Why is the Eastern Orthodox Church false?

[Chaldean_Rite]

To God Almighty, there is no time.

But I do not believe He would keep such an important dogma from being apparent in His Church for the first 1800 years (of our time).

That is one reason why the Holy Orthodox Church believes it is an innovation.

But we are creatures of time, nevertheless. And anyways, He didn’t keep anything from us, its right there in Scripture.

 

[Ignatios]

tdgesq:

Are you saying that the Council of Jerusalem was wrong?

NO, Here let me post again what I said, since you have shot way off of what I have been trying to explain to you for about three times>>>…

Read the decrees **of your own councils Ignatios:…**Chapter VI. of Acts and Decrees of the Synod of Jerusalem (A.D. 1672)
catholicity.elcore.net/Confes…Dositheus.html

…And what I am saying that this Council is not “my Council” in another words, this is not the Jurisdiction that I am under…and then further I explained to you, that I am from the Holy See of Antioch and since it is so, as Antiochian I am not bound to the decree of that Council, since that council was “LOCAL” and NOT Ecumenical.
And, in a course of a debate, one must be able to distinguish between what is “LOCAL” and what is “ECUMENICAL”…So. In another words, your statement that, this **was my Councils **is erroneous and does not apply (technically), My comment was not wether we accept it or not nor was it wrong or right. I hope it is clear for you now, however the above quote from Jerusalem was not explained, and it is wrong of you to assume things according to your church’s teaching, you must “search and study” and your opinion should be based on a full and complete understanding of any critical issue such as this one, Sigh.

my following reply would somewhat explain, what had been said in the council of Jerusalem, however this subject is complicated and one cannot explain it fully and clearly through an Internet forum.

If isn’t a true expression of the Orthodox understanding of Hades, Heaven, and Hell then please let me know

1722 At a synod held in Constantinople this year, the Orthodox made the following pronouncement regarding the state of the dead and the existence of purgatory: “[W]e the godly, following the truth and turning away from such innovations, confess and accept two places for the souls of the dead, paradise and hell, for the righteous and sinners, as the holy Scripture teaches us. We do not accept a third place, a purgatory, by any means, since neither Scripture nor the holy Fathers have taught us any such thing. However, we believe these two places have many abodes … None of the teachers of the Church have handed down or taught such a purgatory, but they all speak of one single place of punishment, hades, just as they teach about one luminous and bright place, paradise. But both the souls of the holy and the righteous go indisputably to paradise and those of the sinners go to hades, of whom the profane and those who have sinned unforgivably are punished forever and those who have offended forgivably and moderately hope to gain freedom through the unspeakable mercy of God.

Oh, that was in response to your statement that the RC’s tamper with the words in council documents. I just decided to make the same claim about the EO to see how you reacted, not because I believe it. You are right. It is a pretty childish claim from either side. Let’s stop doing it.

What I said was a respond to the many tampered quotes I encountered during the debate on this thread and it was not just an attack without a reason >>> … By anthony Post#303,Pope Gregory:

“As to what they say of the Church of Constantinople, who doubts that it is subject to the Apostolic See? This is constantly owned by the most pious Emperor and by our brother and Bishop of that city.” **(Lib. IX, Ep. 12) **

And here is the true undistorted untampered quote:

(Lib. IX., Ep. 12.) For the See of Constantinople, though now patriarchal, was not even an ancient sedes apostolica.

the above is just one for an example.

 

[Ignatios]

tdgesq:

I’m having trouble comprehending it for a number of reasons…

Of course you do, as I explained to you in the above, this is not a subject that you can learn in the course of a debate. “Study and Search”

First, your sentence structure is nearly unintelligible,…

hhhmmmm. lets see, since this “comment” coming from one whom we have clearly noticed that his comprehention level is very low, then how could we consider it???

…but from what I can make of it you claim here that nobody has gone to hell yet.

I dont claim anything … …I am only trying to transmit to you what the Church had believed and practiced from the beginning.

Second, the council of Jerusalem does not say “going,” it says “[W]e believe that the souls of those that have fallen asleep are either at rest or in torment . . . .” It looks like you disagree with that council after all.

:byzsoc: …Please try to comprehend, No the council did not say “going” but they await their full judgement on the last day, please try to read the quote that I posted earlier for anthony or go to my Post#754…"* they depart immediately either to joy, or to sorrow and lamentation though confessedly neither their enjoyment, nor condemnation are complete*. "
and then read the one above the"1722 synod…" and then try to comprehend what is being said and note the word “abodes”

Finally, pretending that somehow the council can be read to agree with you that the souls of the dead are “going” to be at rest or in torment, does that mean the souls of the just are not in heaven?

Again read my previous posts concerning this and in which the Fathers of the Church explains it( the post I gave to anthony earlier Posts#769&770.

