Purgatory

  • Thread starter Thread starter bones_IV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mickey said:
Origen

If a man departs this life with lighter faults, he is condemned to fire which burns away the lighter materials, and prepares the soul for the kingdom of God, where nothing defiled may enter. For if on the foundation of Christ you have built not only gold and silver and precious stones (I Cor., 3); but also wood and hay and stubble, what do you expect when the soul shall be separated from the body? Would you enter into heaven with your wood and hay and stubble and thus defile the kingdom of God; or on account of these hindrances would you remain without and receive no reward for your gold and silver and precious stones? Neither is this just. It remains then that you be committed to the fire which will burn the light materials; for our God to those who can comprehend heavenly things is called a cleansing fire. But this fire consumes not the creature, but what the creature has himself built, wood, and hay and stubble. It is manifest that the fire destroys the wood of our transgressions and then returns to us the reward of our great works. (Patres Groeci. XIII, col. 445, 448 A.D. 185-232]).

Yup, as I’ve mentioned before, the seeds were planted by Origen and Clement of Alexandria. This is where the concept of purgatory was born and not before 👍

Peace,
CM
 
40.png
Churchmouse:
Yup, as I’ve mentioned before, the seeds were planted by Origen and Clement of Alexandria. This is where the concept of purgatory was born and not before 👍

Peace,
CM
Yup, Church history is a beautiful thing! 👍
 
40.png
Churchmouse:
We aren’t talking “terms.” The word “Trinity” isn’t in Scripture, but the concept most definitely is there. The word “Purgatory” isn’t in Scripture, but the concept is nowhere to be found. Again, if we look at the word “God” in Genesis 1:26 it singular, but the word “us” in reference to “God” is plural. Thus, there is a unity in plurality. If we go to the Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4 where the word translated “one” is “echad” signifying plurality. If we go to the NT passages we see Christ in the water, a voice from heaven, and the Holy Spirit descending like a dove (Matthew 3:16-17). We see Jesus praying to the Father in other verses, again showing a plurality (Jesus isn’t being psychotic by praying to himself). We can go on and on. Again, these are clear references to a Trinity. Nowhere does purgatory enjoy this clarity. So, the bottom line is, the Trinity is a logical extension of Scripture. Purgatory is not!

Peace,
CM
I whole-heartedly disagree with you on most of this. I was talking about terms. I do see Purgatory as a logical extension from Scripture. I would challenge you (as I have done before) to ask an Atheist which seems like a more logical extension from Scripture, you will probably be surprised at the answer. 😉 ((I have asked a couple atheist/agnostic friends of mine, and hands down they say that purgatory makes more sense and seems like a more logical extension than the Trinity.))
 
Also, I know that it is possible that you do see some of the books in the old testament as Scripture, but none the less, they are indeed, and I wonder what your thoughts are on 2 Macc 43-46:

43 And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, 44 (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) 45 And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them.

*45 “With godliness”… Judas hoped that these men who died fighting for the cause of God and religion, might find mercy: either because they might be excused from mortal sin by ignorance; or might have repented of their sin, at least at their death. *

46 It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

*46 “It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead”… Here is an evident and undeniable proof of the practice of praying for the dead under the old law, which was then strictly observed by the Jews, and consequently could not be introduced at that time by Judas, their chief and high priest, if it had not been always their custom. *

(This is taken straight from the Bible with it’s own commentary.)
 
E.E.N.S.:
I whole-heartedly disagree with you on most of this. I was talking about terms. I do see Purgatory as a logical extension from Scripture. I would challenge you (as I have done before) to ask an Atheist which seems like a more logical extension from Scripture, you will probably be surprised at the answer. 😉 ((I have asked a couple atheist/agnostic friends of mine, and hands down they say that purgatory makes more sense and seems like a more logical extension than the Trinity.))
This is strange…since when are the atheist the authority on what is or isn’t theological? Again, all one has to do is read Scripture, read the passages which support the Trinity (which is outright) and then read the passages Catholics say imply purgatory (which doesn’t show what you claim it does). You don’t need to jump through hoops to see which is logical.

Peace,
CM
 
40.png
Churchmouse:
You don’t need to jump through hoops to see which is logical.
I agree! I would also state that you don’t need to jump through hoops to AVOID what is logical.

