Protestant OT books by Josephus

[lagerald24]

First of all @Philobeto, I would point out to this Protestant minister that good scholars of Biblical history tell us that the Jews did not settle the canon of their Scriptures well until the second century. See this video by Dr. Taylor Marshall for more info on the deuterocanon, as it isn’t my specialty:

 

[Nicene]

Simple question: Who did Jesus leave in charge?

Next question: Why did the Jews close their cannon ( excluding everything in Greek) as Christianity arose?

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[lagerald24]

In regards to the issue of salvation by works in the Deuterocanon, I think this Protestant pastor fellow would have to throw out several other books of Scripture because the teaching that giving alms is meritorious is a Biblical principle. Proverbs 19:17 says, “Whoever is kind to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will reward them for what they have done.” Matthew 19:21-22 says, “Jesus answered, ‘If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.’ When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.” So, we see that things we do, aka “works”, are part of our salvation. This doesn’t do away with faith or grace but is a result of our nature having been purified by grace through faith and the love of God in our hearts which enables us to please God as His children. Finally, as Proverbs 16:6 says, “Through love and faithfulness sin is atoned for; through the fear of the LORD evil is avoided.” See also Our Lord’s teaching on giving alms in Matthew chapter 6. His words in Matthew 10 are interesting as well, "Whoever welcomes a prophet as a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward, and whoever welcomes a righteous person as a righteous person will receive a righteous person’s reward. And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones who is my disciple, truly I tell you, that person will certainly not lose their reward.”

 

[De_Maria]

Philobeto:

The Non-biblical Doctrine Of Purgatory Is Taught In The Apocrypha

The doctrine of purgatory - a place of purging between heaven and hell - is taught in the Apocrypha.

Where? Purgation is extant in scripture. The historic issue is the existence of an intermediate state/place.

Historic? Since when?

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Philobeto:

The Non-biblical Doctrine Of Purgatory Is Taught In The Apocrypha

The doctrine of purgatory - a place of purging between heaven and hell - is taught in the Apocrypha.

Where? Purgation is extant in scripture. The historic issue is the existence of an intermediate state/place.

Historic? Since when?

Is it not a historic issue? Or do you think it started with this pastor?

 

[De_Maria]

Who first rejected the issue?

 

[JonNC]

Who first rejected the issue?

A better question is who first taught it, but to answer yours, it certainly wasn’t this pastor, so it is a historical issue, as I first said. And it wasn’t western traditions not in communion with the pope.

That said, Greek Orthodox Metropolitan Kallistos Ware acknowledges several schools of thought among the Orthodox on the topic of purification after death. This divergence indicates that certain Catholic interpretations of purgatory, specifically the satisfaction model, more than the concept itself, are what is universally rejected. Also, there are Orthodox sources that indicate some sins can be forgiven after death[2];(Mt 12:32) but which also reject the teaching of purgatory because of the doctrine of indulgences and idea of literal purgatorial fire that are tied to it. Still other Orthodox hold to the notion of the Toll Houses and that those who pass through them after death have no assurance of final salvation.
Rather than say that the doctrine of Purgatory is a heresy, it is more accurate to say that it is an ancient ecumenical tradition which, due to the mysterious nature of the subject matter, Christians throughout history have interpreted and explained in a very wide variety of ways, some of which were strongly rejected by Eastern Orthodox Christians.

https://orthodoxwiki.org/Purgatory

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

Who first rejected the issue?

A better question is who first taught it, but to answer yours, it certainly wasn’t this pastor, so it is a historical issue, as I first said. …

That’s not an answer to my question. A better answer would be for you to say that you don’t know.

The first to reject Purgatory were the Orthodox, in the 10th Century. Previously, they accepted the Teaching as is evident by St. Cyprian’s words:

Cyprian

It is one thing to stand for pardon, another thing to attain to glory; it is one thing, when cast into prison, not to go out thence until one has paid the uttermost farthing; another thing at once to receive the wages of faith and courage. It is one thing, tortured by long suffering for sins, to be cleansed and long purged by fire; another to have purged all sins by suffering. It is one thing, in fine, to be in suspense till the sentence of God at the Day of judgment; another to be at once crowned by the Lord (Letters 51[55]:20 [A.D. 253]).