Now this really does make it appear you believe the souls of the just are held in Hades before the final judgment. So is Hades also what you are calling hell? Are the souls of the just held in hell until the final judgment? Seems like that is what you are saying.

please go back and read it again within context… make me believe??? this is what your purgatory is…Please comprehend the text

Link or citation please. In any case, now we have two places - heaven and hell, with many abodes in each. Are the souls of the just in heaven or hell?

I gave the link in the above…again and again, please read and try to comprehend.

Using dictionary.com to define theological terms is probably a bad idea, as has been pointed out to you multiple times…

Show me where you pointed out multiple times…besides you got this one backwords, terms are used to define theology, and to understand what those terms (words) means you use a dictionary, If not then tell me what Purgatorium means?:coffeeread:

…When you put quote tags around things it makes it difficult to respond to them because they don’t appear in the reply window…

Okay, very well then, tell me how would you like them to be done in order to help you out here, Dont mind me I aint but a simple Middle Easterner.

…Please also give citations or links

Already did many times, if this is not helping you out, let me know, I will get me a help to help you out.

Again, regardless of whether Purgatory or Hades constitutes a “place” or a “state” (I don’t know of any dogmatic definition on that) it is nevertheless something where:

…of these and such like the souls depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to the sins they have committed.
…

The above by itself, It can be used to support portion of your pugatory defintions, but when we find other things as we read on, We see that what they are talking about and what you are trying to imply to them are 2 diffrent things, so please read the following and comprehend it:
… *and are **delivered by *the Supreme Goodness, through the prayers <152> of the Priests, and the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed

Through the Supreme godness and the prayers that they are delivered, Not through "TORMENTS, FIRE AND PAPER FROM THE POPE "

And :

“… deliverance for such from their direful condition, and that **before the common resurrection and judgment we know **and believe; but when we know not.”

Again in your Purgatory some may be released before and some may be held untill after the Ressurection.

Aren’t the attacks on purgatory just a another way for certain Orthodox to justify schism, in contradiction of the teachings of their own fathers?

We prooved for you from many quotes from the Fathers of the Church and also from your quotes (like the one above) that THERE IS NO PURGATORY. but obviously enough it is planted in your mind that it is, so all we can say is, may GOD Bless you and enlighten your heart and your mind.

 

[Ignatios]

ChaldeanRite:

But we are creatures of time, nevertheless. And anyways, He didn’t keep anything from us, its right there in Scripture

could you give us a reffrence to where in the Holy Scritpures it says so, in order for us to know what you are talking about and research it? thank you.

 

[peary]

**VICAR (definition):

1. Church of England. a. a person acting as priest of a parish in place of the rector, or as representative of a religious community to which tithes belong.
   b. the priest of a parish the tithes of which are impropriated and who receives only the smaller tithes or a salary.
2. Protestant Episcopal Church. a. a member of the clergy whose sole or chief charge is a chapel dependent on the church of a parish.
   b. a bishop’s assistant in charge of a church or mission.
3. Roman Catholic Church. an ecclesiastic representing the pope or a bishop.
4. a person who acts in place of another; substitute.
5. a person who is authorized to perform the functions of another; deputy: God’s vicar on earth.

[Origin: 1250–1300; ME < AF vicare; OF vicaire < L vicārius a substitute, n.

Actually, the pope is the vicar of the Chair of Peter who was put in charge of the apostles and the Church after the Resurrection and Ascension. When one says that the pope is the “vicar of Christ” it means that, as in the Old Testament Davidic Kingdom, Christ’s “prime minister” here on earth. It does not mean that he is another Christ.****

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Dear Friends,
Neither Heaven, nor Hell are places as defined in the Space/Time of our universe.
They are states of delight, or disaster, in the presence of The Loving G_d, or of separation therefrom, or facing as a mortal enemy.
We are also told, that these states are entered only after the final judgement.
So in a very real sense, these states are as ‘not yet’.
So what is now, and what is past, and what is until?
Why do you object if someone calls the present, past, and pending, Purgatory.
Whether it be a state for the living, or those sleeping in death.

Whatever you might think, we have here a ‘not-proven’, for none save one has returned to give witness, and such witness given by Our Lord, is that Heaven and Hell belong to ‘Not-Yet’.
So past, present, and pending are ‘Not-Yet’
If Rome chooses to call ‘Not-Yet’ ‘Purgatory’, then is that so inaccurate as to bring The Church to schism?

