Ok, when we die... One Judgment? Or Two?

  • Thread starter Thread starter NotWorthy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Amen!!!

A lot of people don’t realize that the reason the Catholic Church came up with the Canon of Scripture is so that they could all be reading from the same books in the Liturgy. It seems certain churches were reading some books, but not others, while others churches were reading from still different books. For instance, Pope St. Clement’s Epistle to the Church in Corinth was read as part of the Liturgy for at least 100 years after he wrote it. The Church in Corinth felt so strongly about the exhortations of Pope St. Clement that they felt the author was divinely inspired by God.

All these books that were finally decided on by the OS-claimed-Roman-Controlled-Catholic-Church were chosen because they supported all the teachings of the OS-claimed-Roman-Controlled-Catholic-Church.
To be deep in history is to be Catholic 👍
 
Amen!!!

A lot of people don’t realize that the reason the Catholic Church came up with the Canon of Scripture is so that they could all be reading from the same books in the Liturgy. It seems certain churches were reading some books, but not others, while others churches were reading from still different books. For instance, Pope St. Clement’s Epistle to the Church in Corinth was read as part of the Liturgy for at least 100 years after he wrote it. The Church in Corinth felt so strongly about the exhortations of Pope St. Clement that they felt the author was divinely inspired by God.

All these books that were finally decided on by the OS-claimed-Roman-Controlled-Catholic-Church were chosen because they supported all the teachings of the OS-claimed-Roman-Controlled-Catholic-Church.
Don’t mis-state my claim. The church did not come under the control of the Roman Empire until the 6th century. It started its paganistic rites, etc. after Constantine. Constantine made it the official State Religion but it was still a long time before Rome claimed jurisdiction over all the church. That’s why for the first 500 years, our church was the same one. That’s when it started deviating from the Bible until the reformation attempted to make the necessary reforms.

Martin Luther was simply the catalyist that got the church back to an apostolic church.
 
Originally Posted by qui est ce
Is putting a manger scene on your lawn making Jesus a baby again?

Originally Posted by qui est ce
You sound like you have an issue with Crucifixes. Are you afraid of the Cross?
How is celebrating our redemption from sin by Christ crucified recrucifying him, yet celebrating his birth is not making him a baby. The logic escapes me.

PS, “It is Finished” means Jesus accomplished his goal of opening the gates of Heaven (see John 26:30 below). Interestingly the wine was offered on a hyssop, same as what was used to spread the blood of the lamb on the lintels at Passover.

You do see that the Last Supper was the fulfillment of the Passover? The lamb had to be eaten. It had to be a first born perfect lamb. Sounds like Jesus to me.
So why did Protestants change Tradion by removing several books from the Bible and adding Sola Scriptura?
And how did God accomplish this? He inspired men. MEN wrote it down, inspired by the HS.
To correct you—the Protestant church removed nothing from the Bible. It was the Council of Trent that placed the apocryphal books, as inspired Scripture, in the Bible. Prior to that they were always considered deutero-canonical.
 
Don’t mis-state my claim. The church did not come under the control of the Roman Empire until the 6th century. It started its paganistic rites, etc. after Constantine. Constantine made it the official State Religion but it was still a long time before Rome claimed jurisdiction over all the church. That’s why for the first 500 years, our church was the same one. That’s when it started deviating from the Bible until the reformation attempted to make the necessary reforms.
First of all, Constantine issued the Edict of Milan in 313, and he did NOT make the Christian religion the official religion of the state
The Edict of Milan, removed penalties for professing Christianity (under which many had been martyred in previous persecutions of Christians) and returned confiscated Church property. A similar edict had been issued in 311 by Galerius, then senior emperor of the Tetrarchy, Galerius’ edict granted Christians the right to practice their religion but did not restore any property to them.

Constantine maintained the title of Pontifex Maximus, which emperors bore as heads of the pagan priesthood. Writing to Christians, Constantine made clear that he believed he owed his successes to the protection of the Christian High God alone. .
Martin Luther was simply the catalyist that got the church back to an apostolic church.
Wrong. He threw out many books,because they contradicted his man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fides. 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.” His views on some of these books changed in later years.

