• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Is purgatory a Biblical or extra biblical teaching?

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
50,637
18,327
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,089,696.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
When the NT Bible was canonized, Christians handily used the LXX as the OT Canon because it's written in Greek (the same as the NT Bible).
psst.... the Old Testament Canon was not written in Greek, but in Hebrew. New Testament was written in Greek and Aramaic.
 
Upvote 0

Hawkins

Member
Site Supporter
Apr 27, 2005
2,737
427
Canada
✟319,729.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Better English by Grok:

The concept of purgatory appears to be derived from the Apocrypha, but it is not canonically legitimate. Humans lack a true understanding of what canonization entails in conveying historical truth, as we inherently lack the ability to record history accurately. Among the thousands of civilizations that have ever existed on the surface of the Earth, only the Chinese and the Jews possess relatively complete historical records.

(Possibly, God preserved Chinese history as a reference—the only one available. However, humans lack the insight to examine it in detail, as the god of this world has blinded their minds.)

Chinese history is canonized; without canonization, there would be no Chinese history. This illustrates how critical canonization is for preserving historical information. Canonization involves ongoing efforts by an authority to preserve content and pass it down through generations. Successive Chinese governments have been responsible for maintaining and transmitting this canon of history.

By the same token, the canonization of both the New Testament (NT) and Old Testament (OT) requires sustained effort from a dedicated authority. OT canonization began with King Hezekiah; it is said that 17 out of the 24 books bear his seal. Kings can serve as authorities in conveying secular history, much like in the Chinese tradition. However, kings (which are Caesars) cannot be reliable authorities working for God. God must select His own earthly authorities during different periods (similar to the role of successive Chinese governments in preserving secular history). By the time of Jesus, the Pharisees were sitting in Moses' seat and acted as such an authority. The last two books added to the OT Canon are believed to be those written in Aramaic rather than Hebrew, completing the 24-book OT Canon guarded by the Pharisees (the Sadducees did not have a full canon, as they embraced only the first five books which is the Law). (The corresponding authority for the NT is God's earthly Church.)

The Chinese claim to have 5,000 years of history. The first 2,500 years of their canonical history (as recorded in the Shiji) were written by a single person who never left his house. One can imagine how a solitary individual, confined to his house without traveling, could reliably document 2,500 years of history. Yet this represents the pinnacle of human capability in writing history! It is Satan's effort to deceive humans into overestimating their abilities and to lure them toward an unattainable ideal (symbolized by the Tree of Knowledge). As a result, humans judge the Bible as "imperfect" or "erroneous" based on this impossible standard, while overlooking actual human limitations.

That said, purgatory is not a canonical concept and is therefore not legitimate (if one understands what canonization truly means). The Septuagint (LXX) was an effort to translate Jewish writings into Greek for the Hellenistic world, benefiting even Jews who spoke only Greek (possibly including Saint Stephen, the first martyr). Its accuracy was maintained by various publishers rather than a central authority (such as the Pharisaic elites in the Jewish Great Sanhedrin). In contrast, the Hebrew versions of the canonical OT Scriptures were "published" or copied by scribes authenticated by the Pharisees and the Great Sanhedrin. These were controlled copies, whereas the LXX consisted of uncontrolled copies.

When the NT was canonized, Christians conveniently adopted the LXX as their OT Canon because it was written in Greek (the same language as the NT). However, the true nature of canonization is that the OT belongs to the Jews—it is their testimony, canonized from the time of King Hezekiah through Ezra and the Pharisees. The NT, on the other hand, belongs to Christians—it is the testimony of Jewish Christians and their canonization process. The Apocrypha's legitimacy is thus excluded. The LXX can serve only as a reference to the original Jewish OT Canon.

The Judgment of the Covenant (as opposed to the Law) is a subjective judgment from a just and fair God (who is Christ). Jesus will consider all factors—including one's heart and mind—to deliver a fair judgment under any circumstances and determine who enters Heaven. Purgatory is never necessary in this context.
 
Upvote 0

Hawkins

Member
Site Supporter
Apr 27, 2005
2,737
427
Canada
✟319,729.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
psst.... the Old Testament Canon was not written in Greek, but in Hebrew. New Testament was written in Greek and Aramaic.

The Christian OT Canon defined by early Christians are in Greek. It is the Septuagint (LXX). You'd better re-read what I wrote!
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
26,024
8,400
Dallas
✟1,125,235.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The Christian OT Canon defined by early Christians are in Greek. It is the Septuagint (LXX). You'd better re-read what I wrote!
It’s ironic that the Greek speaking apostolic churches rejected the doctrine of purgatory and only the Latin speaking churches accepted it.
 