 

[anthony022071]

[Ignatios]

“Given at the Pseudo-Synod of Ferrara-Florence”
"…To all this the Orthodox party gave a clear and satisfactory answer. [5] They remarked, that the words quoted from the book of Maccabees, and our Saviour’s words, can only prove that some sins will be forgiven after death; but whether by means of punishment by fire, or by other means, nothing was known for certain.* Besides, what has forgiveness of sins to do with punishment by fire and tortures? Only one of these two things can happen: either punishment or forgiveness, and not both at once."***

They were ignorant of the scriptures to say that fire and tortures have nothing to do with forgiveness of sins.

Ps. xxxviii.
O LORD, rebuke me not in Thy wrath; neither chasten me in Thy hot displeasure.

Is. iv. 4.
When the LORD shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment and by the spirit of burning.

Mal. iii. 3.
He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver; and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver,

Zech. ix. 11.
As for Thee also, by the blood of Thy covenant, I have sent forth Thy prisoners out of the pit, wherein is no water.

Wisdom 3.1-6
But the souls of the upright are in the hands of God, and no torment can touch them. To the unenlightened, they appear to die, their departure was regarded as disaster, their leaving us like annihilation; but they are at peace. If, as it seems to us, they suffered punishment, their hope was rich with immortality; slight was their correction, great will their blessings be. God was putting them to the test and has proved them worthy to be with him; he has tested them like gold in a furnace, and accepted them as a burnt offering.

Luke,16
The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried; and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes, and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus in his bosom. And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy upon me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame.’

Matt. 18:32-34
‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you besought me; and should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’ And in anger his lord delivered him to the jailers, till he should pay all his debt. So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.

2 Corinthians 7:10
Godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation and brings no regret, but worldly grief produces death.

Hebrews 12:5-6
And have you forgotten the exhortation which addresses you as sons? – "My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, nor lose courage when you are punished by him. For the Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives.

Heb 12:29
For indeed our God is a consuming fire.

1 Peter 1:7
So that the genuineness of your faith, more precious than gold which though perishable is tested by fire…

 

[anthony022071]

“Only one of these two things can happen: either punishment or forgiveness, and not both at once.”

The Greek bishops evidently learned nothing from the scriptures, where God punished Israel for its sins,by sending Israel into exile in Babylon,and as he punished his people,he forgave them.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

[Ignatios]

They were ignorant of the scriptures to say that fire and tortures have nothing to do with forgiveness of sins.

Ps. xxxviii.
O LORD, rebuke me not in Thy wrath; neither chasten me in Thy hot displeasure.

Is. iv. 4.
When the LORD shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment and by the spirit of burning.

Mal. iii. 3.
He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver; and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver,

Zech. ix. 11.
As for Thee also, by the blood of Thy covenant, I have sent forth Thy prisoners out of the pit, wherein is no water.

Wisdom 3.1-6
But the souls of the upright are in the hands of God, and no torment can touch them. To the unenlightened, they appear to die, their departure was regarded as disaster, their leaving us like annihilation; but they are at peace. If, as it seems to us, they suffered punishment, their hope was rich with immortality; slight was their correction, great will their blessings be. God was putting them to the test and has proved them worthy to be with him; he has tested them like gold in a furnace, and accepted them as a burnt offering.

Luke,16
The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried; and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes, and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus in his bosom. And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy upon me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame.’

Matt. 18:32-34
‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you besought me; and should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’ And in anger his lord delivered him to the jailers, till he should pay all his debt. So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.

2 Corinthians 7:10
Godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation and brings no regret, but worldly grief produces death.

Hebrews 12:5-6
And have you forgotten the exhortation which addresses you as sons? – "My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, nor lose courage when you are punished by him. For the Lord disciplines him whom he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives.

Heb 12:29
For indeed our God is a consuming fire.

1 Peter 1:7
So that the genuineness of your faith, more precious than gold which though perishable is tested by fire…

Yes, yes, yes, BUT NOT-YET.
Not Yet is Pending.
Pending is an opportunity, even for those sleeping in death, that an advocate might plead for mercy, and be heard.
Is Purgatory anything other than Not-Yet?

 

[tdgesq]

my following reply would somewhat explain, what had been said in the council of Jerusalem, however this subject is complicated and one cannot explain it fully and clearly through an Internet forum.

I take it then that you don’t disagree with the council of Jerusalem. It is just complicated to explain. That’s fine.

1722 At a synod held in Constantinople this year, the Orthodox made the following pronouncement regarding the state of the dead and the existence of purgatory: “[W]e the godly, following the truth and turning away from such innovations, confess and accept two places for the souls of the dead, paradise and hell, for the righteous and sinners, as the holy Scripture teaches us

Was this council binding on your Metropolitan? You are citing it as an authority on the issue after all. But I have no problem with this statement theologically. Here is the Thomistic theological construct for hell:

Hell (infernus) in theological usage is a place of punishment after death. Theologians distinguish four meanings of the term hell:

* hell in the strict sense, or the place of punishment for the damned, be they demons or men;
* the limbo of infants (limbus parvulorum), where those who die in original sin alone, and without personal mortal sin, are confined and undergo some kind of punishment;
* the limbo of the Fathers (limbus patrum), in which the souls of the just who died before Christ awaited their admission to heaven; for in the meantime heaven was closed against them in punishment for the sin of Adam;
* purgatory, where the just, who die in venial sin or who still owe a debt of temporal punishment for sin, are cleansed by suffering before their admission to heaven. [newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm)

Even Aquinas accepted that purgatory can be viewed as a level of hell.

