purgatory

  • Thread starter Thread starter durhamfire
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
… but only those who do the will of His Father who is in heaven (Matt. 7:21). He said that on that day when the entrance into the kingdom is opened, many will say that they prophesied in His name, cast out demons and performed miracles (Catholicism elevates these to the status of “saints”).
No, Moon. First of all, the Church does not “elevate” anyone. She recognizes those whom God has already elevated. God does not create saints out of those who do not know HIm Only those who live, move, and have their being in Christ have the hope of attaining heaven. It is true that God also works miracles and mighty works through these persons, and the Church recognizes these as signs that God is at work in them, but it is their character that the Church “elevates” as an example.
Hence, entrance into the kingdom obviously is not based on works at all, but whether or not one is known by Christ. Astonishingly, one might do many great works during his life time in the name of Jesus, even miracles, only to hear the Words from Him, “I never knew you.” Works, then, is not the criterion by which one is known by Christ, and only those who are known by Him will enter the kingdom.
Although I agree with your premise, the conclusion is flawed. Although the basis of entry to heaven is grace (not works), God does know us by our works. It is one of the criteria by which He judges the quality of our relationship with Him. As He said to Abraham “now I know…” when Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac. It was Abrahams works (deeds/action) through which he was known by God. This the illustration James uses to show that works complete our faith.
So you believe that works plus something can?
Both faith and works are reflections of the action of grace in us. Neither are the basis for salvation, yet, neither are separated from it.
Jesus, however, dismisses works altogether and reveals that it’s those who are known by Him that enter the kingdom.Saved?
No, He does not dismiss works altogether. He speaks quite abit about works, and says that we are known by our fruits.
According to the text in question, to be known by Christ is not based at all on works, therefore, it must be based on an entirely different, Divine principle. So I asked, is it possible you may have missed this Divine principle and the simplicity of it? :sad_yes::nope:
I think what you are confusing here is “based”. Although works are not the 'basis" of our salvation, or our being known by God, neither are they separated from it.
 
I reject your personal doctrine of Sanctification.
Yes , I know. And it’s upon this same foundation of unbelief that those men before you formed their extrabiblical doctrines of “purgatory,” “temporal punishment,” “indulgences;” and their sacrament of “penance.” :ehh:
 
Your tendency to use words such as “horrific” and “severe” paint a fairly clear picture of an underlying, yet significant, reason you hate the doctrine of purgatory. Certainly you feel you have the authority to define doctrine as you think you are led by the Spirit through Scripture (a huge mistake). And certainly you have a bone to pick with the Church’s claim to earthly authority in Christ’s earthly absence. But I personally believe it’s also because you’re afraid of suffering
No, my dear friend, I flatly reject it because it has no Divine support, no Biblical backing. I also refuse to rob from the glory of my Lord though His suffering on my behalf, and deny the infinite GRACE of God toward me through faith in the Person and “finished” sacrificial work of His beloved Son.

You may personally believe what you want about me, but now you’ve got my own testimony.
 
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,
What you gave, Yankee, was proof that you do not understand the doctrine of purgatory. It only is available to those who have had their eternal debt of sin paid by Christ. It is the purification fo the sinner who has come to Him in true repentance. It is how he effects man’s purification from sin.

Catholics wrote the NT, Yankee. There is nothing in it that is not Catholic. All the documents that were not Catholic were excluded. We accept everything in it as such. What we do not accept is the erroneous interpretation you make of it.
 
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.
LOL. This one is a first for me.

Ok, let me get this straight. Jesus is saying that hypothetically, the heavenly father will deliver the believer to the hypothetical torturers until he pays all of the hypthetical debt, unless the believer hypothetically forgives his brother from the heart? Did I get that hypothetical right? 😃
Code:
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.
Actually, I don’t see anything in this passage about “unbelivable”. It seems like a clear illustration of the consequences of lack of forgiveness.
An unforgiving servant is called a wicked servant because no true believer would do such.
Except that there is no distinction in scripture for a “true” believer. And if believers did not hold unforgiveness in their hearts, then there would be no reason for Him to give this illustration, would there?