Upvote 0

RamiC

Well-Known Member
Jan 1, 2025
836
630
Brighton
✟36,773.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
The purpose for Christ’s sacrifice was to pay for all of our sins.
Is that "pay" or forgive? Why do we need to confess if sin is already payed for? And do believers all die perfect enough to go heaven?

Although my entire post was just quotes from the linked article, because I happened to find it.
 
Upvote 0

Jipsah

Blood Drinker
Aug 17, 2005
14,006
4,586
72
Franklin, Tennessee
✟302,659.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
But it does have everything to do with atonement for sin, which is where the problem begins.
No, it doesn't. Purgatory is a where you clean up before you get into Heaven. You don't go striding into God's Presence stinking and covered in filth. So you have to stop off and get cleaned up. Not all that hard a concept, really. Then again, maybe having done farm work when I was growing up that left us filthy and malordorous, I know how granny would have greeted us if we'd come clomping into the house after mucking out stalls or some such without having at least hosed off first.

Maybe this idea is just too hard for lifelong city folk to grasp.
 
Upvote 0

RamiC

Well-Known Member
Jan 1, 2025
836
630
Brighton
✟36,773.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Maybe this idea is just too hard for lifelong city folk to grasp.
I am city folk, and I get the idea. I see it more in terms of healing required, and situations in which maybe there is a sin not singularly down to one person, or compromised responsibilty, I am just undecided about Biblical support for the concept.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
23,054
20,066
Flyoverland
✟1,399,359.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
It seems to be a concept developed from the Apocrypha. It's not canonically legitimate. Humans lack actual knowledge about what canonization could mean, in terms of conveying historical truth as humans lack the ability to actually write history. Among the thousand civilizations ever existed on the surface of earth, only the Chinese and the Jews can have a rather complete set of history.

(Possibly that God left the Chinese history to be a reference, which is the only reference available. Humans however don't have the sense to examine it in details, as the god of this world has blinded the minds of humans)

Chinese history is canonized, without canonization there will be no Chinese history. That's how critical canonization is in terms of preserving historical information. Canonization is about continued effort from an authority in terms of preserving its content and passing it through generations. It's the successive Chinese governments which are responsible for keeping and conveying the Canon of history.

By the same token, canonization of both NT and OT involves continued effort from a dedicated authority. OT canonization started with King Hezekiah, it's said that 17 out of 24 books of are with the seal of King Hezekiah. Kings can be an authority as how the Chinese conveying secular history. However kings (Caesar) cannot be a reliable authority working for God. God has to choose His own earthly authority in the different periods of time (similar effect of successive Chinese governments preserving the secular history). By the time of Jesus' days, the Pharisees are in Moses' seat acting as such an authority. The last 2 books added to the OT Canon are supposed to be the two books written in Aramaic instead of Hebrew, forming the 24 book OT Canon, as guarded by the Pharisees (Sadducees don't actually have a Canon as they only embrace the first 5 books which is the Law) as such an authority. (the corresponding authority for the NT Bible is God's earthly Church)

The Chinese claim to have 5000 years of history. The first 2500 years of canonical history (Shiji) was written by a single person sitting home without leaving his own house. You can imagine that how a single person sitting home without going anywhere could possibly write a history of 2500 years reliably. This however marks the maximum level of human capability in terms of writing history! It's Satan's effort to fool humans into overestimating their ability, and it's Satan's effort in leading humans to an ideal which can never achieved by humans (that's the Tree of Knowledge). Humans thus based on this mission impossible ideal to judge that the Bible is "imperfect" or "erroneous" by overlooking the actual human capability.

That said. purgatory is not a canonical concept and is not legitimate (if you know what canonization could mean). LXX is an effort to translate the Jewish writings to the Hellenistic world to benefit even the Jews who can only speak Greek (may include even Saint Stephen the first Martyr). It's accuracy is maintained by the various publishers instead of a central authority (such as the Pharisaic elites in the Jewish Great Sanhedrin). On the other hand, the Hebrew version of the canonical OT Scripture are "published"/copied by the scribes authenticated by the Pharisees/Great Sanhedrin. They are controlled copies while the LXX are uncontrolled copies.

When the NT Bible was canonized, Christians handily used the LXX as the OT Canon because it's written in Greek (the same as the NT Bible). However the true nature of canonization is that, OT belongs to the Jews. It's the Jews' testimony and their canonization from King Hezekiah till Ezra till the Pharisees. NT on the other hand belongs to Christians. It's the Jewish Christians' testimony and it's the Christians' canonization. The legitimation of Apocrypha is excluded. LXX can only be a reference to the original Jewish OT Canon.

