Your opinion on Purgatory?

[frangiuliano115]

Thanks for all of the insight Fran. I think we might have come full circle on this topic. Just wanted to clear up a couple things I think I missed, which you are welcome to respond to.

Maybe your first sentence is why I have such a hard time understanding the second. I think we are the ones that take Jesus off with our sins, but I agree he never leaves us. Us ignoring or forgetting he is there, when we sin, is what I mean by not fully putting on Jesus. I don’t think I have a problem with trusting Jesus, I have taking some pretty huge leaps of Faith in my life. I think it is more about becoming worthy of what he has given me and will give me in the next life. I know some will say all you have to do is ask/believe, but when you had to work for everything you have in your life that is a hard concept to grasp.

Important to understand: We don’t take Jesus off with our sins. That’s the WHOLE REASON we have Him on! To protect us from our sins. We take Him off when we abandon Him. (will be PM’ing you re OSAS - which is not bilbical).

Let’s say you had an argument with your wife. Did you divorce her or did you just have an argument? That’s the best way I could explain the difference.

We don’t ignore Him when we sin. And, yes, He’s there. And that’s why we have a guilty conscience - because we know we hurt Him. I’m not sure about this ignoring word you used. We’d have to get into that a bit more but it may not be worth it. You mean “ignore” in the sense that you didn’t LISTEN to Him? I think so.
MT, can we ever really become worthy? What a responsibility! We are worthy in the Lord Jesus Christ. We are children of God. Children don’t have to be worthy. They are intrinsically worthy, not because of something they do. (you know I believe in James, please understand). Taking leaps. I’ve taken many myself, as also in the present time. So, yes, the only thing you could ask for and be sure to get is Faith and salvation. All else is a big mystery and if anyone tells you they understand, it means they haven’t arrived at the end line yet.

Skipped this one. I just wanted to say that I am the exact opposite. Knowing that Jesus will cleanse me, of anything that I am not aware of, in Purgatory before the eternal feast is a freeing experience and makes me trust that he loves me even more. It seems we both know the destination, we are just on different paths. I guess if I’m wrong I can just plead being an infallible human. I’m sure Jesus will cover that sin as well.

LOL. Being fallible is not a sin. God knows we’re weak. Even the Pope is fallible except when he’s speaking ex-cathedra! Be happy how you are and in what you believe. There is no problem with this - you are blessed.

ONE

 

[frangiuliano115]

TWO

I think I will always have a hard time wrapping my brain around this. I can understand the meaning of it but I lose focus when I come to non-confessed sins. Because this is a sin that you might not have been sorry for or asked forgiveness for. In my mind it just makes it sound like Jesus is willing to shield you from God, with no punishment, the fact that you were sorry for cheating on your wife 40 times, because you repented, but he is not willing to shield you because you couldn’t find it in yourself to forgive your neighbor and rebuild your relationship with the neighbor when he let his dog dig up your prize rose

You have given me some needed giggles.
MT - how could you not be sorry for a sin if you love the Lord? WHILE we are committing the sin we are already sorry for it! It’s just that our sin nature is difficult to control at times. The enemy is strong and he’s always attacking us.
Yes, Jesus is willing to SHIELD you from God with no punishment. I like that word “shield”!

If my son disobeys me, and he’s sorry, I will forgive him.
if I forgive him and hug him and the relationship is reconciled (by confession in your case and by Jesus offering in my case) should I still punish him? What do you think? Would this make our relationship better? Or would it strain it? Just a thought.

Plus, you must know that if you do not remember a sin, there is no need to worry about it since it will automatically be forgiven with absolution.

Now, regarding your wife and the neighbor’s roses.
This is pretty funny! So you count? LOL!
Jesus will shield you from everything! Even if you die mad at your neighbor IF in your heart you knew that EVENTUALLY you would have forgiven them. Forgiveness is a whole different matter as you must know. Have you forgiven someone if you’re still mad at them?? YES! And eventually even the feeling will fade. Emotion is NOT a sin.

Perfectly clear, you have treated me with much respect these past days. I do not condemn you for your beliefs either, only God will judge us. I do however, enjoy learning your thought process.

I do believe Jesus makes us righteous, but I also believe every time we sin we walk away from that righteousness. I know I can’t make myself righteous, but I do a pretty good job of making myself unrighteous on occasion.

Okay. You believe with the light that has been given you. BUT, if I could leave you with one thought, please let it be this: Every time we sin we do NOT walk away from that righteousness. Jesus is our righteousness.
Do you realize what you’re saying? If your belief was correct it would be like this: You sin, you’re lost, you confess, you’re saved… you sin, you’re lost, you confess, you’re saved… you sin, you’re lost, you confess, you’re saved… and on and on. Does that make sense to you? It would be a continual see-saw. (but this belief does not cause loss of salvation, you are saved anyway, whether you know it or not).

I was referring to the non-confessed sins which I still don’t understand what happens to them since we never new of them or were not sorry about what we did. If we weren’t sorry in this life does Jesus point out our fault and give us a chance to be sorry in the next?

Don’t you worry about not having confessed sins you never knew about.
Jesus has your back covered! And even in the Catholic doctrine of confession, what I said is true.

The whole OSAS concept makes my head spin. I would appreciate any advice you could give. But I think it would be best to PM me so we don’t start a new topic on this thread.

It makes my head spin too - and that’s not easy to do!

Soon,
FG

 

[John_Martin]

If my son disobeys me, and he’s sorry, I will forgive him.
if I forgive him and hug him and the relationship is reconciled (by confession in your case and by Jesus offering in my case) should I still punish him? What do you think? Would this make our relationship better? Or would it strain it? Just a thought.

Have you ever hugged your son (in forgiveness) but he refuses to hug you back, says “Let go of me! Leave my room!”? If you have, you are acting as God acts, however, Re-conciliation is on the part of the son acting the acts of Friendship. It is Jesus Re-conciliating (hugging God back) that is the reconciliation for us who “cling to Jesus”, but not for those who are staying away from Jesus. How many times did Paul write in his letters that “Those who do these things have no inheritance in the Kingdom of God and of Christ” ? When you are in sin, when you have entered into temptation to fulfill the act tempted, you are not with Jesus, and not justified. In your own understanding you know you are not participating in Christ, you know you are not friends with God (not “conciliated”), not righteous, and do not want it. You want God “out of your sight”.

Plus, you must know that if you do not remember a sin, there is no need to worry about it since it will automatically be forgiven with absolution.

