Matthew 12:31-32, how does this point to purgatory!?

[mich2]

And this place they specifically defined as Gehenna. This was not Purgatory.

It was their broken understanding of Hell: eternal damnation.

Yes, and no; the jewish faith admit to** not having much dogma about the afterlife, and leaving a great deal of room for personal opinion.** However, from the New testament, some opinions can be elevated to a dogmatic level.Notice the place of temporal punishment and purifications are identified as being either Gehenna or Sheol (Hadies) or some other names.Christianity distinguished between Hadies and Gehenna, but some Jews clearly understood the proper concept as seen in the writings of Josephus, where Hadies, not Gehenna is described as having a place for temporal punishments.

Christ corrected that misunderstanding for good. We cannot go back and take a false teaching (limited Gehenna), which our Lord then corrected, and then say that error is proof of yet another place or state never even mentioned or taught in the original false teaching.

A limited Gehenna was taught only by** some** jews and was denied by others, such as Josephus.Here is what he wrote concerning what we identify as being Gehenna:

but allotting to the lovers of wicked works eternal punishment. To these belong the unquenchable fire, and that without end, and a certain fiery worm, never dying, and not destroying the body, but continuing its eruption out of the body with never-ceasing grief: neither will sleep give ease to these men, nor will the night afford them comfort; death will not free them from their punishment, nor will the interceding prayers of their kindred profit them;

This is totally against the teachings of a limited Gehenna, but is totally in accord with the New Testament description of Gehenna.

Judaism did NOT teach Purgatory for the saved only, but a limited Hell instead…even for the wicked.

Basically universalism or annihilation…neither of which is true doctrine.

Again, not all jews followed such a belief.

We should all also note that this false doctrine about a limited Gehenna came from erroneous Jewish oral tradition…NOT the Word of God as given to them.

One needs to be careful before ifdentifying** all** jewish traditions not found in scriptures as erronious. Otherwise one needs to explain some New Testament passages, such as Jesus’
mentioning of Abraham’s Bosom (not found in the Old Testament), the quotation of Enoch found in the epistle of Jude (nowhere found in the O.T.) the body of Moses fought over between the Archangel Micheal and Satan ( where is this mentioned in the O.T?) St Paul identifying Paradise as being located in the third Heaven (where in scriptures is this mentioned?)…All of these were, at one time,simply jewish traditions not recognized as dogmatic teachings.

Andre

 

[Atemi]

Yes, and no; the jewish faith admit to** not having much dogma about the afterlife, and leaving a great deal of room for personal opinion.**

And it is from these personal opinions that RC apologists seek proof of a non-existent Jewish “Purgatory.”

However, from the New testament, some opinions can be elevated to a dogmatic level. Notice the place of temporal punishment and purifications are identified as being either Gehenna or Sheol (Hadies) or some other names.

Christ never addressed Gehenna as being temporary.

And the punishments of Hades were not for the elect either. They were for the damned awaiting final judgment.

Christianity distinguished between Hadies and Gehenna, but some Jews clearly understood the proper concept as seen in the writings of Josephus, where Hadies, not Gehenna is described as having a place for temporal punishments.

Hades is NOT the Jewish “Purgatory.”

Josephus made clear that only the wicked are punished in Hades, just as our Lord made clear in His teaching about Lazarus and the rich man. Lazarus was not over in Abraham’s Bosom being punished in flames for venial sin.

No.

Josephus said that the just in Hades suffer not at all. This is no “Purgatory” at all.

“For there is one descent into this region, at whose gate we believe there stands an archangel with an host; which gate when those pass through that are conducted down by the angels appointed over souls, they do not go the same way; but the just are guided to the right hand, and are led with hymns, sung by the angels appointed over that place, unto a region of light, in which the just have dwelt from the beginning of the world; not constrained by necessity, but ever enjoying the prospect of the good things they see, and rejoice in the expectation of those new enjoyments which will be peculiar to every one of them, and esteeming those things beyond what we have here; with whom there is no place of toil, no burning heat, no piercing cold, nor are any briers there; but the countenance of the just, which they see, always smiles them, while they wait for that rest and eternal new life in heaven, which is to succeed this region. This place we call The Bosom of Abraham.”