St. Clement
“In the other life there will be two fires, a ‘devouring and consuming’ one for the incorrigible, and for the rest, a fire that ‘sanctifies’ and ‘does not consume, like the fire of the forge,’ a ‘prudent, intelligent’ fire which penetrates the soul that passes through it.” (Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 8.6, c. before 215 A.D.)

However, although the Orthodox have now rejected Purgatory, they did not do so wholesale, as they continue to pray for the dead. They simply no longer accept the idea of a “place” or “prison” in the afterlife, as did St. Clement of Alexandria and St. Cyprian, 3rd Century Bishops of the Eastern Church.

 

[po18guy]

Saint Paul. 1 Cor 3:10-14

1. After we die.
2. At the judgment.
3. Work either survives or buns up.
4. The man is still saved.
5. As though passing through fire.
6. Is this not clear enough?
7. DOES NOT MATTER what we think it means.
8. What matters is what the Church teaches without error.
9. Done.

 

[JonNC]

That’s not an answer to my question. A better answer would be for you to say that you don’t know.

You say I don’t know, then reference the part of the Church that I said did.

However, although the Orthodox have now rejected Purgatory, they did not do so wholesale, as they continue to pray for the dead. They simply no longer accept the idea of a “place” or “prison” in the afterlife, as did St. Clement of Alexandria and St. Cyprian, 3rd Century Bishops of the Eastern Church.

That isn’t what Ware says, but to the extent that he doesn’t agree with the views of some of the ECF’s , Pope Benedict’s views don’t exactly align either.

Purgatory “is not, as Tertullian thought, some kind of supra-worldly concentration camp where man is forced to undergo punishment in a more or less arbitrary fashion.”

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

That’s not an answer to my question. A better answer would be for you to say that you don’t know.

You say I don’t know, then reference the part of the Church that I said did.

Really? You referenced the Early Church Fathers? I missed that part.

That isn’t what Ware says, but to the extent that he doesn’t agree with the views of some of the ECF’s ,

I’m giving the Catholic answer.

Pope Benedict’s views don’t exactly align either.

Yes, they do.

Purgatory “is not, as Tertullian thought, some kind of supra-worldly concentration camp where man is forced to undergo punishment in a more or less arbitrary fashion.”

Not the question under discussion. All this does is prove that Purgatory is historically a Doctrine which was Taught and believed by Catholics. I asked you who first disagreed with the Doctrine. My point is that although the Orthodox began to disagree with the Doctrine in the 10th century, they behave as though the Doctrine is true. They still pray for their beloved dead.

But who disavowed the Doctrine completely?

 

[JonNC]

Really? You referenced the Early Church Fathers? I missed that part.

I referenced the Eastern Orthodox as the first who questioned it. So, yes, you did miss it, because your question was not about the ECF’s.

Who first rejected the issue?

That was your question.

I’m giving the Catholic answer.

I know the Catholic view, and a number of members here over the years who have expressed it better.

Not the question under discussion. All this does is prove that Purgatory is historically a Doctrine which was Taught and believed by Catholics.

A dodge. Again, I was answering your question. No one questions that the Catholic Church teaches Purgatory.

I asked you who first disagreed with the Doctrine.

And I answered it.

My point is that although the Orthodox began to disagree with the Doctrine in the 10th century, they behave as though the Doctrine is true. They still pray for their beloved dead.

A point off the topic.
So do I.

But who disavowed the Doctrine completely?

Apparently the pastor in the OP, who is entirely wrong regarding the Bible not teaching purgation.

 

[TARRAT]

Did you read the list of quotes from Jesus from those books? If it’s good enough for Jesus it is good enough for me.

 

[De_Maria]

I referenced the Eastern Orthodox as the first who questioned it. So, yes, you did miss it, because your question was not about the ECF’s.

My reference to the ECF’s is to prove that it was a universally accepted Doctrine, to that point. And also, to show that the Orthodox rejection is illogical, since they continue to behave as though they accept the Doctrine.

