Is Purgatory in the Bible?

[sousley]

There is no purgatory.

Hi telement. I can see that you’re fairly new to this forum. In your last few posts, you seem to be having some difficulties with the Catholic faith. Your profile indicates that you are Catholic so I am somewhat confused. If you feel your profile is in error, might I suggest that you take the time to correct your religious status to clarify your position so that posters are able to give more appropriate answers to your questions.

 

[Razanir]

As I pointed out in my first post, even the Catholic Church agrees that the Scriptures it points to are only “indications”, not “proofs” of the doctrine. When I examine the Scriptures in question, I find the only way they can “indicate” Purgatory is if I ignore the context in which the Scriptures are found. I don’t see any reason why I should ignore context in order to see some doctrine that has not been shown clearly in Scripture. That is my basis for denying the doctrine (in relation to the topic).

Again, if we only believed things that are directly stated in Scripture, we’d be non-Trinitarians like the Jehovah’s Witnesses. You believe in the Trinity, right? Then you believe in things not explicitly stated. Purgatory is no different

On purgatory…if you died right now…do you think you are clean enough to make it to heaven?

Do you think you have purged all of your sinful nature to stand in the presence of God? Do you think you are clean enough to stand in the presence of God…knowing, as the Bible says…that there is no sin in heaven?

This is the main part. No one on Earth is clean enough right now to enter Heaven.

 

[Bodyandblood999]

QUOTE]

 

[Cachonga]

pablope:

By the way, the CC does not prove its doctrines from Scripture…for it was written and compiled for the Catholic Church…its teachings and doctrines are reflected in Scripture, for these where whole before any NT was ever written.

Not the topic of this thread.

Okay…so you decided for yourself…hence my question…are you really the authority to determine what is doctrine and not in relation to Scripture?

Not the topic of this thread.

So, do you think you understand Scripture better than Scott Hahn’s explanation of several Biblical indicators of purgatory? (catholiceducation.org/article…cs/ap0091.html)

Not the topic of this thread (but it appears you think Scott Hahn is an infallible interpreter of Scripture).

Do you think the Holy Spirit is guiding you differently and more to the truth than Scott Hahn is?

Not the topic of this thread (but it appears you think Scott Hahn is an infallible interpreter of Scripture).

And what context are you talking about? Context according to whom?

Finally, something related to the topic! As I already mentioned, the verses from Maccabbees tells of how Judas sent to Jerusalem to make a sin offering for those killed in battle, even though it was obvious that God killed them because of their idolatry (Jews should not be ignorant of the consequences of idolatry). The purpose of this was so these men could have a better resurrection (nothing about relieving temporal punishment). 1 Cor 3 speaks of church leaders having their works tested (I would challenge Darryl B to show which verse says anything about a “flaming sword”). Again, nothing of temporal punishment for sins. I do suggest you listen to the Purgatory debate between Tim Staples and James White, as well as the debate between Peter Stravinskas and James White (see my first post for links to these debates, or ask Catholic Answers if they can provide them - after all, isn’t Tim Staples a Catholic Answers apologist?).

Razanir:

Again, if we only believed things that are directly stated in Scripture, we’d be non-Trinitarians like the Jehovah’s Witnesses. You believe in the Trinity, right? Then you believe in things not explicitly stated. Purgatory is no different

Not on the topic of this thread (and I strongly disagree that the Trinity cannot be found clearly within the Scriptures, unlike the doctrine of Purgatory).

 

[Razanir]

Not the topic of this thread.

Not the topic of this thread.

Not the topic of this thread (but it appears you think Scott Hahn is an infallible interpreter of Scripture).

Not the topic of this thread (but it appears you think Scott Hahn is an infallible interpreter of Scripture).

Finally, something related to the topic! As I already mentioned, the verses from Maccabbees tells of how Judas sent to Jerusalem to make a sin offering for those killed in battle, even though it was obvious that God killed them because of their idolatry (Jews should not be ignorant of the consequences of idolatry). The purpose of this was so these men could have a better resurrection (nothing about relieving temporal punishment). 1 Cor 3 speaks of church leaders having their works tested (I would challenge Darryl B to show which verse says anything about a “flaming sword”). Again, nothing of temporal punishment for sins. I do suggest you listen to the Purgatory debate between Tim Staples and James White, as well as the debate between Peter Stravinskas and James White (see my first post for links to these debates, or ask Catholic Answers if they can provide them - after all, isn’t Tim Staples a Catholic Answers apologist?).

