Is Purgatory in the Bible?

[Brian Sellers]

It's pretty poor when Catholics state what Protestants say/think instead of asking Protestants what they believe (and vice versa) so that a dialogue can follow. I do understand though that the RCC has a doctrine that is well-codified, that Protestant doctrine is a somewhat mobile target, and that PanDeVida probably just wishes to be clear and thorough on the topic.

In light of this I will stick to what I believe. Here is the doctrine of Purgatory RCC from the OP.

"All who die in God’s grace, 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 (1030)."

I will attempt to rephrase the above to match my Protestant beliefs which will be similar to many denominations in the reformed vein.

--All those who have put their trust in the "free gift" of Christ will be saved. While still imperfect, their grafting into Christ and access to the Holy Spirit works to conform them to the likeness of Christ. This 'sanctification' occurs throughout life and is perfected after death by purification and the replacement of their mortal bodies with immortal bodies. In this perfected state, believers inherit a new earth where they will live forever with God.--

I reject (as I believe most Protestants would), not a purification, but that a personal holiness other than that of Christ's is required. I also reject that any will be perfectly purified before death.

A rephrasing of the RCC statement to reflect my articulation above is included below. This might help in conversation as well.

--All who die in Christ, though still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, thus receiving through Christ, His holiness and the joy of eternity with God--.

I personally suspect that the RCC understanding may be an unfortunate modern understanding (or possibly a poor articulation) that obscures a richer medieval theology that is similar to what I've said above, but I've not done the research to support this thought.

Nicely done. Thank you. Part of the issue is that the Catechism is built one part on another in a series of sequential steps, much like a Calculus textbook. Therefore, like most expositions on belief and theology a reader's ability to fully comprehend the text in front of him is somewhat dependent on having some understanding of the previous section. Paragraph 1030 is part of a larger discussion regarding the Christian belief of Everlasting Life contained in Article 12. So when you read paragraph 1030 it is presumed you have read the 10 preceding paragraphs and will read at least the following 20 paragraphs and the scriptural references to fully understand the Church's teaching. Sadly, many Catholics don't do this and therefore are unable to explain or do so inaccurately the Church's teaching. That being said, for many Catholics it is a "non kingdom" issue, that is your salvation is not dependent on your understanding of purgatory. Contrary to the beliefs expressed on this forum, we are Christians, we love Jesus, we recognize that without His atoning sacrifice on Calvary there would be no path for us or anyone through the gates of heaven. We do our best to follow Him, that is follow His commandments, and like most Christians we stumble but we know Christ will always find us and take us back, we just have to be willing to follow. Our journey is not about being better or being right, it is about getting closer to God through Jesus Christ and the closer we are to God the more sanctified we become until we are full of grace, that is perfected in every way and prepared to meet our Creator face to face. I agree that most will not obtain or receive that level of sanctification in this life, but I do not consider it impossible. For many of us the journey will continue after death if we have been baptized in the faith and accepted the saving grace of Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior and the final destiny is to be in full communion with God. For those who have rejected Jesus, there is no recourse after death. Purgatory is not a "second chance" to accept Jesus Christ. It is a continuation of His saving Grace that fully redeems and washes completely away all our sins so that we may enter through the narrow gate to Heaven. For it is by His death and Resurrection, that Jesus Christ has "opened" heaven to us. So my focus is on Christ, whether or not there is a purgatory or some other transcendent waypoint between Heaven and earth does not change the temporal requirement to follow Christ. “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me." My desire is to spend eternity with the One who made me and with all those I love.

 

[Root of Jesse]

There are the beliefs of Protestants which are extremely varied (even within a given denomination) and those doctrines of denominations which are much better defined. I forget which Bishop or Pope said it during Luther's day, but it is true that the denominations proliferate based on whatever interpretation. The most difficult of the Sola's is "always reforming", but the idea is to identify error and replace with a right understanding--in theory this is a church's prerogative. But frequently it's exercised by all. Systematic and perpetuated error versus individual error seems to be the big question.

I'm a bit surprised to see that 1 Cor 3:10-15 is not thought by some here to refer to purification or testing of works by "fire"--this is a fairly standard interpretation. Purification is good news--the remaining sinfulness taken away (not just covered by Christ's righteousness). The only other plain sense here is that Paul might be referring specifically to teachers/preachers being held to a higher standard regarding their works in 'building' the faith of others.

The idea that at death Christians go to heaven is not strictly Biblical. The Apostles Creed (I'm unaware of any denominations that would disagree with its statements) says we believe in the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. World, the new earth, not heaven. The exact wording of the Purgatory catechism aside, does the RCC believe differently?

No, in fact we confess the Apostles' Creed, Nicene Creed and Athanasian Creed. I get that some people think that the doctrine of purgatory led to the corruption of the practice of indulgences, but even if it did, that just means Catholics weren't being Catholic.

If the dead are resurrected, where are they between their physical death and their resurrection? I know of some answers, none are particularly satisfying.

