purgatory

[SteveGC]

My goodness, moon. Going on two years on these forums for you, and you still fail to get Catholic teaching. What’s disappointing is that I know you know the Catechism, have probably read it many times, and you STILL think the works we focus on are works of the Law…works without Christ. I’m not sure how many different ways we can explain this to you…

Our works are no different than the works you claim to partake of, in terms of their origin; we keep saying this, but you keep claiming we do works on our own, through our own human power, in an attempt to gain merit with God. You keep thinking that, and that leads me nowhere but to the belief that you are biased beyond repair. Such obstinance in the face of facts and repeated explanation is mesmerizing.

Why don’t you accept this fact once and for all, and limit your problems with our teachings to the real issues…such as whether or not eternal life in heaven is declared for you as absolutely certain while you are still alive on earth? That’s your definition of salvation, and it inhibits you from seeing the truth of the necessity of Graceful work (love, charity). I still wonder if you frequent other protestant sites and argue OSAS with them - as Catholics are nowhere near alone in their belief in salvation as a lifelong process, and that we can reject God at any moment after some initial conversion event, regardless of how heartfelt, humble and authentic that might’ve been.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

moondweller:

I’ve taken a lot of time to study Rome’s theology.

Rome’s Theology? Do you mean Catholic Theology? The Theology of the Orthodox Churches, the Byzantine and Roman Catholic Churches, which all share the same Theology? Do you include The Church of England, and Episcopalian Churches too? They also agree with “Rome’s theology.” You can also add several more mainline Protestant Churches to what you refer to as “Rome’s theology.” At least in what constitutes Salvation doctrine.

Basically you represent the non-organized religion theology, or Evangelical non-denominational, private judgment theology of the individual, where no two people agree on anything. That is your anchor and your sure harbor?

 

[yankee_drifter]

Folks, you can see how this goes…

Yankee_drifter posted one of his standard cut&paste posts from an Internet website attacking the Catholic Church for A) changing the form of baptism from immersion to pouring and B) baptizing infants.

I responded with three posts chock full of scriptures and quotes from the Early Church Fathers demonstrating that both practices were clearly known in the early centuries. I took some time to research and respond to each of his cut & paste quotes from……“Catholic” sources.

Having been silenced by my responses, Yankee_drifter attempts to divert our attention by taking me to task for being off topic.

One wonders why HE brought up baptism in the first place?

Randy, you repeatedly ask for references and I gave the citations, all catholic sources, one from a handbook for the catholic clergy and you said: That’s not a catholic source! I quoted accurately, giving credit to each source and you cry: foul! He’s cutting and pasting!

Also, many of your postings are direct verbatim from web sites. As are many posts.

We debated and you showed a misunderstanding of much of the Scriptures. You could not tell me what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is. When I gave you proof that purgatory does not exist because Christ paid our sin debt in full and purifies the sinner who comes to Him in true repentance, and I showed you in Hebrews where it says that Christ has effected man’s purgation from sin (Heb. 1:3) but you won’t accept what the Bible says,

Jakob has started a new thread on baptism…see you there.

 

[Thing]

**When I gave you proof that purgatory does not exist **because Christ paid our sin debt in full and purifies the sinner who comes to Him in true repentance, and I showed you in Hebrews where it says that Christ has effected man’s purgation from sin (Heb. 1:3) **but you won’t accept what he Bible says, **

Oh Hi.
Where is this place?

34 And his lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all the debt. 35 So also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

 

[yankee_drifter]

Oh Hi.
Where is this place?

34 And his lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all the debt. 35 So also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

I assume you are referring to Matt 18:34-35, although you omit the complete reference.

This passage has nothing to do with "purgatory.’ It talks about a hypothetical situation. It shows how unbelievable it would be for a Christian, who’s sins have been forgiven by Christ, to turn around and be unforgiving of others. An unforgiving servant is called a wicked servant because no true believer would do such. A truly saved christian would never behave like the man in the story, who was delivered to the tormentors (jailers). One behaving in this manner falls into the condemnation of the lost, not the born-again christian. True forgiveness, from the heart of a regenerate person is one of the signs of genuine salvation and conversion.

Why, if many passages say Christ paid our sin debt in full and purifies the sinner who turns to Him, why are you still looking for a lone passage or isolated verse (which has nothing to do with it anyway) to claim otherwise?

