Staples White debate on Purgatory

[MarcoPolo]

It’s too long to discuss right now, but we agree that Scripture is theopneustos.

Do you subscribe to James White’s interpretation of this word? As I recall, he argued that since theopneustos occurs only in 2 Tim 3:16 that therefore Scripture is the only thing that is divine revelation and thus sola scriptura is true.

 

[Non_Serviam]

It’s been interesting to follow this, both here and in White’s broadcasts. It’s also been amazing how this thread has strayed from it’s original intent-but that tends to happen on CAF when things that cast catholicism in a bad light get brought up.

In deciding who “won” the debate, one has to keep firmly in mind that the debate wasn’t about purgatory, but rather it was about whether purgatory was what Paul was talking about in I Cor 3. It’s purely an exercise in exegesis, not theology.

In reading the thread, it seems tha tthe one point that White made that keeps getting brushed aside at CAF relates to the people being spoken about in the passage. The NAB does a nice job of bringing it out:
I Cor 3:9 NAB:

For we are God’s co-workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.

Paul is referring to himself and fellow ministers as builders and the believers who make up the church (to whom he writes the Epistle) as the building. So if this passage is about purgatory it is only in reference to ministers.

Note that Paul says that Christ is the foundation and that the various ministers (He, Apollos and others) are building the church upon that foundation. He then goes on to state that the materials can be precious or not-that fire will determine their quality.

Thus Paul is saying that each minister will have an impact on the quality of the people in the church. One sees the same idea in the initial Chapters of Revelation, where the “angels” ( Gk ‘sent one’) or the ministers of those churches are told that the quality of their work has an impact on how their church members will be judged.

It would seem that Paul is referring to the fire of judgement, possibly through tribulation, through sickness and dissension in the body-all of these being mentioned in I Cor as punishments on the church for its sins.

It is also important to keep in mind that Paul starts I Cor by pointing out that Christ’s body is divided by those who put their loyalty to their favourite teacher ahead of their loyalty to other believers who don’t give their loyalty to the same teacher (funny how we never hear this passage with Peter’s name in it brought up by Catholics ) . In continuing this thought in chapters 2 and 3 Paul is pointing out that if a minister’s efforts have only produced church members who are contentious and prone to disunity that there will be judgment and that the teacher will suffer loss (have nothing to show for his ministry)-as anyone does whose building burns down-but will still be saved.

It seems clear that Paul is saying that he, Apollos, Cephas et al. will be saved if the Corinthians continue on in sin and disunity. This will lead to continued and eventually eternal judgment for the church members on “the Day”. Paul and the other ministers will have to stand before God without these believers and lose the “wage” they would have gotten as successful ministers and shepherds while still holding on to their individual salvation. In the hope of presenting the Corinthians to God as gold, silver and precious gems, Paul has written this corrective Epistle.

If one continues to read I Corinthians one sees these themes repeated over and over, bodily disunity, judgment, and a call to recognize Paul’s prescription for wholeness.

With that out of the way, I would say that White did a better job of exegeting the passage, although I think his reformed presuppositions would cause him to disagree with me about whether the believers who get burned up were ever believers. Staples tried to see purgatory any place he saw fire and got “burned” for it. Hopefully he will learn from that mistake and put on a better performance in future.

 

[Just_Me_Andrew]

Concerning the 2 Maccabees 12:40-45:

But under the tunic of each of the dead they found amulets sacred to the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. So it was clear to all that this was why these men had been slain. (Idolatry=“mortal sin”)

They all therefore praised the ways of the Lord, the just judge who brings to light the things that are hidden.

Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas warned the soldiers to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.

He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection of the dead in view;

for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been useless and foolish to pray for them in death.

But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought.

Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from this sin.

In studying this chapter, personally I don’t see how it relates to Purgatory and why it would influence CS Lewis.

I don’t see the concept of Purgatory here…You have some Israelite soldiers who were idolaters who were slain in battle *(So it was clear to all that this was why these men had been slain.)*I see that there was a collection done to provide an expiatory sacrifice for the dead that had fallen. They were hoping for God’s mercy on these idolatrous Israelite men. How does it relate again to the issue of Purgatory…and prayers for the dead?

