Purgatory and 1 Corinthians 15:52

[hurst]

bene7:

Something like “Purgatory” must be divinely revealed. There must be DIRECT, divine teaching on it, like the doctrine of Hell.

The Catholic Church teaches that God has divinely revealed the reality of Purgatory.

The souls of the just which, in the moment of death, are burdened with venial sins or temporal punishment due to sins, enter Purgatory (De fide) [Ott, p.482]

There, you have no excuse now. It is a direct teaching of the Catholic Church, which has the duty of making known what God has revealed. It is the same Church that Christ started with St. Peter and maintained for almost 2000 years.

By the way, an example of a temporal punishment inflicted by apostolic authority is here:

1 Cor 5:1 It is absolutely heard, that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as the like is not among the heathens; that one should have his father’s wife. 2 And you are puffed up; and have not rather mourned, that he might be taken away from among you, that hath done this deed. 3 I indeed, absent in body, but present in spirit, have already judged, as though I were present, him that hath so done, 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, you being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus; 5 To deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

2 Corinthians 13:10 Therefore I write these things, being absent, that, being present, I may not deal more severely, according to the power which the Lord hath given me unto edification, and not unto destruction.

2 Cor 2:7 So that on the contrary, you should rather forgive him and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. 8 Wherefore, I beseech you, that you would confirm your charity towards him. 9 For to this end also did I write, that I may know the experiment of you, whether you be obedient in all things. 10 And to whom you have pardoned any thing, I also. For, what I have pardoned, if I have pardoned any thing, for your sakes have I done it in the person of Christ.

Now if that man had died while still undergoing temporal punishment and not having finished it, then it would be something to be suffered in purgatory.

Also, this is yet another example that should alert you to the fact that he was not “already” purified simply for believing. Nor can you say he wasn’t a true believer, since Paul himself anticipates that man would be saved, and because he says to put out from the believers those who commit such crimes.

hurst

 

[Pillar_of_Cloud]

bene7:

You’re wrong about multiple baptisms as being a “practice” of Fundamentalists or Baptists.

Since you have so many good Baptist friends why is it you haven’t asked them to explain their peculiar “practice” of multiple baptisms?

Actually, I’m not wrong with this–I’ve seen it happen in this particular Baptist church. People who were baptized once to show their devotion have been baptized again to “recommit” themselves or some such thing. Further, I’ve read of other Fundamentalists who, in ministering to someone (who wasn’t quite getting the Christian lifestyle, if you catch my drift) who kept baptizing the person in hopes that it would “catch.”

However, you are right, t’would be best to go right to the source and ask them about their practice

 

[Mickey]

bene7:

No, it’s knowledge based on the original, God-breathed (theopneustos) Scriptures. I wouldn’t call the writers of the N.T. revisionists. You quote Augustine (I quote Scripture), but he came on the scene centuries after the Apostolic age and the writings of N.T.

Much Scripture has been quoted to you. I just backed it up with some Church history. It is your **interpretation **that is revisionist–not the writings themselves. But again, I think you know this.

 

[Sean_Boyle]

Bene7,

In this game of verse tennis, there have been lots of good volleys. It is clear that the Best your ever going to do here is, Tie! You haven’t made it to tie yet. Your game is lacking some backing. It’s authority.

Maybe if pride where taken out of this equation, you could just listen and learn about Christ’s Church. Isn’t that why you came to this site? To understand? Committing your life to Christ also means following the authority he left here on earth. The Catholic Church.

You are asking that proof be provided to you in biblical form. The bible is not the sole authority on matters of faith. Where is that in the bible? How can the Bible be sole proof of something if you can’t even prove that Jesus wanted the Bible to be the sole authority on faith and morals ? he never said use only the Bible. He never said use on the King James Version of the Bible.

Christ’s authority here on earth, the Church, gave us the bible to aid in our understanding of faith not to be the faith.

 

[Mickey]

Sean Boyle:

Maybe if pride where taken out of this equation, you could just listen and learn about Christ’s Church. Isn’t that why you came to this site? To understand?

