

Is this an attempt to difuse attention away from answering your errors from your previous post?
m:

The argumentative form is one of “How dare you chuck seven books just because they don’t fit with your personal beliefs!” If you were ever to exclaim such a thing, step one would be for you to immediately retract it and apologize. Step two would be to properly understand the rationale for calling these books apocryphal and stop pretending they’re no different from the rest of the Old Testament. Now let’s see if you can come up with the appropriate answers. Just so it’s easier for you to quote me:

I’ve already quoted you. You don’t know how you even got the bible you call the bible.
m:

There is something unique about the Apocryphal books, though, and Rev. Graham misses it. Do you know what it is? I’ll give you a hint. It has something to do with his description of the Old Testament books that would be accurate if it did not include the Apocrypha,

Don’t take offense, but how old are you?
m:

but it is not accurate if it does include the Apocrypha. Here’s one more hint: It’s something that makes these books different from all the other ones included in the Septuagint.

Well, actually, there’s two things that make them different from all the other books in the Septuagint. But the first one is basically the same thing as the answer to the first question. See if you can get them both.

Look friend,

I don’t know if this is your first rodeo, but this has not been a good ride for you. This is not the place to play guessing games.

Now the topic is purgatory and does it really exist. I suggest we don’t get derailed and stay on topic

 

[mmmcounts]

Now the topic is purgatory and does it really exist. I suggest we don’t get derailed and stay on topic.

Answer my question first. You haven’t even made an attempt. You just asked it right back. I told you to come up with the answer and you haven’t done it yet.

So how is it 7 books were removed out of your Protestant bible?

I’ve given you several hints. Look back at them if you like. Answer this question. What make the Apocryphal books different from all the other books in the Septuagint?

 

[paul_c]

mmmcount:
you say:

If you don’t mind, it sounds to me like Catholic doctrine equates progressive sanctification with progressive salvation. And even after you die, you’re still not completely saved yet.

In Catholic Theology, you are completely saved when you enter Purgatory, because at that point, you are guaranteed to Go to Heaven after you have been properly purified. Until you die and are judged, you will not know whether you are saved or not.

Your theology is completely devoid of any personal responsibility. You say:

One of the fundamentals in understanding salvation is that it’s not because of who we are or of what we’ve done

and

It’s not your job to take care of your own sin.

. The fact is, Jesus does hold us responsible for our actions. Let’s just spend a few lines going through the actual Gospel to prove the point:

Matt 7: 21-27:

Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but **only the one who does the will **of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?’ Then I will declare to them solemnly, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you evildoers.’

“Everyone who listens to these words of mine and **acts on them will be like a wise man who built his house on rock.
The rain fell, the floods came, and the winds blew and buffeted the house. But it did not collapse; it had been set solidly on rock.
And everyone who listens to these words of mine but does not act **on them will be like a fool who built his house on sand. The rain fell, the floods came, and the winds blew and buffeted the house. And it collapsed and was completely ruined.”

matthew 19:16-19:

Now someone approached him and said, “Teacher, what good must I do to gain eternal life?” He answered him, “Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good. **If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” ** He asked him, “Which ones?” And Jesus replied, " ‘You shall not kill; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; honor your father and your mother’; and ‘you shall love your neighbor as yourself.’"

Matthew 25: 31-46:

When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. **For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’ ** Then the righteous will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’ And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’ Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

You should be able to readily note from these sayings of Jesus that works and the personal responsibility for doing them is required for salvation. This is also rendered extremely clear by St. James, who says in chapter 2 of his epistle " Faith without works is dead" and St. Paul who says in 1Corinthinians 13, " If I have Faith to move mountains and do not have love, I am nothing"

Heed also the words of St. Peter in his second epistle , chapter 3:

And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures. Therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, be on your guard not to be led into the error of the unprincipled and to fall from your own stability.

Note, two things in this quote. 1) the reference to misinterpreting Paul and 2) the fact that your actions can lead to your own distruction.

 

[tm30]

Liberal? LOL! It is a patristic interpretation. Read the parable in context.

