Purgatory for Protestants?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bbbbbbb
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No. The books were removed at his insistence. In recent years, Bible publishers have put the books you refer to as the Apocrypha back in together in the back of the Bible.

It might interest you to know that Martin Luther also wanted the books of James (which contradicted his “faith alone” belief), Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation removed.
 
Respectfully, I don’t care what’s in Luther’s version of the Bible. I’m talking about Protestant Bibles like the KJV.
 
Our Lord came to Sister Faustina imploring her to profess his Mercy. He told her to tell the world of his infinite Mercy. This Mercy will not fail us on Earth nor in purgatory. Those who seek God find God. In my own experience, Christ has used my pain to shape my faith and to strengthen my relationship with God. He has shown Mercy every step of the way. Love is merciful. Even in my tiny love I am capable of Mercy. Therefore, God’s mercy is promised and infinite. There are those who reject God. If someone is in relationship with Christ on a daily basis, this is not rejection. It may only be a beginning and purgatory maybe a time, whether for a minute or a thousand years, when we finish the work. I believe that it will be both painful and joyful as we experience the freedom of giving up sin and becoming more like Christ. At least that has been my experience here. Growth can be painful. But once it is attained, past issues dissolve and chains break. Do not be afraid!
 
Trickypixie said:
Purgatory is a second chance.
Click to expand...
Wrong. I take it you aren’t Catholic. If you were, you would realize that Purgatory isn’t a second chance by any stretch of the imagination.

When Catholics go to Confession and are given Absolution, we still have to make restitution or reparation for the wrongs we committed against others. If we die before we can do that or before we’ve finished doing that, we go to Purgatory and are there until God says we’re finished. Then we go to be with Him.

Consider Purgatory the Refiner’s Fire. There is pain and suffering. But in the end, we are as He wants us and we are then allowed into Heaven, our home for eternity.
 
Were it not for purgatory, many people would go straight to hell. It may be painful, but it is a a way to heaven. If I am not prepared for heaven when I die, purgatory will make me ready. For this I am grateful. Just as in this life, growth towards God means death to my Flesh and is painful.

I expect purgatory to be a necessary suffering as well and I expect God to remain his merciful self. This is well within the Catholic teachings on purgatory. Asking me if I’m Catholic is a diversion from the statement. It’s insulting to imply that because I have a different view I could not possibly be Catholic.
 
Without purgatory, the only option is hell. I consider that a second chance. I cannot warrant merit there but God has not discarded me and and there is the promise of salvation. If I’m in purgatory then I failed in this life. If that isn’t a second chance, I don’t know what it is. If you want me to believe that God punishes rather than corrects, I would suggest more prayer. I am a sinner and he has shown me mercy. He has shown me that threw him my suffering has meaning. God does not change and Purgatory will serve the same purpose. It will make me useful to him and I trust that wisdom. If I am not willing to endure the pain then I am not worthy of the Kingdom.
 
  1. Not that we are aware of. The key is we do not know if one died in such a state
  2. Yes, as it is grave matter.
  3. I doubt it can be considered will or knowledge for those who don’t believe in Catholicism to go to Mass.
  4. If they are deserving of purgatory.
  5. Judgement is God’s Alone.
  6. Judgement is God’s Alone.
I recall reading that one saint said that protestants stay in purgatory longer since they don’t have people to pray for them.
 
Last edited:
I am neither Catholic nor Protestant; I am Jewish. But I like your questions! For question #3, it seems to me, just based on logic, that the answer is yes (though, of course, no guarantees for anyone). The (Catholic) Church believes, as I understand it, that even though Protestants remain in their religion, if they are saved, it is THROUGH the Church albeit without the benefits of all the Sacraments. Besides, why would a Protestant go to Mass if they attend their own church? If the answer to question #1 is no, one should remember that in order to be considered a mortal sin, one of the criteria is full knowledge that one has committed a mortal sin, with no repentance; another is that the sin involve grave matter. To me (as a Jew), this is a stumbling block since, according to my faith, G-d judges the totality of a person’s life, which takes precedence over the last commission of an unrepentant mortal sin. My two cents.
 
Last edited:
lilypadrees said:
No. The books were removed at his insistence
Click to expand...
Well, i don’t know what to believe then, you, or Lutherans, or historians who say he included them???
lilypadrees said:
It might interest you to know that Martin Luther also wanted the books of James (which contradicted his “faith alone” belief), Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation removed.
Click to expand...
Oh really, Luther besmirched ! And some have besmirched zealous “clerics” for having besmirched the bible for having caused such a mess !

Luther included them , with prefaces, many sounding like Jerome and other Catholics of good standing.

As to the book of James, perhaps he was overreacting, but understandably so, due to his experience with the institutional church and some of its practices, (some would say abuses) dealing with justification(by righteous works).

