Purgatory-the risks of teaching it to new Catholics

[steve-b]

steve-b:

As YOU can see, what I said is what the Church teaches. Purgatory explained

Note: back in Post 188 “money money money” is the argument used by @ReadTheBible. That old argument is also addressed.

Perhaps you need to read slower.

1 Corinthians 3:10-15 -
10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.
14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
15 If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire

This is your best evidence for purgatory?

Assuming one isn’t gointgto hell,

Those passages show what happensfor someone who is saved BUT after one dies and before entrance to heaven. They go through a process. You’re NOT addressing that point.

ReadTheBible:

On judgement day every human’s work and life will be be revealed?.

True

ReadTheBible:

That passage says nothing about a person suffering or the soul suffering

When the passage says one “suffers loss” through the process of being tested in fire, does it sound like a pleasant experience?

ReadTheBible:

. Do you believe people are in purgatory now and you or any other human can do anything to lessen their time spent there?

I’ll just say, If a Protestant is in purgatory, based on Protestants not believing in purgatory, then Protestants aren’t praying for their dead.

That’s assuming in a positive view, there are Protestants in purgatory going to heaven.

I say it that way because Jesus did tell us in advance, from His lips to our ears

Few make it to heaven

As in most go to hell.

 

[vz71]

If you were to ask most Catholics what the purpose of purgatory is, what would most Catholics say? They would generally say that it exists to purify people who are saved.

If you are going to argue against something, wouldn’t it be a wise idea to pull the actual teaching instead of a popular answer?

 

[steve-b]

The Bible teaches there will be weeping and knashing of teeth.

It also states in Revelation 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Not sure how you’re relating that to the topic…

Who’s being referenced?

He’s talking about those who actually Make it to heaven.

 

[ReadTheBible]

This is from the Apostle Paul and he explains what happens to the dead and leaves zero doubt.

1 Thessalonians 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

This can’t be any easier to understand. Paul explicitly states he wants people to know and not be ignorant to what happens to people who die.He states sorrow not. Why does he say this? Do you think Paul explicitly tells us not to worry for the dead but there’s some hidden meaning we are to pray for the dead? That makes absolutely no sense. None.

It explains yet again when the dead shall be risen from sleep. The dead, all the dead, shall rise but the dead in Christ shall rise first. It’s again crystal clear and it’s pointed out by Paul to be crystal clear so there can be no ignorance pertaining to death.

 

[nogames]

nogames:

If you were to ask most Catholics what the purpose of purgatory is, what would most Catholics say? They would generally say that it exists to purify people who are saved.

If you are going to argue against something, wouldn’t it be a wise idea to pull the actual teaching instead of a popular answer?

That is exactly my point. Early in this thread, it was shown what the actual teachings about purgatory are. But then someone brought up the passage from 1 Cor. 3:10-15 as an alleged reference to purgatory! Suddenly, purgatory wasn’t for the purification of PEOPLE anymore! It is now for the burning of bad works! Where does the bible tell us that when our bad works are burned-up, we magically become good people?

BTW, can you explain what good it might do to rely upon the infallible teaching ministry of the Catholic Church, if there are so many Catholics HERE (who should know what their church teaches) that are confused about the purpose and the effects of purgatory? Does it exist to purify PEOPLE, or to reveal the quality of their works? Does the burning of our bad works (leaving only the good works) make us pure enough for heaven? Why couldn’t God purify everyone’s works, so that everyone can go to heaven? It looks to me as though God has just burned-up your error on purgatory! That teaching must not be a good work!

 

[Pup7]

This is all spelled out in the Catechism, and referenced. 1020-1041 is pretty specific.

And God can’t purify everyone - because some turn against Him. (And this is across Christianity; as a Methodist I was taught about Hell for certain.)

CCC, 1033: We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves…To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell”.

 

[Usagi]

Right.

nogames, this is what people were trying to say earlier on whether the purgatory experience can change the will of a person.