That was your question.

Correct.

I know the Catholic view, and a number of members here over the years who have expressed it better.

I never said I was the best. So, what’s your point?

A dodge. Again, I was answering your question. No one questions that the Catholic Church teaches Purgatory.

I asked you who first disagreed with the Doctrine.

And I answered it.

…

But who disavowed the Doctrine completely?

Apparently the pastor in the OP, who is entirely wrong regarding the Bible not teaching purgation.

The correct answer, is Luther. Revocation of Purgatory 1530.

 

[JonNC]

My reference to the ECF’s is to prove that it was a universally accepted Doctrine, to that point. And also, to show that the Orthodox rejection is illogical, since they continue to behave as though they accept the Doctrine.

It doesn’t prove that at all. It proves that those particular ECF’s held that particular position.
It also doesn’t show anything of the sort about the E.O. view. If one takes the time to read current dialogue, one finds a significant level of agreement on the view of purgation. In fact, the issue is often a discussion of the practices of indulgences and the like in the western Church, not the understanding of purgation itself. Again, the quote I gave shows it.

I never said I was the best. So, what’s your point?

Your claim was stated as if it were fact.

The correct answer, is Luther. Revocation of Purgatory 1530.

Luther’s objections, similar to those stated by Metropolitan Ware, revolve around the development of practices and abuses around the teaching.

“When they have given up their purgatorial ‘Mass fairs’ (something Augustine never dreamed of), then we will discuss with them whether St. Augustine’s word, lacking support from Scripture, may be tolerated and whether the dead may be commemorated at the sacrament. It will not do to formulate articles of faith on the basis of the holy Fathers’ works or words.” - Luther

The existence of purgatory is not dogmatically denied. Rather, 1) the existence of purgatory is not taught by Scripture and thus cannot be binding doctrine, and 2) belief in purgatory is now hopelessly bound up with unacceptable practices. A belief that could be discussed in principle is concretely objectionable because of its associations.
http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-te...ous/ecumenical/lutheran/hope-eternal-life.cfm

 

[JonNC]

And from the dialogue, of which 5 and 6 are particularly important.

207. Catholics and Lutherans agree:
1. During this life, the justified “are not exempt from a lifelong struggle against the contradiction to God within the selfish desires of the old Adam (see Gal. 5:16; Rom. 7:7-10)” (JDDJ, 28; cf. Trent DS 1515 and 1690 and LC, Baptism, paras. 65-67236).
2. This struggle is rightly described by a variety of categories: e.g., penitence, healing, daily dying and rising with Christ.
3. Borne in Christ, the painful aspects of this struggle are a participation in Christ’s suffering and death. Catholic teachings call these pains temporal punishments; the Lutheran Confessions grant they can, "in a formal sense,"237 be called punishments.
4. This ongoing struggle does not indicate an insufficiency in Christ’s saving work, but is an aspect of our being conformed to Christ and his saving work.238
**5. The effects of sin in the justified are fully removed only as they die, undergo judgment, and encounter the purifying love of Christ. The justified are transformed from their condition at death to the condition with which they will be blessed in eternal glory. All, even martyrs and saints of the highest order, will find the encounter with the Risen Christ transformative in ways beyond human comprehension.

1. Christ transforms those who enter into eternal life. This change is a work of God’s grace. It can be rightly understood as our final and perfect conformation to Christ (Phil 3:21). The fire of Christ’s love burns away all that is incompatible with living in the direct presence of God. It is the complete death of the old person, leaving only the new person in Christ.*
   7. Scripture tells us little about the process of the transformation from this life to entrance into eternal life. Categories of space and time can be applied only analogously.

 

[De_Maria]

@JonNC

All besides the point. You made it appear that Purgatory had not previously been an accepted Doctrine when you said to Philobeto:

The Non-biblical Doctrine Of Purgatory Is Taught In The Apocrypha

The doctrine of purgatory - a place of purging between heaven and hell - is taught in the Apocrypha.

So, I made it a point to prove the following.