Your analogy to the Gospel of John is strange. Is this Gospel a parable? Do we not know who is the beloved of Christ?

The point was to illustrate that your interpretation of the parable is speculative at best, even if there are patristic examples. Nowhere does it say everything uttered in the patristic age was correct - Origen springs to mind.

 

[tm30]

Death is eternal separation from God. I won’t experience that. Will you experience the wages of sin? Or has Jesus propitiated that debt?

No, death is when your heart stops beating. That’s the price of Adam’s sin. Physical death.

The price of eternal separation comes with rejection of the Gospel. Since no sin was redeemable until the Sacrifice, are you intimating that every man, woman, and child up until that point was condemened to the eternal fire?

I’m going to experience the wages of sin because, according to Matthew 18:26 -

26 But that servant falling down, besought him, saying: Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. 27 And the lord of that servant being moved with pity, let him go and forgave him the debt. 28 But when that servant was gone out, he found one of his fellow servants that owed him an hundred pence: and laying hold of him, throttled him, saying: Pay what thou owest. 29 And his fellow servant falling down, besought him, saying: Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. 30 And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he paid the debt.

This is a nice little two-for-one passage. On the one hand, the Lord tells us that 1) Once-saved-always-saved is a blatant falsehood, and 2) We will be called to account until the last penny is paid.

Comments?

 

[tm30]

lol The ways of Jesus do not include purgatory. That’s where your faulty logic got you. Why don’t you stop trying to cram things in there between death and life everlasting?

Laughter is a defensive mechanism in debate. You laugh because you believe it serves to cosmetically discount the other person’s argument. In short, it’s a sign of weakness.

If you refer to the passage from Matthew I posted above this, you will see that the ways of Jesus indeed include purgatory.

On the other hand, Jesus says nothing about abortion at all, anywhere in the Gospel. Do you believe defense of the unborn is in “the way of Jesus”? By your method of exegesis, the answer is “no”.

 

[Mickey]

Nowhere does it say everything uttered in the patristic age was correct - Origen springs to mind.

Origen ended as a heretic. Having said that, your Church (and mine) teaches that we interpret Scripture through Tradition and the Holy Fathers. The Fathers are not infallible, but I will abide by the interpretaions of holy saints and fathers such as John Chrysostom, Romanos the Melodist, Jerome, and Nicholai of Ochrid—before I abide by the opinions of tm30.

No offense.

 

[tm30]

Sorry we Catholic’s do not believe in death. Jesus died on the cross to take away death. Death is not eternal separation from God Hell is. If you believe in Jesus Christ you then believe that he took away death. It tells you in the bible. Death has nothing over us. Thanks to Jesus Christ. He beat death.

He didn’t take away death - He took away the sting of death.

The final death (at the General Judgment) is what He has taken away from those who accept his mercy.

If we don’t believe in death, then we can’t believe in the Resurrection. Jesus showed that death can be conquered - and will - for each of us who believe. But everyone still experiences death of the body.

 

[Mickey]

You laugh because you believe it serves to cosmetically discount the other person’s argument. In short, it’s a sign of weakness.

Or maybe he just likes to laugh.

 

[Mickey]

Jesus showed that death can be conquered

By death, He trampled death.

 

[tm30]

Origen ended as a heretic. Having said that, your Church (and mine) teaches that we interpret Scripture through Tradition and the Holy Fathers. The Fathers are not infallible, but I will abide by the interpretaions of holy saints and fathers such as John Chrysostom, Romanos the Melodist, Jerome, and Nicholai of Ochrid—before I abide by the opinions of tm30.

No offense.

No offense taken. As you said, the Fathers are not infallible. But the Church is. And since there is no official interpretation, we can freely disagree with the Church Fathers on this.

 

[tm30]

By death, He trampled death.

Amen.

 

[Mickey]

we can freely disagree with the Church Fathers on this.

I suppose some within your own Tradition might say that you are just a half step removed from protestantism with that comment.

 

[fhansen]

Sanctification is one thing. Salvation is another. I think you’re confused.

If you don’t mind, it sounds to me like Catholic doctrine equates progressive sanctification with progressive salvation.