Not on the topic of this thread (and I strongly disagree that the Trinity cannot be found clearly within the Scriptures, unlike the doctrine of Purgatory).

This reply irritates me. You know that? All of these things that are “Not on the topic of this thread” most certainly are. You make the argument that if it is not explicitly stated in the Bible, it shouldn’t be a Christian belief. We are arguing that the Bible can and does imply things, such as the existence of Purgatory. And please, show me a verse in the Bible where it flat out says “God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are all God.”

 

[pablope]

*Okay…so you decided for yourself…hence my question…are you really the authority to determine what is doctrine and not in relation to Scripture? *

 

[pablope]

I am sorry…how do you know I do not understand justification?

I do…it is just that I understand it differently than you do…the CC has taught it for 2000 yrs…your understanding did not crop till till after 1521…after the protestant reformation.

And if indeed our deeds follow us…if we have unpleasant deeds…vestiges of sin, a taint of sin…how will that those unpleasant deeds get past the gate of heaven?

All of my sins were in the future when Christ “cancelled the handwriting of ordinances that were against us, having nailed it to the cross.” (Col.2)

You are providing verses in isolation of other verses…to make your theology work.

Christ will indeed forgive our future sins…when we commit them and if we confess and ask for their forgiveness.

He will not forgive them unless we ask for forgiveness.

Yet Paul can summarily proclaim in Romans 8:1 that “There is therefor now NO condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” None. Zip. Zero. In the Greek that is NADA. This is why Jesus says, for those who have ears to hear, “Verily, verily [sounds important] I tell you, whoever hears my word and BELIEVES him who sent me HAS eternal life and WILL NOT be judged but HAS crossed over from death to life.”-John 5:24 This is the kind of glorious grace that could cause a former slave trader to write “Amazin Grace,” or someone like Chris Tomlin to ignite the Christian world with songs of freedom and wonder! “It is FINISHED!” Paid in full. NO condemnation. Yet Jesus said FEW will find it, and many will say on the last day, “But Lord, we did miracles in your name, cast demons out in your name…” And He will say, “I NEVER knew you. Depart.” The good news is that He will never say that to his justified children!

What has these above have any relation to the topic of purgatory?

Again…here is my question to you:

And Rev 21 says…27 But nothing unclean shall enter it, nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

Do you agree there is no sin in heaven?

So let me repost my question:

If you were to die right now…can you be absolutely sure you are clean, you have no vestiges of sin in you that you will take with you to heaven? Keep in mind…as revelation says…your deeds follow you…so if you still have sin in you, have not purged youreslf completely of your sinful nature…how can you enter heaven, be in the presence of God with any taint of sin in you?

 

[Darryl_B]

I would challenge Darryl B to show which verse says anything about a “flaming sword”.

Genesis 3:24 And he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

 

[Cachonga]

Razanir:

This reply irritates me. You know that? All of these things that are “Not on the topic of this thread” most certainly are. You make the argument that if it is not explicitly stated in the Bible, it shouldn’t be a Christian belief. We are arguing that the Bible can and does imply things, such as the existence of Purgatory. And please, show me a verse in the Bible where it flat out says “God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are all God.”

It appears that we are looking at the topic differently. The topic is “Is Purgatory in the Bible?”. I have pointed out that even Catholics admit that the Scriptures pointed to are “indications” of the doctrine, not “proofs”. You claim that I “make the argument that if it is not explicitly stated in the Bible, it shouldn’t be a Christian belief.” Please tell me in which post I made such a claim. I do challenge the conclusions, and have given an example of how an “indication” could be used to come to an erroneous conclusion as a basis for the challenge.

You say we are “arguing that the Bible can and does imply things, such as the existence of Purgatory.”, but the topic is specifically on whether or not Purgatory is in the Bible. There is no mention in the title of it being implied or explicit. To bring in other things, such as the Trinity, is to go (in my opinion) beyond the topic. I will say that I have given Scriptural evidence for belief in the Trinity in the past (in a thread specifically on that topic), and was then told that, yes the Scriptures did show the Trinity, but I couldn’t have known it without the teaching of the Church.