That actually depends on contrition - Judas, like the other disciples, confessed sins to Jesus, but forgot to tell him about each instance of stealing from the common purse with sorrow for these. In the end he knew he had no inheritance with Christ and ended his life in suicide rather than clinging to Jesus in hope of reconciliation.

Okay. You believe with the light that has been given you. BUT, if I could leave you with one thought, please let it be this: Every time we sin we do NOT walk away from that righteousness. Jesus is our righteousness.
Do you realize what you’re saying? If your belief was correct it would be like this: You sin, you’re lost, you confess, you’re saved… you sin, you’re lost, you confess, you’re saved… you sin, you’re lost, you confess, you’re saved… and on and on. Does that make sense to you? It would be a continual see-saw. (but this belief does not cause loss of salvation, you are saved anyway, whether you know it or not).

“Saved” means being a member of the Church, being Baptized by the Church, being granted citizenship in the Kingdom God established when Jesus was anointed (baptized by John) as our King. When Luke writes that 3000 souls added, he is referring to their Baptism into citizenship in this Kingdom. “And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.” (those who were being granted citizenship, a promise of inheritance, by the Apostles)
We are justified when we are believing the messengers from Christ.
We are unjustified when we are looking for life, goodness, pleasure, as if these come from something we can gain for ourselves without turning to Christ (in the persons of his messengers, the Church, who officially grant us his Grace, his Holy Spirit).

Jesus is our righteousness because he gives us his Holy Spirit, infusing us with Grace, infusing us with Virtue, at the hands of his Apostles, the Church. Not our righteousness as a “certificate of ‘you are saved’:” but because we have been infused with Virtue, which makes a man “good” and makes his works “good” when the virtues are used in one’s doings.

That we are “justified by faith” means that we take Jesus’ official messengers at their word that we are now citizens of this People of God, where before we were not the People. “I am baptized by someone who has come from Jesus” is my justification for saying, “I am one of his own People.”
When someone asks you, “Why are you doing things virtuously?” you answer, “I am called ‘one of the People’, and have been given Virtue to use in my doings”.
That was Abraham’s justification: When asked, “Why are you heading West?” he would answer, "I am Yahweh’s People; his messenger told me, and called me to head West to the place he would show me. So I am justified in saying I am his People, because he sent his Angel to tell me, and I am justified in heading West because he has called me, his People, to go West. "
That is Abraham believing God.

What I have to say about the Mystery of Purgatory is here: softvocation.org/2014/09/24/the-last-things-part-i/

 

[frangiuliano115]

Have you ever hugged your son (in forgiveness) but he refuses to hug you back, says “Let go of me! Leave my room!”? If you have, you are acting as God acts, however, Re-conciliation is on the part of the son acting the acts of Friendship. It is Jesus Re-conciliating (hugging God back) that is the reconciliation for us who “cling to Jesus”, but not for those who are staying away from Jesus. How many times did Paul write in his letters that “Those who do these things have no inheritance in the Kingdom of God and of Christ” ? When you are in sin, when you have entered into temptation to fulfill the act tempted, you are not with Jesus, and not justified. In your own understanding you know you are not participating in Christ, you know you are not friends with God (not “conciliated”), not righteous, and do not want it. You want God “out of your sight”.

That actually depends on contrition - Judas, like the other disciples, confessed sins to Jesus, but forgot to tell him about each instance of stealing from the common purse with sorrow for these. In the end he knew he had no inheritance with Christ and ended his life in suicide rather than clinging to Jesus in hope of reconciliation.

“Saved” means being a member of the Church, being Baptized by the Church, being granted citizenship in the Kingdom God established when Jesus was anointed (baptized by John) as our King. When Luke writes that 3000 souls added, he is referring to their Baptism into citizenship in this Kingdom. “And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.” (those who were being granted citizenship, a promise of inheritance, by the Apostles)
We are justified when we are believing the messengers from Christ.
We are unjustified when we are looking for life, goodness, pleasure, as if these come from something we can gain for ourselves without turning to Christ (in the persons of his messengers, the Church, who officially grant us his Grace, his Holy Spirit).

Jesus is our righteousness because he gives us his Holy Spirit, infusing us with Grace, infusing us with Virtue, at the hands of his Apostles, the Church. Not our righteousness as a “certificate of ‘you are saved’:” but because we have been infused with Virtue, which makes a man “good” and makes his works “good” when the virtues are used in one’s doings.

That we are “justified by faith” means that we take Jesus’ official messengers at their word that we are now citizens of this People of God, where before we were not the People. “I am baptized by someone who has come from Jesus” is my justification for saying, “I am one of his own People.”
When someone asks you, “Why are you doing things virtuously?” you answer, “I am called ‘one of the People’, and have been given Virtue to use in my doings”.
That was Abraham’s justification: When asked, “Why are you heading West?” he would answer, "I am Yahweh’s People; his messenger told me, and called me to head West to the place he would show me. So I am justified in saying I am his People, because he sent his Angel to tell me, and I am justified in heading West because he has called me, his People, to go West. "
That is Abraham believing God.

What I have to say about the Mystery of Purgatory is here: softvocation.org/2014/09/24/the-last-things-part-i/

Hi John,
You bring up some good points which I look forward to answering since they will further clarify the non-Catholic position. If it interests you - I assume it does if you posted a reply. Not to convince you of anything.

You must be in my time zone (Europe).

Lata…Lunchtime!
FG

 

[frangiuliano115]

Have you ever hugged your son (in forgiveness) but he refuses to hug you back, says “Let go of me! Leave my room!”? If you have, you are acting as God acts, however, Re-conciliation is on the part of the son acting the acts of Friendship. It is Jesus Re-conciliating (hugging God back) that is the reconciliation for us who “cling to Jesus”, but not for those who are staying away from Jesus. How many times did Paul write in his letters that “Those who do these things have no inheritance in the Kingdom of God and of Christ” ? When you are in sin, when you have entered into temptation to fulfill the act tempted, you are not with Jesus, and not justified. In your own understanding you know you are not participating in Christ, you know you are not friends with God (not “conciliated”), not righteous, and do not want it. You want God “out of your sight”.

Well John, I just lost a whole letter I wrote to you and I don’t know how. It took some time too.
So we’ll have to go quick this time. Sorry.