 

[Thing]

I assume you are referring to Matt 18:34-35, although you omit the complete reference.

This passage has nothing to do with "purgatory.’ It talks about a hypothetical situation. It shows how unbelievable it would be for a Christian, who’s sins have been forgiven by Christ, to turn around and be unforgiving of others. An unforgiving servant is called a wicked servant because no true believer would do such. A truly saved christian would never behave like the man in the story, who was delivered to the tormentors (jailers). One behaving in this manner falls into the condemnation of the lost, not the born-again christian. True forgiveness, from the heart of a regenerate person is one of the signs of genuine salvation and conversion.

Why, if many passages say Christ paid our sin debt in full and purifies the sinner who turns to Him, why are you still looking for a lone passage or isolated verse (which has nothing to do with it anyway) to claim otherwise?

34 And his lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all the debt. 35 So also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

I did not omit the complete reference, if you asked for it you would have received it.

One behaving in this manner falls into the condemnation of the lost, not the born-again christian

This is not true. Of all analogies Christ could, as God He knows all the best ones, have used He chose one where the person is cast into jail, pays for his crime over a certain period, and then is released.
Many times He tell of those who are cut off and gathered up and burned in the furnace, or given to the fire that never quenches and the worm that never dies, or they go to their destruction.

However the way He chose was to say that the torture is for a period until the debt is repaid, then the person is released.

But you have chosen to change Holy Scripture to suit yourself by saying that in the example Christ gave the person was lost with the ‘condemnation of the lost’.

If you do not believe this, that the person is condemned and lost forever then please explain to me where this place is that the person was held in for a time and then released when their debt was repaid?

Why, if many passages say Christ paid our sin debt in full and purifies the sinner who turns to Him, why are you still looking for a lone passage or isolated verse (which has nothing to do with it anyway) to claim otherwise?

Because if all Scripture is inspired by God then you must not neglect even one verse because it contradicts your interpretation.

Those people in purgatory whom Christ must be speaking of are already saved when they are in purgatory, as they are released from it after a period. So purgatory as explained by Christ does not contradict Scripture which say Christ saves us, saved us or whatever. The person who makes it to purgatory is already saved, as Christ said, they are released when they have paid their debt.

 

[SteveGC]

Christ paid our sin debt in full and purifies the sinner who comes to Him in true repentance, and I showed you in Hebrews where it says that Christ has effected man’s purgation from sin (Heb. 1:3) but you won’t accept what the Bible says,

I think that you think you’ve proven Randy wrong about purgatory because you believe in once saved - always saved. Is that a belief of yours? I’m not seeing in Hebrews 1:3 that this refers to purification for entry into heaven, or purification from all sins for which we have not repented.

What I see here is a purification from sins for which we have repented. In other words, forgiveness of sins. I believe purification can be used in one sense to refer to a final cleansing for the eternally saved, which brings them fully into their God-like image so that they may bear to see Him face to face (purgatory), and it can also refer to forgiveness of repented sin. I believe Hebrews 1:3 is referring to the latter. You seem to think that coming to Christ in true repentance at one point in time (a single event of repentance) effects a full purification of all future sins, making a further presumption that one would repent for all future sins, a highly implausible reality for most Christians. Also, as Randy has alluded to…you are very presumptuous about man’s readiness for entry into eternal glory through just the act of a one-time repentance. I know with God all things are possible, but do you not believe in any sort of anteroom of heaven, wherein our transition from this world into the next involves some sort of shedding of ourselves and dressing for the occasion?

All I’m saying is that you showing Randy that purgatory (final purification from the remnant of all sins) is negated biblically is still highly debatable.

 

[SteveGC]

I assume you are referring to Matt 18:34-35, although you omit the complete reference.

This passage has nothing to do with "purgatory.’ It talks about a hypothetical situation. It shows how unbelievable it would be for a Christian, who’s sins have been forgiven by Christ, to turn around and be unforgiving of others. An unforgiving servant is called a wicked servant because no true believer would do such. A truly saved christian would never behave like the man in the story, who was delivered to the tormentors (jailers). One behaving in this manner falls into the condemnation of the lost, not the born-again christian. True forgiveness, from the heart of a regenerate person is one of the signs of genuine salvation and conversion.