There is the fundamental orientation of the will toward or away from God. God’s grace is required to turn our wills toward him; we cannot do so by any effort of our own. At best, we can (by God’s prevenient grace) approach and ask for His mercy (whether by seeking baptism as a Catholic, Orthodox, or mainline Protestant or via a sinner’s prayer/altar call according to other Protestants). Most everyone but the Calvinists agrees that we can, instead, obstinately refuse God’s grace, and some of us hold that we can turn away from it after it has initially been granted). At death, if we have resisted God’s grace and kept our will turned away from Him, our destination is Hell. If we have accepted God’s grace (made available through Jesus’ sacrifice), we are bound for Heaven. I don’t think there’s anything unbiblical or disagreeable to most Christians in that.

Beyond that moment of initial justification, there is for most of us a “Christian walk” that takes up the rest of our lives and, it is to be hoped, results in us being conformed more and more to God’s will. The Protestants I am familiar with call this process sanctification and are very careful to distinguish it from that initial moment of justification. Catholics also believe in this process, perhaps emphasizing it even more than our brother Christians because we focus on being saved as a matter of being made holy, not simply being declared holy by virtue of what Jesus did for us. Nevertheless, our ongoing sanctification too is the work of Christ, and while we participate, usually the best we can do is get our own wills out of the way and let Him work.

Now, we observe that most Christians who die are not entirely sanctified — not by any failing of Jesus or His Cross, of course, but because He has chosen to work with us in time instead of just blasting us into perfect people instantly.

But we believe that we will be perfect in Heaven. (And unlike readthebible, we believe in accordance with other Scriptures and considerable Christian consensus that our afterlife starts immediately upon death, not only after the Last Judgment.) So there must be some transition in which our remaining sanctification is completed. It doesn’t have to take time and it doesn’t have to be in a separate place — perhaps all desire to sin is simply wiped away by that first glimpse of our Lord in His full glory — but logic suggests it happens. Catholics have come to call that experience “purgatory.” Like our sanctification in life, this doesn’t replace or negate the Cross of Christ — it exists only because Jesus died to take away our sins and make us like Himself.

Because it completes the sanctification of the already saved rather than being involved in initial justification, the purgatory experience may turn our will more perfectly toward God, but it doesn’t change that initial orientation away from or toward God in the first place. That is what people mean by saying purgatory would not be of use to move the wills of the damned.

 

[vz71]

If you work hard at it, and prove a falsely held understanding to be wrong; you have said nothing about the actual teaching.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

When the passage says one “suffers loss” through the process of being tested in fire, does it sound like a pleasant experience?

I intentionally bolded man’s work in those verses. You are caught up in the fire aspect yet do not look at what they say. The work is revealed by fire. It’s not the person or soul sitting in purgatory or anywhere else.

It doesn’t matter what you bolded. You miss the context as you have throughout the discussion.

ReadTheBible:

You’re free to think that but the scripture simply doesn’t say so.
You are catholic and you must submit to what the church tells you the meaning of those verses are. I am bound to scripture alone and the catholic church holds no authority over me.

1. The Catholic Church, the only Church Jesus established 2000 yrs ago on Peter and those in union with him, and is here today, with pope Francis 266th successor to St Peter, is the pillar and foundation of truth …, not you
2. Do you even know where you got the bible? It was from the Catholic Church.

Up to the year 382, there WAS no bible because there was no closed canon. So there was no idea of scripture alone until Martin Luther, 1100 years later, an excommunicated Catholic Priest who was declared a heretic.

You say you’re scripture alone. Well then, buckle up buckaroo

Scripture is also tradition. It happens to be the written variety of tradition
2 Thes 2:15
From the Greek study bible ἄρα οὖν, ἀδελφοί, στήκετε stand firm, persevere , καὶ κρατεῖτε hold fast τὰς παραδόσεις traditions ἃς ἐδιδάχθητε taught εἴτε διὰ whether by λόγου (statement ) or (letter / epistle) ἡμῶν. (from us)

It is NOT by letter alone. and Not by word of mouth alone.
Both oral AND letter are to be held firm to.