1) The body is dead until the resurrection, the soul is in heaven with God. Problematic because soul as distinct from body is Hellenistic philosophy, not a teaching of Judaism.

2) There is an intermediate place.
a-One of rest (dead but not really gone), asleep if you will. Mostly consistent with Scripture, e.g. Sheol, the Pit.
b-Various versions of Purgatory--Limbo, waiting area, Hell-like punishment, etc. Not yet convinced of support for this--Jesus paints a different picture--a prepared room in a mansion, paradise, the Kingdom of God/Heaven.

Limbo wasn't a doctrine, it was an attempt to explain what happens to unbaptized children, because we believe that baptism saves one.

3) Dead is dead until Resurrection. I guess this has its merits (a variant of 2 with similar problems)

4) In heaven, until Resurrected. Limited Scriptural support.

5) In heaven, before and after Resurrection--completely discounts both the OT prophets and NT passages of new earth and the Kingdom.

How does the RCC answer this question? Does Purgatory last till the Resurrection or just until the believer is 'purified'?

Well, they attempted to say that we spend 'time' in purgatory, but since Purgatory is a subset of Heaven, and there's no time in heaven, that doesn't fly. Indulgences were said to reduce one's 'time', but don't really know how that works.
Any discussion of the four last things, Death, Heaven, Hell, Purgatory is speculative-we don't really know, and words are insufficient to really describe them.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Perhaps if the rich man cried out to God, instead of some man, he would have found a better answer to his prayer.

Well, only God answers prayers, but when you're dead, you're wherever Judgement said you're going. Prayer from hell is futile. If he had cried out to God while alive, maybe he wouldn't be where he is. But God doesn't answer our prayers, necessarily, the way we want them answered. I know countless prayers to win the lottery do not get answered the way they pray-er wishes. God's not an ATM machine, but he answers every prayer, regardless of if we ask for intercession from a saint or ask Him directly.

 

[W2L]

Well, only God answers prayers, but when you're dead, you're wherever Judgement said you're going. Prayer from hell is futile. If he had cried out to God while alive, maybe he wouldn't be where he is. But God doesn't answer our prayers, necessarily, the way we want them answered. I know countless prayers to win the lottery do not get answered the way they pray-er wishes. God's not an ATM machine, but he answers every prayer, regardless of if we ask for intercession from a saint or ask Him directly.

I wont be worried about the flames of purgatory. Cant worry about something that doesnt exist.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I wont be worried about the flames of purgatory. Cant worry about something that doesnt exist.

Few truer words were ever written.

One of the great ironies that I find in Roman Catholic theology is that non-Catholics can be saved if they have been properly baptized. The issue becomes one of if there might be non-Catholics going to heaven because of their baptism, do they need to pass through Purgatory to get there?

Given current Catholic teaching that Purgatory is nothing more difficult than a refreshing shower to cleanse oneself of residual effects of sin, then who needs to worry at all?

 

[W2L]

Few truer words were ever written.

One of the great ironies that I find in Roman Catholic theology is that non-Catholics can be saved if they have been properly baptized. The issue becomes one of if there might be non-Catholics going to heaven because of their baptism, do they need to pass through Purgatory to get there?

Given current Catholic teaching that Purgatory is nothing more difficult than a refreshing shower to cleanse oneself of residual effects of sin, then who needs to worry at all?

Agreed.

 

[Brian Sellers]

As you know, the Council of Florence was not accepted by the Eastern Orthodox Christians and churches. The decisions and agreements made by the Orthodox representatives were rejected.

Albion, I stated that to be fair to the Greek position they retracted their statement and I went on to state that I believe the Orthodox Church now follows the Confession of Dositheus (1672). I never implied that the Greeks accepted the Council of Florence for if they had then they would be part of the Roman Catholic Church. My point was that the two doctrines at that time were nearly identical and had been the accepted teaching of the Church for 1500 years. You claim they shared only some similarities. I ask again, what were the differences? Seriously, perhaps I'm missing something.

 

[Brian Sellers]

Well c'mon, friend. It's common knowledge that a Catholic council in the Middle Ages enunciated the doctrine of Purgatory, and that the Treasury of Merit, Indulgences, which sins merit Purgatory, what the punishment in Purgatory is like, and on and on owe to a finding or decision of the Roman Catholic Church. It might be argued that the Bible gives a few hints of something to come or that some people had an idea roughly like this at an earlier time, but only in general terms. But as for where Purgatory ITSELF originated...it was the Church of Rome. And there is no other church which has this same belief.