Why, if many passages say Christ paid our sin debt in full and purifies the sinner who turns to Him, why are you still looking for a lone passage or isolated verse (which has nothing to do with it anyway) to claim otherwise?

So, would it be “unbelievable” for a “true believer” to sin at all? Or are you just saying that being unforgiving is an unbelievable sin for the “true believer”? What sins would be believable, since I assume (and hope) you don’t think that believers avoid all sin?

 

[paul_c]

We debated and you showed a misunderstanding of much of the Scriptures. You could not tell me what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is. When I gave you proof that purgatory does not exist because Christ paid our sin debt in full and purifies the sinner who comes to Him in true repentance, and I showed you in Hebrews where it says that Christ has effected man’s purgation from sin (Heb. 1:3) but you won’t accept what the Bible says,

Jakob has started a new thread on baptism…see you there.

On the Contrary, Randy showed he understood scripture and you showed you did not. Christ paid the debt for our previous sins - previous in the sense that we are forgiven the sins prior to our baptism, when we are born again in Christ. You have never shown through scripture or otherwise that Jesus forgives post -baptismal sins other than through the sacrament of reconciliation. All those references you have about Jesus forgiving our sins and paying our debt in full refer to his action when we first come to him in baptism and he gives us new life. Your challenge is to prove otherwise. Good luck…

And I’ll start you off with a clear statement from Romans3: 24-26 :
They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as an expiation, through faith, by his blood, to prove his righteousness because of the forgiveness of sins previously committed, through the forbearance of God–to prove his righteousness in the present time, that he might be righteous and justify the one who has faith in Jesus

Please note, that Paul is explicit that Jesus redemptive grace applies to sins previously committed. . Not for all sins past, present and future as you claim, but only those committed prior to our redemption.

 

[PRmerger]

I assume you are referring to Matt 18:34-35, although you omit the complete reference.

This passage has nothing to do with "purgatory.’

You are telling Catholics that our interpretation of that verse is wrong, which brings me to this question: **yankee, are you an infallible interpreter of Scripture? ** If not (and I assume you don’t claim infallibility ) who are you to say that your interpretation of this verse is right and ours is wrong? Your assertion is based on your own personal, private reading of the Bible. Why do you not extend this privilege to Catholics as well?

Also, you criticize the CC’s observance of “rituals”. Does your church observe the Lord’s Supper?
-if NOT, then aren’t you disobeying Jesus’ command to do so?
-if SO, then you ought not criticize Catholics for our rituals, for you participate in one as well.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

yankee_drifter:

I showed you in Hebrews where it says that Christ has effected man’s purgation from sin (Heb. 1:3)

What you and so many evangelicals fail to grasp is that the Catholic teaching on Purgatory has nothing to do with forgiveness of sins, or purgation of sins. You have jumped to the conclusion that Paul is referring to what Purgatory does when he uses the word “purgation” but that is NOT the case. The Catholic doctrine of Purgatory is merely the purifying from temporal punishment due to sins. Sins that were already forgiven leave a ‘scar’ on the soul which requires healing. That is why penance for sins is also taught by the Gospel. It is necessary for the healing of the soul. Evangelicals deny the need for penance.

 

[PRmerger]

What you and so many evangelicals fail to grasp is that the Catholic teaching on Purgatory has nothing to do with forgiveness of sins, or purgation of sins. You have jumped to the conclusion that Paul is referring to what Purgatory does when he uses the word “purgation” but that is NOT the case. The Catholic doctrine of Purgatory is merely the purifying from temporal punishment due to sins. Sins that were already forgiven leave a ‘scar’ on the soul which requires healing. That is why penance for sins is also taught by the Gospel. It is necessary for the healing of the soul. Evangelicals deny the need for penance.

However, if we have venial sins on our soul when we die, those are, indeed, forgiven through Christ’s atoning and purifying blood, in Purgatory.

"As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come. CCC 1031

It would make sense, as otherwise, how are we cleansed if we die with a sin on our soul? Venial sins still need to be forgiven!