No.

There is no Purgatory here. Far from it.

Josephus was basically right about Hades and Gehenna, but neither one is “Purgatory.” That would not be invented until much later.

A limited Gehenna was taught only by** some** jews and was denied by others, such as Josephus.Here is what he wrote concerning what we identify as being Gehenna:

Yes, and he is basically correct.

This is my point.

Those that got Gehenna correct are not the ones RC apologists use as proof of a Jewish “Purgatory.”

No.

The Jewish “Purgatory” was a limited Gehenna…and thus false doctrine. Catholics have been citing plainly false doctrine as proof of Purgatory.

This is not acceptable.

Again, not all jews followed such a belief.

Agreed.

But the ones cited for proof of Purgatory were the ones who were WRONG.

You recognize they were wrong yourself. I would not be content to call a witness I know is wrong, but that is what Catholic apologists do all too often when defending “Purgatory.”

One needs to be careful before ifdentifying** all** jewish traditions not found in scriptures as erronious.

Sorry, Andre.

I didn’t do that, so let me repeat myself:

“We should all also note that this false doctrine about a limited Gehenna came from erroneous Jewish oral tradition…NOT the Word of God as given to them.”

This is true. I must still stand by it.

It as been a pleasure discussing with you, BTW.

 

[mich2]

And it is from these personal opinions that RC apologists seek proof of a non-existent Jewish “Purgatory.”

How would you understand this statement written by Josephus, to mean, Atemi?

1. Now as to Hades, wherein the souls of the righteous and unrighteous are detained, it is necessary to speak of it. Hades is a place in the world not regularly finished; a subterraneous region, wherein the light of this world does not shine; . . . This region is allotted as a place of custody for souls, in which angels are appointed as guardians to them,** who distribute to them temporary punishments, agreeable to every one’s behavior and manners**.

and this statement as well…

but allotting to the lovers of wicked works eternal punishment. To these belong the unquenchable fire, and that without end, and a certain fiery worm, never dying, and not destroying the body, but continuing its eruption out of the body with never-ceasing grief: neither will sleep give ease to these men, nor will the night afford them comfort; death will not free them from their punishment,** nor will the interceding prayers of their kindred profit them;/**

Why would he speak of interceding prayers if they are of no value for the dead? Notice that he mentions they are of no value for those who are ** lovers of wicked works** only, that is, those who will be in Gehenna.

It as been a pleasure discussing with you, BTW.

It’s been a pleasure discussing with you as well, Atemi.
Andre

 

[Steadfast_love]

The ancient Jews did not believe in the convenient and novel mortal and venial sins, so to juxtapose your theology onto theirs is a great error.

More to the point, Catholic doctrine has developed in a way they never could have guessed.

Scribes: “The Messiah who will be born in Bethlehem is actually Jesus of Nazarus?”

Why then does God teach that “mortal” sin can be unintentional but the RCC teaches that mortal sin cannot be unintentional?

The change between God’s word in the OT and Catholic teaching is Jesus.

• OT: The wages of sin (mortal and venial) is death. (This is always true)
• NT: Jesus saves all those who turn to him. (This is always true)
• RCC: Mortal sin is especially serious because it is a willful turning away from the one who saves. (This is always true)

I see no contradiction.

God already did that waaaaay back in Deuteronomy.

If one must now argue that the soldiers are all ignorant of the Law, and that God also nullified His Laws in Lev 4, then they are on their own.

Not ignorant of the law, ignorant of Jamnian religious wear. Also ignorant in the sense that they plundered in haste. Like if someone grabbed an innocent looking silver locket but didn’t bother opening it to discover that it contains… an idol! (Which is why a sound rebuking followed by a chance to sort treasure was needed.)

Remember that there are three parts to mortal sin: (1) grave matter, (2) full knowledge and (3) deliberate will.