As for Protestantism,

All division, dissension, schism, sedition, from the Church (the Catholic Church) established by Jesus on Peter and those united to him, is condemned. As in those, who are in division and keep it going to this day and for all time.

If you want the scripture and history references, all properly referenced, just ask.

I’ll address the rest of your post to follow

 

[steve-b]

The bible is clear. Catholicism puts their own interpretations into a couple verses and made up the word purgatory. There is no mention of that by any prophet since the beginning of time and not even the catholic church will argue that truth.

Job 7:9 As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away: so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more. 10 He shall return no more to his house, neither shall his place know him any more.

This next passage is irrefutable evidence there is no such thing as purgatory.

Good grief!!!

If you’re going to use THAT passage as you do, then there is no resurrection of the dead either.

ReadTheBible:

Job 14:14 If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.15 Thou shalt call, and I will answer thee: thou wilt have a desire to the work of thine hands.16 For now thou numberest my steps: dost thou not watch over my sin? 17 My transgression is sealed up in a bag, and thou sewest up mine iniquity.

Could anyone officially go to heaven in the OT? If they could, then they didn’t need Jesus, and The OT would have been just fine. No need for the NT either.
The OT speaks in types and shadows.

ReadTheBible:

From the moment he dies Job knows his transgressions are known full to God and there is nothing left to do. Daniel doesn’t come along later and pray for Job to get out of purgatory to make it to heaven.

Another example.

1 Corinthians 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.

How does the church explain these examples

[snip for space]

While Jesus body was in the tomb, was He asleep for 3 days, with no idea of anything for those 3 days? NO

As Peter said.

Jesus in that time between death on the cross and His resurrection, Jesus went to preach to the souls in prison

To be clear,

Jesus body is dead. NOT so for His spirit/soul. AND Jesus descended to preach to those souls in prison, and note, they were able to hear and understand what Jesus was telling them. So while their bodies have been dead since the time of Noah, and they are not in a happy place, they are in a prison, doing time if you will, till they can be released.

IOW, where they are they CAN be released. There are those in in a place, who can’t be released. The place Jesus distinguished as hell of the damned

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

As for Protestantism,

All division, dissension, schism, sedition, from the Church (the Catholic Church) established by Jesus on Peter and those united to him, is condemned. As in those, who are in division and keep it going to this day and for all time.

If you wish to discuss traditions we could discuss traditions of Papacy killing christians for owning a bible. We can start an entire topic on the traditions of catholicism and see how grotesque and utterly vile they were. For over a 1000 years the papacy ruled over the saints with an iron fist

[snip for space]

I’ve seen all of the Jack Chick screed. We’re talking about history. The Catholic Church has been here since instituted by Jesus. And since the topic of this thread covers purgatory, & teaching of the Catholic Church, then the topic can take a fairly wide swath in this topic.

ReadTheBible:

You’re wrong about Peter in Rome.There’s no proof that Peter was ever in Rome let alone founded a church there.

Peter was crucified upside down on Vatican Hill. He is buried under the altar, in the Vatican, in St Peter’s in Rome.

ReadTheBible:

Paul was in Rome. It’s funny how Paul goes to great lengths to mention everyone of stature in Rome yet never once mentions Peter.

In the book of Romans, Paul writes to Rome, saying he hasn’t been there …Yet.
He and Peter were both in Rome. They both built the Church of Rome. Peter focused on the Jews and Paul focused on the Gentiles.

Bp Ignatius of Antioch, was ordained ~69 a.d., was a direct disciple of John the apostle. Ignatius writes to the Church of Rome, “Not as Peter and Paul did, do I command you [Romans]. They were apostles, and I am a convict” Epistle to the Romans 4:3

I can give lots of quotes.