 

[rinnie]

What you and so many evangelicals fail to grasp is that the Catholic teaching on Purgatory has nothing to do with forgiveness of sins, or purgation of sins. You have jumped to the conclusion that Paul is referring to what Purgatory does when he uses the word “purgation” but that is NOT the case. The Catholic doctrine of Purgatory is merely the purifying from temporal punishment due to sins. Sins that were already forgiven leave a ‘scar’ on the soul which requires healing. That is why penance for sins is also taught by the Gospel. It is necessary for the healing of the soul. Evangelicals deny the need for penance.

Actually we have explained this time after time after time…I guess you get my point. But they reject the authority of Catholic doctrine. So even when we show it to them it really does no good. But they insist to ask for it:shrug: So we give it, Then they ignore it anyway:shrug:

Its like I tell you I have a hundred dollars in my pocket. You say I don’t believe you show me. So I take out 5 twentys and show you. Then you don’t know what to say. So now that I proved it you cannot accept that. So you say thats wasn’t a hundred dollar bill. That is what this has become.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

However, if we have venial sins on our soul when we die, those are, indeed, forgiven through Christ’s atoning and purifying blood, in Purgatory.

"As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come. CCC 1031

It would make sense, as otherwise, how are we cleansed if we die with a sin on our soul? Venial sins still need to be forgiven!

I understand your concern. You have entered into a discussion on the theology and hierarchy of sin, which in full Catholic teaching is forgiven as you quoted. However, it is a case of confusing the issue when discussing the topic of Purgatory with Evangelicals. My preference is to posit that all sin (mortal and venial) is forgiven before we die, leaving only the temporal punishment due to sin, (mortal and venial) for purgatory to purify. How venial sin figures into this equation if one dies with venial sin, is for the theologians to argue. This way, the true nature of Purgatory is illustrated. My aim would be to equate Purgatory with Penance. Penance, whether done in this life, or the next (Purgatory) is primarily done for the temporal punishment due to sin. That does not negate the possibility that penance done in this life or the next, may have the effect of purifying venial sins as well. But that is another issue, best reserved for another argument.

One last note is that the wording “temporal punishment due to sins” is a theological contrivance to articulate the injury that is done to the soul by sin. These are all legal fictions, so to speak, put into words, in order to help us understand the Gospel.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Randy, you repeatedly ask for references and I gave the citations, all catholic sources, one from a handbook for the catholic clergy and you said: That’s not a catholic source!

It was from a physician writing a handbook for priests in the nineteenth centruy, but this is obviously not a document produced by the Church. If the Catholic Church wants to communicate with her priests, she does so directly and not through third-parties.

I’m curious…did you check out the book before you quoted from it? I looked at it, and you could have too, if you were really interested in doing your homework. Instead, you relied upon the shoddy research of some website hack to provide you with the ammunition you desire to fire more shots at the Catholic Church.

I quoted accurately, giving credit to each source and you cry: foul! He’s cutting and pasting!

Yes, this was a good first effort at actually documenting some of your assertions. I have to give you that. However, although you may have cut & paste accurately, you seem to misunderstand that the primary sources that your web-source cited have no authority in the Church itself. If you want to cite authoritative documents, start by researching www.vatican.va or the Catechism which is available online with a nice search utility. Otherwise, you’re just quoting the opinions of individual priests and theologians which mean little if anything.

Also, many of your postings are direct verbatim from web sites. As are many posts.

You’re darn straight they are, because I am concientious about providing accurate information and good answers to tough questions.

However, in this particular case, I took the time and trouble to respond to each of the “Catholic sources” and explained why the quote may or may not be relevant. As usual, you made no effort to respond to anything I offered.

We debated and you showed a misunderstanding of much of the Scriptures.

First, there was no debate. We exchanged a few dozen PM’s on a wide variety of topics since you would not restrict the discussion to a single topic that could be explored to a logical conclusion. Kinda like what we see you post in the open forums.

And what I showed was a DIFFERENT and coherent understanding of the scriptures.

You could not tell me what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is.

No, I refused to play the game that you want (and many evangelical/fundamentalists) want to play in which you test to see whether I am a REAL Christian according to YOUR interpretation of the scriptures. The fact is that you would reject ANYTHING I might have said if it did not match your favorite verses and intradenominational vocabulary. If I recall correctly (and I have responded to you with HUNDREDS of replies over the past two months), I actually did quote Paul at one point, and you took issue with my choice of scripture verses…proving my point.