1. • God established what is a grave matter. People can’t change that and we’re under His law even if we disbelieve it. Judas has no business monkeying around with this, nor does he.
   • Judas rebuked the men to impart full knowledge about the nature of the amulets. He doesn’t say “Thou shalt have no other gods…” because they know that already. What he focuses on is that these amulets are forbidden. These amulets are why they died. He teaches them “beads three leave 'em be” or however you distinguish Jamnian amulets from kosher treasure. Conversely an overly cautious man might have thrown out acceptable treasure, like an American $1 bill because they are printed from a graven image and on the back it says “In God we trust” right between an all-seeing pyramid and an eagle. (Perhaps their god-eagle lives in a heavenly all-seeing pyramid? )
   • He urges the survivors to choose with deliberate will to follow God’s commandments with respect to the amulets. Right or wrong, life or death – their choice.

   But then, that is not talking about Purgatory as any good Catholic knows that EVERYONE in Purgatory is guaranteed resurrection.

   Judas did not believe that these men would be guaranteed resurrection as he wanted their sin blotted out so they would be raised. That is not Purgatory.

   Judas is right to hope for the resurrection but we have faith in the Resurrection because we know Him.
   
   And from a practical standpoint, there is a very real chance that not everyone will enter the kingdom but that doesn’t stop us from praying that they would be.
   
   (Catholic fact: we don’t know specifically who is in purgatory.)

 

[guanophore]

Christ never addressed Gehenna as being temporary.

No, but he did speak of Hades (the land of the dead) like that.

And the punishments of Hades were not for the elect either. They were for the damned awaiting final judgment.

What is the state of the person described in this verse?:

“If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” (fire = purgation) Cor 3:15

If he is saved, is He in heaven? Is anything allowed in Heaven that is not already purified? What is he losing?

Hades is NOT the Jewish “Purgatory.”

Perhaps not. Perhaps the understanding of the need and action of purification of the saved by fire was not understood, until Jesus?

This is not acceptable. Sorry, Andre.

I had to laugh at this one. Are you the standard for faith, morals, and interpretation of the teachngs? If it is not acceptable,then may you go your way in peace! No need to be sorrowful.

“We should all also note that this false doctrine about a limited Gehenna came from erroneous Jewish oral tradition…NOT the Word of God as given to them.”

This is true. I must still stand by it.

Since you have set yourself up as the acceptable standard of what God was teaching, then I think you must, stand by your beliefs. One wonders why you are here?

 

[Atemi]

And it is from these personal opinions that RC apologists seek proof of a non-existent Jewish "Purgatory."

How would you understand this statement written by Josephus, to mean, Atemi?

1. Now as to Hades, wherein the souls of the righteous and unrighteous are detained, it is necessary to speak of it. Hades is a place in the world not regularly finished; a subterraneous region, wherein the light of this world does not shine; . . . This region is allotted as a place of custody for souls, in which angels are appointed as guardians to them, who distribute to them temporary punishments, agreeable to every one’s behavior and manners.

Josephus goes on to tell us those who get the punishments. I quoted the text before, but I will do so again here. Immediately following what Josephus wrote above, he continues…

"In this region there is a certain place set apart, as a lake of unquenchable fire, whereinto we suppose no one hath hitherto been cast; but it is prepared for a day afore-determined by God, in which one righteous sentence shall deservedly be passed upon all men; when the unjust, and those that have been disobedient to God, and have given honor to such idols as have been the vain operations of the hands of men as to God himself, shall be adjudged to this everlasting punishment, as having been the causes of defilement; while the just shall obtain an incorruptible and never-fading kingdom. These are now indeed confined in Hades, but not in the same place wherein the unjust are confined.