The Judgment of Covenant (vs. Law) is a subjective judgment from a just and fair God (who is Christ). Jesus will sum up all factors (including one's heart and mind) to provide a fair judgment under all circumstances to determine who shall enter Heaven. Purgatory is never needed in this situation.
Your premise that the OT ‘belongs to the Jews’ while the NT belongs to Christians’ is flawed. The whole Bible belongs to Christians, and thus is valid matter for Christian canonization. And that’s what happened. What the Jews do with the books they want to read is their business. We are not bound by the Pharisees to know what is Scripture. After all, they rejected any mention of Jesus and rejected every Christian writing they knew of in setting their canon to exclude Jesus. We are not bound by that either.

I tried to steer discussion to why the Jews prayed for their dead and still do pray for their dead. The best I get is how some canonical books of the OT can’t really be canon. And yet even the Jews today, who don’t have those books in their own canon still pray Kaddish for their dead. It’s not as simple as saying we reject those books so such prayers aren’t in our Bible so they never happened. Jewish prayers for their dead and dead happened and still happen. And Orthodox and Catholic Christians do it too, in continuity with our Jewish ancestors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jas3
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
23,054
20,066
Flyoverland
✟1,399,359.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
No, it doesn't. Purgatory is a where you clean up before you get into Heaven. You don't go striding into God's Presence stinking and covered in filth. So you have to stop off and get cleaned up. Not all that hard a concept, really. Then again, maybe having done farm work when I was growing up that left us filthy and malordorous, I know how granny would have greeted us if we'd come clomping into the house after mucking out stalls or some such without having at least hosed off first.

Maybe this idea is just too hard for lifelong city folk to grasp.
I think their idea is Jesus paid it all, so they aren’t malodorous after mucking out the stables. They are pristine and ready to sit down at grandma’s table just as they are.

I think it comes from an inability to distinguish between guilt for sin and reparation needed for the results of sin. We can be forgiven, but we still need to repair the mess we have made.

It’s like the kid who broke the window playing baseball when he was told not to play baseball so close to the house. He’s sorry and he asks forgiveness. And he is forgiven. But the window is still broken. In most forms of Protestantism the window is automagically fixed when the kid is forgiven. In traditional Christianity the kid is expected to contribute to the fixing of the window. THAT is what is too hard to grasp. Or that you need to clean up before coming to dinner. They are sure they are already clean.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
23,054
20,066
Flyoverland
✟1,399,359.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Better English by Grok:

The concept of purgatory appears to be derived from the Apocrypha, but it is not canonically legitimate. Humans lack a true understanding of what canonization entails in conveying historical truth, as we inherently lack the ability to record history accurately. Among the thousands of civilizations that have ever existed on the surface of the Earth, only the Chinese and the Jews possess relatively complete historical records.

(Possibly, God preserved Chinese history as a reference—the only one available. However, humans lack the insight to examine it in detail, as the god of this world has blinded their minds.)

Chinese history is canonized; without canonization, there would be no Chinese history. This illustrates how critical canonization is for preserving historical information. Canonization involves ongoing efforts by an authority to preserve content and pass it down through generations. Successive Chinese governments have been responsible for maintaining and transmitting this canon of history.

By the same token, the canonization of both the New Testament (NT) and Old Testament (OT) requires sustained effort from a dedicated authority. OT canonization began with King Hezekiah; it is said that 17 out of the 24 books bear his seal. Kings can serve as authorities in conveying secular history, much like in the Chinese tradition. However, kings (which are Caesars) cannot be reliable authorities working for God. God must select His own earthly authorities during different periods (similar to the role of successive Chinese governments in preserving secular history). By the time of Jesus, the Pharisees were sitting in Moses' seat and acted as such an authority. The last two books added to the OT Canon are believed to be those written in Aramaic rather than Hebrew, completing the 24-book OT Canon guarded by the Pharisees (the Sadducees did not have a full canon, as they embraced only the first five books which is the Law). (The corresponding authority for the NT is God's earthly Church.)

The Chinese claim to have 5,000 years of history. The first 2,500 years of their canonical history (as recorded in the Shiji) were written by a single person who never left his house. One can imagine how a solitary individual, confined to his house without traveling, could reliably document 2,500 years of history. Yet this represents the pinnacle of human capability in writing history! It is Satan's effort to deceive humans into overestimating their abilities and to lure them toward an unattainable ideal (symbolized by the Tree of Knowledge). As a result, humans judge the Bible as "imperfect" or "erroneous" based on this impossible standard, while overlooking actual human limitations.

That said, purgatory is not a canonical concept and is therefore not legitimate (if one understands what canonization truly means). The Septuagint (LXX) was an effort to translate Jewish writings into Greek for the Hellenistic world, benefiting even Jews who spoke only Greek (possibly including Saint Stephen, the first martyr). Its accuracy was maintained by various publishers rather than a central authority (such as the Pharisaic elites in the Jewish Great Sanhedrin). In contrast, the Hebrew versions of the canonical OT Scriptures were "published" or copied by scribes authenticated by the Pharisees and the Great Sanhedrin. These were controlled copies, whereas the LXX consisted of uncontrolled copies.