Luther chose to place the (deutero’s) Apocrypha between the Old and New Testaments. These books and addenda to canonical books are found in the Greek Septuagint but not in the Hebrew Masoretic text.

He also change the meaning of Paul’s words by adding Alone to Faith. Romans 3:28 controversially so that it read: “thus, we hold, then, that man is justified without the works of the law to do, alone through faith” The but Luther defended his translation by maintaining that the adverb “alone” was required both by idiomatic German and the apostle Paul’s intended meaning. So He changed Paul’s words according to what Martin Luther decided they meant.

Sounds man-made to me.
To correct you—the Protestant church removed nothing from the Bible. It was the Council of Trent that placed the apocryphal books, as inspired Scripture, in the Bible. Prior to that they were always considered deutero-canonical.
If you study your history, you will find the Catholic Church only makes infallible statements when a controversy arises. The Bible had contained the deuto’s since 382. This was universally accepted for 1500 years, until Luther came along and changed it. The Council of Trent was convened to counter Luther’s heresies and restate the official Catholic postion on the Bible. Also to address abuses by some clergy.
 
It would be easier for you then to just answer the question.
Then please answer my question about displaying the crucifix is recrucifying Jesus, but displaying a manger scene does not make Jesus a baby again.
 
Actually that is not what is taught by the Church. Purgatory is definitely NOT a second chance at being with God. It is a place of cleansing, purgation of our souls because nothing unclean shall enter Heaven. Nobody knows exactly what it’s like but it’s existence is well known from Scripture (Matt 5:26 and 1 Cor 3:15). The Church Fathers also taught about it (I don’t know the references on them). We know that Christ instructed us to “be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matt 5:48). We also know that Hebrews 12:14 instructs us to “strive for that holiness without which we cannot see God”. See also what the CCC says about this. I just thought I would straighten that out for you.

God bless you!
I understand what you are saying BUT, and this is a big BUT, If purgatory is a final cleansing, and we must have pure souls, why would they need cleansing. And also why when we said the rosary Lead all souls into heaven, especially the ones in most need of your mercy? If when we get to purgatory we are getting into heaven, why would we need Gods mercy. To me Gods mercy means we need help? Now I dont disagree purgatory is the final cleansing I agree 100% with that, but that is what i see purgatory as needing that cleansing? But who gives it to us but God, and only he cant grant that cleansing? Do you see what I am saying? Now if you read in the CCC its says some go through it some dont. I see it as repenting in a way. If you dont repent in this world you will in the next. What I guess I am trying to say is we all go through Purgatory, dont get me wrong but some can get stuck there.
 
Don’t mis-state my claim. The church did not come under the control of the Roman Empire until the 6th century. It started its paganistic rites, etc. after Constantine. Constantine made it the official State Religion but it was still a long time before Rome claimed jurisdiction over all the church. That’s why for the first 500 years, our church was the same one. That’s when it started deviating from the Bible until the reformation attempted to make the necessary reforms.

Martin Luther was simply the catalyist that got the church back to an apostolic church.
You are so funny when you say this. Show me where Martin Luther’s teachings echoed Ignatius, Justin Martyr’s, Ireneaus, or Augustin’s.

Oh, and when did Constantine make the Catholic Church the official State Religion?
 
To correct you—the Protestant church removed nothing from the Bible. It was the Council of Trent that placed the apocryphal books, as inspired Scripture, in the Bible. Prior to that they were always considered deutero-canonical.
Funny again. They are still called Deuterocanonical. They were called that by the ancient Jews. But they are still Canonical.
 
You are so funny when you say this. Show me where Martin Luther’s teachings echoed Ignatius, Justin Martyr’s, Ireneaus, or Augustin’s.