I might not totally agree with Luther here, just as you might not totally agree with some of the practices of the church at that time (I mean something was counter reformed).
 
meltzerboy2 said:
To me (as a Jew), this is a stumbling block since, according to my faith, G-d judges the totality of a person’s life, which takes precedence over the last commission of an unrepentant mortal sin. My two cents.
Click to expand...
I partly agree. I may not be saying it right but don’t agree with the ok with G-d today, maybe not ok tomorrow, and so on and so on. Yet don’t mind daily reflection. But it is not like you are written in the book of life, then you not, then you are, back and forth if dealing with a grave matter thru confessional.

As to totality of life, well we by ourselves are in trouble. As pointed out, every jot an tittle wile be judged, and every penny paid back so to speak.

Kind of like always stopping at your local stop sign, I mean a million times, but just once you kind of run it…still have to pay the ticket, irregardless, all your good times will not sway the judge…coulda killed somebody, and the law requires penalty…

may cause stumbling , but G-d is a holy G-d, as suggested by leaving our vowel out, and all sin big or small, requires blood washing, being placed upon the lamb…, our only hope
 
Trickypixie said:
Purgatory is a second chance.
Click to expand...
I will make a deal with you Trixypixie, if stop misrepresenting Catholic teaching like you did here, i will start respecting your post. Please learn what purgator really is, PLEASE!

Peace!!!
 
Last edited:
lilypadrees said:
No. The books were removed at his insistence. In recent years, Bible publishers have put the books you refer to as the Apocrypha back in together in the back of the Bible.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. I have a copy of Luther’s translation. It is still in print. It still contains 74 books, just like it did in 1534.
lilypadrees said:
It might interest you to know that Martin Luther also wanted the books of James (which contradicted his “faith alone” belief), Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation removed.
Click to expand...
Actually, James doesn’t. As for him wanting to remove it. You will need to provide a source, since his commentary, he praises it. He does question its authorship, as did many going back to Eusebius who, among others, rejected it.
It was not luther who named it and the other books you mentioned, antilagomena.
lilypadrees said:
Respectfully, I don’t care what’s in Luther’s version of the Bible. I’m talking about Protestant Bibles like the KJV.
Click to expand...
The KJV of 1611 contained then, too, as does the Bible on our lectern. There are numerous readings from them throughout the year.
 
I’ll try one more time. While I am on Earth if I follow the church’s teachings I have a chance to avoid purgatory and go straight to heaven. If I fail to live up to the teachings, rather than sending me to hell, my merciful god has a place called purgatory where I will be purged of my sins and made perfect as nothing that is not perfect may Heaven. I warrant hell yet I am given purgatory. Purgatory will be painful as it will rid me of myself and my sin. The pain will be worth it as in the end I will become what God wishes Which is far more than I can dream of in my current state. You are upset because I see it as a merciful second chance. I don’t view my trials as punishment. You’re quite mean. Your meanness blinds you to the fact that we are basically saying the same thing. The difference is that I see the suffering in purgatory as a mercy and you see it as a punishment. To explore God’s mercy please read sister faustina’s diary. I found it enlightening and so did St John Paul the Great.
 
I’m glad you agree with me, if only in part. And I as well agree with you…in part. Where we differ, based on our religious teachings I think, is that the comparison between G-d’s judgment and human judgment, while to an extent may be true, is ultimately a faulty one. This is because G-d’s judgment is infinitely merciful and His mercy is inextricably linked to His justice. I would even say G-d’s mercy is the core of His justice, so that even if we do not meet His standards of practicing the Law to its fullest, He understands and can/will forgive us our shortcomings, so long as we repent and strive toward improvement, gradually and incrementally. Insofar as the shedding of blood is concerned, I have addressed the Jewish position on this so many times that I don’t feel the need to rehash the same apologetic arguments, so I’m leaving this point aside.
 
Again, I am referring to the KJV which is recognized as the officially authorized Protestant Bible.
 
JonNC said:
40.png
lilypadrees:
No. The books were removed at his insistence. In recent years, Bible publishers have put the books you refer to as the Apocrypha back in together in the back of the Bible.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. I have a copy of Luther’s translation. It is still in print. It still contains 74 books, just like it did in 1534.
lilypadrees said:
It might interest you to know that Martin Luther also wanted the books of James (which contradicted his “faith alone” belief), Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation removed.
Click to expand...
Actually, James doesn’t. As for him wanting to remove it. You will need to provide a source, since his commentary, he praises it. He does question its authorship, as did many going back to Eusebius who, among others, rejected it.
It was not luther who named it and the other books you mentioned, antilagomena.
lilypadrees said:
Respectfully, I don’t care what’s in Luther’s version of the Bible. I’m talking about Protestant Bibles like the KJV.
Click to expand...
The KJV of 1611 contained then, too, as does the Bible on our lectern. There are numerous readings from them throughout the year.
Click to expand...
Yes, the 1611 KJV contained all the books. This was before they were removed. If you will do your research, you will find the books were gradually removed from later editions. Only in recent years, have Bible publishers returned them to various versions of the Protestant Bible, usually in the back rather than where they were originally.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top