Staples White debate on Purgatory

[PRmerger]

Because many Protestant seldom read/know their OT. Too much ‘legalism’ for them to consider. They tend to stick to Pauline themes … at least the parts they feel agree with their Faith w/o works paradigms.

I was corrected earlier that JW did indeed say that there are instances in Scripture of fire purging us–his position was just that 1 Cor 3 was not an example of this.

 

[PRmerger]

WHERE is the evidence for this? You cannot prove that they were accepted as divinely inspired by their inclusion in a tome. Also, the earliest LXX manuscript is from the 4th century, how are you going to prove that their canon contained the books?

I don’t know if that’s true that the earliest LXX manuscript is from the 4th century, but why is that relevant? What year is the earliest manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew?

Here’s something interesting:

**from the Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397):**It was also determined that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in the Church under the title of divine Scriptures. The Canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, 3 two books of Paraleipomena, 4 Job, the Psalter, five books of Solomon, 5 the books of the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, 6 two books of the Maccabees. Of the New Testament: four books of the Gospels, one book of the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of the Apostle Paul, one epistle of the same [writer] to the Hebrews, two Epistles of the Apostle Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude, one book of the Apocalypse of John. Let this be made known also to our brother and fellow-priest Boniface, or to other bishops of those parts, for the purpose of confirming that Canon. because we have received from our fathers that those books must be read in the Church. Let it also be allowed that the Passions of Martyrs be read when their festivals are kept.

 

[Churchmouse]

So are you saying that there is no purification for our sins? Is not Christ’s death on the Cross a purification for our sins?

Well, it’s a propitiation for our sins. Christ IS our purification. We remain wretched sinners, but Christ is our righteousness.

If His death on the Cross served as a purification for our sins, than purgatory dervies from that Sacrifice.

You thrusting purgatory into the equation.

Without his Sacrifice…, no purification. No purification…, no purgatory.

Again, there needn’t be a purgatory and Christ’s sacrifice is still sufficient.

CM

 

[Churchmouse]

So your position is, Satan is in heaven. Again, I’ve never heard a Christian espouse this idea.

What I am telling you is what Scripture is giving in light of your claim that nothing “unclean” will enter heaven.

How then, do you explain Rev 21:27?

This is after the general judgment. Satan is no longer a factor.

We know that Satan was an angel, but, as he became unclean, he was thrown out of heaven (Rev 12:7-12); Satan/Lucifer was not always unclean.

Considering that he was accusing “before” being thrown out, like I said this doesn’t seem to pertain to the Fall.

After he is thrown out of heaven, he is no longer in heaven, and according to Scripture, cannot enter heaven (Rev 21:27).

He can’t. He is in the lake of fire forever and ever (Rev. 20:10).

Now as to meeting with the Lord, is it your contention that the Lord in the OT never meet anyone outside of heaven?

Not at all, yet both Job 1 and Rev. 12 have Satan in heaven. Again, this is what Scripture states.

CM

 

[Churchmouse]

Well, here’s a “bible Christian” pastor and PhD who strongly believes in purgatory. If there is no purgatory, then aren’t you in effect claiming that you are perfect? If not, where does scripture claim that you are washed automatically each time you sin, or even as you are sinning?

atlah.org/about/FocusOnPurgatory.html

LOL!!! You see what I mean that folks tend to use “Protestant” liberally regardless of who it may be. This guy’s a joke. Sure, he believes in purgatory, but he also believes in Armstrongism (which denies the deity of Christ, the Trinity, etc.). He’s a heretic to the nth degree.

CM

 

[Churchmouse]

We debate all salvation topics … using all of scripture. Catholics are multifaceted, multi-talented apologists … and are still sky high from the SAINT’s victory.

Oh yeah, Tim Staples recent victory also …

Asides from the wishful thinking, one would wish that things were a bit systematic in discussion.

CM

 

[Churchmouse]

I don’t know if that’s true that the earliest LXX manuscript is from the 4th century, but why is that relevant? What year is the earliest manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew?

Here’s something interesting:

It’s relevant because no one can know for sure what the Alexandrian Jews had in their list of books. To assume that they had the added books in their LXX is just that, an assumption.

You do realize that Carthage was a local council and didn’t speak for all of Christendom. Augustine was a big influence and he advocated the Apocrypha, however, his contemporary, Jerome, didn’t. Jerome’s view continued all throughout church history, even as far off as Trent. Again, it is very telling that these books were still a matter of debate WITHIN the council of Trent, with Cardinal Giralomo Seripando and his group denying the Apocryphal books (not to mention other contemporaries of the times, such as Cardinals Ximenes and Cajetan, the same one who opposed Luther). Very telling indeed.

CM

 

[PRmerger]

You do realize that Carthage was a local council and didn’t speak for all of Christendom.

Hi, Friend!

No, I did not realize that Carthage was a local council.