We do not accept a third place, a purgatory, by any means, since neither Scripture nor the holy Fathers have taught us any such thing. However, we believe these two places have many abodes

I see nothing here that separates us. I do not believe there is any dogmatic requirement in the RCC that Catholics view Purgatory as a category separate and apart from from hell/hades. I can readily accept that it is an abode within the overall category of hell/hades.

None of the teachers of the Church have handed down or taught such a purgatory, but they all speak of one single place of punishment, hades, just as they teach about one luminous and bright place, paradise. But both the souls of the holy and the righteous go indisputably to paradise and those of the sinners go to hades, of whom the profane and those who have sinned unforgivably are punished forever and those who have offended forgivably and moderately hope to gain freedom through the unspeakable mercy of God.

I still see nothing objectionable. Catholics believe that the righteous immediately go to heaven. Those who have profaned and sinned unforgivably are punished forever in the level of hell Catholics term infernus. Those who have offended forgivably and moderately go to the level of hell called Purgatory. What is it that we disagree upon again?

hhhmmmm. lets see, since this “comment” coming from one whom we have clearly noticed that his comprehention level is very low, then how could we consider it???

Well, here is what you originally posted:

We believe that the souls of those that have fallen asleep are either at rest or in torment,( LOOK AND TELL ME WHERE DO YOU SEE THIRD PLACE OR “PURGATORY” REST OR TORMENT IS GOING ( he didnt go yet)TO HELL OR HEAVEN )

I guess others will have to judge of whether that is a well written comprehensible statement.

Please try to comprehend, No the council did not say “going” but they await their full judgement on the last day, please try to read the quote that I posted earlier for anthony or go to my Post#754…"* they depart immediately either to joy, or to sorrow and lamentation though confessedly neither their enjoyment, nor condemnation are complete*

.

The righteous do directly depart to heaven though, even before the resurrection of the body. You said so above. So apparently it is only those who descend to Hades that must await the final resurrection. That is fine. But the Council of Jerusalem states that enjoyment in both states, heaven and hades, is not complete until bodily resurrection. I am free to agree with that.

Show me where you pointed out multiple times…besides you got this one backwords, terms are used to define theology, and to understand what those terms (words) means you use a dictionary, If not then tell me what Purgatorium means?:coffeeread:

I said that others have pointed it out to you. Do I really need to go back and show you the many times that’s been pointed out to you? Seriously. Wouldn’t that be a waste of time since you know it has been?

What is backwards is to use dictionary terms in place of theological terms. Using your reasoning, I could go to the dictionary definition of “hell” and it would be completely different from what the EO mean by it, as well as what the RCC means by it as demonstrated in the link to the Catholic Encyclopedia above. It seems a bit silly to many of us here that you continue to insist on dictionary definitions that don’t fit your own EO concept of things like heaven, hades, and hell.

 

[tdgesq]

. . . continued

Through the Supreme godness and the prayers that they are delivered, Not through "TORMENTS, FIRE AND PAPER FROM THE POPE "

By a piece of paper I assume you mean indulgences. It has been pointed out to you multiple times, by me included, what the RCC teaches with respect to indulgences. If you want to continue to misrepresent it, then that is your prerogative I suppose. If you don’t want to answer my last post where I asked how it could be that good works during life and a change in interior disposition could not lessen the punishments of Hades, then just say you don’t want to answer. Here is an article on indulgences if you are inclined to try and understand what the RCC teaches: newadvent.org/cathen/07783a.htm

As for punishment in Purgatory, even the Council of Jerusalem uses the word “punishment” for the souls in Hades. There is no requirement that I believe it is literal fire, even if certain Latin fathers allude to it.

Again in your Purgatory some may be released before and some may be held untill after the Ressurection.

Are you saying that it is an incontrovertible Tradition of your church that God will not release any of the suffering souls in Hades prior to the resurrection of the body? I have never seen an EO admit such a thing.

Is it also a known divine truth to Orthodoxy that no souls will suffer for their misdeeds during life in Hades after the general resurrection? I suppose God in his great mercy very well could do that, regardless of the length of suffering of other souls. I don’t believe the RCC definitively teaches that he could not or would not. For a Latin, it is a strange result for some souls to suffer for thousands of years and others for only a day based solely on the timing of the general resurrection. I won’t deny though that it is God’s choice as to how he exercises mercy and judgment.