All sanctification is progressive and in that sense, yes, salvation or justification is a process in Catholic theology since we believe one must be fully sanctified/justified in order to enter heaven rather than being partially sanctified for some reason and then allowed into heaven anyway, i.e. we believe God really intends to “complete the good work in us” as you quoted in a previous post.

One of the fundamentals in understanding salvation is that it’s not because of who we are or of what we’ve done. It is truly because of Jesus Christ, what He did for us, and who He is in us.

It’s because of His sinlessness that we may become sinless, too, and God will be satisfied with nothing less for us. The whole drama of the fall together with the separation from God that we experience in this world and then mans’ redemption isn’t just so God can punish us and then magically save us from our punishment but rather to effect a change in us-the “our part” of our salvation -where we come to recognize our absolute need for and dependency on Him for ourselves -we come to agree with Him as to this reality-and then become cooperators in His plan of salvation. He wants to reverse, within each of us, the wrong choice made by Adam and Eve-He’s working on changing our wills rather than simply overriding them. He wants perfection/sinlessness- rather than merely non-imputed sinfulness- in heaven.

The reconciliation won by Jesus from our side is: the change in mans’ heart as he witnesses the righteous One laying down his life for the unrighteous- forgiving our sins rather than holding them against us-and recognizing that he’d had a distorted view of God all along and so begins a new life of trust in and love for Him-and from Gods’ side is: the graces that He pores forth as a result of this metanoia that will result in a completed work of transformation with our cooperation. As St Augustine said:
**He who created us without our help will not save us without our consent. **

Now if it’s something God is doing in us, why exactly do you think God can’t be faithful to “complete the good work in us” before death? It is a process- God is the one who begins the good work, and He will be faithful to complete it.

It seems to me that some holding to Reformed theology often want it both ways-for the work to be completed but for it not to need completion if the job doesn’t happen to be finished prior to heaven.

We don’t deserve to enter heaven, but because Christ propitiates our sins and stands as our intercessor, we stand forgiven and our debt of sin is paid- by Jesus and no one else- in full.

Would Adam & Eve have been worthy of heaven had they not sinned? Gods’ purpose is to mold us into beings worthy of heaven-who else would you think He wants to populate the place with?

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 1Cor :6-9-10

And Jesus tells us we can’t even have such things in our hearts, let alone commit them.

 

[steve_b]

Answer my question first.

You haven’t even made an attempt. You just asked it right back. I told you to come up with the answer and you haven’t done it yet.

I’ve given you several hints. Look back at them if you like. Answer this question. What make the Apocryphal books different from all the other books in the Septuagint?

Those 7 books are canonical. They are NOT apocryphal, they are scripture, inspired from God. That’s all one needs to know.

Since you don’t know

• where you got the bible,
• and you don’t know the difference between (T)radition and (t)radition
  forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4671623&postcount=360

My suggestion to you is don’t give ANYBODY hints on ANYTHING. If you have something to say, then say it and be willing to defend it. You’ve made huge errors in what you’ve said so far and won’t defend any of it when asked.

As for the topic of this thread, it’s purgatory.

 

[rinnie]

He didn’t take away death - He took away the sting of death.

The final death (at the General Judgment) is what He has taken away from those who accept his mercy.

If we don’t believe in death, then we can’t believe in the Resurrection. Jesus showed that death can be conquered - and will - for each of us who believe. But everyone still experiences death of the body.

We do not care of the death of the body. It is the soul that we worry about. Before Jesus there was only death. Now because of Jesus there is true Life. We believe that the Eucharist is the bread of life. Jesus did not take away the sting of death. I believe in Jesus Christ, and those who believe in him will never die, they will have eternal life.

 

[mmmcounts]

Those 7 books are canonical. They are NOT apocryphal, they are scripture, inspired from God. That’s all one needs to know.