Unfortunately, some come here in an attempt to prove that the Catholic Church is wrong and to sharpen their “debating skills”. My opinion is that some (not all) are so afraid that the Catholic Church holds the fullness of truth, that they must prove it to be false in an attempt to justify their own interpretations. But you have hit the nail on the head. Satan often uses pride against us to transform charity into arrogance. All humans of all faith affiliations fall into this trap. It is one of satan’s favorite arrows.

 

[Gene_C]

Hi Bene,

It sounds like this thread is an “I am right, you all are wrong” type of discussion. If you can’t deal with the issues I brought up, passages that deal directly with the fate of the saved after death, and their context, and the meanings of the words in the original language, then you are just telling us what YOU are reading into Scripture.

The ideas associated with purgatory are entirely Scriptural and are explicityly taught in Scripture.

Pray for the Lord to show you the truth. He will.

Peace,
Gene

P.S. Why is Paul praying for a Christian who has died in 2 Timothy 1:18?

 

[Mickey]

bene7:

However, I have known many people who have been baptized twice. The reason being their first baptism was performed upon them while in an unbelieving state. They came from a religious background, like Catholic or Lutheran, that baptized infants or the very young.

So why baptise a baby when it doesn’t know yet what is happening? Why not wait for the baby to grow and believe in Christ and ask for baptism? If we were to follow this line of reasoning, we wouldn’t inoculate the baby against diphtheria until he grows up and asks for it! But we know better. Baptising infants before they know what is going on is an expression of God’s great love for us. It shows that God loves us and accepts us before we can ever know and love Him. It shows that we are wanted and loved by God from the very moment of our birth. Nothing shows the nature of God’s grace more than infant baptism.

Full article at: home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/Baptism.htm

 

[Pillar_of_Cloud]

f

bene7:

Through His suffering and death on the cross Jesus completed the “work” of reconciliation. But the “word” regarding this accomplished work of Christ would require suffering as well. So in that respect Paul did “fill up” (complete) that which was lacking in Christ’s afflictions. Suffering was required for the “work” of reconciliation to be completed (and completed it was). And suffering continued to be required for the ministry of the “word” of reconciliation to be accomplished by Paul on behalf of the Church.

But Paul in no way ever hints at the idea that his sufferings in taking the “word” of reconciliation to the Gentile world was expiatory in any sense, or meritoriously aided in the cleansing of his sins or those of the Church. Paul emphatically testifies throughout his Epistles that that work was accomplished completely and perfectly through the suffering and death of Christ on the cross alone, and we enter into that finished work through faith alone. Anything else is blasphemy.

Blessings,
Bene

Well said! Your response shows that you know God’s written Word well, and based on your reading, your answer is justifiable. However, my readings of the Scriptures draw a different conclusion to the nature of Christ’s sacrifice, redemptive suffering, and to the “ministry of reconciliation.”

We have agreed that Christ’s sacrifice was Perfect, that Redemption and ALL forgiveness of sins flows from it. You will have no argument from me about that.

But what does it mean to even be redeemed. What does it mean to be forgiven? Are these two words synonymous, or is there a difference to them?

Col. 14, as you pointed out, reads that “[Christ]…in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” A simple reading indicates that one is the same as the other, kind of like, “…he was a Mailman, a deliverer of mail.”

(EDIT: Hm, I found something interesting. The King James version translates this verse a little differently: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins." According to this, they are indeed not the same thing!)

There are several occasions that seem to indicate otherwise though. I’m borrowing from hurst when I post this (he posted it right before me)

1 Cor 1:2 To the church of God that is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that invoke the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, in every place of theirs and ours.

1 Cor 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal. As unto little ones in Christ. 2 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. 3 For, whereas there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal, and walk according to man?

They are sanctified (redeemed), yet still carnal (in their sins). The First Epistle of John takes an even harsher stance on this, saying “Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor knows Him.” (1 Jn 3:6). That takes me to task, for I sin constantly, yet still hope in my Lord for salvation.

And yet, earlier in his epistle, John says “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1 Jn 1:8-9)

These are believers John is speaking to, those who have been redeemed by Christ. Yet, John tells us to not say “we have no sin,” but to confess our sins, and we will be forgiven. Probably you want to respond that one confession of sin when we first become believers is enough, and after that, it’s once-and-always. But the rest of John’s epistle seems to say he is speaking to “veteran” believers, people who already claim to know the Lord.