The reasons they prayed for these men would have been completely different reasons than one would give to pray for a dead Catholic relative. As far as I know, in Catholicism idolaters who died are in hell…transpose that to 2 Macc 12:40-45 LOL

The Israelite soldiers were hoping that God would blot out this “mortal sin” of Idolatry. Please Catholic brothers and sisters show me the connection!

1Jo 5:16 If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that.

Wops those Israelite soldiers made a big mistake… Have a great day friends GBU all

 

[Churchmouse]

I only referenced Lewis because he did not hold to Papal authority, and if nothing else, should give someone pause before embracing the idea that the Catholic Church “made it up.” If my post was not worded clearly, I was not indicating that my 3-point proof was something Lewis used himself (that I’m aware of), although his argument in the Malcolm letter closely resembles it. If someone was to deny that Purgatory is fairly deduced from Scripture, I think he has to deny one of the 3 points.

I don’t think that Lewis based his belief in Scripture but on logic. That’s why I asked for a primary source. I don’t think that Lewis’s musings give any relevance to the Catholic position, whether it was made up or not.

CM

 

[PRmerger]

This I’ve got to jump on. Can you give us instances where the “entire Word of God” was used to define the concept of the Trinity?

What???

The CC uses the entire Word of God, the entire deposit of faith, the entire Apostolic teaching, Scripture and Tradition, to understand God’s revelation.

We need not look to Magisterial pronouncements for, say, the fact that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. We need not look outside the Sacred Scriptures to tell us that Mary was Jesus’ mother…

We use the entirety of what God has revealed to attempt to understand the nature of God.

 

[Churchmouse]

I disagree. While 1 Cor 3 is not a proof text, there is certainly a valid argument to be made that it does support the doctrine of Purgatory.

Purgatory, just like Trinity, is a “logical extension” of Scripture.

Do you really want to bring up history as a foundation for doctrines, CM? If you wouldn’t mind giving me a reference to your catechism, and then we can talk about how historical your views are. Do you believe in the Rapture? OSAS? Women’s ordination? Altar calls? Infant dedications? I am quite certain that you have a multitude of doctrines that were not held for over 500 years.

You’re going back to red herrings. The dialogue isn’t about anything you’ve named above. There are things which can be logically derived from Scripture and things which cannot. Purgatory just doesn’t fit.

Once I know what it is your pastor believes–and that you accept–then we can discuss.

Again, the subject is purgatory. It isn’t about pastors, other beliefs, and whatnot.

I gotta go. Be back later.

CM

 

[Pete_Holter]

if this passage is about purgatory it is only in reference to ministers.

Greetings Non Serviam! Here are my thoughts on this.

In 2 Corinthians 10:8, Paul tells us that he received authority from God “for building you up and not for destroying you” (cf. 2 Cor. 13:10). This language connects us with the passage from 1 Corinthians 3 where Paul talks about the rewards prepared for those who build on the foundation and the threat of doom prepared for those who destroy God’s temple. Paul received a gift for building up the church, and he will be judged based on how he uses it.

The important point to be made is that every Christian builds on the foundation of Jesus Christ. Paul and Peter told the believers that they were, “like living stones,” “being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit,” “to be a holy priesthood” (Ephesians 2:22; 1 Peter 2:5). And we are exhorted through their teaching to “strive to excel in building up the church” (1 Cor. 14:12). Paul builds with his apostolic authority. You are building with your gift of faith, or service, or healing, helping, etc. The purpose of Church leadership is “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ” (Ephesians 4:12). All believers are being equipped so that they themselves can build up the body of Christ. Paul’s discussion in 1 Corinthians 3 focuses on the leadership. And as we’ve seen, this applies, by the extension and purpose of their ministry, to every believer. We are all stewards of the gifts that God has given us by His grace (cf. 1 Peter 4:10). Not all are apostles, prophets, and teachers (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:29). And yet “each has his own gift from God” (1 Corinthians 7:7) for “mutual upbuilding” (Rom 14:19), “for the common good” (1 Corinthians 14:12).