The son telling the father to leave the room:
I’m sure you’ve read the Prodigal Son. The Father represents God. He was waiting for the son with open arms.
It takes two to reconcile.
“Those who do these things” Paul is speaking of non-beleivers or backslid Christians, or maybe even giving directin to Christians. You do not provide scripture and many verses are similar so you make it difficult for me to respond.
You do not lose your justification when you sin. Please read CCC no. 1987 -1995. Pay attention to 1988 "We take part in Christ’s Passion by dying to SIN. Not sins. Big difference.

Not wanting God in your life anymore looks more like this than like sin:
2 Peter 2:20-22

That actually depends on contrition - Judas, like the other disciples, confessed sins to Jesus, but forgot to tell him about each instance of stealing from the common purse with sorrow for these. In the end he knew he had no inheritance with Christ and ended his life in suicide rather than clinging to Jesus in hope of reconciliation.

You’re speaking about forgotten, unconfessed sins here. HOW could you have either type of contrition if YOU DON’T EVEN KNOW YOU SINNED? How are you sorry for a sin you don’t know you committed?

Judas. Where does it say he ever confessed to Jesus? I can’t find this.
WHY do you suppose he committed suicide?

“Saved” means being a member of the Church, being Baptized by the Church, being granted citizenship in the Kingdom God established when Jesus was anointed (baptized by John) as our King. When Luke writes that 3000 souls added, he is referring to their Baptism into citizenship in this Kingdom. “And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.” (those who were being granted citizenship, a promise of inheritance, by the Apostles)
We are justified when we are believing the messengers from Christ.
We are unjustified when we are looking for life, goodness, pleasure, as if these come from something we can gain for ourselves without turning to Christ (in the persons of his messengers, the Church, who officially grant us his Grace, his Holy Spirit).

Jesus wasn’t annointed by John the Baptist. He was baptized by him. GOD annointed Jesus. Jesus is Prophet, Priest, and King. But the first time around, He came as the Savior (priest, see Hebrews), the next time around, He’ll come as King.
Okay re the 3,000. I’m just hoping you’re not one of these people who think you won’t be saved unless you’re baptized.

Jesus is our righteousness because he gives us his Holy Spirit, infusing us with Grace, infusing us with Virtue, at the hands of his Apostles, the Church. Not our righteousness as a “certificate of ‘you are saved’:” but because we have been infused with Virtue, which makes a man “good” and makes his works “good” when the virtues are used in one’s doings.

Yes. Read those CCC paragraphs. You know a “good” man? I’d like to meet him!
See Mark 10:18
You’re not saved because you’re good John. You could NEVER be that good.
You’re saved because Jesus is saving you. His atoning and redeeming - salvific - work.

That we are “justified by faith” means that we take Jesus’ official messengers at their word that we are now citizens of this People of God, where before we were not the People. “I am baptized by someone who has come from Jesus” is my justification for saying, “I am one of his own People.”
When someone asks you, “Why are you doing things virtuously?” you answer, “I am called ‘one of the People’, and have been given Virtue to use in my doings”.
That was Abraham’s justification: When asked, “Why are you heading West?” he would answer, "I am Yahweh’s People; his messenger told me, and called me to head West to the place he would show me. So I am justified in saying I am his People, because he sent his Angel to tell me, and I am justified in heading West because he has called me, his People, to go West. "
That is Abraham believing God.

There are too many errors here. it would take a whole post by itself. WHERE did you get these ideas? They’re not even CATHOLIC!

What I have to say about the Mystery of Purgatory is here: softvocation.org/2014/09/24/the-last-things-part-i/

I’m sorry, I don’t read links. But you could believe whatever you want to - it’s fine by me, no problem.
I DO wish you’d get your theology corrected, and I mean CATHOLIC theology.
It would take very long to go through everything. If you’re interested either use the CCC or the bible or read up on good Catholic sites online. EWTN would be good for starters. Dr. Scott Hahn’s site would be good too - I can’t remember what it’s called. Google it.

FG

 

[phantom87]

I think of it as a place of learning… The CCC and scripture tells us a Purifying fire is awaiting , I think that puts some off … The idea of going through a fire (Because all we can relate to is physical pain in this case) Sounds terrifying to many cause lets face it , who wants to hurt ?

This of course would totally neglect that God loves us and doesn’t want to see us in pain so why would he make us suffer ?

 

[MT1926]

Important to understand: We don’t take Jesus off with our sins. That’s the WHOLE REASON we have Him on!
Let’s say you had an argument with your wife. Did you divorce her or did you just have an argument? That’s the best way I could explain the difference.

This is a very good “black & white” explanation. But what I also think about are the shades of grey and believe God sees them as well. What about the unresolved argument? The couple does not divorce and stays civil to each other but there is no way of getting over this issue of the argument. I think what you are saying is Jesus covers the shades of grey and God does not see them. I know we don’t agree on this but it just seems to easy, takes away our responsibilities in this world. Makes it seem like our relationship with God is one sided.

We don’t ignore Him when we sin. And, yes, He’s there. And that’s why we have a guilty conscience - because we know we hurt Him. I’m not sure about this ignoring word you used. We’d have to get into that a bit more but it may not be worth it. You mean “ignore” in the sense that you didn’t LISTEN to Him? I think so.

Yes, ignore does mean didn’t listen to him, but then we need to define what we mean when we say didn’t listen to him. Where I was trying to go with this was a sin that we know or not know to be wrong, yet we are OK with it because we are able to justify our actions in our own mind. Even if we are able to justify them it is still a sin. Being a father of 5 opens your eyes to how easily we humans can justify our own actions. I’ve scratched out half of my hair trying to figure out their thought processes. God must be bald scratching his head over billions.

If I make my kids responsible for their actions can’t imagine God won’t make us responsible as well.

MT, can we ever really become worthy? What a responsibility! We are worthy in the Lord Jesus Christ. We are children of God. Children don’t have to be worthy. They are intrinsically worthy, not because of something they do. (you know I believe in James, please understand). Taking leaps. I’ve taken many myself, as also in the present time. So, yes, the only thing you could ask for and be sure to get is Faith and salvation. All else is a big mystery and if anyone tells you they understand, it means they haven’t arrived at the end line yet.

ONE

Can we ever really become worthy is an excellent question. Obviously the answer is no, but at the same time this question is a double edged sword. It’s your next statement “children don’t have to be worthy” is the other edge of the sword. I will always love my children but they also have to prove they are worthy by not only accepting that love but also by their actions. The thing that worries me with this is that many in this world will and have taken this to the extreme. Growing up every time I heard these words, not just religiously but also worldly, the first thought in my mind was I might not ever really become worthy, but I am going to give it everything I have to try. Now a days, 46 years later, the worldly answer I often hear is yep your right so why even try.