Continued…

 

[Pillar_of_Cloud]

Later he states, “My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may be without sin. And if any man is a sinner, we have a friend and helper with the Father, Jesus Christ, the upright one: He is the offering for our sins; and not for ours only, but for all the world. And by this we may be certain that we have knowledge of him, if we keep his laws. The man who says, I have knowledge of him, and does not keep his laws, is false, and there is nothing true in him.” (2:1-4)

This verse shows that this community has already responded to the Lord’s call, because there are hypocrites among them. Thus, the forgiveness of sins is a constant renewal, whereas the Redemption is once-for-all. This is how I draw it out. The Redemption opened the Gates of Heaven, but each man’s salvation must come through acceptance of Christ as his Lord, to live uprightly as best he can, and confess his sins whenever he thus commits them, which certainly happens, since I know no Christian who has not sinned since his conversion to the Lord, some who confess to a priest, others who confess in mental silence, and others who might say (although erroneously) “Thank God all my sins have already been forgiven, including this one.” Fact is, all continue to sin and fall short of the glory of God, and those who fail to confess their sins will end up discarding Christ’s Redemption as well as forgiveness of sin, both of which are a result of Christ’s sacrifice. The former is for all men, the latter for those who truly believe on the Lord. It is for this reason I think the Church can teach that those who do not know Christ and yet live naturally good moral lives have a chance for Heaven, albeit probably through Purgatory, because their undeadly sins have never been confessed.

Now, back to Purgatory on that note. When Jesus commissioned the Apostles after his Ressurection, “breathing on them, he said to them, ‘Let the Holy Spirit come on you: Any to whom you give forgiveness, will be made free from their sins; and any from whom you keep back forgiveness, will still be in their sins.’” (Jn 20: 22-23)

This is the ministry of reconciliation the Paul speaks of by the way, (which, of course, goes into a whole other discussion about priestly confession, which is really too much for this thread) but the point is that the Apostles were commissioned to forgive sins (this translation, although Protestant, makes it so clear that it’s not to ‘preach the word and those who hear it will be saved, etc’) not to redeem men, which Christ had already completed to the fullness. But the word that sins could be forgiven through the Cross had to go out.

The forgiveness of sins is a personal matter, which each man is judged for when he comes before the Throne. If he has no unconfessed sins, Heaven, if he has some, Purgatory, if he has deadly sin, Hell: 1 John 5:16: “If a man sees his brother doing a sin which is not bad enough for death, let him make a prayer to God, and God will give life to him whose sin was not bad enough for death. (This is an interesting line, that we can ask for forgiveness of others) There is a sin whose punishment is death: I do not say that he may make such a request then. 17 All evil-doing is sin: but death is not the punishment for every sort of sin.” It is those sins which are unconfessed and unforgiven that lease us time in Purgatory.

Continued…

 

[Pillar_of_Cloud]

Back to the actual topic though, Scripture teaches that Paul did very much DID hint that his suffering “meritoriously aided in the cleansing of his sins or those of the Church.”:

2 Cor. 4:10-18: “In our bodies there is ever the mark of the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may be seen in our bodies. For, while living, we are still being given up to death because of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may be seen in our flesh, though it is under the power of death. So then, death is working in us, but life in you. But having the same spirit of faith, as it is said in the Writings, The words of my mouth came from the faith in my heart; in the same way, our words are the outcome of our faith; Because we are certain that he who made the Lord Jesus come back from the dead, will do the same for us, and will give us a place in his glory with you. For we go through all things on account of you, because the greater the number to whom the grace is given, the greater is the praise to the glory of God. For which cause we do not give way to weariness; but though our outer man is getting feebler, our inner man is made new day by day. For our present trouble, which is only for a short time, is working out for us a much greater weight of glory; While our minds are not on the things which are seen, but on the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are for a time; but the things which are not seen are eternal.”

This passage, although not talking about redemptive suffering as we have discussed it before , but he talks about suffering as being an instrument of grace. And what is grace? Romans 5:21 “That, as sin had power in death, so grace might have power through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Grace has the power of Righteousness into Eternal life—sounds like redemptive power to me.

And again:
Phi 3:8 Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ **
Phi 3:9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith–
Phi 3:10 that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death,**
Phi 3:11 that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead. **
Phi 3:12 Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. **
Phi 3:13 Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead,
Phi 3:14 I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.
Phi 3:15 Let those of us who are mature think this way, and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal that also to you.