I find the notion that “true” believers are always forgiving of others absurd. If a person found themselves struggling with forgiveness, then I guess that would mean they had to question whether or not they are a “true” believer, since it would be "unbelievable…to be unforgiving’. Talk about eternal insecurity!
A truly saved christian would never behave like the man in the story, who was delivered to the tormentors (jailers).
Well, it makes a nice story, but the fact is, the ones Jesus were addressing were “true” believers. It is no wonder evangelicals have to keep being saved over and over again at the altar call. Everytime they sin, they are told they are not “true” believers!
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.
I agree that unforgiveness can separate us from our heavenly inheritance, just as Jesus indicates. But since He was addressing those that were born again at the time, it seems rather silly that He would make this point unless they needed it.
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?
I agree, I think this search is futile. If one does not embrace the apostolic teaching on Purgatory, one is not going to find it in scripture.

However, the fact that Jesus paid our eternal sin debt does not mean that there are not consequences in this life. Just as He allowed the thief to pay the just penalty for his crimes on the cross, sometimes, he ordains what we pay the temporal consequences for our sins.
 
No, my dear friend, I flatly reject it because it has no Divine support, no Biblical backing.
I know you think that - I even stated as such in my post. It’s still a vastly empty refutation. All this tells me is that you have yet to open yourself to the fullness of Truth. A protestant claim of “No biblical backing” means very little, moon. We already know that you have your own personal interpretation of Scripture…which wouldn’t be so bad except for the fact that you interpret it divorced from revealed Truth through the Church…and you further attempt to define your own dogma through your reading, ignoring the faith Christ deposited into His Apostolic Church. So, no Catholic I know of would be compelled to give any credence to anything on the order of “hey, I don’t find it in Scripture, so there”.
I also refuse to **rob from the glory of my Lord **though His suffering on my behalf, and deny the infinite GRACE of God toward me through faith in the Person and “finished” sacrificial work of His beloved Son.
Note my bold. The way in which you use the term ‘glory’ here, moon, reveals you have no idea what that is. You may mean to say something like…“you fail to glorify my Lord”, which is atleast more appropriate in terms of understanding the difference between God’s infinite glory vs our glorification (worship and praise) of Him. Either way, you’ve got it wrong. As you use the term “glory”, it erroneously presumes that God’s glory is variable, able to be added to, or taken from. Absolutely incorrect. Glory is God’s very nature. No one can rob Him of it. He possesses it regardless of our actions, be they sacred or wicked, blasphemous or faithful. God, in fact, cannot be “robbed” of anything.

If you mean to say we fail to glorify Him, I’d atleast grant you that you had a clue what you were talking about, even though you’d still be wrong. For the doctrine of purgatory does nothing dishonorable, disrespectful or otherwise neglectful toward our Lord. To follow His Church is one of the most honorable things we can do for Him. The Church has taught us that salvation is a lifelong process, and that those of us who are not purified while alive on earth, will be purified before entrance into His eternal Kingdom. That’s fully sufficient for us, and if you would humble yourself and drop your anti-Catholic bias, it would be for you too.
You may personally believe what you want about me, but now you’ve got my own testimony.
Yes, we all certainly do, moon. And it is duly noted here.
 
Note my bold. The way in which you use the term ‘glory’ here, moon, reveals you have no idea what that is. You may mean to say something like…“you fail to glorify my Lord”,
Nope, that’s not at all what I mean. You would have to understand the depth of His grace toward us to grasp what I was saying. You rob from His glory when you take what is His and in some way apply it to yourself. I know you can’t understand this, Steve.
 
Well, it makes a nice story, but the fact is, the ones Jesus were addressing were “true” believers. It is no wonder evangelicals have to keep being saved over and over again at the altar call. Everytime they sin, they are told they are not “true” believers!
That’s a good point guanophore. 👍

It amazes me how protestants will equate all sin as being equal in God’s Eyes, yet if you individually mention certain sins such as the sin of unforgivingness, then just like magic, that person was never ‘saved’ to begin with. The smaller sins (even though they don’t like to admit this), they just repeat “We all have a sinful nature but Christ has already saved me”.

This is what happens when one builds their doctrines upon their self made interpretations that are far out of reach from the Doctrines of the Apostles.
 
You may personally believe what you want about me, but now you’ve got my own testimony.
No. We have read your disjointed theology and ‘reformed’ dogma.