From our talks I know this is not what you believe, but I think we can both agree we both know others that do think this way.

 

[John_Martin]

There are too many errors here. it would take a whole post by itself. WHERE did you get these ideas? They’re not even CATHOLIC!

From Thomas Aquinas, St. Paul, St. Peter, etc.
Someone outside the Church is outside the Church because they embrace teachings contrary to the Church and is not in a position to define the Church teaching for the Church .

If you quote from the CCC, are you quoting as someone who is obedient to the Pope and Magisterium, believing all that is in the Catechism as fully truth? Or are you quoting as an outside observer of Catholicism trying to tell Catholics how they should interpret the meanings of the Catechism from your outside beliefs?

Your wording of things betrays that you are a Protestant of some denomination, meaning that your stance is one of protest against the being of the Church and its teachings. You appear to have no understanding of Gratuitous and Sanctifying Grace, wherein we are justified and sanctified. You seem to have no grasp of Sacramental bestowal of the salvation of Christ. And you speak against what you do not understand.

Yes, Jesus was anointed as King by John the Baptist, which was confirmed by the Holy Spirit and voice from Heaven. And we are born again in baptism by the Church, and given the Holy Spirit in that same material Sacrament. The Church, the People Jesus sent to us physically, give us our salvation in person, give us citizenship in his Kingdom in person, give us teaching in person, give us the Body and Blood of Christ to eat and drink in person, give us God’s forgiveness in person.

 

[MT1926]

TWO
You have given me some needed giggles.
MT - how could you not be sorry for a sin if you love the Lord? WHILE we are committing the sin we are already sorry for it! It’s just that our sin nature is difficult to control at times. The enemy is strong and he’s always attacking us.
Yes, Jesus is willing to SHIELD you from God with no punishment. I like that word “shield”!

Like I mentioned earlier there are many people that sin and justify their actions in their mind. If they are capable of justifying their actions they obviously don’t think it is a sin therefor they could not be sorry for a sin that they don’t think is a sin. I think this is what leads to relativism.

If my son disobeys me, and he’s sorry, I will forgive him.
if I forgive him and hug him and the relationship is reconciled (by confession in your case and by Jesus offering in my case) should I still punish him? What do you think? Would this make our relationship better? Or would it strain it? Just a thought.

It depends on the situation. It is possible that the punishment could improve or strain the relationship and it is possible the lack of punishment could improve or strain the relationship. I know many parents who never punished their children when they were young and it is the saddest sight you could imagine to see how much their children walk all over them daily.

Now, regarding your wife and the neighbor’s roses.
This is pretty funny! So you count? LOL!
Jesus will shield you from everything! Even if you die mad at your neighbor IF in your heart you knew that EVENTUALLY you would have forgiven them. Forgiveness is a whole different matter as you must know. Have you forgiven someone if you’re still mad at them?? YES! And eventually even the feeling will fade. Emotion is NOT a sin.

Yes “IF” is the word that I am speaking of. What happens if that “IF” never comes into your heart. I mean the person has always believed and is already saved but is human and can not get past this one sin. Is that person doomed to hell?

Do you realize what you’re saying? If your belief was correct it would be like this: You sin, you’re lost, you confess, you’re saved… you sin, you’re lost, you confess, you’re saved… you sin, you’re lost, you confess, you’re saved… and on and on. Does that make sense to you? It would be a continual see-saw. (but this belief does not cause loss of salvation, you are saved anyway, whether you know it or not).

I agree that I am saying you are lost. But that does not mean you become unsaved. Just because my son walked away does not mean he is no longer my son. But at the present time he is lost.

 

[frangiuliano115]

I think of it as a place of learning… The CCC and scripture tells us a Purifying fire is awaiting , I think that puts some off … The idea of going through a fire (Because all we can relate to is physical pain in this case) Sounds terrifying to many cause lets face it , who wants to hurt ?

This of course would totally neglect that God loves us and doesn’t want to see us in pain so why would he make us suffer ?

If you confirm theology regarding purgatory,you’ll find that no one really knows what it will be.
I doubt it will be fire. I’d stop believing in such a God.
The distance between the person and God would be enough.
But, I agree with you, why do we need to suffer?

(it’s a rhetorical question - no response necessary)

FG

 

[frangiuliano115]

From Thomas Aquinas, St. Paul, St. Peter, etc.
Someone outside the Church is outside the Church because they embrace teachings contrary to the Church and is not in a position to define the Church teaching for the Church .

If you quote from the CCC, are you quoting as someone who is obedient to the Pope and Magisterium, believing all that is in the Catechism as fully truth? Or are you quoting as an outside observer of Catholicism trying to tell Catholics how they should interpret the meanings of the Catechism from your outside beliefs?

Your wording of things betrays that you are a Protestant of some denomination, meaning that your stance is one of protest against the being of the Church and its teachings. You appear to have no understanding of Gratuitous and Sanctifying Grace, wherein we are justified and sanctified. You seem to have no grasp of Sacramental bestowal of the salvation of Christ. And you speak against what you do not understand.

Yes, Jesus was anointed as King by John the Baptist, which was confirmed by the Holy Spirit and voice from Heaven. And we are born again in baptism by the Church, and given the Holy Spirit in that same material Sacrament. The Church, the People Jesus sent to us physically, give us our salvation in person, give us citizenship in his Kingdom in person, give us teaching in person, give us the Body and Blood of Christ to eat and drink in person, give us God’s forgiveness in person.

Okay John Martin,
I guess our conversation ends here since you see me as a hostile person.
Let me just say this:

I’m not telling Catholics how to interpret the Catechism. I listed the paragraphs you listed. I didn’t comment on them.

When John was to baptize Jesus, John said “Behold, the LAMB of God who takes away the sins of the world.” John 1:29
Does this sound like a King or like a Savior?
Jesus is the King of the Kingdom of God, but while He was on earth THE FIRST TIME,2,000 years ago, He was not here as King but as Savior.

I’d say that my beliefs are not against the church but are based on scripture. I do not define church teaching. The CCC and encyclicals do that.

If I quote from the CCC it is because I know it well. Very well. There are very few paragraphs I would not agree with, but enough to give me a problem.

I plainly stated that I am Christian - no need to go by my wording. If I was Catholic, I would have written Catholic.