 

[Ignatios]

[Ignatios]

They were ignorant of the scriptures to say that fire and tortures have nothing to do with forgiveness of sins.

…

anthony, you keep burying yourself deeper and deeper, Now the Church Fathers for 2000 years were Ignorants of the Scriptures, those holy men who spent their times and life on praying, spirituality, Searching and studying the Scriptures and the Church history, and in many cases they are part of the Church history itself, Can you truly think in your right mind that they were ignorant of the scriptures??? And it is obvious from previous posts of yours that you didnt know what the next verse was and I have no doubt that you do not know what comes after or/and before those verses that you posted…
Like I said before you cant be more Catholic then your church fathers, assuming that, what you said is right, then that would make your church wrong too since they say that the Orthodox Church is not heretical but schismatic.
Also that would make your church fathers ignorants too of the scriptures, since they too didnt face the Orthodox Teachers during the Pseudo-Synod of Ferrara-Florence with those verses that YOU have found in the scriptures( by the way none of those verses backup the claim to purgatory, NONE whatsoever).
You have put all the Churche’s Fathers Eastern and Western in one bag with your last post. that is the bag of ignorant.
Have you thought what you are posting before you did? I dont think so, like always, you respond just to respond.
But are you Ignorant of the scriptures? No, becuase in order to be so, you have to have some knowledge of the scriptures, and you fell waaaaaaaaaaaaay far from being short of that.
Now all you got to do anthony is, go to Rome and rebuke the fathers of your church of the council of Florence for not facing the Orthodox Teachers with your finding, and then go to the Eastern Teachers and enlight them with your finding, and then you will be the HERO who Healed the 1000 years schism…

WAY TO GO TIGER.

 

[anthony022071]

anthony, you keep burying yourself deeper and deeper, Now the Church Fathers for 2000 years were Ignorants of the Scriptures, those holy men who spent their times and life on praying, spirituality, Searching and studying the Scriptures and the Church history, and in many cases they are part of the Church history itself, Can you truly think in your right mind that they were ignorant of the scriptures???

 

[anthony022071]

Edited:

There is clearly a connection in scripture between forgiveness,and fire and punishment,and it is evident that forgiveness and punishment can happen at the same time. We cannot enter heaven without being purified of our sins,and we cannot be purified of our sins without suffering. And scripture suggests that we will be purified and suffer by fire. This fire may be taken figuratively,but it is still fire.

See post 771.

 

[anthony022071]

Dear Friends,
Neither Heaven, nor Hell are places as defined in the Space/Time of our universe.
They are states of delight, or disaster, in the presence of The Loving G_d, or of separation therefrom, or facing as a mortal enemy.
We are also told, that these states are entered only after the final judgement.
So in a very real sense, these states are as ‘not yet’.
So what is now, and what is past, and what is until?
Why do you object if someone calls the present, past, and pending, Purgatory.
Whether it be a state for the living, or those sleeping in death.

 

[Ignatios]

tdgesq:

I take it then that you don’t disagree with the council of Jerusalem…

As long as you dont interpret it according to your understanding that is

…It is just complicated to explain. That’s fine.

Please COMPREHEND what I said in the TEXT, And what I said is “…however this subject is complicated and one cannot explain it fully and clearly through an Internet forum.”

In another words, It is complicated to EXPLAIN ON AN INTERNET DEBATE FORUM, AND NOT COMPLICATED TO EXPLAIN, That if you are willing to learn.

Now what am I doing “Debating” or “Teaching” if you let me know, I will be more then glad to do either.

Was this council binding on your Metropolitan?

looool…Okay, I will try this ONE MORE TIME, If I said that I am from the “JURISDICTION” of the Holy See of Antioch ( the Patriarch of Antioch is Ignatios IV )…fine so far???.. I hope so…And the Council was “LOCAL” under the Jurisdiction of the Holy See of Jerusalem ( the Patriarch of Jerusalem is Theophilos III) …Now technicaly, is a “LOCAL COUNCIL” binding on a Bishop outside that Jurisdiction? …If you have to search to find out the answer for this … Then you are not qualified yet to debate, Then I would suggest on you to go “STUDY and SEARCH”.

It seems like I have to stop at every intersection and explain things to you. (sigh)

You are citing it as an authority on the issue after all. But I have no problem with this statement theologically.

VERY WELL THEN, LETS MOVE ON.

I can readily accept that it is an abode within the overall category of hell/hades.