Paul tells us that he applied these things in 1 Corinthians 3 to himself and Apollos so that the Corinthians “may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another. For who sees anything different in you? What do you have that you did not receive?” (1 Corinthians 4:6-7). Paul and Apollos both received their gifts from God, just as the Corinthians received theirs. Paul worked as a “master builder… according to the grace of God given to” him (1 Corinthians 3:10). We are to follow his example. The gifts of the Spirit are for “building up the church” (1 Corinthians 14:12). This is one of the reasons why love is supreme: it “builds up” (1 Corinthians 8:1). “[W]hen each part [of the body] is working properly, [Christ] makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love” (Ephesians 4:15-16). Apollos watered (1 Corinthians 3:6), and husbands “water” their wives with the word of God (cf. Ephesians 5:26). Paul laid down the foundation of Christ, and as there is no other foundation besides Him, all those who come behind Paul can do nothing else except to build upon this same foundation. This is the endeavor of every Christian. To build upon the rock of Jesus Christ (Matthew 7:24-27)!

Paul sees nothing different in the Corinthians than he sees in himself (cf. 1 Corinthians 4:7). We have all received gifts from God’s Spirit to be used for the upbuilding of the Church. The illustrations drawn in 1 Corinthians 3 therefore rightly apply to all believers. We will all be held accountable for this shared ministry of building on the foundation of Jesus Christ, each in his own way.

The fire reveals each man’s work. Dr. White says that our motives are what are revealed by the fire. This must be fundamental to what Paul is saying because the Day discloses the works, i.e., they are hidden to man before then. And Paul goes on to say that when the Lord comes, He will “bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart” (1 Cor. 4:5). These hidden motives are so deeply laid within us that we can only know them in part, and we wait for the Day to disclose them even to ourselves (1 Cor. 4:4-5)!

But what the fire reveals, it goes on to test to see “what sort of work each one has done,” and it burns up what is unworthy. And yet, our motives are more internal to us than any other work we might conceive. They are the undisclosed “purposes of the heart.” For the “heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” (Jeremiah 17:9) Why, then, does the testing of our motives by fire not affect our person as the doctrine of purgatory teaches it would? It seems that it must, and that the person saved “as through fire” was certainly suffering the loss of ungodly attachments and sinful motives in the time of his testing.

Have a blessed night!

In Christ,
Pete

 

[Non_Serviam]

Greetings Non Serviam! Here are my thoughts on this.

In 2 Corinthians 10:8, Paul tells us that he received authority from God “for building you up and not for destroying you” (cf. 2 Cor. 13:10). This language connects us with the passage from 1 Corinthians 3 where Paul talks about the rewards prepared for those who build on the foundation and the threat of doom prepared for those who destroy God’s temple. Paul received a gift for building up the church, and he will be judged based on how he uses it.

Pete,

While you’ve put together some interesting thoughts on the subject, I need to stop you here. 2 Corinthians can’t provide the interpretation for I Cor 3 for the simple fact that the Corinthians didn’t have it when they initially read I Cor.

So while I wholeheartedly agree that Paul talks about all believers “building” in II Cor. it doesn’t change the fact that he was referring to ministers only in the passage in I Cor 3.-he even interprets the metaphor for us in verse 9 to make sure we don’t get confused.

I Cor 3:9 For we are God’s co-workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.

Paul makes it clear in the passage he isn’t talking about *what *is being built on Christ, but *who *is being built on Him. It is people that will be lost if ministers fail their calling, not works or sinful appetites.

If you can find your position in I Cor I’ll certainly reconsider-as I said I agree with your interpretation of II Cor, just not with the idea that it supercedes the internal interpretation of I Cor.

 

[MarcoPolo]

I don’t think that Lewis based his belief in Scripture but on logic. That’s why I asked for a primary source. I don’t think that Lewis’s musings give any relevance to the Catholic position, whether it was made up or not.

CM

Ok, great, we disagree on whether or not Lewis is using a Catholic eye or not.

So what do you think about the 3-point proof I provided that followed my comment on Lewis?

 

[MarcoPolo]

he was referring to ministers only in the passage in I Cor 3

So if I understand correctly, you agree the passage speaks about purification of a soul, but this particular passage only refers to the purification that shall be undergone by ministers.

 

[Non_Serviam]

So if I understand correctly, you agree the passage speaks about purification of a soul, but this particular passage only refers to the purification that shall be undergone by ministers.

No, I don’t agree with that particular interpretation-I provided mine on the previous page. (#233)

I did say that if Catholics wanted to attempt to claim this verse taught purgatory that it would only be referring to ministers rather than all believers, based on verse 9, but I don’t believe that the text refers to purgation.