 

[Cachonga]

Darryl B:

Genesis 3:24 And he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Let’s try this again. Since you mentioned the flaming sword in connection with 1 Cor 3:15, please show me where, in 1 Cor 3:15, is there any mention of a “flaming sword”. Considering the answer you already gave (and presuming you cannot show a “flaming sword” in 1 Cor 3:15), could you please explain how the flaming sword that guarded the way to the Tree of Life (which is no longer on Earth) is relevant to 1 Cor 3:15. If you don’t think it’s on topic, feel free to just say it’s not on topic.

 

[Cachonga]

pablope:

It is…and it is related to your claim there is no purgatory…so how about it…how did you come to the conclusion there is no purgatory? Are you the authority to determine what is doctrine and not in relation to Scripture?

I came to the conclusion there is no Purgatory because I do not find it in Scripture. As I pointed out, the “indications” the Church points to, in my opinion, are taken out of context (I have given examples of that already). The authority I acknowledge is not part of the topic of this thread, but it is obviously not the Catholic Church.

Where did I claim Scott Hahn is an infallible interpretet?

You didn’t say it directly, but it seems strange that you would ask if I “understand Scripture better than Scott Hahn’s explanation of several Biblical indicators of purgatory?” Why not point to the CCC or some official church document? BTW – I have looked over the link to Scott’s article (not overly impressed). I recommend James White, not because I think he’s infallible (I disagree with him on some things), but because he has done debates on the topic of Purgatory against Roman Catholic apologists (one of whom currently works with Catholic Answers). As far as being an infallible interpreter, while it’s off topic, I will say that I am very grateful that nowhere in Scripture are we told that we need to understand anything infallibly (certainly the Jews didn’t understand the Scriptures infallibly, yet Jesus held them accountable for what was in them, right?).

What do you mean better resurrection? There is only one resurrection…not several.

If they need a better resurrection…then they are not in hell…for once in hell, one cannot get out…so where are those soldiers, if not in hell?

And a better resurrection to where? Where were the soldiers in the first place? Why would they need a better resurrection…and isn’t this the purpose of purgatory? To be cleansed to that one can enter heaven?

My mistake. I can’t find the version that was translated “better resurrection” (I never claimed to be infallible). However, as I had mentioned previously (post #14 of this thread),

Cachonga:

I have also heard a priest (Peter Stravinskas in the Purgatory debate with James White) mention that whether the sin offering was efficacious or not was “neither here nor there”. I disagree. If the offering is not efficacious, then how is it not a tradition of men? If it is efficacious, then why didn’t God mention it when He gave the Law to Moses (just look at all the details that were given about all kinds of offerings). Also, there were some sins that could not be taken care of by a sin offering (like adultery, murder, witchcraft and idolatry).

pablope:

Can you point to a verse in 1cor 3 that says it applies specifically to church leaders only?

1 Cor 1-4, “And I, brethren, could not speak to you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal. As unto little ones in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not meat; for you were not able as yet. But neither indeed are you now able; for you are yet carnal. For, whereas there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal, and walk according to man? For while one saith, I indeed am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollo; are you not men? What then is Apollo, and what is Paul?” (DRA) Notice how Paul rebukes the Corintians for being carnal instead of spiritual.

1 Cor 3:5-9, “The ministers of him whom you have believed; and to every one as the Lord hath given. I have planted, Apollo watered, but God gave the increase. Therefore, neither he that planteth is any thing, nor he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth, and he that watereth, ate one. And every man shall receive his own reward, according to his own labour. For we are God’s coadjutors: you are God’s husbandry; you are God’s building.” (DRA) Here Paul describes what he (and other leaders) have been doing with the Church (one planted, another watered, etc…). Paul makes a distinction between the leaders and laity in verse 9 (leaders are coadjutors, laity are God’s husbandry).

<continued…>

 

[Cachonga]

1 Cor 3:10-13 , “According to the grace of God that is given to me, as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation; and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus. Now if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble: Every man’s work shall be manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work, of what sort it is.” (DRA) Who builds on the foundation? The workers. What sort of work did they do? Gold, silver, wood, hay, stubble. What is tried in the fire? Works (not the workers, but their works). Verse 14 says, “If any man’s work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.” (DRA) Someone whose works survive the fire will receive a reward. Verse 15 says, “If any man’s work burn, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.” (DRA) If someone’s works are burned up, he will still be saved, but there will be no reward. So, what reward does one get from Purgatory (keep in mind that everyone will have their works tested by fire, including Peter, Paul and Mary)?