Oh, and when did Constantine make the Catholic Church the official State Religion?
**Luther was ordained just like those early leaders and they all taught the apostolic teachings. Luther tried to return the church to those principles and to the Scriptures. That’s why he taught as they did. It was much later when Rome got their hands into the church that it began to change. Luther only wanted to return it to its roots. **

You will find the following excerp from the encyclopedia here

Constantine’s rise to power came in a period of confusing politics. Emperors came ans went in the Roman Empire in the early 300’s, and at one time, the empire had 4 contesting emperors. Constantine spent most of his reign to secure full control of the entire empire.

**With him, Christianity is transformed into the preferred religion of the state. **Whether Constantine himself was a Christian, or if he used the popularity of Christianity to aid his political goals, is a matter of understanding the sources. He is reported to have stated that he was aided by the Christian God, and is believed by many that the story of him being baptized shortly before his death, is a true story.

Yet, Constantine appears to have been closely linked to traditional Roman religions throughout his life, and the story of the above-mentioned baptizim have clear legendary elements, clearly making it questionable. Also, even after Christianity was made state religion, support for Roman religions continued. It may actually appear that Constantine adhered to some aspects of Christianity without having embraced the full Christian faith, or at least that the full conversion happened only first at the end of his life. Early on, he linked the Christian God with the sun god of Roman religion, yet, letters from him clearly indicate that at least he was not without some form of conviction.

Constantine played an important role in the development of Christian theology and its universal structure when convening the Council of Nicaea in 325.

Constantine regulated the laws to fit Christian interests, fx. was the penalty of crucifixion abolished, Sunday was made the holy day of the week and many privileges were introduced in favour of the clergy. In some cases, Roman sacred sites were turned into churches.

Constantine ordered the building of several churches, of which the original Hagia Sophia in Constantinople and St. Peter in Rome are among the most famous in Christian history.

Constantine imposed numerous regulations on the Jews; among which conversion from Christianity to Judaism was outlawed and Jewish entry to Jerusalem was strictly limited.

All this is in every history book in every public library everywhere. It is just the RCC that doesn’t believe it.
 
First of all, Constantine issued the Edict of Milan in 313, and he did NOT make the Christian religion the official religion of the state
The Edict of Milan, removed penalties for professing Christianity (under which many had been martyred in previous persecutions of Christians) and returned confiscated Church property. A similar edict had been issued in 311 by Galerius, then senior emperor of the Tetrarchy, Galerius’ edict granted Christians the right to practice their religion but did not restore any property to them.

Constantine maintained the title of Pontifex Maximus, which emperors bore as heads of the pagan priesthood. Writing to Christians, Constantine made clear that he believed he owed his successes to the protection of the Christian High God alone. .
Wrong. He threw out many books,because they contradicted his man-made doctrine of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fides. 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.” His views on some of these books changed in later years.

Luther chose to place the (deutero’s) Apocrypha between the Old and New Testaments. These books and addenda to canonical books are found in the Greek Septuagint but not in the Hebrew Masoretic text.

He also change the meaning of Paul’s words by adding Alone to Faith. Romans 3:28 controversially so that it read: “thus, we hold, then, that man is justified without the works of the law to do, alone through faith” The but Luther defended his translation by maintaining that the adverb “alone” was required both by idiomatic German and the apostle Paul’s intended meaning. So He changed Paul’s words according to what Martin Luther decided they meant.

Sounds man-made to me.

If you study your history, you will find the Catholic Church only makes infallible statements when a controversy arises. The Bible had contained the deuto’s since 382. This was universally accepted for 1500 years, until Luther came along and changed it. The Council of Trent was convened to counter Luther’s heresies and restate the official Catholic postion on the Bible. Also to address abuses by some clergy.
See another post of mine about Constantine.

As for the deutero-canonical books, the church never considered them canonical until Trent. They always called them deutero-canonical. They were not in the canonized Old Testament and were always considered apocryphal, even by the church at that time.
 
Then please answer my question about displaying the crucifix is recrucifying Jesus, but displaying a manger scene does not make Jesus a baby again.
**Everytime you show the cross with Jesus on it, it is crucifying him again. As I said, this should be blasphemous.