Let us hear your ‘experience’ with the Lord … your salvation testimony :yup:

As your mentor John McArthur says … Christianity is Experiential, not theoretical.
 
Your definition of Divine Revelation is flawed. The Catholic Church, since apostolic times, has been the oracle of Divine Revelation. That hasn’t changed even until now. The Scriptures which you falsely conclude is the whole sum of Divine Revelations, is just a sealed book to the unbeliever. Practically all non-Catholic Christians assume they can shove the Church aside and read, interpret, and teach the Scriptures for themselves. But they are usurping the authority of the Church which was Divinely appointed by Jesus Christ himself, to reside within his Church. St. Paul himself says NOT All are teachers. But you block your ears whenever Paul says something which doesn’t square with your false assumptions and usurpations. You are therefore blind to all of the Scriptural proofs for Purgatory, temporal punishments, and indulgences. They are definitely there in Sacred Scripture, but to one to whom the book is sealed, it is undetected.

How many times have I had to correct you on your false assumption that only Christians have divine revelations? It’s because you don’t understand divine revelations. ALL RELIGIONS claim they have divine revelations, even bacs, but that doesn’t make it so. If you are going to place all of your faith in divine revelations (and you should) then you must take the matter more seriously than just jumping to easy or comfortable conclusions. You must look within yourself, and ask yourself, if you would be capable (or willing) to follow Divine Revelations wherever they lead. Would God entrust his revelations to just a book of print, or to inspired writers. Would God entrust the teaching of this book to just anyone who picks it up, or to inspired teachers? Is salvation of so little value (in God’s eyes) that He wouldn’t take every necessary precaution to ensure that His TRUE WORD is correctly taught for all time?
Jesus Christ, before His ascension to heaven, gave us, not a man to lead, guide and teach us Truth, but gave us the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit indwells the Christian who is born again and washed in the blood of Christ. This is why Scriptures can be understood by the Christian. He is relying on the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Jews were given the Oracles of God. God trusted a fallible people with His infallible Word. With His divine revelations. But Jesus never said for the Jews to go to the synagogue and have the rabbi interpret for them. He often said: Have you not read?

What Christ accomplished at Calvary, leaves no place or need for purgatory, indulgences, temporal punishment. These things go against the perfect, complete blood sacrifice of Christ on behalf of the sinner. There is nothing left for sinners to do, but to accept this free gift of salvation, believe on the One who offers this gift, and follow Him. Christ did not make a partial payment, then demanded we pay the rest. That’s the opposite of what REDEEM means.

If you need unwritten traditions, or apocryphal books, to try and prove purgatory, then you are going outside of God’s Holy, inspired, inerrant Word. You are denying the all sufficiency of Christ’s atonement. You are adding to Scripture which we have no right to do. We must never usurp Christ’s authority by placing men in very lofty positions as if they were Christ on earth, and placing traditions on par with the God breathed, Holy Spirit authored, Holy Scriptures. Nor does Christ reside in a church. He does not dwell in temples made by hands.

We have been repeatedly warned to stick to the topic or else the thread will be closed.
 
Jesus Christ, before His ascension to heaven, gave us, not a man to lead, guide and teach us Truth, but gave us the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit indwells the Christian who is born again and washed in the blood of Christ. This is why Scriptures can be understood by the Christian. He is relying on the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Jews were given the Oracles of God. God trusted a fallible people with His infallible Word. With His divine revelations. But Jesus never said for the Jews to go to the synagogue and have the rabbi interpret for them. He often said: Have you not read?
This is so true, bro. And the numerous traditions started and enforced by their religious leaders Christ Himself constantly rebuked and corrected by the Scripture.

During this whole discussion on purgatory two Scripture passages seem to always come to my mind:Heb 10:14 "For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified."Why is this so hard to believe by so many? Two reasons pointed out by Christ Himself:Mark 12:24 Jesus said to them, “Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that (1) you do not understand the Scriptures (2) or the power of God?”
 
Yes , I know. And it’s upon this same foundation of unbelief that those men before you formed their extrabiblical doctrines of “purgatory,” “temporal punishment,” “indulgences;” and their sacrament of “penance.”
There are many extra-biblical doctrines which you accept…you just don’t like this one.