Well…again…can you explain why I should listen to Jame White? Why not Scott Hahn?

What makes White’s interpretations more authoritative than Hahn? Why did you pick White over Hahn?

Forget interpretation. Scott Hahn is presenting his opinions (as is James White). The difference is, James White is engaged in actual debate with Roman Catholic apologists, complete with Q&A between the 2 debaters (so you can see what kind of questions a Catholic apologist would ask, and how he would answer questions from a Protestant).

 

[Darryl_B]

Let’s try this again. Since you mentioned the flaming sword in connection with 1 Cor 3:15, please show me where, in 1 Cor 3:15, is there any mention of a “flaming sword”. Considering the answer you already gave (and presuming you cannot show a “flaming sword” in 1 Cor 3:15), could you please explain how the flaming sword that guarded the way to the Tree of Life (which is no longer on Earth) is relevant to 1 Cor 3:15. If you don’t think it’s on topic, feel free to just say it’s not on topic.

Why would I want to try this again. You asked me to show a passage that talks about a flaming sword I did that. You cannot eat of the tree of life no matter where it is without getting past the flaming sword. You cannot get into heaven without passing through a fire which purifies.

You can choose to see the comparison, or you can choose not to. I choose to.

 

[sennincatholic]

I Cor 3 is not talking at all about someone being burned. He is using a metaphor about what we build with our life and service, and about rewards, not punishment. What we “build” in this life will be examined just like gold is examined with fire. The things that born again people have done through faith in Christ will produce eternal reward. All the rest will be burned up, but God’s child, of course, will be save. Notice it doesn’t say they will be saved THROUGH fire, but “AS ONE”…
The Greek is better represented in the New American Standard Bible: “If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so AS through fire.”

SOLA SCRIPTURA FANATICS!Give us a break!
Who gives you the authority to choose what is metaphor or not in scripture?How will the illetrate christian figure out metaphor?Why do you think the council of Jerusalem took place?(ACTS 15).All of the apostles had scripture within their reach but why couldn’t each of them come to thesame conclusion on circumscision for the gentiles by intepreting the scriptures individually.It is only when they met as a council that they could conclude the matter.The Church says there is purgatory…so i believe.period!

 

[Cachonga]

Darryl B:

Why would I want to try this again. You asked me to show a passage that talks about a flaming sword I did that. You cannot eat of the tree of life no matter where it is without getting past the flaming sword. You cannot get into heaven without passing through a fire which purifies.

You can choose to see the comparison, or you can choose not to. I choose to.

Just one more question - is this connection of the flaming sword with the fires of testing an official teaching of the Church, or is it just your own, fallible, opinion? If it’s a Church teaching, please provide the documentation for this.

 

[pablope]

I came to the conclusion there is no Purgatory because I do not find it in Scripture. As I pointed out, the “indications” the Church points to, in my opinion, are taken out of context (I have given examples of that already).

Okay…out of context…according to your interpretation. So why is your interpretation correct over that of the Catholic Church?

That is why I asked…do you have more wisdom, better guidance to the meaning than the CC?

You didn’t say it directly, but it seems strange that you would ask if I “understand Scripture better than Scott Hahn’s explanation of several Biblical indicators of purgatory?” Why not point to the CCC or some official church document?

 

[Bodyandblood999]

My friend, I’m amazed. Of course I am clean enough to stand in his presence! That is what happened the moment Christ saved me and washed me. I still sin, but my standing before God this very moment is as righteous as that of Christ, and that is true for every born again person. That is exactly what justification is all about, and is why Paul can say, “There is therefor NO condemnation (that means “NO condemnation” in the Greek) for those whi=o are in Christ Jesus. Until you see that, you will be miserable under the Law (if you are honest about your sins). Notice what Paul says about all the believers in Colossae: “giving thanks to the Father, who HAS QUALIFIED you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light.”(Colossians 1:12 ESV) Paul even says in Romans 7:17 that “it is no longer I who sins, but sin that dwells in me.” Yet he had just said he keeps struggling with sin. Chew on that one for a while. He says in Romans 8 that we have not received a Spirit of fear again, but one of ADOPTION, by which we cry out, Abba Father.” If I was worried about my sins casting me out of heaven, I would be in fear all the time, rather than enjoying my adoption by the God who died for me! And guess what!? This causes me to be both motivated and empowered to live a more holy life.