Well, you’re about to learn something else. In the source you gave me, it talked about the Old Testament and said it was written in Hebrew. This is only true if you exclude the apocryphal books, because 6 of the 7 were written in Greek and the other was written in Latin. Jews did not ever call them sacred scriptures. Do you understand that? Ever. They existed, but they were not included as the Word of God. So now you know what makes those 7 books different from the Septuagint. The true Old Testament books were translated from Hebrew to Greek, while the apocryphal books were originally written in Greek (except the one that was in Latin), they had never been included as true Scripture before, and they were added in when they shouldn’t have been. So now that you know this, you can never again say the apocryphal books are just the same as all the other ones, and

That’s all one needs to know.

You can also never again say silly things like “You Protestants just ripped those books out because you didn’t like them.” You’ve failed miserably in your task of finding out what makes the 7 apocryphal books different from the true OT, and you’ve shown yourself to be ignorant of the reasons for excluding them. Now you know the facts, and your best bet is to deal with them instead of just continuing to ignore them.

 

[mmmcounts]

In Catholic Theology

(Edited)

Your theology is completely devoid of any personal responsibility.

There is responsibility, but it does not include the impossible and illogical burden of earning our salvation through good works. It’s good to do good works and true faith is always accompanied by good works, but these works do not earn salvation. It is by grace you have been saved through faith, not of yourselves, it is a gift. Not of works, lest any man should boast. So what? It’s a gift. I can’t help it. It’s the Bible. Got a problem with it?

You should be able to readily note from these sayings of Jesus that works and the personal responsibility for doing them is required for salvation.

You have it backwards. From those who receive salvation, works are required. Salvation through faith leads to works if that faith is true faith. Works do not lead to salvation, they are a result of it.

Ok, you gave me a lot of passages to deal with. Matthew 7: Are you missing the point that people will do mighty deeds, but that’s not what salvation is about? The second part of that one is about responding to the message of the Gospel. It’s not about doing good works.

Matthew 19. You intentionally left off the end of that story. You know what Jesus’ point was. And it didn’t have anything to do with keeping the rules well enough. It was about true faith in Jesus.

Matthew 25. We conclude that those who belong to Jesus will care about the things God cares about, and the people focused on here are “the least of these.” Again, you have it backwards. The people who belong to Jesus do the things of God and the ones who don’t belong to Jesus do not. I’m trying to connect this to purgatory somehow, but I can’t figure out how. Let’s just move on.

You should be able to readily note from these sayings of Jesus that works and the personal responsibility for doing them is required for salvation.

Wrong. Backwards again. Once we receive salvation, the power of Christ compels us to do the things of God. True faith always leads to a change in someone’s life. Read James. This is the work of God in someone’s life, not the work of a person earning salvation. If you have been crucified with Christ, you no longer live. Jesus Christ lives in you, and the change in your life is evidence of His work. Can you see where you’ve gotten this wrong? The good works that happen after salvation are of God, not of us. God does not require a self-impelled change in our lives so that we can prove to Him that our faith is real. Rather, if our faith is real, God changes our lives. And it shows.

In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures. Therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, be on your guard not to be led into the error of the unprincipled and to fall from your own stability.

Note, two things in this quote. 1) the reference to misinterpreting Paul and 2) the fact that your actions can lead to your own destruction.

Oh, now that’s sloppy. People who know Jesus should be on their guard because such errors can cause God’s children to…what does that say? Fall from their stability or steadfastness. Oh, but you said they’d fall to their destruction. Looks like you’re saying one thing and the Bible’s saying another. If people fall from their stability/steadfastness, that’s bad. But it’s not the same thing as losing your salvation. Note that you have misinterpreted Peter. You said he was telling us believers could lose their salvation if such and such happened. But it actually says something other than that. Unbelievers who can never understand the Bible will fall to destruction. Believers who are led into error fall from stability. When you try and tell me that 2 Peter 3:17 says a believers’ actions (in this case, properly understanding the Bible) will lead to that believer’s destruction (that is, eternal damnation), that is a misinterpretation of the Bible. And you sound like an Arminian.

2 Peter 3:16 talks about unbelievers and what happens to them if they don’t understand the Bible’s message of salvation. 2 Peter 3:17 does not talk about believers’ actions leading to their destruction" as you say. It does talk about believers falling from stability, but that is not destruction.