:clapping: :dancing: :extrahappy: Halleluyah

I still see nothing objectionable. Catholics believe that the righteous immediately go to heaven. Those who have profaned and sinned unforgivably are punished forever in the level of hell Catholics term infernus. Those who have offended forgivably and moderately go to the level of hell called Purgatory. What is it that we disagree upon again?

UH, you must read again, and understand, according to each side’s Teaching, understanding, interpreting the Scriptures etc…to mention one for you, …Catholics believe that the righteous immediately go to heaven…you said…The Orthodox say that …But both the souls of the holy and the righteous go indisputably to paradise, but NOT YET, and that because …“go to my Post#754…” they depart immediately either to joy, or to sorrow and lamentation though confessedly neither their enjoyment, nor condemnation are complete. "…and then …read John 5:28-29 … 28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation
Also Luke 14:14 14and you will be blessed, since they do not have the means to repay you; for you will be repaid at (A)the resurrection of the righteous." etc…

 

[Ignatios]

Well, here is what you originally posted:

Quote:
We believe that the souls of those that have fallen asleep are either at rest or in torment,( LOOK AND TELL ME WHERE DO YOU SEE THIRD PLACE OR “PURGATORY” REST OR TORMENT IS GOING ( he didnt go yet)TO HELL OR HEAVEN )

I guess others will have to judge of whether that is a well written comprehensible statement.

tdgesq, I never claimed that I am perfect in my third language( the English) , but this by no means can be counted as " unintelligible " as you had it listed in your previous post # 766.

however if you wanna pick on a small things like that, I can go back and bring up a quite few mistakes of your own in your own language, however your problem is much bigger then this, that is comprehention, look just in your last post how many times you asked a questions and how many times you understood things wrong, where it was not my writting but quotings. but lets not loose too much time over those silly stuff.

The righteous do directly depart to heaven though, even before the resurrection of the body. You said so above…

Where I said so?

…So apparently it is only those who descend to Hades that must await the final resurrection. That is fine. But the Council of Jerusalem states that enjoyment in both states, heaven and hades, is not complete until bodily resurrection. I am free to agree with that.

You built all this on something that I nor the Council said… Please read and comprehend.

I said that others have pointed it out to you

And here is what you said:

Using dictionary.com to define theological terms is probably a bad idea, as has been pointed out to you multiple times…

It is clear that you are implying that you the one who said this, besides you didnt say “others” as you have mentioned in the above.

Do I really need to go back and show you the many times that’s been pointed out to you? Seriously

SERIOUSLY, NO JOKE. If you cant back it up dont say it.

Wouldn’t that be a waste of time since you know it has been?

No I dont know that it has been, please enlighten me.

What is backwards is to use dictionary terms in place of theological terms. Using your reasoning, I could go to the dictionary definition of “hell” and it would be completely different from what the EO mean by it, as well as what the RCC means by it as demonstrated in the link to the Catholic Encyclopedia above. It seems a bit silly to many of us here that you continue to insist on dictionary definitions that don’t fit your own EO concept of things like heaven, hades, and hell.

according to the dictionary “hell” is equal torment, place for the condemned, misery etc…

Heaven is equal existence of the blessed after the mortal life, supreme happiness, the abode of God, the angels, and the spirits of the righteous after death; etc…
So no problem there, all the above from the dictionary and they seems to be very orthodox.
We are talking about, what the word means, we are not speaking of Theology of the word but what it means, So again, can you tell me what Purgatorium means?

[By a piece of paper I assume you mean indulgences. It has been pointed out to you multiple times, by me included, what the RCC teaches with respect to indulgences…/QUOTE]
And i have posted for you FROM your catholic site ( a couple of them) what Indulgences is.
So, if you wanna argue this, then your arguement stands against your RC teaching and not mine, for it was not my own words.

Read below from post#733

lets go first to the catechumen of the Catholic Church…

1)1471 What is an indulgence?

“An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.”
PUNISH SINS THAT ARE FORGIVEN???

“An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin.” The faithful can gain indulgences for themselves or apply them to the dead.

1. 1498 Through indulgences the faithful can obtain the remission of temporal punishment resulting from sin for themselves and also for the souls in Purgatory

1. 1479 Since the faithful departed now being purified are also members of the same communion of saints, one way we can help them is to obtain indulgences for them, so that the temporal punishments due for their sins may be remitted.

Now here is where my words in an earlier post came from>>>

1. …St. Peter and his successors, may also remit the temporal punishments, analogous to the pardoning power given to secular officials. Thus, the full power to grant indulgences resides with the pope, who has full power of jurisdiction in the Church. This power is shared, by the measure of the pope’s disposition, with the bishops of the Church19 and to those to whom this is expressly conceded by law.20

1. …These Christians, seeking to imitate Christ, agreed. To verify the agreement, a slip of paper or other indicia was given to the penitent…

for 5&6 look in this link>>>catholic.net/rcc/Periodic…/article9.html

1. , The Pope has the plenitude of pontifical power, being like a king in his kingdom … Hence them alone the Pope, in his letters, addresses as “brethren,” whereas he calls all others his “sons.” Therefore the plenitude of the power of granting indulgences resides in the Pope, because he can grant them.