(Thanks, Lazerlike42, for posting this in another thread and unwittingly helping me in my understanding!)

Focus here on what Paul says about his suffering. “that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead.” Paul says he wants to share Christ’s sufferings…that by any means possible he may attain the resurrection of the dead. This is no simple “suffering that the gospel be spread!” He suffers for his life! This, of course, is not meant to say he must earn his salvation by suffering, but lo, his suffering certain aids the cause! Even further, in verse 12, he says he hasn’t already attained it (the resurrection from the dead, i.e. Salvation) OR that he is perfect (I leave that one up to the imagination) but he presses on to make it his own, why? Because Christ has made him His own! Even saying he is owned by Christ, he does not think that buys him a ticket into Heaven…but, again, pushes the fact that his suffering will help him get there.

Continued…

 

[Pillar_of_Cloud]

And Paul wasn’t the only one, check out Peter’s thoughts on suffering:

16 But if he undergoes punishment [suffering] as a Christian, that is no shame to him; let him give glory to God in this name.
17 For the time has come for the judging, starting with the church of God; but if it makes a start with us, what will be the end of those who are not under the rule of God?
18 And if it is hard for even the good man to get salvation, what chance has the man without religion or the sinner?
19 For this reason let those who by the purpose of God undergo punishment, keep on in well-doing and put their souls into the safe hands of their Maker. (1 Pt. 4:16-19)

Peter says almost point blank: ‘We suffer now because Judgment has begun.’ These are all good Christians, but assuredly, they are undergoing suffering for the sake of Judgement. …suffering because of Judgement? Purgatory, anyone? Of course, these people are working off their Purgatorial time during life, since they’re not dead quite yet, but, same deal.

Let us look father back in 1 Peter:

Verse 12 and 13, same chapter: Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial among you, which cometh upon you to prove you, as though a strange thing happened unto you: but insomuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings, rejoice; that at the revelation of his glory also ye may rejoice with exceeding joy.”

Let’s define some terminology. Is it agreeable that the “revelation of his glory” refers to the final judgment? If so, those who suffer the “fiery trial” will rejoice with exceeding joy when it comes. Why? Because they have already taken care of their Purgatorial time with redemptive suffering! They’ve already suffered, so it’ll be right to Heaven for them.

And earlier, Chapter 4:1, and then skip to 6: “Forasmuch then as Christ suffered in the flesh, arm ye yourselves also with the same mind; for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin… For unto this end was the gospel preached even to the dead, that they might be judged indeed according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.”

He who suffers has ceased from sin. One way of seeing this is that after they have stopped sinning, they suffer. But the other, more sensible interpretation is that suffering, ceases [or as another translation puts it, “puts an end to”] sin. Simply put, suffering eliminates sin. Purgatory does the same, the souls there suffer for their sins, not out of punishment, but for cleansings sake, that they may enter Heaven pure. Look at verse 6, the Gospel preached to the DEAD, that may be JUDGED according to men in the flesh (recall “for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin”) but live according to God in the spirit. In other words, they were cleansed of sin in Purgatory (since, we all agree, that after death it is too late to repent) and let into Heaven. Scripture speaks for itself, human suffering is redemptive when joined to the Cross of Christ and Purgatory is reality.

God bless.

 

[bene7]

Hurst:

The Catholic Church teaches that God has divinely revealed the reality of Purgatory.

The Apostles were taught directly by Christ for three years during His earthly ministry, then after His bodily resurrection He taught them for forty days concerning the things of the kingdom (Acts 1:3). Paul was caught up to the third heaven, Paradise itself, and was personally told many things, so give men the name of the Pope or Prelate who was personally instructed by the Lord on the reality of this place called “Purgatory?” What day, what year was he visited? The doctrine’s not found in Scripture, Paul knew nothing of it, nor did Peter, John, Luke, James or even Jude. In fact Jude says to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” And the doctrine itself militates against Paul’s teachings regarding the cross, so there would have to be direct, divine revelation given for it to supersede what Paul had already been instructed. And who is this god that changes his mind? Can a god like that be trusted?? Or maybe, just maybe, it’s the claim by the Catholic church that says the reality of Purgatory was revealed to it, that can’t be trusted. Unless it can provide proof of this divine revelation. So far it hasn’t. It simply claims to have authority to teach it.