When the NT was canonized, Christians conveniently adopted the LXX as their OT Canon because it was written in Greek (the same language as the NT). However, the true nature of canonization is that the OT belongs to the Jews—it is their testimony, canonized from the time of King Hezekiah through Ezra and the Pharisees. The NT, on the other hand, belongs to Christians—it is the testimony of Jewish Christians and their canonization process. The Apocrypha's legitimacy is thus excluded. The LXX can serve only as a reference to the original Jewish OT Canon.

The Judgment of the Covenant (as opposed to the Law) is a subjective judgment from a just and fair God (who is Christ). Jesus will consider all factors—including one's heart and mind—to deliver a fair judgment under any circumstances and determine who enters Heaven. Purgatory is never necessary in this context.
So you fed me AI confusion?
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
23,054
20,066
Flyoverland
✟1,399,359.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
I am city folk, and I get the idea. I see it more in terms of healing required, and situations in which maybe there is a sin not singularly down to one person, or compromised responsibilty, I am just undecided about Biblical support for the concept.
The Biblical support is probably limited to evidence of prayers for the dead and the idea that ones works will be purified as if by fire. It isn’t a systematic all worked out teaching in the Bible. But then lots of things aren’t systematic all worked out teaching from the Bible alone. The concept of the Trinity took a few centuries to work out, with a major heresy (Arianism) complicating the process. Arius was the closest thing the early Church had to a follower of Sola Scriptura. Look where that got him.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
23,054
20,066
Flyoverland
✟1,399,359.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
But it does have everything to do with atonement for sin, which is where the problem begins.
Um, no. Purgatory has nothing to do with atonement properly understood. It has to do with reparation for the effects of sin but has nothing to do with the forgiveness of sins. The latter is what atonement is about. The former is what a life of penance is about. Two different things. I suspect you can’t see that, and I get it, but a few threads earlier we discussed getting cleaned up before dinner after mucking out the stables and repairing the window you broke. These things, being filthy dirty and expecting a place at the table, or breaking a window and expecting it to be automagically fixed, are what so many just can’t fathom about our responsibility for past sins.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
26,024
8,400
Dallas
✟1,125,235.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Um, no. Purgatory has nothing to do with atonement properly understood. It has to do with reparation for the effects of sin but has nothing to do with the forgiveness of sins. The latter is what atonement is about. The former is what a life of penance is about. Two different things. I suspect you can’t see that, and I get it, but a few threads earlier we discussed getting cleaned up before dinner after mucking out the stables and repairing the window you broke. These things, being filthy dirty and expecting a place at the table, or breaking a window and expecting it to be automagically fixed, are what so many just can’t fathom about our responsibility for past sins.
You need to read the Catechism again my friend.
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
7,145
3,244
45
San jacinto
✟218,877.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It’s ironic that the Greek speaking apostolic churches rejected the doctrine of purgatory and only the Latin speaking churches accepted it.
Greek speaking churches affirm purgation, they simply deny that there is a special place where it occurs. It is simply a process of continued sanctification, rather than an instantaneous transformation into resurrection bodies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jipsah
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
26,024
8,400
Dallas
✟1,125,235.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So the catechism says purgatory is all about the atonement?
1031. "The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. [Cf. Council of Florence (1439): DS 1304; Council of Trent (1563): DS 1820; (1547): 1580; see also Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus (1336): DS 1000.] 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. [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. [St. Gregory the Great, Dial. 4, 39: PL 77, 396; cf. Mt 12:32-36.]"



1472. "To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the 'eternal punishment' of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the 'temporal punishment' of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain. [Cf. Council of Trent (1551): DS 1712-1713; (1563): 1820.]"

In reality Jesus never said that any offenses would be forgiven in the age to come, He actually said the exact opposite.
 
Upvote 0

Jipsah

Blood Drinker
Aug 17, 2005
14,006
4,586
72
Franklin, Tennessee
✟302,659.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You need to read the Catechism again my friend.
How about this partr:

All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
23,054
20,066
Flyoverland
✟1,399,359.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
1031. "The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. [Cf. Council of Florence (1439): DS 1304; Council of Trent (1563): DS 1820; (1547): 1580; see also Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus (1336): DS 1000.] 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. [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. [St. Gregory the Great, Dial. 4, 39: PL 77, 396; cf. Mt 12:32-36.]"



1472. "To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the 'eternal punishment' of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the 'temporal punishment' of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain. [Cf. Council of Trent (1551): DS 1712-1713; (1563): 1820.]"

In reality Jesus never said that any offenses would be forgiven in the age to come, He actually said the exact opposite.
Do you see 1472 as dealing with the atonement or not? I don’t.
 
Upvote 0