 

[Pete_Holter]

Pete,

While you’ve put together some interesting thoughts on the subject, I need to stop you here. 2 Corinthians can’t provide the interpretation for I Cor 3 for the simple fact that the Corinthians didn’t have it when they initially read I Cor.

So while I wholeheartedly agree that Paul talks about all believers “building” in II Cor. it doesn’t change the fact that he was referring to ministers only in the passage in I Cor 3.-he even interprets the metaphor for us in verse 9 to make sure we don’t get confused.

I Cor 3:9 For we are God’s co-workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.

Paul makes it clear in the passage he isn’t talking about *what *is being built on Christ, but *who *is being built on Him. It is people that will be lost if ministers fail their calling, not works or sinful appetites.

If you can find your position in I Cor I’ll certainly reconsider-as I said I agree with your interpretation of II Cor, just not with the idea that it supercedes the internal interpretation of I Cor.

Sure! The “gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw” are the works we perform to build God’s building, and are not to be taken as the people being built. If the “wood, hay, and straw” are “burned up” by God’s fire, which is surely Paul’s intended meaning, and these objects are the people we’ve ministered to, then this scenario would be demonstrating that we have destroyed God’s temple through our ministry and deserve to be destroyed ourselves. And this is exactly what Paul teaches in verses 16 and 17. But in verses 10-15, the person whose work is destroyed is saved. And this is how we know that the “gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw” must be “how we build” and not “who we build” (cf. v. 10). Our reward in heaven is not dependent upon whether the people we minister to respond to God’s grace, but only upon whether and how we minister. I think this is what Paul is teaching here.

Although, I also have to say that I see what you’re saying because the thought occurred to me before. But when all things were considered, it seemed to me that I was just having a hard time keeping up with Paul’s complex thoughts and multiple metaphors.

I hope you find this helpful and are able to return to what I wrote before to be “built up” by the word of God.

With the love of Christ,
Pete

 

[brb3]

doesn’t change the fact that he was referring to ministers only in the passage in I Cor 3.-

Paul makes it clear in the passage he isn’t talking about *what *is being built on Christ, but *who *is being built on Him. It is people that will be lost if ministers fail their calling,

We are all called to be disciples of Christ … each with our own ‘talents’. White’s point to restrict scripture to priests/pastors only was only half true.

 

[brb3]

Staples tried to see purgatory any place he saw fire and got “burned” for it. Hopefully he will learn from that mistake and put on a better performance in future.

Staples doesn’t morph scriptures to ‘fit’ his personal ideas. He accepts the Church’s teaching on the subject, as supported by ECF’s and Apostles.

 

[brb3]

The important point to be made is that every Christian builds on the foundation of Jesus Christ. Paul and Peter told the believers that they were, “like living stones,” “being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit,” “to be a holy priesthood” (Ephesians 2:22; 1 Peter 2:5). And we are exhorted through their teaching to “strive to excel in building up the church”

Exactly ! Paul tells the Christians in an Epistle to ‘imitate’ him, as he ‘imitates’ Christ. All Catholics compose a royal priesthood, as we ABIDE IN CHRIST. To the degree we show our Love for the Brethren & the unsaved, we honor our Lord.

 

[Pete_Holter]

Exactly ! Paul tells the Christians in an Epistle to ‘imitate’ him, as he ‘imitates’ Christ. All Catholics compose a royal priesthood, as we ABIDE IN CHRIST. To the degree we show our Love for the Brethren & the unsaved, we honor our Lord.

Hey brb3!

May we honor Him!

We are all called to be disciples of Christ … each with our own ‘talents’. White’s point to restrict scripture to priests/pastors only was only half true.

He did acknowledge the possibility of a secondary, wider application towards the end of his first segment:

“First, the passage is about Christian workers, not all the Christian faithful. Any wider application would only be secondary in nature.”

Your brother in the Lord,
Pete

 

[MarcoPolo]

No, I don’t agree with that particular interpretation-I provided mine on the previous page. (#233)

I did say that if Catholics wanted to attempt to claim this verse taught purgatory that it would only be referring to ministers rather than all believers, based on verse 9, but I don’t believe that the text refers to purgation.