And here is the proof from another RC link “THEEE NEWADVENT”
newadvent.org/summa/5026.htm

I think thats enough for now I am off to bed…I will continue another time, i promise you this as always

 

[anthony022071]

And it is obvious from previous posts of yours that you didnt know what the next verse was

and I have no doubt that you do not know what comes after or/and before those verses that you posted…

Do you mean these verse? What about them?

Cor 3,9-11
For we are God’s co-workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.
According to the grace of God given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But each one must be careful how he builds upon it,
for no one can lay a foundation other than the one that is there, namely, Jesus Christ.

Cor 3,16-17
Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?
If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for the temple of God, which you are, is holy.

Like I said before you cant be more Catholic then your church fathers, assuming that, what you said is right, then that would make your church wrong too since they say that the Orthodox Church is not heretical but schismatic.

To become schismatic is itself a heresy.

Also that would make your church fathers ignorants too of the scriptures, since they too didnt face the Orthodox Teachers during the Pseudo-Synod of Ferrara-Florence with those verses that YOU have found in the scriptures

How do you know? What you quoted from the Orthodox website is not a part of the documents of the council.

( by the way none of those verses backup the claim to purgatory, NONE whatsoever).

Answer me this. What do you think purgatory is?

From the Catholic Catechism:
scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a12.htm
< 1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.606 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:607

(607 Cf. 1 Cor 3:15; 1 Pet 1:7.)

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.608 >

 

[tdgesq]

Now what am I doing “Debating” or “Teaching” if you let me know, I will be more then glad to do either.

Believe it or not, you can do both at the same time. I am more interested in the teaching than the debating though.

looool…Okay, I will try this ONE MORE TIME, If I said that I am from the “JURISDICTION” of the Holy See of Antioch ( the Patriarch of Antioch is Ignatios IV )…fine so far???..

Which one? I know of at least four separate churches that claim lineage from the See of Antioch.

I hope so…And the Council was “LOCAL” under the Jurisdiction of the Holy See of Jerusalem ( the Patriarch of Jerusalem is Theophilos III) …Now technicaly, is a “LOCAL COUNCIL” binding on a Bishop outside that Jurisdiction?

Yes, the council of Jerusalem was local. I understand that it is not binding on your conscience as a member of another Patriarchate. What you fail to recognize is that I was not referencing the Council of Jerusalem at all in this particular response to you.

…If you have to search to find out the answer for this … Then you are not qualified yet to debate, Then I would suggest on you to go “STUDY and SEARCH”.

Ignatios, I was referring to your citation to a local council of Constantinople. Look for yourself:

1722 At a synod held in Constantinople this year, the Orthodox made the following pronouncement regarding the state of the dead and the existence of purgatory: “[W]e the godly, following the truth and turning away from such innovations, confess and accept two places for the souls of the dead, paradise and hell, for the righteous and sinners, as the holy Scripture teaches us

You cite to a local council (Constantinople) as an authority, but when I cite to a local council (Jerusalem) you claim it has no authority over you. Why then are you citing to a local council {not of Antioch} as some authority that would tell me what the EO really believe?

:clapping: :dancing: :extrahappy: Halleluyah

The above is in response to my comment that the RCC very much believes that there is only a heaven and a hell, within which there are many abodes. Yes. We are in total agreement. That you are surprised at this is troubling. It isn’t just my view. It is the theological construct under which the RCC operates. There is no disagreement between our churches here.

Catholics believe that the righteous immediately go to heaven…you said…The Orthodox say that …But both the souls of the holy and the righteous go indisputably to paradise, but NOT YET, and that because …“go to my Post#754…” they depart immediately either to joy, or to sorrow and lamentation though confessedly neither their enjoyment, nor condemnation are complete. "…and then …read John 5:28-29 … 28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

Then where do the righteous immediately go if not paradise? There are only two states according to you - heaven and hades. Which one of these states do the righteous currently find themselves in? I asked you this question before, and here is what you said then:

But both the souls of the holy and the righteous go indisputably to paradise and those of the sinners go to hades, of whom the profane and those who have sinned unforgivably are punished forever and those who have offended forgivably and moderately hope to gain freedom through the unspeakable mercy of God.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3845497&postcount=778

It is a simple question: what state are the souls of righteous in now. Is it heaven or hades? There are only two states. Where are the souls of the just right now?

tdgesq, I never claimed that I am perfect in my third language( the English) , but this by no means can be counted as " unintelligible " as you had it listed in your previous post # 766.