For there is one descent into this region, at whose gate we believe there stands an archangel with an host; which gate when those pass through that are conducted down by the angels appointed over souls, they do not go the same way; but the just are guided to the right hand, and are led with hymns, sung by the angels appointed over that place, unto a region of light, in which the just have dwelt from the beginning of the world; not constrained by necessity, but ever enjoying the prospect of the good things they see, and rejoice in the expectation of those new enjoyments which will be peculiar to every one of them, and esteeming those things beyond what we have here; with whom there is no place of toil, no burning heat, no piercing cold, nor are any briers there; but the countenance of the and of the just, which they see, always smiles them, while they wait for that rest and eternal new life in heaven, which is to succeed this region. This place we call The Bosom of Abraham.

But as to the unjust, they are dragged by force to the left hand by the angels allotted for punishment, no longer going with a good-will, but as prisoners driven by violence; to whom are sent the angels appointed over them to reproach them and threaten them with their terrible looks, and to thrust them still downwards. Now those angels that are set over these souls drag them into the neighborhood of hell itself; who, when they are hard by it, continually hear the noise of it, and do not stand clear of the hot vapor itself; but when they have a near view of this spectacle, as of a terrible and exceeding great prospect of fire, they are struck with a fearful expectation of a future judgment, and in effect punished thereby: and not only so, but where they see the place [or choir] of the fathers and of the just, even hereby are they punished; for a chaos deep and large is fixed between them; insomuch that a just man that hath compassion upon them cannot be admitted, nor can one that is unjust, if he were bold enough to attempt it, pass over it."

Josephus records that there is no punishment whatsoever for those who are the righteous. Only the DAMNED are punished with temporary punishments…until they are cast into Gehenna forever.

Those being punished with temporary punishments will never be saved. They are forever lost.

No Purgatory here at all.

Actually, just the opposite.

 

[Atemi]

and this statement as well…

but allotting to the lovers of wicked works eternal punishment. To these belong the unquenchable fire, and that without end, and a certain fiery worm, never dying, and not destroying the body, but continuing its eruption out of the body with never-ceasing grief: neither will sleep give ease to these men, nor will the night afford them comfort; death will not free them from their punishment, nor will the interceding prayers of their kindred profit them

Why would he speak of interceding prayers if they are of no value for the dead?

Because people were praying for their dead loved ones in his day. This is common to many pagan and ancient beliefs. This is not new or unique to Catholicism.

He says that praying for the damned will do no good. That’s it.

We all already know this.

Notice that he mentions they are of no value for those who are lovers of wicked works only, that is, those who will be in Gehenna.

And he mentions nothing about praying for those in Abraham’s Bosom who are experiencing a foretaste of Heaven and many enjoyments that keep smiles on their faces.

That is not the picture Roman Catholicism paints for the righteous dead, or those dead in Christ. Except for a few, those that are sent to Purgatory are punished with great suffering that is literally out of this world (if we are to believe the Doctors, Popes, and Saints in this regard).

This place or state is totally UNKNOWN in ancient Judaism and even modern day Judaism.

Yet apologists for this doctrine call on a Jewish witness to it. This is horribly deceptive, IMV. It calls on false doctrine as “proof.”

 

[Steadfast_love]

I agree with Church Millitant’s point, that this passage isn’t a solid proof of Purgatory, however it clearly demonstrates that salvation can continue past this age, into another age. Unless someone were to argue that we experience multiple ages while here on earth, then they must realize that the process of salvation can continue on in another age, or really world.

On a personal note, that’s exactly why, as a Presbyterian kid, that verse used to keep me up all night. :hypno:

Now that I’m becoming Catholic?

 

[Atemi]

I agree with Church Millitant’s point, that this passage isn’t a solid proof of Purgatory, however it clearly demonstrates that salvation can continue past this age, into another age. Unless someone were to argue that we experience multiple ages while here on earth, then they must realize that the process of salvation can continue on in another age, or really world.

And that is exactly what the Word of God says. Earth has undergone previous ages and there are more to come:

Eph 3:4 “you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ, which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets”

Col 1:26 “the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but now has been revealed to His saints.”

And if you listen carefully at Mass:

“From age to age you gather a people to yourself, so that from east to west a perfect offering may be made to the glory of your name…”

Multiple ages, Returnee.

When I’m faced with the question of purgatory by anti-Catholic Christians

As opposed to anti-Protestant Christians?