I know all about justification, sanctification and glorification. Both the Catholic and Protestant view. I also know all about the Sacraments. I dare say MORE than most Catholics do. The church does not do enough teaching IMHO.

Peace
FG

 

[frangiuliano115]

This is a very good “black & white” explanation. But what I also think about are the shades of grey and believe God sees them as well. What about the unresolved argument? The couple does not divorce and stays civil to each other but there is no way of getting over this issue of the argument. I think what you are saying is Jesus covers the shades of grey and God does not see them. I know we don’t agree on this but it just seems to easy, takes away our responsibilities in this world. Makes it seem like our relationship with God is one sided.

You’re correct. God does not see the shades of grey. He sees only His Son. If the couple stays together, THE MARRIAGE is still valid.
No responsibility is taken away. Please see Mathew chapters 5, 6 and 7. Does that sound like we have nothing to do? Justification is a gift from God, a relationship requires two people.

Yes, ignore does mean didn’t listen to him, but then we need to define what we mean when we say didn’t listen to him. Where I was trying to go with this was a sin that we know or not know to be wrong, yet we are OK with it because we are able to justify our actions in our own mind. Even if we are able to justify them it is still a sin. Being a father of 5 opens your eyes to how easily we humans can justify our own actions. I’ve scratched out half of my hair trying to figure out their thought processes. God must be bald scratching his head over billions.

If I make my kids responsible for their actions can’t imagine God won’t make us responsible as well.

Yeah. Two kids and 5 grandkids. But I still have all my hair, and it’s a good thing too since I’m a girl!
We will be given rewards in heaven. Based on our actions and on our works.
2 Corinthians 5:10

But if you read the N.T. carefully, you’ll find that it does not state that we lose our salvation for not working, but only our rewards. Providing we bear good fruit!
Mathew 7:13-23 speaks of how we are to live our lives. We must not bear bad fruit, we must adhere to the beatitudes. But if we do this, we will be safe.

Can we ever really become worthy is an excellent question. Obviously the answer is no, but at the same time this question is a double edged sword. It’s your next statement “children don’t have to be worthy” is the other edge of the sword. I will always love my children but they also have to prove they are worthy by not only accepting that love but also by their actions. The thing that worries me with this is that many in this world will and have taken this to the extreme. Growing up every time I heard these words, not just religiously but also worldly, the first thought in my mind was I might not ever really become worthy, but I am going to give it everything I have to try. Now a days, 46 years later, the worldly answer I often hear is yep your right so why even try.

From our talks I know this is not what you believe, but I think we can both agree we both know others that do think this way.

Yes. I agree. Children are worthy for us - but THEY SHOULDN’T KNOW! However, yes, this is a very secular conversation and I agree with you totally. Life has become too easy for the new generations. You had mentioned relativism but cannot find the post, I AGREE 100%. God does not like relativism. There is much more we can agree on, than not agree on - in both life (if I’ve understood you) and also in our Christianity.
Let me see if I can find that other post.

FG

 

[frangiuliano115]

Like I mentioned earlier there are many people that sin and justify their actions in their mind. If they are capable of justifying their actions they obviously don’t think it is a sin therefor they could not be sorry for a sin that they don’t think is a sin. I think this is what leads to relativism.

Ah. Here it is. Didn’t want to miss it.
I AGREE TOTALLY. Objective moral values (God’s) MUST exist.

It depends on the situation. It is possible that the punishment could improve or strain the relationship and it is possible the lack of punishment could improve or strain the relationship. I know many parents who never punished their children when they were young and it is the saddest sight you could imagine to see how much their children walk all over them daily.

Well, in Christianity we do say that God admonishes us in this world and sometimes sends trials our way to teach us. I have no firm thoughts on this. I do believe in Romans 8:28.

Yes “IF” is the word that I am speaking of. What happens if that “IF” never comes into your heart. I mean the person has always believed and is already saved but is human and can not get past this one sin. Is that person doomed to hell?

MT, are you speaking about the wife or the roses? Well, actually it’s the same. A priest once told me that sins are like dust. They keep falling down and God keeps forgiving them. This is why it’s so wonderful that God sees our heart. For the wife: I would hope that the Holy Spirit would give enough courage to be able to stop. If one falls every now and then, he gets back up and keeps going. We’re only human, as you said. But always remember that God will not be mocked. I believe the Holy Spirit gives us a lot of strength. Re the roses. Forgiveness is a matter of the WILL. I WILL to forgive my neighbor. I’ll PRAY for him. Little by little the bad feelings go away and one day you will not have them anymore. And if you do, because in your humanity you cannot get over the feeling, God will be just to forgive you. How could it be any other way? Do you think He really wants us to be perfect? °We must try our best with His help.

I agree that I am saying you are lost. But that does not mean you become unsaved. Just because my son walked away does not mean he is no longer my son. But at the present time he is lost.

Biblically speaking, being lost and being not saved is the same thing.
We are all sons of God in the sense that He created all of us. But we have to be “children” of God too. Trust in Him.

It’s been good. Thanks for the conversation. If anything else comes to mind, I’ll be happy to discuss with you.

FG

 

[thecolorsblend]

Purgatory is a much disliked doctrine to protestants because it diminishes the greatness of Christ’s sacrifice.

If you believe that, you don’t understand Purgatory.

I know what you mean about using the CCC. But I would refrain from doing that because it shuts down the conversation immediately

Again, a Church teaching is being challenged. The CCC is the Church’s most comprehensive statement as to her teachings. Asking me to not quote from it is illogical, counterproductive and unreasonable. With respect, I have no intention of abiding by this request.

The CCC is difficult enough for a Catholic to understand, imagine a non-catholic.

It’s written in a pretty straight forward manner. The specific section I quoted is written, I think, on a 5th grade level. It isn’t challenging to understand.

Also, that is the whole problem, they aren’t interested in the churches’ teachings, but in the teachings of the bible (as you must know).

And again, Sola Scriptura is your limitation. Please do not attempt to impose it upon me. Again, a Church teaching is being questioned in this thread. The CCC is a reference guide of Church teachings compiled by the Church. Not referencing it as a source in this discussion is out of the question.

Believe it or not, I fully know the CCC and I DO understand 1030 - 1033. The problem is that I do not agree with it.

Irrespective of whether you agree with it, the CCC says what it says in clear, unambiguous language. You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion. But not your own facts. The way you have characterized Purgatory is not a Church teaching.

This is what I have come to believe after much study. Purgatory is not really something we should be arguing about since those in purgatory are saved and that’s what counts.