ReadtheBible:

Catholicism tries to use Peter as their foundation in order to lend more credence to their authority. Neither Peter, nor any Pope ever so entitled is the head of the church. Jesus alone is. Catholicsm played a part in canonizing the bible. Do you not think God preserves his word no matter what instrument he chooses to do so with? Was it not God who through Nebuchadnezzar showed Daniel the end times? Was it not God who proclaimed Cyrus to be the one to let the children of Israel return 150 years before Cyrus was born? God promised his word would last forever.

Who is feeding you your information?

Now for some history

to follow

 

[steve-b]

Catholicism tries to use Peter as their foundation in order to lend more credence to their authority. Neither Peter, nor any Pope ever so entitled is the head of the church. Jesus alone is. Catholicsm played a part in canonizing the bible. Do you not think God preserves his word no matter what instrument he chooses to do so with? Was it not God who through Nebuchadnezzar showed Daniel the end times? Was it not God who proclaimed Cyrus to be the one to let the children of Israel return 150 years before Cyrus was born? God promised his word would last forever.

steve-b:

Who is feeding you your information?

Now for some history

to follow

Here it is

Acts 9:31
From the Greek Study Bible
Ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐκκλησία καθ’ ὅλης τῆς

Translation:
ἐκκλησία = church http://bibleapps.com/greek/1577.htm ,
καθ’ = according to http://bibleapps.com/greek/2596.htm ,
ὅλης = whole http://bibleapps.com/greek/3650.htm ,
τῆς = the http://bibleapps.com/greek/3588.htm , Judea and Galilee and Sama’ria…"
= the Kataholos Church = the Catholic Church.

Any doubts on that?

Ignatius of Antioch, was ordained by the apostles, and made bishop of Antioch ~69 a.d. That is before the book of Acts is written. He was also a direct disciple of St John the apostle. Ignatius wrote 6 letters to the Church in 6 locations. In his writings, he is calling the “Church” he’s writing to the Catholic Church.

St Ignatius, uses Christian in (ch 2) and Catholic Church in (ch 8) in his Epistle to the Smyrnæans http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0109.htm
Also note: He writes, schismatics won’t be going to heaven, in his Epistle to the Philadelphians (ch 3) . http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0108.htm .

Ignatius is passing on what he learned from the apostles.

And you as a Protestant will ask, what apostle wrote about that?

It was Paul

Romans and Galatians both quotes use the same Greek word [διχοστασίαι,] for dissension / division /schism And the consequence for that sin if one won’t return to the Catholic Church? Paul says “I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God”. IOW they go to hell when they die

Where did Paul get that warning from?

That condemnation for division came from Jesus who condemns division from His Church John 17 , and since the HS only teaches what comes from Jesus no one then can say anytime in history, the HS inspired THEM to divide from, or inspired all the dissensions / divisions / schisms we see see today in Christianity, to divide from the Catholic Church.

ReadTheBible:

Do not think for a second it was for the glory of catholocism that the bible exists.

The NT was written in, by, for, the Catholic Church

 

[ReadTheBible]

Peter was crucified upside down on Vatican Hill. He is buried under the altar, in the Vatican, in St Peter’s in Rome.

That simply isn’t true. Catholicism stating something doesn’t make it true. I think this is what you will never cease to cling to. Paul on his 4th missionary to Rome, 61 to 63 A.D, During that time he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon. Still not once did he mention Peter. Some historians, scholars, think Peter was in Rome when he wrote 1st Peter. They will ague he used symbolic language saying Babylon in place of Rome. But if you study closely the Parthians, who were from Babylon, were among the Jews during Pentecost in 30 A.D. - see Acts 2:9

Babylon was a city of the Parthian Empire at that time and suggests Peter listened to Jesus when he was told to travel to a territory ruled by the 10 tribes.