But others have claimed such authority as well. Like the Judaisers in Galatia. And Paul responded with:

GAL 1:6-8 “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you, and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed.”

Now if that man had died while still undergoing temporal punishment and not having finished it, then it would be something to be suffered in purgatory.

A conclusion based on a false premise. The verses you provided had to do with discipline. The Church is to discipline itself and carry out disciplinary action where and when needed. But this has nothing to do with “Purgatory” or the cleansing of one’s sins either in this life or the next.

Bene7:

The true believer is/was purified of ALL sins when he personally put his faith in the Person and work of Jesus Christ.

Hurst:

This is based on an erroneous understanding of what Christ did on the Cross for us. Faith is only the beginning of a life of grace, a certainty of that which is unseen. Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the evidence of things that appear not.

You quote Hebrews 11:1 regarding faith, but it’s in Hebrews 1:3 that we find the content of that faith, as to who Christ is and what He accomplished for us:

HEB 1:3 "And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high;

I am quite aware of a Catholic’s unbelief in the finished work of Christ on the cross. But every time I actually hear one of you verbalize it (or in this case, write it) I am still shocked and taken back.

Blessings,
Bene

 

[bene7]

Hurst:

Then you are accusing St. Paul of unbelief. Speaking to those same people he said were sanctified, he calls them carnal: 1 Cor 1:2 To the church of God that is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that invoke the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, in every place of theirs and ours.

1 Cor 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal. As unto little ones in Christ. 2 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. 3 For, whereas there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal, and walk according to man?

Yes, Paul begins his greetings to the true believers at Corinth with what they actually (objectively) are, now being “in Christ Jesus,” that is, “sanctified,” set apart in Him for God’s eternal purposes. But what Paul is addressing in 3:1 has to do with immaturity, not impurity. The need for experiential sanctification, not regeneration. In fact Paul presents three classifications of humanity in 1 Cor. 2:14 - 3:2:

2:14: The “natural man” (psuchikos): This man doesn’t accept the things of the Spirit of God, they’re foolishness to him, he can’t understand them because they’re spiritually appraised. He’s an unbeliever, not regenerated by the Holy Spirit. The danger is when men such as these are elevated to high positions in the Church.

2:15: The “spiritual man” (pneumtikos): This man understands, is able to grasp, the things of the Spirit. He knows the things freely given to us by God (3:12), those things taught by the Spirit (3:13). He appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no man (i.e, no natural man).

3:1-2: The “fleshly man,” the “babe in Christ” (sarkikos): This was the state of the Corinthian believers. As believers they were already sanctified (set apart) in Christ (1:2), but they were still “babes,” spiritually speaking, needing milk to drink. Not able to take “solid food.” They were still “fleshly” in their behavior and walking like mere men; their objectives and affections being as that of the natural men. This was the reason for Paul’s letter to them. They were in need of discipline, to mature in Christ, to walk as spiritual men, then Paul could talk to them as men who could receive the deeper, spiritual truths concerning Christ and what God had freely given to them in Him (3:1; cf. 2:12-13).

None of this had to do with purifying sins. It had to do with the Corinthian believer adjusting his objectives and affections to that of his calling, with who he is, now, “in Christ.” As Paul wrote to the Ephesian church:

EPH 4:1 I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, entreat you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called,

But perhaps you will say that Christ “covers” over our sins, as though they weren’t there. Well, Paul isn’t ignoring them, and is even taking them to task about it.

You’re right, the cross of Christ does not “cover over” our sins. It actually “takes away” our sins: “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29; cf. Col. 2:13-14).

In 1 Cor. 6 Paul chastises these Corinthian “babes” about their behavior. Reminding them that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God, and lists the various* types* of unrighteous. But in 6:11 he says:

**1COR. 6:11 "And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.

Paul does not identify them with the unrighteous, or as sinners in need of redemption. But as believers whose sins have been washed by the blood of Christ, as believers sanctified and justified in His name and in the Spirit of God, yet still in need of discipline and maturity. It wasn’t their sins that needed cleansing (that was done by Christ’s sustitutionary sacrifice), they needed to “clean up their act”.