Be that as it may, the OP had questions regarding Purgatory.

No offense taken. You can speak freely. You see, to me and all others except Catholics, it is as easy as being saved or not being saved. Please understand that by this I don’t mean that someone has to say the sinner’s prayer or he’s doomed. I know people who have never read the bible and I’m sure they’re saved. However, there is that dividing line. Even Jesus said there are two roads, one that leads to life and one that leads to destruction. I fail to see how this is simplistic… To me it means that a person must make a choice to serve God (or he is serving the evil one).

It’s simplistic because it leaves you addressing a premise I have not advanced.

Purgatory is not related to the possibility of salvation. Again, salvation is assumed of those who go there. Purgatory addresses an entirely different purpose than forgiveness.

Where we differ is that I believe that Jesus’ death and our trusting in Him accomplishes both functions - it removes sins and it takes care of the sin nature.

It is possible that Our Lord is the one doing the purifying in Purgatory. The point is that his atoning death on the cross achieves forgiveness for transgressions. Sin nature itself is a different problem and is addressed through a separate process

But then you say it’s not about forgiveness of transgressons. Okay. Each and every sin could have been confessed and forgiven before death. But you believe that you STILL have to go to purgatory. This doesn’t make sense to me.

Do not put words in my mouth please.

With respect to salvation, I believe, as per Church teachings, that it is possible that people can go directly to Heaven upon death while others must first go through Purgatory.

But how could I EVER pay back what I owe to God?

Ask for his forgiveness.

How much time would I have to spend in purgatory?

Apart from being unknowable, you still seem to be connecting time spent in Purgatory with the precise transgression of (in your example) embezzlement. You wouldn’t go to Purgatory because you embezzled. But someone might go to Purgatory if they have a very strong attachment to theft, shoplifting and the like and need to have that nature cleansed from their soul.

Isn’t this whole idea of why Jesus had to do His salvific work?

Clearly you do not understand Purgatory or, indeed, the nature of the problem. Please reread the above.

It seems impossible for me to be able to pay God back. My debt is too big. This is why we say that Jesus paid our debt - we could not pay it on our own. He came to redeem us - buy us back from the grips of the evil one - the dominion of sin. So we are now His already.

Ibid. You’re again confounding transgressions with sin nature in the context of Purgatory. You’re not grasping the issue. You say that you do. But you do not.

There is “incident” and there is “principle”. Transgressions are incidents. Sin nature is the principle.

Our Lord died on the cross so that the hypothetical embezzler can be forgiven for his theft. Forgiveness for this incident is available to the embezzler if he asks for it.

The embezzler may have a strong attraction to theft. Or perhaps he’s greedy. Or whatever. The principle at play is his sin nature, a tendency towards taking things which don’t belong to him. That principle must be addressed. He cannot enter Heaven in that state. So Purgatory is a way of removing that principle: His sin nature toward stealing, embezzling, greed, etc.

He’s forgiven for his incidents of theft when he asks God’s forgiveness. His tendency to steal can be purged in Purgatory. Two separate issues, two separate solutions.

 

[frangiuliano115]

If you believe that, you don’t understand Purgatory.

Again, a Church teaching is being challenged. The CCC is the Church’s most comprehensive statement as to her teachings. Asking me to not quote from it is illogical, counterproductive and unreasonable. With respect, I have no intention of abiding by this request.

It’s written in a pretty straight forward manner. The specific section I quoted is written, I think, on a 5th grade level. It isn’t challenging to understand.

And again, Sola Scriptura is your limitation. Please do not attempt to impose it upon me. Again, a Church teaching is being questioned in this thread. The CCC is a reference guide of Church teachings compiled by the Church. Not referencing it as a source in this discussion is out of the question.

Irrespective of whether you agree with it, the CCC says what it says in clear, unambiguous language. You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion. But not your own facts. The way you have characterized Purgatory is not a Church teaching.

Be that as it may, the OP had questions regarding Purgatory.

It’s simplistic because it leaves you addressing a premise I have not advanced.

Purgatory is not related to the possibility of salvation. Again, salvation is assumed of those who go there. Purgatory addresses an entirely different purpose than forgiveness.

It is possible that Our Lord is the one doing the purifying in Purgatory. The point is that his atoning death on the cross achieves forgiveness for transgressions. Sin nature itself is a different problem and is addressed through a separate process

Do not put words in my mouth please.

With respect to salvation, I believe, as per Church teachings, that it is possible that people can go directly to Heaven upon death while others must first go through Purgatory.

Ask for his forgiveness.

Apart from being unknowable, you still seem to be connecting time spent in Purgatory with the precise transgression of (in your example) embezzlement. You wouldn’t go to Purgatory because you embezzled. But someone might go to Purgatory if they have a very strong attachment to theft, shoplifting and the like and need to have that nature cleansed from their soul.

Clearly you do not understand Purgatory or, indeed, the nature of the problem. Please reread the above.

Ibid. You’re again confounding transgressions with sin nature in the context of Purgatory. You’re not grasping the issue. You say that you do. But you do not.

There is “incident” and there is “principle”. Transgressions are incidents. Sin nature is the principle.

Our Lord died on the cross so that the hypothetical embezzler can be forgiven for his theft. Forgiveness for this incident is available to the embezzler if he asks for it.

The embezzler may have a strong attraction to theft. Or perhaps he’s greedy. Or whatever. The principle at play is his sin nature, a tendency towards taking things which don’t belong to him. That principle must be addressed. He cannot enter Heaven in that state. So Purgatory is a way of removing that principle: His sin nature toward stealing, embezzling, greed, etc.

He’s forgiven for his incidents of theft when he asks God’s forgiveness. His tendency to steal can be purged in Purgatory. Two separate issues, two separate solutions.

The Colorsblend

We will not be able to dialogue. Your dislike for me is apparent.
Let me just say this:
NO ONE HAS BEEN TO PURGATORY AND COME BACK TO TELL ABOUT IT.
Some saints have had visions, but they are visions.

Re the CCC. I’m trying to help you but, of course, you can use it with protestants if you wish. They won’t pay any attention to it, but whatever you wish to do.

Also, throughout your entire post you kept telling me how I don’t know anything.
I’ll give you a big shock. I used to teach the Catechism of the Catholic Church because I was Catholic and have taught there. The reason I had to leave is BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE THEOLOGY TOO WELL and I could no longer agree with it.