As for the manger scene, it is obviously a celebration of the birth of Jesus. You should know the difference.

Now of course, you will answer my questions…**
 
I feel sure you know the difference…
Is the 2nd Law as binding on the Jews as the Torah? I don’t see where the 2nd Canon is any less binding on good Christians?

Can you show me where Catholic Bibles had the Deutero’s simply listed as “Deuterocanonical” apart from the main Canon? I’ve only seen Protestant Bibles do this. Although they changed “deuterocanon” to Apochrypha.
 
Constantine made it** the official State Religion** but it was still a long time before Rome claimed jurisdiction over all the church. .
Can you please clarify when this happened. The answer to this question is very, VERY important, my friend.
 
Notworthy, Thats not what i meant. What i am saying yes, when you meet God, is when you die, your soul leaves your body, this is judgement day, if you reject Christ, and you fate is hell, yes you are done, finished, once you are doomed to hell thats it, not get out of hell free card, but i dont see purgatory as heaven either, its in between. In 1021 of ccc its says man receives his eternal retribution in his immortal soul at the moment of death, yes particular judgement is met. either entrance into the blessedness of heaven through purification or immediately, or immedate amd everlasting dammation. Now i agree in purgatory you are assured of eternal salvation but after death you must undergo purification to achieve holiness to enter heaven. Now its not hell, but read 1032 in the ccc the way I understand it Job sons were purified by their fathers sacrifice. But that is why i dont see heaven as purgatory either, thats why I see it as a second chance (my words) because its like you are stuck. Now the way i see it if you are in purgatory you can be there a long time, we can pray eachother out, but not out of hell. Now that is the first judgement the way i see it. now on the last day Christ will reunite the soul with the body. That to me is the final judgment. In 1038 its says the just and the unjust will be reunited with their bodys, thats when Jesus will separate the sheep from the goats. The bad will go to hell, and the good get eternal life. And it wont come until Christ returns in glory. Thats where i see a new heaven and new earth right here. Like it should have been before Adam and Eve sinned. its says the world will be transformed to the original state. Back to purgatory in 1058 the Church prays that on one should be lost, Lord let me never be parted from you, it is true that no one can save himself it is also true that God desires all me be be saved. With God all things are possible. Its just to me nothing else makes sense. That is why I believe we pray for the dead, because the ones who are still going through the final cleansing, they still have sins, but still believe in Gods grace and forgiveness, just didnt live as good as they could have and are sorry. Thats why I believe repent in this world or the next time, but its better in this world its shorter. But thats why i see purgatory as a second chance. To correct what you didnt here, but dont get me wrong if you are of the devil you will never get to purgatory, its final damnation and thats it, total separation from God and thats it, you choose the devil you got him. I just see purgatory as a tempory place because if not why would it say that we undergo a purification to ACHIEVE HOLINESS necessary to ENTER THE JOY OF GOD.
 
Notworthy, Thats not what i meant. What i am saying yes, when you meet God, is when you die, your soul leaves your body, this is judgement day, if you reject Christ, and you fate is hell, yes you are done, finished, once you are doomed to hell thats it, not get out of hell free card, but i dont see purgatory as heaven either, its in between.

snip…
Ok, that’s much better. I’m sorry if I seem a little particular, but as OS has proved, people of others faiths are already able to mis-represent Catholic Doctrine without our help. Many claim that Catholics teach that Purgatory is a 2nd chance to get to heaven. I’d rather them come to that conclusion falsely, then for a Catholic to mistakenly lead them to that conclusion by not choosing the clearest words.

Keep up the Faith, my brother!!!
 
There are two judgments: particular and general.
The particular judgment is what we experience immediately following death when our souls are revealed. We will either experience heaven, hell, or purgation.
The general judgment is the revelation of our sins to all on the last day, when our souls will be re-united with our bodies and we will exist either in a state of heaven or hell for all eternity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top