None of this has to do with “Purgatory,” nor does Paul even present such a concept.

Blessings
Bene**

 

[Sean_Boyle]

If Christ’s death delivered us from sin once and for all. Then why did the good thief still need to died an agonizing death (temporal punishment). Why is there still pain for women in child birth?

God… The Father of Christ the same God that started the Catholic Church through his son doesn’t change.

The god that you create in your mind to justify all your personal interpetations, does.

It’s odd that you use the Christianity founded by The Church to form your own religion. The apostles, the early Church fathers, and Jesus himself never believed your interpetation of scripture.

What is the matter?

Have you been backed into a corner with the biblical verse shared with you that you can’t cope with the fact that you are living and believeing in false docturines? Since your in this position the only defense is to cast far flung accusations about the Church. Many people before you have come to that point just before they decide that the Catholic Church is the Faith taught by Christ and that the Church is Christ’s authority here on earth.

Welcome to the fold. I’m sure that is a little early for you but I can tell you… Your next step on this fourm is to say something outlandish about the Catholic Church then you’ll say something like your leaving the forum for good because we aren’t really christian.

Then over the next couple of months the Holy Spirit will start to lead you to the truth.

Good Luck, let us know how it goes.

 

[bene7]

Pillar of Cloud:

Well said! Your response shows that you know God’s written Word well, and based on your reading, your answer is justifiable. However, my readings of the Scriptures draw a different conclusion to the nature of Christ’s sacrifice, redemptive suffering, and to the “ministry of reconciliation.”

We have agreed that Christ’s sacrifice was Perfect, that Redemption and ALL forgiveness of sins flows from it. You will have no argument from me about that.

But I don’t agree with you that the forgiveness of sins “flows” from the cross of Christ. His sacrifice actually procured, brought into effect, the forgiveness of sins. And everyone who truly believes in Him (not a church) receives the forgiveness of sins He procured through the sacrifice of Himself.

“…in whom we HAVE redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:14).

“Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins” (Acts 10:43).

“Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through Him forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you” (Acts 10:38)

And yet, earlier in his epistle, John says “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1 Jn 1:8-9)

These are believers John is speaking to, those who have been redeemed by Christ.

Actually John here is not directly confronting believers, but the problem of Gnosticism that had infiltrated the churches at that time. Gnostics didn’t believe that God could actually come in the flesh, nor did they believe in the moral concept of sin. Matter was simply an illusion. That’s why he says:

1JOHN 1:8 “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”

It is impossible for a true believer to say he has no sin. The reason one believes in Christ is because he has been convicted by the Spirit of sin. It’s the Gnostic that claimed he had no sin, and the truth was not in him. In 1 John 1:9 John is saying to those who leaned toward the false doctrines of Gnosticism that if they confess (i.e., acknowledge) their sins, He (God) is faithful and righteous (because of Christ’s sin-sacrifice) to forgive them of their sins, and to cleanse them from all unrighteousness (because of the shed blood of Christ on the cross).

1JON 1:10* “If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.”*

No true believer can say that he has not sinned. Or he would have had no reason to believe in Christ in the first place. Obviously the one who says he has no sin calls a God a liar, hence, he is not a believer and the word is not in him.

You need to understand Scripture in its proper context. All Scripture is written for you, but not all Scripture is necessarily written about you.

When addressing believers John writes:

1JOHN 2:12 “I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for His name’s sake.”

God’s Word is very clear on the fact that all who believe in Christ receive the forgiveness of all sins, once for all, and is thoroughly cleansed of his sins. Because is faithful to Christ’s work on the cross, and because of that work is remains just when He forgives those who believe IN HIM.

Blessings,
Bene

 

[bene7]

Sean Boyle:

If Christ’s death delivered us from sin once and for all. Then why did the good thief still need to died an agonizing death (temporal punishment). Why is there still pain for women in child birth?