Augustine was a big influence and he advocated the Apocrypha, however, his contemporary, Jerome, didn’t. Jerome’s view continued all throughout church history, even as far off as Trent. Again, it is very telling that these books were still a matter of debate WITHIN the council of Trent, with Cardinal Giralomo Seripando and his group denying the Apocryphal books (not to mention other contemporaries of the times, such as Cardinals Ximenes and Cajetan, the same one who opposed Luther). Very telling indeed.

CM

Again, how is it that you know that the Gospel of Thomas is not inspired, but the Gospel of Mark is? Whose authority do you submit to for this?

IOW, you mentioned “criteria” for determining what’s canonical. What criteria did you use?

Oh, and come visit my Profile Page. I have a private photo album that I’ve set up–I think it makes it easier to chat with friends if we can actually see whom it is we’re conversing with, and see that they’re actual living, breathing children of God.

 

[brb3]

Again, there needn’t be a purgatory and Christ’s sacrifice is still sufficient.

The Cross purges us of all pre-conversion sins [original & actual]. And, yes, the Cross is the source of all later purgings which we receive in our Post-Baptismal lives.

Nevertheless, we MUST confess and receive forgiveness to be periodically purged in this life. However, if one goes several months w/o confessing … we would not be ‘spiritually fit’ for meeting our maker. Provided we didn’t commit a Mortal sin … upon death we would need ‘purging’ of the venial sins. As scriptures teach, ‘W/O holiness, no man will see God’.

As Tim Staples told White in that debate … purgatory is a ‘process’ by which we are ‘refined’ by holy fire. It’s not a physical locale we are sent to to ‘work off’ our sins by saying Hail Mary’s. It could be purely mental anguish we experience for our commission of all unconfessed, Post-Baptismal venial sins – [a ‘spiritual’ fire which purifies our souls] … perhaps.

 

[Byzman]

Well, it’s a propitiation for our sins. Christ IS our purification. We remain wretched sinners, but Christ is our righteousness.

Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross was both a propitiation and purification for our sins. Don’t make it seem like it is one and not the other.

Hebrews 1:3

He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After** making purification for sins**, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high

Hebrews 9:13-14

For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.]

In one sense we can say Christ is our Purgatory. He purges our sins.

 

[Byzman]

It’s relevant because no one can know for sure what the Alexandrian Jews had in their list of books. To assume that they had the added books in their LXX is just that, an assumption.

You do realize that Carthage was a local council and didn’t speak for all of Christendom. Augustine was a big influence and he advocated the Apocrypha, however, his contemporary, Jerome, didn’t. Jerome’s view continued all throughout church history, even as far off as Trent. Again, it is very telling that these books were still a matter of debate WITHIN the council of Trent, with Cardinal Giralomo Seripando and his group denying the Apocryphal books (not to mention other contemporaries of the times, such as Cardinals Ximenes and Cajetan, the same one who opposed Luther). Very telling indeed.

CM

You obviously do not realize that the Council of Carthage was sent to the Pope to be approved by him, and yes the Pope speaks for all Christendom.

ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xv.iv.iv.xxv.html

Let this be sent to our brother and fellow bishop, Boniface, and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.

Boniface was the Bishop of Rome during this African Code.

 

[cfrancis]

What I am telling you is what Scripture is giving in light of your claim that nothing “unclean” will enter heaven.

Just so I am clear as to what you believe: you believe that Satan is in heaven. Is this a correct understanding of your belief?

This is after the general judgment. Satan is no longer a factor.

Again, so I am clear as to what you believe: before the general judgment, before Rev 21:27, unclean things are in heaven. Is this a correct understanding of your belief?

Considering that he was accusing “before” being thrown out, like I said this doesn’t seem to pertain to the Fall.

I’m not sure I understand what you believe here. It appears that you are saying that Rev 12:7-12 does not describe Lucifer being expelled from heaven. Is this a correct understanding of your belief?

He can’t. He is in the lake of fire forever and ever (Rev. 20:10).

At what can Satan not enter heaven, according to your belief?

• Was Satan in heaven from Gen 1 to Rev 12?
• Can Satan enter heaven b/n Rev 12 and Rev 20?

Not at all, yet both Job 1 and Rev. 12 have Satan in heaven. Again, this is what Scripture states.CM

Yes, we have Satan in heaven in Rev 12 - when is then kicked out of heaven. I’d buy your argument if Rev 12 said God allowed a defeated and rebellious Satan to remain in heaven.
As for Job 1 - please tell me where it states Satan is in heaven.

 

[PRmerger]

You obviously do not realize that the Council of Carthage was sent to the Pope to be approved by him, and yes the Pope speaks for all Christendom.

ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xv.iv.iv.xxv.html

Boniface was the Bishop of Rome during this African Code.