When I gave you proof that purgatory does not exist because Christ paid our sin debt in full and purifies the sinner who comes to Him in true repentance, and I showed you in Hebrews where it says that Christ has effected man’s purgation from sin (Heb. 1:3) but you won’t accept what the Bible says,

Actually, what you gave me is your interpretation of scriptures which are out of sync with what Christianity has taught about purgatory for 2,000 years, and since I and several others have corrected you repeatedly, it is evident that you won’t accept what the scriptures actually teach.

JacobG has started a new thread on baptism…see you there.

You sure will.

 

[brb2]

To believe in Him is to believe what HE HAS DONE, once for all, through the sacrifice of Himself.In Biblical soteriology men are saved through faith in Christ alone. The saved then are exhorted to love the brethren and to be at peace with all men if possible (1 Thess. 4:9; Rom. 12:18

True enuf, but you have agreed here that you continue to fall short, since your election day. So, do you accept the scriptural imperative to Confess your post-baptismal sins ?

If not, why reject Paul’s teaching on confession ? /// If so, why reject as invalid/unscriptural … the Catholic means of confession to Christ, thru his priests ?

Can’t you see the beauty/utility of Purgatory … for unconfessed venial sins ?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Paul declares that suffering is an important part of our growth and maturity as Christians. Consequently, if suffering at the beginning of our walk with Christ does not take away from the sufficiency of the Cross, why should any suffering at the end of our journey to our heavenly home be thought to do so?

 

[moondweller]

Paul declares that suffering is an important part of our growth and maturity as Christians. Consequently, if suffering at the beginning of our walk with Christ does not take away from the sufficiency of the Cross, why should any suffering at the end of our journey to our heavenly home be thought to do so?

Because you just stated it yourself, Randy. Suffering has to do with the growth and maturity (if endured in faith) of the Christian (defined as one who has personally BELIEVED the Word of God concerning Christ). It has absolutely nothing to do with purifying a Christian of sins. There’s only ONE Man who ever suffered (and died) for that, and it wasn’t done in the afterlife, but right here on earth in a real place in time and history. It wasn’t His own sins of which He made purification, but ours. Everyone one of them. And it wasn’t by “purifying fire,” but shed blood. This according to Divine revelation - to be BELIEVED in unto salvation.

 

[rinnie]

MD. Lets get back to the question at hand.

No more beating around the bush. I want a straight answer Lets see if you can do this Just Once.

Jesus says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come.

Okay now, Now this passages states quite clear that certain offenses can be Pardoned in this age. But it also states some sins can be pardoned in the age to come.

Now I do not want you to give me tons of scripture that have nothing to do with this as you have been doing I am asking YOU. Can we have sin and get to heaven? Yes or No?

Can we be forgiven in Hell Yes or No?

Then if its either heaven or hell where are these sins being pardoned in the age to come?

Or are you going to do as you have been doing ignore this scripture.

So where is this place or state. Heaven or hell? Because you deny Purgatory? Simple enough.

 

[paul_c]

Because you just stated it yourself, Randy. Suffering has to do with the growth and maturity (if endured in faith) of the Christian (defined as one who has personally BELIEVED the Word of God concerning Christ). It has absolutely nothing to do with purifying a Christian of sins. There’s only ONE Man who ever suffered (and died) for that, and it wasn’t done in the afterlife, but right here on earth in a real place in time and history. It wasn’t His own sins of which He made purification, but ours. Everyone one of them. And it wasn’t by “purifying fire,” but shed blood. This according to Divine revelation - to be BELIEVED in unto salvation.

Moondweller,

Jesus died to reconcile us with God. This was the work that only the incarnate God could accomplish. This is true and we owe our salvation to Jesus for that. However, that is not the end of the story. While he died to save all men, do you believe that all men will be saved? I think you actually believe that only some men will be saved, those that believe, correct? Well, we also believe that belief in the saving power of Jesus is required for salvation. But that’s not the end of the story either. Once we are saved through Grace by Baptism, we need to follow Christ. If we fail to do that, do we really believe what he said and the efficacy of what he did? Because he clearly said “follow me” multiple times in the Gospels, did he not? His whole ministry was about how to be holy as the Father is holy, is it not? Read the Gospels. You’ll see.