Peter wrote his 2nd letter 65 and 66 A.D.He never mentions being in Rome nor does he say he’s writing from Rome.He likely died in 67 or 68 AD and it remains possible during that time he visited Rome but it doesn’t seem likely.

 

[ReadTheBible]

Could anyone officially go to heaven in the OT? If they could, then they didn’t need Jesus, and The OT would have been just fine. No need for the NT either.

The OT speaks in types and shadows.

No human has entered heaven except Jesus and he’s the one who said this in John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

 

[ReadTheBible]

The NT was written in, by, for, the Catholic Church

That is heresy. The word of God was with God in the beginning and he promised it would last forever…

John 1:In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Psalm 12:6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Mark 13:31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

God’s word is for all. You say it is “for, the Catholic Church” - that’s simply not true.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

The way to attain Heaven may have changed (sort of), but humanity’s need for healing didn’t, nor did the fact that sin damages the soul.

Beyond this, Jesus spoke clearly about cleaning fire. If someone were damned, there would be no need for cleansing, as those in Hell are unclean. The only reason there would be a need for cleansing flame is if there were a state in which we are saved, but not use fully pure.

 

[ReadTheBible]

Jesus spoke clearly about cleaning fire.

Please provide the verses.

Here’s my question to you or anyone. Do you in fact believe humans have died, gone through purgatory, and entered heaven?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

ProdglArchitect:

Jesus spoke clearly about cleaning fire.

Please provide the verses.

Here’s my question to you or anyone. Do you in fact believe humans have died, gone through purgatory, and entered heaven?

The verses were provided in that link earlier in the discussion. I’m not going to repeat them again (simply because I do not have the time at the moment.) I encourage you to really read through that link, as it provides a fairly comprehensive overview of the Catholic position.

And yes, I believe that most of the people in Heaven went through purgatory. We even have accounts of souls in purgatory appearing to loved ones to request prayers. Some of them even left physical evidence. For instance, look up Sr. Teresa Gesta - From the Franciscan Sisters of the Cross in Foligna. She appeared to one of the sisters of the monastery and left a burnt hand print on a door.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

steve-b:

The NT was written in, by, for, the Catholic Church

That is heresy. The word of God was with God in the beginning and he promised it would last forever…

No, it is not Heresy. The NT was quite clearly written down, and it was written down by first century Catholics, and then compiled by the Catholic Church to be used for the instruction of Catholics (And those seeking to become Catholic)… This is a matter of History.

Christ is certainly present in the NT in a unique and real way, but to deny that the NT was written down and compiled is pure folly.

Feel free to respond to either post, but I’m not going to be able to respond any time soon. God Bless, and really, I encourage you to thoroughly read that link with an open mind. The Early Church Fathers wrote about purgatory, there is plenty of evidence for its historic belief.

 

[steve-b]

steve-b:

Peter was crucified upside down on Vatican Hill. He is buried under the altar, in the Vatican, in St Peter’s in Rome.

That simply isn’t true. Catholicism stating something doesn’t make it true. I think this is what you will never cease to cling to. Paul on his 4th missionary to Rome, 61 to 63 A.D, During that time he wrote Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon. Still not once did he mention Peter. Some historians, scholars, think Peter was in Rome when he wrote 1st Peter. They will ague he used symbolic language saying Babylon in place of Rome. But if you study closely the Parthians, who were from Babylon, were among the Jews during Pentecost in 30 A.D. - see Acts 2:9

When Saul was converted, and became Paul, which apostle did Paul specifically go to see twice, the second time to make sure he was teaching correctly? It was Peter.

ReadTheBible:

Babylon was a city of the Parthian Empire at that time and suggests Peter listened to Jesus when he was told to travel to a territory ruled by the 10 tribes.

Peter wrote his 2nd letter 65 and 66 A.D.He never mentions being in Rome nor does he say he’s writing from Rome.He likely died in 67 or 68 AD and it remains possible during that time he visited Rome but it doesn’t seem likely.

Unlike your responses I give references properly referenced