People aren’t so quick to call others that around here…

I don’t like to focus on what we have LEFT of Scripture today, as all (so called) “proof texts” are quite vague and easily interpreted many ways. What I like to do is point to the fact that Scripture was edited by Luther, for the express point of attacking the notion of Purgatory and then, by extension, indulgences.

Scripture was not edited by Luther…

Remember what Luther’s main focus was, to root out the abuse of indulgences at his time. Unfortunately, he took it too far by attacking Church doctrine itself, and really, the only way he could do that, specifically with the concept of Purgatory, was to remove 2 Macc from the Canon.

Luther removed nothing from the Canon.

The Catholic Church did NOT have a definitive canon until Trent, so there was no definitive canon to remove anything from…

The passage found at 2 Maccabees 12:40–45 CLEARLY shows that prayer for the dead is effectual. This is why 2 Macc had to be removed by Luther.

Wrong.

Ancient Jews did not believe in Purgatory.

Judas prayed so that the sins of the dead (idolators) would be erased and they would be raised. Please read the text.

He did not pray for them so they could go through Purgatory (or anything like it) faster.

Protestants don’t like to admit it, but Luther DID remove portions of the Bible, this is historical fact.

Incorrect.

There was no definitive canon for the Catholic Church until Trent.

Please adjust your apologetic.

For me, the argument ends there, whether they acknowledge it or not, since it truly is the clearest Scriptural evidence for Purgatory of any.

There is nothing clearly about “Purgatory” in the text at all. The mere fact that the ancient Jews did not even believe in Purgatory says enough.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Scripture was not edited by Luther…

I see lacking of history you have in by making this statement.

Luther did remove 7 from the OT. He even consider removing the James, Revelation, Book of Esther, Jude, and Hebrews.

Wikipedia states the following:

Initially Luther had a low view of the books of Esther, Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation. He called the Epistle of James “an epistle of straw,” finding little in it that pointed to Christ and His saving work. He also had harsh words for the book of Revelation, saying that he could “in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it.”[3] He had reason to question the apostolicity of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation because the early church categorized these books as antilegomena, meaning that they were not accepted without reservation as canonical. Luther did not, however, remove them from his editions of the Scriptures. His views on some of these books changed in later years.

Luther removed nothing from the Canon.

The Catholic Church did NOT have a definitive canon until Trent, so there was no definitive canon to remove anything from…

This topic has been discuss in another thread. Let me point you to the right direction. Deutrocanonical Books-Apologetics

Wrong.

Ancient Jews did not believe in Purgatory.

Judas prayed so that the sins of the dead (idolators) would be erased and they would be raised. Please read the text.

He did not pray for them so they could go through Purgatory (or anything like it) faster.

They do not believe in the doctrine of purgatory but they do pray for the dead.

It’s called the Mourner’s Kaddish and recite during the funeral.

Magnified and sanctified be God’s great name in the world which He has created according to His will. May He establish His kingdom soon, in our lifetime. Let us say: Amen.

May His great name be praised to all eternity.

This what is said during the prayer:

Hallowed and honored, extolled and exalted, adored and acclaimed be the name of the Holy One, though He is above all the praises, hymns, and songs of adoration which men can utter. Let us say: Amen.

May God grant abundant peace and life to us and to all Israel. Let us say: Amen.

May He who ordains harmony in the universe grant peace to us and to all Israel. Let us say: Amen.

It’s Hebrew language:

it-gadal v’yit-kadash sh’mey raba, b’alma di v’ra hirutey, vyam-lih mal-hutey b’ha-yey-hon uv’yomey-hon uv’ha-yey d’hol beyt yisrael ba-agala u-vizman kariv, v’imru amen. (Congregation and Mourners

Y’hey sh’mey raba m’varah l’alam ul’almey alma-ya. (Mourners

Yit-barah v’yish-tabah v’yit-pa-ar v’yit-romam v’yit-na-sey v’yit-hadar v’yit-aleh v’yit-halal sh’mey d’kud-sha, b’rih hu, leyla* min kol bir-hata v’shi-rata tush-b’hata v’ne-hemata da-amiran b’alma, v imru amen.