And it is your unbelief that prevents you from acknowledging the infallibility of the Church which has spoken definitively on this doctrine.
 
Jesus Christ, before His ascension to heaven, gave us, not a man to lead, guide and teach us Truth, but gave us the Holy Spirit.
He gave us both. Since you accept the leadership of the Holy Spirit promised to the Church, let’s focus on what you miss: the leadership of the Apostle Peter.

In John 21:15-19, the resurrected Christ, commands Simon Peter three times to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep.”

15When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?” “Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed (bosko)* my* lambs.” 16Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Take care of (poimanao) my sheep.” 17 The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, "Feed (bosko)my sheep.

In this passage, we can see that Jesus leaves Peter in charge of feeding, tending and caring for His sheep. Who feeds, tends and cares for sheep? A shepherd!

Unfortunately, many non-Catholics object to the Catholic understanding that Peter was given this unique leadership position, and they cite a passage from earlier in this same Gospel wherein Jesus presents Himself as the Good Shepherd, and says there is to be but “one flock and one Shepherd.” (John 10:11-16) Therefore, the immediate question springs to mind: If Christ is the Good Shepherd, why can’t He “feed” and “tend” His own sheep?

Of course, Jesus is God, and He is clearly capable of taking care of His own flock – even after He ascends to heaven. So, why does He appoint Peter to this role? Obviously, all sheep belong to Christ, and they do not cease to belong to Jesus after the ascension. Yet, Peter is told to “feed” and “tend” them. Jesus commissions Peter to act as His “stand-in” or “vicar” after the ascension. Jesus will remain the one Shepherd, yet Peter will “feed” and “tend” the sheep, in the sense that Jesus will not be physically present to do it. Thus, Peter will be the visible, vicarious shepherd of the flock.

Because of the implications of this earthly authority and the unique Catholic claims for the papacy, non-Catholics seek alternative explanations for Jesus’ words. One attempt is to claim that Peter simply has the same authority to care for the flock of Christ that all of the other apostles had. However, this argument fails for two reasons.

First, the extent of the authority Jesus gave to Peter can be seen quite clearly in the original Greek. For example, the word which is used for “feed” in John 21 is bosko – a word which the Jewish historian Philo of Alexandria, and other 1st Century writers, use to denote “spiritual nourishment.” Similarly, the word “tend” is poimanao – the same Greek word which is translated as “rule” in passages such as Matt 2:6, Rev 2:27, Rev. 12:5, and Rev. 19:15, where it is applied to Jesus Himself. Peter, like Jesus, is to “rule” over the sheep, and to “supply them with spiritual nourishment.” Thus, Peter is established as the vicarious shepherd (i.e., “supreme pastor”) of the Church in Christ’s physical absence.

While it may be argued that any shepherd would have similar responsibilities for his sheep and that the Bible is full of passages using the relationship between sheep and shepherd as a metaphor for our relationship with God, in the context of the New Testament, only Peter received this unique appointment directly from Christ Himself. Jesus took great care to identify Peter’s new responsibility as head of the Church with His own role as Head of the Body, the Church. No other Apostle received this focus.

(cont.)
 
Second, in Luke’s Last Supper account, we see quite clearly that Peter was singled out to play the role of a leader and unifier among the Apostles. The passage is as follows:

Luke 22:31-32
“Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your own faith may not fail; and once you have turned back, you must strengthen your brothers. 33But he replied, “Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death.” 34Jesus answered, “I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know me.”

In Luke 22:31-32, Satan sought to destroy all of the Apostles, but Jesus prayed for Simon Peter alone that Peter might strengthen all of the other Apostles whose faith would be shaken, as well. Clearly, Peter is not merely “one Apostle among others.” Rather, he is also responsible for the welfare of all. That is a special ministry – the ministry of the vicarious shepherd. No other Apostle is given the responsibility for caring for the Twelve in this way, and this assignment is all the more significant when we consider that in the following verses (v. 33-34), Jesus predicts Peter’s three-fold denial. Despite Jesus’ foreknowledge of Peter’s denials, Jesus prays for and assigns to Peter the task of caring for the others.