Jesus told the thief that “today you shall be with me in Paradise” (Lk. 23:43). One must assume Christ recognized his faith in Him as genuine and his sins were forgiven. Otherwise He could not have said to him what He did. The thief was on the cross not because he sinned against God, but Rome. It wasn’t God who sentenced him to that hideous death, it was Rome. When one believes in Christ and God forgives ALL his sins because of Christ’s substitutionary death on the cross, that believer is not immediately transported to Heaven, but still lives in this world and must abide in the laws of the land in which he resides. If a believer violates the laws of the land in which he lives, he must pay the consequences based on those laws. Surely you must understand this!!! The cross of Christ didn’t abrogate the curse of the woman in Gen. 3:16, any more than it did the curse of physical death to all mankind, although it does guarantee “eternal life” to all who believe.

Welcome to the fold. I’m sure that is a little early for you but I can tell you… Your next step on this fourm is to say something outlandish about the Catholic Church then you’ll say something like your leaving the forum for good because we aren’t really christian.

Are you claiming to be a prophet? I’m merely challenging your doctrine of “Purgatory” based on what is written in the Scriptures regarding the cross of Christ and its immediate and eternal effects on the true believer. I’m not judging whether or not you’re “Christian.” Only the validity of this doctrine.

Have you been backed into a corner with the biblical verse shared with you that you can’t cope with the fact that you are living and believeing in false docturines?

What verse are you referring to? Which “false” doctrines am I believing in? That God has pardoned ALL my sins because there is plenty of redemption in the blood of Christ? That Christ Himself, on the cross, made purification of sins? That through faith in Christ I have been sanctified “in Him.” These are what you consider “false” doctrines? If they truly are false, as you say, then it would be true that I am a man most to be pitied. But if they are not false, then…

Blessings,
Bene

 

[Mickey]

bene7:

God’s Word is very clear on the fact that all who believe in Christ receive the forgiveness of all sins

The Fundamentalist resistance to the biblical doctrine of purgatory presumes there is a contradiction between Christ’s redeeming us on the cross and the process by which we are sanctified. There isn’t. And a Fundamentalist cannot say that suffering in the final stage of sanctification conflicts with the sufficiency of Christ’s atonement without saying that suffering in the early stages of sanctification also presents a similar conflict. The Fundamentalist has it backward: Our suffering in sanctification does not take away from the cross. Rather, the cross produces our sanctification, which results in our suffering, because “[f]or the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (Heb. 12:11).
Catholic Answers

 

[ncgolf]

Mickey:

The Fundamentalist resistance to the biblical doctrine of purgatory presumes there is a contradiction between Christ’s redeeming us on the cross and the process by which we are sanctified. There isn’t.

I agree. Justification was and is provided by Christ’s death on Calvary but the process of our santification goes on … sometimes even after death. We can only enter Heaven if we are perfect … ie. have been perfectly sanctified. Purgatory completes only the santification for those who at death are not yet perfect.

I also find confusion in the notion that one knows their eternal state while on earth. Bene would have us believe that he knows he is bound only for heaven. Why then the judgement at death? Each person living right now, based on Bene’s criteria for heaven, should know his/her eternal destiny. God waits until death for this knowledge to be communicated … why can’t you Bene.

I believe the difference is Catholics believe that santification begins at Baptism and continues through life (hence the sacraments) … and for some even after death. Bene … you believe that santification ends with belief.

Big difference.

 

[RonWI]

Personal observation. I often hear Catholics speak of purgatory. I have been to several Catholic funerals. Never once have I heard anyone say, “Our dearly departed now is in purgatory, sanctifiying himself for the life he led.”

To the contrary, everyone (priests included) always takes peace in the fact that “she now has re-joined her beloved husband” or “she certainly does not need our prayers, as she has found the peace that we do not know”.

Like I said, just an observation.

 

[ncgolf]

RonWI:

Personal observation. I often hear Catholics speak of purgatory. I have been to several Catholic funerals. Never once have I heard anyone say, “Our dearly departed now is in purgatory, sanctifiying himself for the life he led.”

To the contrary, everyone (priests included) always takes peace in the fact that “she now has re-joined her beloved husband” or “she certainly does not need our prayers, as she has found the peace that we do not know”.

Like I said, just an observation.

Sorry … I don’t agree. I have never heard a priest say they don’t need our prayers. Never. I was an altar boy and have been to and served at numerous funerals.

I find quite the opposite … rarely, if ever, have I heard a priest say someone is in heaven.

If you would go to daily masses you would hear prayers for the souls in purgatory. I know I do.