 

[Cachonga]

pablope:

Okay…out of context…according to your interpretation. So why is your interpretation correct over that of the Catholic Church?

That is why I asked…do you have more wisdom, better guidance to the meaning than the CC?

It’s obvious that I consider my interpretation as adequate before God. I don’t see how I arrive at this conclusion to be part of the topic. I will simply say that I passed reading comprehension in school.

I have assumed you had looked at the CCC. Scott Hahn’s writing is further expounding more on Purgatory.

I do look at the CCC when I need to, but generally, unless I’m directed to specific paragraphs, I will not look at it. Since the topic (as I understand it) is limited to the Scriptures (“Is Purgatory in the Bible?”), I saw no need to look at the CCC (especially since I am aware of the more common Scriptures pointed to).

Well, at least you looked and thank you…and if you still did not agree…then I will leave that to the HS to guide you further.

Exactly. How can I respond to something if I don’t examine references, citations, etc… that are being used by the other side?

We all use “interpretative traditions”…you just chose a different path. If you had not come across this…I hope you have time to read it…which speaks of this interpretative traditions…calledtocommunion.com/200…clesial-deism/

This is true, we all use interpretive traditions, and I have no problem admitting mine could be fallible (that’s why I study and engage in these types of discussions), While it’s not the topic, I am curious as to how you know that your “interpretation” of the infallible teachings of the Church are also infallible. For example, can you (or anyone else) infallibly interpret the dogmatic declaration of Mary’s perpetual virginity? Of course, as I’ve said, this is off topic, so please don’t answer on this thread (feel free to start a new thread and I might join in). I believe it’s something to think about.

 

[Razanir]

My friend, I’m amazed. Of course I am clean enough to stand in his presence! That is what happened the moment Christ saved me and washed me. I still sin, but my standing before God this very moment is as righteous as that of Christ, and that is true for every born again person. That is exactly what justification is all about, and is why Paul can say, “There is therefor NO condemnation (that means “NO condemnation” in the Greek) for those whi=o are in Christ Jesus. Until you see that, you will be miserable under the Law (if you are honest about your sins). Notice what Paul says about all the believers in Colossae: “giving thanks to the Father, who HAS QUALIFIED you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light.”(Colossians 1:12 ESV) Paul even says in Romans 7:17 that “it is no longer I who sins, but sin that dwells in me.” Yet he had just said he keeps struggling with sin. Chew on that one for a while. He says in Romans 8 that we have not received a Spirit of fear again, but one of ADOPTION, by which we cry out, Abba Father.” If I was worried about my sins casting me out of heaven, I would be in fear all the time, rather than enjoying my adoption by the God who died for me! And guess what!? This causes me to be both motivated and empowered to live a more holy life.

First off, can you please clean up your quotes? I can never tell who’s quoting whom, and it gets even more confusing when I quote your posts.

That said, if I didn’t still have my can of soda at my mouth, I’d probably be cleaning it off my laptop screen right now. I don’t care if your sins have been forgiven, do you really think that after sinning for about 70 years (average human life span) that you’d still be clean enough to be with God? It’d be like falling in the mud a few (or a lot of) times walking home and brushing it off each time. Sure you’re much cleaner than before, but you’re still tracking mud.

Corinthians– He has qualified you, yes. That’s like getting accepted into college. You still need to choose to go there.

And in response to your “spirit of fear” comment. Here’s an issue that I see with this type of logic. Oh, that guy’s a murderer. But hey, he accepted Jesus. Therefore all his sins are immediately forgiven. AND he only did it the one time so he’s probably fine. Sins DO cast you out of Heaven (Or more accurately, prevent you from getting in). But God, in His infinite mercy, is always willing to forgive you if we want to be forgiven. That’s the key bit, though. We have to want to be forgiven.

 

[Darryl_B]

Just one more question - is this connection of the flaming sword with the fires of testing an official teaching of the Church, or is it just your own, fallible, opinion? If it’s a Church teaching, please provide the documentation for this.

I find that quite ironic since you are the one denying Church teaching and then try to reinterpret 1 Cor 3 in a means which suits your own fallible opinion? Really? Do you feel comfortable with that logic?

I am not interpeting anything, I am merely pointing out the connection. I think the Church does not have an official statement on every single verse in the Bible. Do you?