Y’hey sh’lama raba min sh’ma-ya, v’ha-yim aleynu v’al kol yisrael, vimru amen.

Oseh shalom bim-romav, hu ya-aseh shalom aleynu v’al kol yisrael, v’imru amen.

• On Shabbat Shuvah add: ul’eyla.

Incorrect.

There was no definitive canon for the Catholic Church until Trent.

Please adjust your apologetic.

There is nothing clearly about “Purgatory” in the text at all. The mere fact that the ancient Jews did not even believe in Purgatory says enough.

The Council of Rome in 382 AD, Council of Hippo 392 A.D, and Council of Carthage in 396 A.D canonical list were affirmed in the Council of Trent in 1545 in response to Protestant Rejection of 7 OT text.

2/3 of the Bible is quoted from the Deutrocanonical Books. These books were used by Christians and Jews until the Jews rejected them in the Council of Jamnia in 90 A.D which only affirmed Hebrew text of the Scripture.

Again if you want to discuss deutrocanonical books go to the thread I pointed out.

 

[Atemi]

Scripture was not edited by Luther…

I see lacking of history you have in by making this statement.

Luther did remove 7 from the OT. He even consider removing the James, Revelation, Book of Esther, Jude, and Hebrews.

The poster said that Luther edited Scripture.

If you want to talk about the canon, that is a different story.

Luther did not edit Scripture. All the Protestant bibles we have today can use all the early manuscripts without any editing from Luther.

**Luther removed nothing from the Canon.

The Catholic Church did NOT have a definitive canon until Trent, so there was no definitive canon to remove anything from… **

This topic has been discuss in another thread. Let me point you to the right direction. Deutrocanonical Books-Apologetics

Thanks for the link. I have perused the thread earlier.

The thread does not change the fact that the Catholic Church did not have a definitive canon until Trent.

A thread cannot change history.

**Ancient Jews did not believe in Purgatory.

Judas prayed so that the sins of the dead (idolators) would be erased and they would be raised. Please read the text.

He did not pray for them so they could go through Purgatory (or anything like it) faster.**

They do not believe in the doctrine of purgatory but they do pray for the dead.

Irrelevant.

So do many pagan religions.

So have some agnostics I know.

Wonderful.

That proves nothing. Praying for the dead is as ancient as polytheism. Purgatory is not.

It’s called the Mourner’s Kaddish and recite during the funeral.

Magnified and sanctified be God’s great name in the world which He has created according to His will. May He establish His kingdom soon, in our lifetime. Let us say: Amen.

May His great name be praised to all eternity.

Nothing here about anything like Purgatory…

Hallowed and honored, extolled and exalted, adored and acclaimed be the name of the Holy One, though He is above all the praises, hymns, and songs of adoration which men can utter. Let us say: Amen.

May God grant abundant peace and life to us and to all Israel. Let us say: Amen.

May He who ordains harmony in the universe grant peace to us and to all Israel. Let us say: Amen.

Nothing here about anything like Purgatory either…

Seeking proof of a doctrine from stunning silence is not the best course of action, IMV.

**Incorrect.

There was no definitive canon for the Catholic Church until Trent.

Please adjust your apologetic.**

The Council of Rome in 382 AD, Council of Hippo 392 A.D, and Council of Carthage in 396 A.D canonical list were affirmed in the Council of Trent in 1545 in response to Protestant Rejection of 7 OT text.

Citing local councils means nothing for our purposes and changes no facts.

Are you aware of how many early fathers paid no attention at all to these councils?

There was no definitive canon until Trent. That means there was no canon of Scripture for Catholics everywhere until over a millenia and a half after Christ.

2/3 of the Bible is quoted from the Deutrocanonical Books.

First of all, 2/3 of the Bible is the OT alone, so I assume you mean the NT.

2/3 of the NT quotes from the Deuteros?