Ah! Thank you for that bit of information, Byzman! :tiphat:

 

[Byzman]

Ah! Thank you for that bit of information, Byzman! :tiphat:

Your welcome! Anytime!

 

[MarcoPolo]

In one sense we can say Christ is our Purgatory. He purges our sins.

Our current Pope once wrote of Purgatory:

“Encounter with the Lord is this transformation.”
(Joseph Ratzinger, Eschatology, p. 231)

 

[Redrum]

It seems this debate boils down to the nature of Christs sacrifice.

Was it sufficient to pay the penalty for ALL of our sins, or wasn’t it? We (protestants) seem to think that Scripture teaches there is no need for any last suffering or punishment to top things off after we die.

(“Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.” Heb 7:27)

When you say Christ is your purgatory I think we are beginning to agree. Only I would then ask why one would invent this dogma since Christ (your purgatory) already sacrificed, suffered, atoned, etc…?

 

[MarcoPolo]

Was it sufficient to pay the penalty for ALL of our sins, or wasn’t it?

Everybody agrees Christ’s sacrifice is sufficient to pay for all sins. I do not think that is the issue here.

Also, Catholics did not “invent” the dogma. We believe it is a truth divinely revealed about a particular occasion of sanctification after death but prior to heaven. It is a tremendous testament to the glory and sanctity of God’s heavenly domain!

 

[Redrum]

Everybody agrees Christ’s sacrifice is sufficient to pay for all sins. I do not think that is the issue here.

Also, Catholics did not “invent” the dogma. We believe it is a truth divinely revealed about a particular occasion of sanctification after death but prior to heaven. It is a tremendous testament to the glory and sanctity of God’s heavenly domain!

Okay well the issue is still down to the nature of Christs sacrifice then. This is where we eventually disagree if we continue to argue about purgatory.

If it was in fact divinely revealed to someone then I guess I’ll find out one day and hopefully I’ll get to admit to you that I’m wrong.

 

[DCNBILL]

Okay well the issue is still down to the nature of Christs sacrifice then. This is where we eventually disagree if we continue to argue about purgatory.

If it was in fact divinely revealed to someone then I guess I’ll find out one day and hopefully I’ll get to admit to you that I’m wrong.

It would seem that the debate is more about the state of one’s soul at the time of death than the nature of The Christ’s sacrifice. When a person dies is one immediately ready for the presence of God? At the moment of death is one perfectly in line with the will of God or not? At the moment of death is the “effects” of sin that the person accumulated over a lifetime purged from their being? In the majority of cases I would assume not. The concept of purgatory is the state in which one is prepared for the presence of God, one is perfectly aligned with the will of God and all effects of sin are cleansed from the being. Yes salvation was already there, but one must be “cleaned up and dressed properly,” to enter into the House of God.

 

[cfrancis]

I believe in the blessed Trinity as defined in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. Now what?

CM

Thank you for the answer, CM.

I like the answer, for it’s probably the same a Catholic would give. Note you didn’t use Scripture for the answer. You could have, as you said earlier, find Scripture that alludes to or implies what the Creeds state:

It isn’t about “million of folks” but about what Scripture states and, regardless of “millions of folks”,** there are Scriptures which give a triune view of the Godhead. There are Scriptures which implies or calls each person “God.” **

But the Creeds provide a much fuller understanding of the relationship and nature of the relationship. This knowledge is obviously important as the Councils of Nicea, Ephesus and Chalcedon were called to deal with the various heresies regarding the Trinity’s relationship and its nature. We should all remember that Arius, Nestorius, and others who promulgated heretical ideas ***were not ***doing so out of malice, but because they pondered Scripture and truly believed what they taught.

…but it doesn’t change the fact that purgatory doesn’t enjoy that clarity that Scripture gives the Trinity. We have councils who used Scripture to illuminate the Trinity during the Arian controversy. CM

The word of the Councils are not found in Scripture, yet, as you say, they used Scripture to build the formulation of the Trinity we now use: Three distinct Divine Persons in One Divine Being sharing the same Divine Nature.

Can you give us instances where the “entire Word of God” was used to define the concept of the Trinity? I recall Scripture being used during the Arian controversy and as the Nicene Creed and Athanasian creeds were formulated. This counts for the Scriptural aspect of the “entire Word of God” but what else was there?CM

You have just done as you ask above: the formulation of the understanding of the Trinity isn’t just a series of Scripture quotations, because, as you stated, Scripture doesn’t give us this. Yes, it “implies” many things, and “calls” each Divine Person, God, but does not explain their relationship to each other as we now understand it (as much as our finite rational mind can understand this infinte Mystery) given to us by the Councils.

It’s just the obvious progression of God-breathed Scriptures as the only viable form of truth. CM

…I believe that Scripture is the authoritative norm for weighing doctrine and right belief… CM

You understand then, given these statements of yours, I truly expected an answer from only Scripture.