See Colors Blend, you never know to whom you are speaking. You should treat people with some respect - even if you don’t agree with them.

Oh. And by the way. If you give the CCC to two different people, and tell them to read a couple of pp, they might just come up with two different concepts. Try this sometime.

FG

 

[John_Martin]

I’ll give you a big shock. I used to teach the Catechism of the Catholic Church because I was Catholic and have taught there. The reason I had to leave is BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE THEOLOGY TOO WELL and I could no longer agree with it…
FG

There was another man who did not agree with the theology, and he stood up in front of the Church and told them “no, you are going the wrong way.”
This man, however did not leave the Church.
Instead, because he trusted the man who was leading the wrong way, he got back into step with the Church and held his tongue (and eventually the man he trusted gave him a full understanding of the way they were being led).

You did not trust the messengers sent to you (who spoke to you with “theology” that did not fit your reasoning). But this other man who did not see the reasoning of his leader trusted his leader more than any reasoning of his own, so he stayed with his leader and humbly silenced his disagreement.

Who are these men? I speak of Peter, rebuking the leader of the Church, Jesus, about going to Jerusalem to face crucifixion; this did not fit Peter’s theological reasoning about the King. But the man Peter loved and trusted said, “Go Behind me, you satan, … anyone who follows Behind me must take up his cross…” And so Peter got back Behind his Lord, his leader whom he loved and trusted.

No student is above his master, his teacher, who in this case sent his Apostles to us as our authorized and knowing teachers. Eventually, when we press for full explanation, they explain all in a way where we do finally agree that it is the only truth. In order to learn, a student must believe in his teacher (and keep requiring a better explanation) until it makes sense (which it will, when the teacher is sent by Christ).

For those of you who do read links, try mine on the Mystery of Purgatory: The Last Things Part I | SoftVocation

 

[thecolorsblend]

We will not be able to dialogue. Your dislike for me is apparent.

This is an interesting observation since my posts have been riddled with “please”, “with all due respect” and other niceties.

Normally I would’ve kept this musing to myself and moved on except for two items.

First, the above is a variation on what you said to a different member a few posts back in this thread. Is it possible that so many people do not like you? I would assume that is doubtful. Indeed, there may be another cause behind you announcing your announcement to disengage.

But second, you are not disengaging. Indeed you go on to do the very thing you claim is not possible to do in this thread.

Curious.

NO ONE HAS BEEN TO PURGATORY AND COME BACK TO TELL ABOUT IT.

That same can be said with certainty about death itself. That is not much of a rebuttal.

Re the CCC. I’m trying to help you but, of course, you can use it with protestants if you wish. They won’t pay any attention to it, but whatever you wish to do.

I understand your purpose. That isn’t the issue. If someone is going to discuss the first Godfather movie with me, they must make reference to the first Godfather movie. If the subject is electrical engineering, they must make reference to electrical engineering.

And if it’s Catholic doctrine, they must make reference to Catholic doctrine.

With respect, your limitation is incomprehensible.

Also, throughout your entire post you kept telling me how I don’t know anything.

I’ve said nothing of the sort. On the contrary, I restricted my comments your understanding of Purgatory. Your attempts at a rebuttal were uniformly predicated upon a very clear lack of understanding on both the nature and purpose of Purgatory. Ergo the logical assumption for me to have made is that you do not understand the very doctrines of which you stand in judgment. That says nothing at all about the rest of your theological acumen, which, for all I know, may be perfectly sound.

I’ll give you a big shock. I used to teach the Catechism of the Catholic Church because I was Catholic and have taught there. The reason I had to leave is BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE THEOLOGY TOO WELL and I could no longer agree with it.

I am sorry to hear that. Perhaps you would have been better served by discussing the matter with your priest. I pray for your reversion to the true faith.

See Colors Blend, you never know to whom you are speaking. You should treat people with some respect - even if you don’t agree with them.

I do not believe I have been disrespectful to you. I have simply pointed out, based on your posts, that you do not understand the doctrine of Purgatory. Again, this is based on your rebuttals to points I and other members have made, all of which demonstrate an at best flawed understanding of Purgatory. Pointing this out is neither respectful nor disrespectful; it simply is. Were I as malicious as you seem to think, I would permit you to wallow in your lack of understanding. But this has not been my approach. On the contrary, I’ve endeavored to clarify Catholic teachings so that you and perhaps anyone reading our exchange may obtain a better grasp of these matters. In addition I’ve gone out of my way to choose my words in such a way as to be inoffensive and cordial.

Oh. And by the way. If you give the CCC to two different people, and tell them to read a couple of pp, they might just come up with two different concepts. Try this sometime.

I do not think I agree with this as many passages in the CCC are written plainly and simply to ensure maximum comprehension among the widest possible audience.

 

[frangiuliano115]

This is an interesting observation since my posts have been riddled with “please”, “with all due respect” and other niceties.

Normally I would’ve kept this musing to myself and moved on except for two items.

First, the above is a variation on what you said to a different member a few posts back in this thread. Is it possible that so many people do not like you? I would assume that is doubtful. Indeed, there may be another cause behind you announcing your announcement to disengage.

But second, you are not disengaging. Indeed you go on to do the very thing you claim is not possible to do in this thread.

Curious.

That same can be said with certainty about death itself. That is not much of a rebuttal.

I understand your purpose. That isn’t the issue. If someone is going to discuss the first Godfather movie with me, they must make reference to the first Godfather movie. If the subject is electrical engineering, they must make reference to electrical engineering.

And if it’s Catholic doctrine, they must make reference to Catholic doctrine.

With respect, your limitation is incomprehensible.

I’ve said nothing of the sort. On the contrary, I restricted my comments your understanding of Purgatory. Your attempts at a rebuttal were uniformly predicated upon a very clear lack of understanding on both the nature and purpose of Purgatory. Ergo the logical assumption for me to have made is that you do not understand the very doctrines of which you stand in judgment. That says nothing at all about the rest of your theological acumen, which, for all I know, may be perfectly sound.

I am sorry to hear that. Perhaps you would have been better served by discussing the matter with your priest. I pray for your reversion to the true faith.

I do not believe I have been disrespectful to you. I have simply pointed out, based on your posts, that you do not understand the doctrine of Purgatory. Again, this is based on your rebuttals to points I and other members have made, all of which demonstrate an at best flawed understanding of Purgatory. Pointing this out is neither respectful nor disrespectful; it simply is. Were I as malicious as you seem to think, I would permit you to wallow in your lack of understanding. But this has not been my approach. On the contrary, I’ve endeavored to clarify Catholic teachings so that you and perhaps anyone reading our exchange may obtain a better grasp of these matters. In addition I’ve gone out of my way to choose my words in such a way as to be inoffensive and cordial.