No, Manny. Where on earth did you ever get this?

Sigh.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Atemi,

You just ignore the facts. Had I not said that prior to the Council of Jamnia in 90 A.D all of Palestine used the Septuagint. So yes, Christians and Jews used it. Since this is not related to the topic we can discuss the Septuagint in another thread if you like.

The concern or belief of Purgatory is ancient as Christianity itself.

The Early Church Fathers of the Christian Church believed in it.

These Christians were taught by the Apostles. I don’t think the Apostles taught them error.

I. The Early Church’s Belief in Purgatory

“And after the exhibition, Tryphaena again receives her. For her daughter Falconilla had died, and said to her in a dream: Mother, thou shaft have this stranger Thecla in my place, in order that she may pray concerning me, and that I may be transferred to the place of the just.” Acts of Paul and Thecla (A.D. 160).

“Abercius by name, I am a disciple of the chaste shepherd…He taught me…faithful writings…These words, I, Abercius, standing by, ordered to be inscribed. In truth, I was in the course of my seventy-second year. Let him who understands and believes this pray fro Abercius.” Inscription of Abercius (A.D. 190).

“Without delay, on that very night, this was shown to me in a vision. I saw Dinocrates going out from a gloomy place, where also there were several others, and he was parched and very thirsty, with a filthy countenance and pallid colour, and the wound on his face which he had when he died. This Dinocrates had been my brother after the flesh, seven years of age? Who died miserably with disease…But I trusted that my prayer would bring help to his suffering; and I prayed for him every day until we passed over into the prison of the camp, for we were to fight in the camp-show. Then was the birth-day of Gets Caesar, and I made my prayer for my brother day and night, groaning and weeping that he might be granted to me. Then, on the day on which we remained in fetters, this was shown to me. I saw that that place which I had formerly observed to be in gloom was now bright; and Dinocrates, with a clean body well clad, was finding refreshment. And where there had been a wound, I saw a scar; and that pool which I had before seen, I saw now with its margin lowered even to the boy’s navel. And one drew water from the pool incessantly, and upon its brink was a goblet filled with water; and Dinocrates drew near and began to drink from it, and the goblet did not fail. And when he was satisfied, he went away from the water to play joyously, after the manner of children, and I awoke. Then I understood that he was translated from the place of punishment.” The Passion of Perpetua and Felicitias, 2:3-4 (A.D. 202).

Source: scripturecatholic.com/purgatory.html

 

[RNRobert]

I see lacking of history you have in by making this statement.

Luther did remove 7 from the OT. He even consider removing the James, Revelation, Book of Esther, Jude, and Hebrews.

He also added the word ‘alone’ to a passage in Romans (I forget which passage) in his translation to make it read “faith alone” in order to justify his novel heresy.

 

[Mannyfit75]

He also added the word ‘alone’ to a passage in Romans (I forget which passage) in his translation to make it read “faith alone” in order to justify his novel heresy.

Yes he did. Martin Luther was wrong for what he did by breaking the Church of Christ into 33,000 plus pieces.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Atemi,

I made a thread just for you. It’s called Septuagint.

forum.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=140928

What I said about those books which the Protestants reject have been used by Christians and Jews. I have also cited verses in the NT citing these Books.

To give you an idea what the Septuagint states.

In the Hebrew Text Issiah 7:14 orginal context states,

Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman [ha-almah] shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

In the Septuagint translation it says;

Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."

The word use here is Parthenos which means virgin in Greek.

 

[Atemi]

Atemi,

You just ignore the facts. Had I not said that prior to the Council of Jamnia in 90 A.D all of Palestine used the Septuagint. So yes, Christians and Jews used it. Since this is not related to the topic we can discuss the Septuagint in another thread if you like.

I am sorry you are getting so frustrated, but I never even mentioned the Septuagint as it is not relevant at all to the point.

And why you would mention a canon that is rejected by the RCC as inspired Scripture is beyond me.

 

[Atemi]

He also added the word ‘alone’ to a passage in Romans (I forget which passage) in his translation to make it read “faith alone” in order to justify his novel heresy.