Peace. 😉
 
E.E.N.S.:
Also, I know that it is possible that you do see some of the books in the old testament as Scripture, but none the less, they are indeed, and I wonder what your thoughts are on 2 Macc 43-46:

43 And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, 44 (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) 45 And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them.

*45 “With godliness”… Judas hoped that these men who died fighting for the cause of God and religion, might find mercy: either because they might be excused from mortal sin by ignorance; or might have repented of their sin, at least at their death. *

46 It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins.

*46 “It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead”… Here is an evident and undeniable proof of the practice of praying for the dead under the old law, which was then strictly observed by the Jews, and consequently could not be introduced at that time by Judas, their chief and high priest, if it had not been always their custom. *

(This is taken straight from the Bible with it’s own commentary.)
The book doesn’t have to be canonical to see that Judas is mindful of the “resurrection” and prays that they be “loosed from their sins.” This doesn’t necessarily imply a purgatory as much as it does the day of resurrection. If we are going to claim prayers for the souls that are presently in purgatory and if purgatory is a state where the souls are released upon providing full satisfaction based on their level of impurity, than this verse really has no bearing on the subject, considering that he is mindful of the “resurrection” and not their present state. Secondly, even though it was a “holy and pious thought” the fact remains that these men died with idols which, according to Catholic thought, is a mortal sin, thus, Judas’ prayers would have no bearing on their state in the afterlife. Also, the passages lend credence that this was Judas’ own thoughts and perceptions and not that this was a practice amongst all the Jews.

So, no, I don’t believe the passage lends credence to purgatory in the least.

Peace,
CM
 
E.E.N.S.:
I agree! I would also state that you don’t need to jump through hoops to AVOID what is logical.

Peace. 😉
Then make it logical for me. Don’t state something without exegeting a single verse. You’ve slung verses, but didn’t exegete them. I challenge you to do so without cutting and pasting responses.

Peace,
CM
 
40.png
Churchmouse:
So, no,** I don’t believe** the passage lends credence to purgatory in the least.

Peace,
CM
That’s okay, CM, I really don’t lament over you not believing in Purgatory…I do lament over you denying Christ’s Church however (but this is for another thread), and I pray that one day your heart will be softened and you will come home. (What else is a brother in Christ supposed to do? 😉 )

Peace.
 
40.png
Churchmouse:
Then make it logical for me. Don’t state something without exegeting a single verse. You’ve slung verses, but didn’t exegete them. I challenge you to do so without cutting and pasting responses.

Peace,
CM
No thanks, CM, 330 posts is enough for me on this one.
 
The “early” Early Church Fathers (from AD 202 and earlier) believed in a place of purgation (taken from scripturecatholic.com/purgatory.html):

The Early Church’s Belief in Purgatory

“And after the exhibition, Tryphaena again receives her. For her daughter Falconilla had died, and said to her in a dream: Mother, thou shaft have this stranger Thecla in my place, in order that she may pray concerning me, and that I may be transferred to the place of the just.” Acts of Paul and Thecla (A.D. 160).

“Abercius by name, I am a disciple of the chaste shepherd…He taught me…faithful writings…These words, I, Abercius, standing by, ordered to be inscribed. In truth, I was in the course of my seventy-second year. Let him who understands and believes this pray for Abercius.” *Inscription of Abercius (A.D. 190). *

“Without delay, on that very night, this was shown to me in a vision. I saw Dinocrates going out from a gloomy place, where also there were several others, and he was parched and very thirsty, with a filthy countenance and pallid colour, and the wound on his face which he had when he died. This Dinocrates had been my brother after the flesh, seven years of age? Who died miserably with disease…But I trusted that my prayer would bring help to his suffering; and I prayed for him every day until we passed over into the prison of the camp, for we were to fight in the camp-show. Then was the birth-day of Gets Caesar, and** I made my prayer for my brother day and night**, groaning and weeping that he might be granted to me. Then, on the day on which we remained in fetters, this was shown to me. I saw that that place which I had formerly observed to be in gloom was now bright; and Dinocrates, with a clean body well clad, was finding refreshment. And where there had been a wound, I saw a scar; and that pool which I had before seen, I saw now with its margin lowered even to the boy’s navel. And one drew water from the pool incessantly, and upon its brink was a goblet filled with water; and Dinocrates drew near and began to drink from it, and the goblet did not fail. And when he was satisfied, he went away from the water to play joyously, after the manner of children, and I awoke. Then I understood that he was translated from the place of punishment.” *The Passion of Perpetua and Felicitias, 2:3-4 (A.D. 202). *

