Purgatory Article

  • Thread starter Thread starter graphite
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
His audience already believes that the debt of sin can be paid after death. He’s teaching that there are some sins that cannot be forgiven even after death. And that teaching is probably not even an entirely new idea for them.
 
Last edited:
More precisely, Jesus’ teaching is the Catholic doctrine of venial sin versus mortal sin.

You’re having so much trouble here because you’re understanding Tim to be making a much more absolute and stand alone statement than he actually is. You’re objecting to a straw man.
 
Last edited:
graphite said:
My argument is that the claim that the author of the article, Tim Staples, makes by saying (in written word, NOT in spoken word as Arkansan states by conflating the original text vs. the Article itself) “This declaration of our Lord implies there are at least some sins that can be forgiven in the next life to a people who already believed it.” has committed a logical fallacy and I would expect the author to admit that and to retract it. He cannot use the scripture presented to claim this is evidence of Purgatory through what is a clear logical error. If there are other arguments for Purgatory, that is fine, we can discuss. But, this particular claim is erroneous.
Click to expand...
Tim never claimed this was evidence for Purgatory. He was simply implying that since a time frame was not placed on the beginning statement then it is possible to conclude that some sins can be forgiven in the age to come.

I’m not seeing how me asking for evidence to the contrary makes me an insane Catholic. I would think a logical person would consider the person who doesn’t ask questions to be the insane one 🤔
graphite said:
The author makes an erroneous inference by claiming the passage implies that Purgatory exists for reasons I have already covered.
Click to expand...
Once again the author never makes this claim. Maybe this is why you are having troubles with Tim’s words. He’s speaking about when sins are being forgiven in this verse. But you keep reading his words as if he is using this verse as a proof text for purgatory.

The definition of implied means to suggest but not directly express. Like I said I know of no where in the Bible that explicitly states sins are only forgiven ONLY in this life. That lack of evidence would make Tim’s implication valid. Not seeing how you can claim your argument is logical when you have no evidence to back up your claim.

God Bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top