1. The Catholic Doctrine of Purgatory was universally accepted in its entirety until the Great Schism with the Orthodox.
2. Even then, the Orthodox continue to behave as though they believe in Purgatory, since they continue to pray for their beloved dead.
3. It was Martin Luther who first rejected Purgatory, 15 centuries after the Doctrine was passed down by Jesus Christ.

If you don’t agree that it was Martin Luther, then you will have to explain why 90% of all Protestants reject that Doctrine, today.

 

[JonNC]

Now you are misapplying a quote to me. The only thing I asked was,

Where? Purgation is extant in scripture. The historic issue is the existence of an intermediate state/place.

I was asking where in the DC’s is an intermediate state/place taught? Purgation is clearly taught. Prayer for the dead is clearly taught.

The Catholic Doctrine of Purgatory was universally accepted in its entirety until the Great Schism with the Orthodox.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

Even then, the Orthodox continue to behave as though they believe in Purgatory, since they continue to pray for their beloved dead.

They clearly believe in Purgation. So do I. So do Lutherans.

It was Martin Luther who first rejected Purgatory, 15 centuries after the Doctrine was passed down by Jesus Christ.

And as I showed, he rejected the abuses and practices that grew up around it. I also showed that even at the time of the Reformation, the existence of Purgatory is not dogmatically rejected by Lutherans.

If you don’t agree that it was Martin Luther…

First, it is perfectly permitted to disagree with Luther. I do on lots of things.
Second, I showed that Luther’s position is not as you portray it (not surprisingly).

then you will have to explain why 90% of all Protestants reject that Doctrine, today.

Why on earth would you offer such an idiotic proposition? I have no such obligation.
Members of other communions have their own reasons for the teachings. I’m not responsible for them. Luther isn’t responsible for them. they are responsible for themselves.

 

[De_Maria]

Now you are misapplying a quote to me.

Nope. The words you quote below are the same that I quoted and attributed to you.

The only thing I asked was,
Where? Purgation is extant in scripture. The historic issue is the existence of an intermediate state/place.

[/QUOTE]
Which gives the impression that Purgatory has never been a settled Doctrine.

I was asking where in the DC’s is an intermediate state/place taught? Purgation is clearly taught. Prayer for the dead is clearly taught.

And Purgatory, in the after life, whether it be a “prison” or a “state”, is clearly taught.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

I’ve provided enough evidence. You’ve provided none to the contrary and the burden of proof is on you.

They clearly believe in Purgation. So do I. So do Lutherans.

Purgation in this life, is not in question. Purgation in the afterlife, the Doctrine of Purgatory is that which you are depicting as not a true Doctrine.

And as I showed, he rejected the abuses and practices that grew up around it…

I provided the title of his booklet, which clearly states that he “revoked” Purgatory.

First, it is perfectly permitted to disagree with Luther…

Lol! In true Protestant style. Luther lived to regret the skeptical attitude that he introduced into the Church. In the end, everyone was rejecting him, the way he rejected the Church.

Why on earth would you offer such an idiotic proposition?..

Lol! Thank you. The logic is obvious and you can’t overcome it. It is Protestants who denied the longstanding Doctrine and that is why Protestants do not accept it to this day.

As usual, when your argument is disproven, you become insulting. But, c’est la vie.

 

[JonNC]

Nope. The words you quote below are the same that I quoted and attributed to you.

You included the words above them from a previous post, and attributed them to me, even though I was questioning their accuracy.

Which gives the impression that Purgatory has never been a settled Doctrine.

Source where it is settled doctrine. Let’s remember that the opinions of the ECF’s are not doctrine.

And Purgatory, in the after life, whether it be a “prison” or a “state”, is clearly taught.

Source. Chapter and verse. And please, nothing inferred.

Lol! In true Protestant style. Luther lived to regret the skeptical attitude that he introduced into the Church. In the end, everyone was rejecting him, the way he rejected the Church.

More misrepresentations.

Thank you. The logic is obvious and you can’t overcome it. It is Protestants who denied the longstanding Doctrine and that is why Protestants do not accept it to this day.

There is no logic in it all, just your usual polemics and misrepresentations.