I admire the fact that you can write in three languages, but your statement was a little bit difficult to understand from a purely linguistic standpoint. Let’s not dwell upon it any longer.

It is clear that you are implying that you the one who said this, besides you didnt say “others” as you have mentioned in the above.

Correct, I didn’t say others had pointed it out to you. I just said it has been pointed out to you. Why you would think I was referring to myself is puzzling since I just started debating you on the subject. Here it is for you:

Using dictionary.com to define theological terms is probably a bad idea, as has been pointed out to you multiple times.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=3830192&postcount=766

SERIOUSLY, NO JOKE. If you cant back it up dont say it.

If you insist:

Regarding Purgatory, whatever you quoted above was just words form a dictionary, here is what the Church has to say about it in the Catechism, which can be found here:
stwalburgas.blogspot.com/2008/02/dogma-of-purgatory.html

Now. Do I really need to go find the other instances I know exist in the nearly 800 posts in this thread?

according to the dictionary “hell” is equal torment, place for the condemned, misery etc…

Heaven is equal existence of the blessed after the mortal life, supreme happiness, the abode of God, the angels, and the spirits of the righteous after death; etc…
So no problem there, all the above from the dictionary and they seems to be very orthodox.

I can see that this discussion has hit a new low. Now you want to use common dictionary terms, which you don’t even link to, and then place “etc.” in the middle of them. Not only that, but the unattributed definitions you just gave don’t come near to explaining what the EO mean by hell. They do not believe in “equal torment.” They teach of different abodes in hell by your own admission. Unbelievable.

We are talking about, what the word means, we are not speaking of Theology of the word but what it means, So again, can you tell me what Purgatorium means?

Then let’s use dictionary.com to define the trinity, God, incarnation, scripture, tradition. There is a reason why there are theological dictionaries and encyclopedias. There is a reason why there are medical and legal dictionaries. The reason is that words of common usage do not mean the same thing in specialized fields – like RC theology. Until you acknowledge this, there can be no further discussion between us. I am too busy to rebut juvenile assertions that the common dictionary is sufficient to define specialized theological terms. Let me know when you are prepared to be rational on this point so that we can continue.

 

[Ignatios]

"tdgesq:

Believe it or not, you can do both at the same time. I am more interested in the teaching than the debating though

You can “learn” from debating( that, IF you are willing to learn) and in indirect way one may, be teaching ( unintentionally, Perhaps), But Debating is not teaching and most definitely TEACHING is NOT debating.

Which one? I know of at least four separate churches that claim lineage from the See of Antioch.

Its the Only Church who the wave of wrong teaching of the RCC did not prevail against it, and still has the truth today as it was handed down to us from the time of the Apostles. So my answer to you would be the Holy Orthodox See of Antioch and all the Levant.

Yes, the council of Jerusalem was local. I understand that it is not binding on your conscience as a member of another Patriarchate. What you fail to recognize is that I was not referencing the Council of Jerusalem at all in this particular response to you.

Ok, for the sake of time lets skip commenting on the first part which I have explained only about 5 different times so far, and since it appears that it is not doing any good, , and let me comment on your last sentence …
What you have said is the following:

Read the decrees of **your own councils **Ignatios:

DECREE XVIII.

We believe that the souls of those that…etc.
​

And this is what I have Answered, sheesh I should tap myself on the back for this patience.

First this council appears to be local

Second let me read it for you since …

So another words THIS IS NOT MY COUNCILS, MY COUNCILS WOULD BE THE ANTIOCHIAN OR THE ECUMENICAL
But It seems like your knowledge is so little to pickup on things like that, forgive me, for not explaining it to you, or maybe I should have gave a lesson?.

Ignatios, I was referring to your citation to a local council of Constantinople. Look for yourself:

LORD JESUS CHRIST SON OF GOD HAVE MERCY ON ME SINNER…Constantinople or Jerusalem or Alexandria, what I am referring to is your question whether my Metropolitan is under any Jurisdiction other then Antioch or not, it was an example …maybe I should have NOTED it with “This is an example”?

You cite to a local council (Constantinople) as an authority, but when I cite to a local council (Jerusalem) you claim it has no authority over you. Why then are you citing to a local council {not of Antioch} as some authority that would tell me what the EO really believe?

Again ONLY if you LISTEN to what the TEXT is saying…I commented on your word that this my council ( Jerusalem) …and what I was trying to point out to you that this is NOT my council since I am from the Holy See of Antioch and NOT JERUSALEM.
Secondly, your words point out clearly to a great lack of knowledge the least to say, The council of Jerusalem has NO AUTHORITY over any other Jurisdiction, But that does NOT mean that the other Sees don’t consider the Teaching of that Council as orthodox.

Continue…​