This is sad because it only serves to mock The Faith as a whole and the early fathers who promoted it.

In case you were unaware, Luther was not the first to think of that “novel heresy” regarding Romans 3:28:

The Roman Catholic New Testament scholar Joseph A. Fitzmyer wrote:

"At 3:28 Luther introduced the adv. “only” into his translation of Romans (1522), “alleyn durch den Glauben” (WAusg 7.38); cf. Aus der Bibel 1546, “alleine durch den Glauben” (WAusg, DB 7.39); also 7.3-27 (Pref. to the Epistle). See further his Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen, of 8 Sept. 1530 (WAusg 30.2 [1909], 627-49; “On Translating: An Open Letter” [LuthW 35.175-202]). Although “alleyn/alleine” finds no corresponding adverb in the Greek text, two of the points that Luther made in his defense of the added adverb were that it was demanded by the context and that sola was used in the theological tradition before him.

Robert Bellarmine listed eight earlier authors who used sola (Disputatio de controversiis: De justificatione 1.25 [Naples: G. Giuliano, 1856], 4.501-3):

Origen, Commentarius in Ep. ad Romanos, cap. 3 (PG 14.952).

Hilary, Commentarius in Matthaeum 8:6 (PL 9.961).

Basil, Hom. de humilitate 20.3 (PG 31.529C).

Ambrosiaster, In Ep. ad Romanos 3.24 (CSEL 81.1.119): “sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei,” through faith alone they have been justified by a gift of God; 4.5 (CSEL 81.1.130).

John Chrysostom, Hom. in Ep. ad Titum 3.3 (PG 62.679 [not in Greek text]).

Cyril of Alexandria, In Joannis Evangelium 10.15.7 (PG 74.368 [but alludes to Jas 2:19]).

Bernard, In Canticum serm. 22.8 (PL 183.881): “solam justificatur per fidem,” is justified by faith alone.

Theophylact, Expositio in ep. ad Galatas 3.12-13 (PG 124.988)."

(Joseph A. Fitzmyer Romans, A New Translation with introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible Series (New York: Doubleday, 1993) 360-361)

To knock Luther’s understanding of “alone” in the context of Rom 3:28, is to knock the very fathers Roman Catholics insist they revere.

I know it sounds good and all on an internet forum, but in reality it only shows that some pieces are definitely missing in your understanding of both the fathers and the earliest understanding of this verse.

 

[tryin2follow]

do we fully understand Christ? no, we can’t until we fully come into communion with Him. He left us the church to teach us His truth, so that we may learn.

in all we do, we should be seeking to understand and learn about our Lord, by asking the Holy Spirit to guide us, not take it upon our selves to argue for months in which it is very apparent to anyone who reads the thread, that no conclusion will be reached.

I will say that I accept all doctrines and teaching of the Catholic Church, because I prayed with an open heart for the Holy Spirit to lead me to where He wanted me to be. and I was slowly but surely drawn to my Catholic faith.

pray and ask for understanding, don’t proclaim it, none of us were there when this all took place, so no one can truly say what happened

I accept the grace of God which is truly and utterly not explainable with words, and the presence of Jesus in my life.

I’ll be praying for your soul

 

[Steadfast_love]

We’re way off topic now but, this page shows that the church fathers were aware of and wrote against sola fide. So don’t blame it on the Church Fathers – Lutheranism is on Luther’s head.

 

[Atemi]

We’re way off topic now but, this page shows that the church fathers were aware of and wrote against sola fide. So don’t blame it on the Church Fathers – Lutheranism is on Luther’s head.

The poster said that Luther added the word “alone” to Romans 3:28 to make it read “faith alone.”

Earlier fathers themselves previously added “alone” to the same passage to make it read “faith alone.”

Saying Luther was out of bounds for doing nothing less than what respected fathers before him did is ludicrous.

You can attack Luther’s conclusions all you want. I attack many of them myself. But that is not the point. The charge is that he edited the Scriptures by adding “alone.”