In summary, we know that Jesus is the Good Shepherd and that there is one Shepherd and one flock (cf. John 10). Yet, in the passage from John 21, we can see that Jesus leaves Peter in charge of feeding, tending and caring for His sheep. Peter becomes the shepherd who will lead the flock after Jesus’ ascension. Therefore, while Jesus is forever our Good Shepherd reigning from heaven, He has made provision for us by naming someone else to stand in His place, to be His vicar, here on earth. The Vicar of Christ established by Jesus is the Pope of the Catholic Church.

Not only does Peter (and his successors, the Popes) hold the keys to the kingdom of God (cf. Mt 16:18, Is. 22:22), but he holds the shepherd’s crook or crozier, as well.
 
What Christ accomplished at Calvary, leaves no place or need for purgatory, indulgences, temporal punishment. These things go against the perfect, complete blood sacrifice of Christ on behalf of the sinner. There is nothing left for sinners to do, but to accept this free gift of salvation, believe on the One who offers this gift, and follow Him. Christ did not make a partial payment, then demanded we pay the rest. That’s the opposite of what REDEEM means.
To the contrary. It is through purgatory that the perfect, complete blood sacrifice of Christ is applied to the believer who cannot cleanse himself. Purgatory - the final cleansing - is done by God, not by man.
If you need unwritten traditions, or apocryphal books, to try and prove purgatory, then you are going outside of God’s Holy, inspired, inerrant Word.
Since the Deuterocanonical books are inspired scripture and since Sacred Tradition is the Word of God, we do not go outside the COMPLETE inspired, inerrant Word.

Now you see why Luther truncated your Bible - one of the Deuteros provided additional support for the Catholic doctrine of purgatory.
 
There are many extra-biblical doctrines which you accept…
Such as?
And it is your unbelief that prevents you from acknowledging the infallibility of the Church which has spoken definitively on this doctrine.
This is true! My belief rests in the Scriptures, not a church. Hence, I cannot believe something on which the Scriptures are silent, even though a church may speak volumes on it.
 
This is so true, bro. And the numerous traditions started and enforced by their religious leaders Christ Himself constantly rebuked and corrected by the Scripture.

During this whole discussion on purgatory two Scripture passages seem to always come to my mind:
Heb 10:14 “For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.”
And since the tense of verb should be more accurately translated “are being sanctified”, one wonders why you fail to appreciate that sanctification is a process and not a one-time event.

You’ve been shown this many times. Why do you ignore it? 🤷
 
Yes , I know. And it’s upon this same foundation of unbelief that those men before you formed their extrabiblical doctrines of “purgatory,” “temporal punishment,” “indulgences;” and their sacrament of “penance.” :ehh:
Oh, you mean the Apostles.
  • Did you know the Apostles were teaching this stuff before the New Testament was even written?
  • Did you know many of these doctrines were never addressed in the Scriptures because there was never any issues to discuss regarding them, and St. Paul says as much in his letters. His letters are usually discussing particular issues that were in question in the various CHURCHES he established.
  • Did you know that St. Paul had to deal with “Bible Only” believers in his day? They were called unbelieving Jews. They didn’t believe his oral teachings, because they were unBiblical. They argued with everything Paul said, and questioned his every interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures.
  • Did you know we still have “Bible Only” believers today? They are called Protestants, and their denominations (based on various erroneous interpretations of the Bible) number in the thousands?
 
I’m speculating, of course, since I have no way to know with certainty what you actually believe, but I would be willing to bet that you probably accept one or more of the following extra-biblical doctrines:
  1. There will be no more Apostles.
  2. Public revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle.
  3. The canon of scripture is closed.
  4. The canon of the New Testament itself.
This is true! My belief rests in the Scriptures, not a church. Hence, I cannot believe something on which the Scriptures are silent, even though a church may speak volumes on it.
It is more accurate to say that your belief rests in your personal, fallible interpretation of the Scriptures.

So there is the heart of the problem. You do not believe that Jesus established an authoritative, infallible Church.

Your denial of Purgatory is just a symptom of a much larger problem.
 
Question for MD, and Yankee, re. Purgatory;

Obviously there is a reason for purgatory, why it needs to be so.

So my question to you both is why, if you are both born again christians, why do you sin?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top