“Accordingly the believer, through great discipline, divesting himself of the passions, passes to the mansion which is better than the former one, viz., to the greatest torment, taking with him the characteristic of repentance from the sins he has committed after baptism. He is tortured then still more–not yet or not quite attaining what he sees others to have acquired. Besides, he is also ashamed of his transgressions. The greatest torments, indeed, are assigned to the believer. For God’s righteousness is good, and His goodness is righteous. And though the punishments cease in the course of the completion of the expiation and purification of each one, yet those have very great and permanent grief who are found worthy of the other fold, on account of not being along with those that have been glorified through righteousness.” *Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 6:14 (post A.D. 202). *

There is also a TON of scriptural references to praying for the dead (leading to Purgatory) at:
scripturecatholic.com/purgatory.html

(I apologize if you already knew of this excellent website…)

One more thought: In general, the absence of ECF writings on a doctrine (this is not the case in regards to praying for the dead) do not prove the lack of that doctrine. ECF writings were very pastoral, and usually used to CORRECT mis-understandings or controversies in the Early Church. It is FLAWED LOGIC to assume that that, in general, a doctrine did not exist because an ECF didn’t write about it.
 
40.png
Churchmouse:
From this point on, I am not going to answer anything from you unless it is clearly about purgatory. Therefore, to answer your question about the 2 centuries, it is important because it shows that it wasn’t taught in the earliest Church. It came* later* with the seeds being sown by Clement of Alexandria and Origen, although the doctrine in its fullness isn’t there until much later. No, Tertullian did not write about purgatory. He believed in something completely different. Show me the citations proving he taught such a thing and I will explain to you exactly what he believed.

Peace,
CM
You don’t have to answer me any more. Did you actually speak to Tertullian and ask him what he believed? If you did not speak to him then how do you know what he believed? Oh yeah, personal interpretation. You don’t really think that you know what he really meant now do you. To say that you will explain to me what Tertullian believed exactly is a joke, unless you can converse with the dead.
 
E.E.N.S.:
That’s okay, CM, I really don’t lament over you not believing in Purgatory…I do lament over you denying Christ’s Church however (but this is for another thread), and I pray that one day your heart will be softened and you will come home. (What else is a brother in Christ supposed to do? 😉 )

Peace.
Don’t cry for me. Cry for those who chose to believe in fairy tales.

Peace,
CM
 
E.E.N.S.:
No thanks, CM, 330 posts is enough for me on this one.
Which means you do not want to try some honest exegesis, but prefer to make your claims without.

Peace,
CM
 
40.png
Churchmouse:
Don’t cry for me. Cry for those who chose to believe in fairy tales.

Peace,
CM
I had an ex-girlfriend a long time ago who believed in Wicca, does that count? 😉
 
40.png
Churchmouse:
Which means you do not want to try some honest exegesis, but prefer to make your claims without.

Peace,
CM
I am reminded of “casting pearls before swine.”

Also, I am tired of hearing you say that no one is giving you exegesis on anything and that we are just “slinging verses.” This is an uncalled for claim, or a false claim. Practice some charity, Lord knows we all need to do this much more than we do…however, claiming that a 2000 year old Church (founded by Christ no less) that has weathered plenty of heresies and false teachings, is propagating “fairy tales” is not only lacking in general charity, but it is extremely arrogant as well.

I have tried (poorly tried, but tried none the less) to show charity in my posts, but it is hard when you accuse everyone who responds contrary to you to be “illogical.”
 
40.png
Mickey:
This is arrogant and uncharitable. 😦
Becareful, EENS and Mickey. He might report you to the MODS for calling him or anything he post as arrogant.

CM your qoute.
“Don’t cry for me. Cry for those who chose to believe in fairy tales.” Are you saying 2000 years of teachings are fairy tales? Boy do you have the nerve. But then again that is expected by heretics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top