I do not think I agree with this as many passages in the CCC are written plainly and simply to ensure maximum comprehension among the widest possible audience.

Hello Colorsblend

It’s not so easy to hurt my feelings because I don’t even know you. But there has to be some level of respect and understanding of each other if there’s to be a conversation. I went back to your reply to me, no. 74 just to make sure I wasn’t in a bad mood when I replied to you! Turns out I was calm, as usual. Here’s what you said to me:

1. I don’t understand purgatory. (interesting concept!)
2. I’m challenging a church teaching (by not agreeing with it-if I agreed I’d be Catholic!)
3. I can’t understand the CCC even though it’s written at a 5th grade level. (please try giving the CCC to a fifth grade and see if they understand it!!)
4. My ideas are simplistic. (I wish they were, I’d be happier)
5. I was told I put words into your mouth. (I don’t think so…)
6. Agaiin, I do not understand purgatory.

You could say I don’t understand something the way YOU understand it, but the way you say it is rather insulting especially since I understand purgatory more than 95% of the people sitting at any given Mass.

I like to converse and have done it on these threads. I don’t like to argue. I like sticking to the topic at hand and not give or receive insults.

I’d like to speak to you - I’m not against it, but we have to get off on the right foot or it’s ended before it starts.

You’ll have to accept that I know both Catholic and Protestant theology and we could proceed from there with an intelligent conversation.

If you care to do this, I’m willing. Just repost the above and I’ll answer to all.

In Christ
FG

 

[po18guy]

To many Protestants this is one of the most wrong of all Catholic teachings. Which is just one of the errors of Protestant disobedience.
laocmo;13779314:

It represents a medieval invention nowhere to be found in the Bible.

Those “Protestants” should read more of the bible then.

It’s often called "a denial of the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice.”

PAUL!!! wrote that he made up in his flesh what was LACKING in the afflictions of Christ. What do they say about that bit of the bible?

Protestant’s will point out the fact that there is no mention of “the cleansing of sin” anywhere in the Bible.

Ignorance of scripture is no excuse.

Protestants say…

…a lot of things that are true, and a lot of things that are made-up by man. Use caution!

…we do not recognize that, because of Jesus’ sacrifice, we are already cleansed, declared righteous, forgiven, redeemed, reconciled, and sanctified.

Ask them to read 2 Cor 2:10 and 2 Cor 5. PAUL!!! forgave sin in the PERSON of Christ, and said that we must be “reconciled to God” Sounds pretty clear to me.

Jesus suffered for our sins so that we could be delivered from suffering.

This one is clearly false on its face. We don’t suffer? AYKM?

To say that we must also suffer for our sins is to say that Jesus’ suffering was insufficient.

Back to PAUL!!! in Colossians 1:24. Right there in the bible.

To say that we must atone for our sins by cleansing in Purgatory is to deny the sufficiency of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus.

They must not read Revelation 21:27: “Nothing impure will enter” heaven. Are they 100% pure as they are? Really? Hint: this is a man-made doctrine of theirs.

Catholics point out a passage that says “nothing unclean shall enter heaven” This leads to the idea of a place where this cleaning can take place. All in all it seems to be a Catholic invention. Who knows for sure.

All in all, I believe you are listening far too much to people that teach error. Error #1 is that the bible is all they need. This is the lie that allows them to twist God’s word to their own desires and destruction (2 Peter 3:16).

Get a catechism. Get Catholicism for Dummies. Get The Essential Catholic Survival Guide. Read them and know. Someone is right and someone is wrong. Jesus did not write the New Testament. He did not command the writing of it. He did not hand out bibles. He did not give all authority to the bible. Jesus founded a Church. He gave all authority on earth and in heaven to the Church (Matthew 16:18-19, Matthew 18:18, John 20:23). That Church overturned the requirement of circumcision which God Himself gave to Abraham (Acts 15).

Talk about awesome.

 

[frangiuliano115]

There was another man who did not agree with the theology, and he stood up in front of the Church and told them “no, you are going the wrong way.”
This man, however did not leave the Church.
Instead, because he trusted the man who was leading the wrong way, he got back into step with the Church and held his tongue (and eventually the man he trusted gave him a full understanding of the way they were being led).

You did not trust the messengers sent to you (who spoke to you with “theology” that did not fit your reasoning). But this other man who did not see the reasoning of his leader trusted his leader more than any reasoning of his own, so he stayed with his leader and humbly silenced his disagreement.

Who are these men? I speak of Peter, rebuking the leader of the Church, Jesus, about going to Jerusalem to face crucifixion; this did not fit Peter’s theological reasoning about the King. But the man Peter loved and trusted said, "Go Behind me, you satan, … anyone who follows Behind me must take up his cross…" And so Peter got back Behind his Lord, his leader whom he loved and trusted.

No student is above his master, his teacher, who in this case sent his Apostles to us as our authorized and knowing teachers. Eventually, when we press for full explanation, they explain all in a way where we do finally agree that it is the only truth. In order to learn, a student must believe in his teacher (and keep requiring a better explanation) until it makes sense (which it will, when the teacher is sent by Christ).

For those of you who do read links, try mine on the Mystery of Purgatory: The Last Things Part I | SoftVocation

I agree with everything you’ve said.
Our faith depends on trusting what the Apostles heard and saw in those approx. 3 years they were with Jesus. And the resurrection.
Your quote up above is wrong and I wouldn’t point it out except that it makes a big difference from the original.

You said:
“Go behind me… you satan.”

This means that Jesus was saying that Peter was satan. “YOU satan.”

The correct quote is:
“Get behind me satan.” Mathew 16:23 NASB

Jesus was addressing satan. Satan was influencing Peter at that moment. Making Peter think in a worldly way instead of in a spiritual way - as Jesus was forced to do since He was God and since His reason for going into Jerusalem was precisely to die. Peter still did not understand this and wouldn’t until after the resurrection.

Problem: Every teacher thinks he is sent by Christ. Including you. Writing articles and linking them to these threads.

The reason I don’t read links is because my time is limited and I’m here so REAL PEOPLE could express their opinions - if I want to read links I could just google stuff - which I don’t like to do. It wasn’t meant as an insult to you personally.

FG