Ok, then the heart of your point is not whether the passage has to do with ministers, which is probably why White didn’t focus on verse 9 either. But briefly, if only ministers were called to build upon Christ’s foundation, I might agree with you. But we all are called to build on Christ’s foundation in a way that is not the same as someone ordained, but as a lay person. The ordained may build in a particular way and that is the example Paul begins with here. But to the extent this passage goes, there is no rationale why the passage’s principle of building upon Christ’s foundation wouldn’t apply to anyone’s calling, particularly when his audience included all. He gave himself as an example, and in his example, his calling is to build as a minister. In your call, you build as a lay person, and help the Church build on the same foundation—Jesus Christ.

I think **Pete Holter **has given you some good thought filled answers. If you have not read my posts already, I have also discussed the purifying nature of gold and silver going through fire. This is a metaphor of refinement, i.e. purification with the impurities burning up. See Zech 13:9 or Ez 22:22 for the same idea in the OT. Historically, this is known as smelting. To deny that the passage relates to purification, one has to reject that Paul’s very metaphor is describing the very process of purifying precious metals. White avoided this aspect of the metaphor both in the debate and on the radio last week when he made an ad hominem attack against me and the Catholics in this thread.

Now White tried to separate the person from the works, but verse 15 does say the person is saved through fire. And in Paul’s theology, the works and the person are united. Consider later in the same letter to the Corinthians when Paul says “Love is patient, love is kind…love doesn’t seek after itself.” These attributes are words of action—things a person does. The works and the person are wrapped up. When the person passes through the fire, the works that are impure are removed from him because they are not compatible. The metaphor of gold/silver, wood/straw, and fire remains consistent.

To cap it off, in verse 17, Paul goes so far to describe someone who is not saved because of his deeds—he describes a person who defiles his own body will be himself destroyed completely. The context of the verse carries through with judgment on the person himself based on what the person has done. The previous verses had persons saved, including those who are first rid of wood/straw with only their pure gold/silver self remaining. And then it finishes with a person who is entirely destroyed in verse 17 for defilement. The thought of judgment and what becomes of the individual person remains consistent in this passage.

 

[Churchmouse]

Ok, great, we disagree on whether or not Lewis is using a Catholic eye or not.

It’s not a matter of disagreement. Lewis had his own reasons for believing in purgatory and his basis was logic. What I’m asking for is Lewis using Scripture to support his logic. Any sources?

So what do you think about the 3-point proof I provided that followed my comment on Lewis?

Are you talking about these…

1. There is not stain or blemish of sin of any kind in heaven where we are fully united with God.
2. We still have sinful tendencies and habits and such in our lives here on earth.
3. Thus prior to full entry into heaven, the imperfections must be removed from the soul—this purification, i.e. purging, is Purgatory.

If this is the case…

1. There will be no stain or blemish when we are glorified.
2. There will be no stain or blemish when we are glorified.
3. This assumes that imperfections must be removed in the afterlife. That would be human reasoning.

CM

 

[PRmerger]

To disagree is your prerogative, but it doesn’t change the fact that purgatory doesn’t enjoy that clarity that Scripture gives the Trinity.

Clarity? If it’s so clear why are there millions of folks who’ve read those same Scripture verses and conclude differently?

 

[brb3]

To cap it off, in verse 17, Paul goes so far to describe someone who is not saved because of his deeds—he describes a person who defiles his own body will be himself destroyed completely. The context of the verse carries through with judgment on the person himself based on what the person has done. The previous verses had persons saved, including those who are first rid of wood/straw with only their pure gold/silver self remaining. And then it finishes with a person who is entirely destroyed in verse 17 for defilement. The thought of judgment and what becomes of the individual person remains consistent in this passage.

Yes ! Also a consistent theme from the OT.

Ref: Malachi 4:1-2 “For behold, the day comes BURNING LIKE AN OVEN, when all the ARROGANT AND ALL EVILDOERS will be STUBBLE; the day that comes SHALL BURN THEM UP, says the Lord of hosts, so that it will leave them neither ROOT NOR BRANCH. But, for you who fear my name the SUN of righteousness SHALL RISE, with HEALING in its wings.”

Isaiah 47:14 "Behold, they are like STUBBLE, the FIRE CONSUMES THEM; they cannot deliver themselves from the POWER OF THE FLAME. NO COAL FOR WARMING ONESELF IS THIS, NO FIRE TO SIT BEFORE! "

Purgatory … clearly taught in the above OT verses, for those that have ‘other than’ stubble.