Descriptions and doctrine regarding purgatory developed over the centuries. Those who believe in purgatory interpret Bible passages such as 2 Maccabees 12:41-46 (not accepted as Scripture by Protestants but recognized by Orthodox and Catholics), 2 Timothy 1:18, Matthew 12:32, Luke 16:19-26, Luke 23:43, 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 and Hebrews 12:29 as support for prayer for the dead, an active interim state for the dead prior to the resurrection, and purifying flames after death. The first Christians looked forward to the imminent return of Christ and did not develop detailed beliefs about the interim state.[ Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press 2005] Gradually, Christians, especially in the West, took an interest in circumstances of the interim state between one's death and the future resurrection. Christians both East and West prayed for the dead in this interim state, though theologians in the East refrained from defining it. Augustine distinguished between the purifying fire that saves and eternal consuming fire for the unrepentant. Gregory the Great established a connection between earthly penance and purification after death. All Soul's Day, established in the 10th century, turned popular attention to the condition of departed souls. I suppose this is where you arrive at your erroneous conclusion regarding the source of purgatory.

Specific examples of belief in purification after death and of the communion of the living with the dead through prayer are found in many of the Church Fathers.[ A Concise Dictionary of Theology, p.27] I’ll list a few. Irenaeus (c. 130-202) mentioned an abode where the souls of the dead remained until the universal judgment, a process that has been described as one which "contains the concept of... purgatory."[ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.31.2] Both St. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215) and his pupil, Origen of Alexandria (c. 185-254), developed a view of purification after death;[ Gerald O'Collins and Edward G. Farrugia, A Concise Dictionary of Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000) p. 27; cf. Adolph Harnack, History of Dogma vol. 2, trans. Neil Buchanan (London, Williams & Norgate, 1995) p. 337; Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 6:14] this view drew upon the notion that fire is a divine instrument from the Old Testament, and understood this in the context of New Testament teachings such as baptism by fire, from the Gospels, and a purificatory trial after death, from St. Paul. [Jacques Le Goff, The Birth of Purgatory (University of Chicago Press, 1984) p. 53; cf. Leviticus 10:1-2, Deuteronomy 32:22, 1 Corinthians 3:10-15].

Origen, in arguing against soul sleep, stated that the souls of the elect immediately entered paradise unless not yet purified, in which case they passed into a state of punishment, a penal fire, which is to be conceived as a place of purification.[ Adolph Harnack, History of Dogma vol. 2, trans. Neil Buchanan (London: Williams & Norgate, 1905) p. 377] For both Clement and Origen, the fire was neither a material thing nor a metaphor, but a "spiritual fire".[Jacques Le Goff, The Birth of Purgatory (University of Chicago Press, 1984) pp. 55-57; cf. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 7:6 and 5:14] An early Latin author, Tertullian (c. 160-225), also articulated a view of purification after death.[ Gerald O'Collins and Edward G. Farrugia, A Concise Dictionary of Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000) p. 27; cf. Adolph Harnack, History of Dogma vol. 2, trans. Neil Buchanan (London, Williams & Norgate, 1995) p. 296 n. 1; George Cross, "The Differentiation of the Roman and Greek Catholic Views of the Future Life", in The Biblical World (1912); Tertullian De Anima] In Tertullian's understanding of the afterlife, the souls of martyrs entered directly into eternal blessedness, whereas the rest entered a generic realm of the dead. There the wicked suffered a foretaste of their eternal punishments,[ A. J. Visser, "A Bird's-Eye View of Ancient Christian Eschatology", in Numen (1967) p. 13] whilst the good experienced various stages and places of bliss wherein "the idea of a kind of purgatory… is quite plainly found," an idea that is representative of a view widely dispersed in antiquity. Later examples, wherein further elaborations are articulated, include St. Cyprian (d. 258),[ Cyprian, Letters 51:20; Gerald O'Collins and Edward G. Farrugia, A Concise Dictionary of Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000) p. 27] St. John Chrysostom (c. 347-407),[ John Chrysostom, Homily on First Corinthians 41:5; Homily on Philippians 3:9-10; Gerald O'Collins and Edward G. Farrugia, A Concise Dictionary of Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000) p. 27] and St. Augustine (354-430), [Augustine, Sermons 159:1, 172:2; City of God 21:13; Handbook on Faith, Hope, and Charity 18:69, 29:109; Confessions 2.27; Gerald O' Collins and Mario Farrugia, Catholicism: the story of Catholic Christianity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003) p. 36].

To disagree with interpretations of Sacred Scripture is one thing but to assert the Church snatched the concept of purgatory out of thin air in the 10th century is disingenuous.

 

[Brian Sellers]

Catholics always say we protestants dont understand, yet its they who cant understand the bible without having it taught to them.

"...yet it's they who can't understand the Bible without having it taught to them."

Yes we believe in teaching and learning the Bible. I believe it's called the Great Commission.
"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen." KJV Matthew 28:20

 

[JesusLovesOurLady]

One of the great ironies that I find in Roman Catholic theology is that non-Catholics can be saved if they have been properly baptized. The issue becomes one of if there might be non-Catholics going to heaven because of their baptism, do they need to pass through Purgatory to get there?

Given current Catholic teaching that Purgatory is nothing more difficult than a refreshing shower to cleanse oneself of residual effects of sin, then who needs to worry at all?

Saint Leonard of Port Maurice records the following in his sermon The Little Number of Those Who are Saved:

"an archdeacon in Lyons gave up his charge and retreated into a desert place to do penance, and that he died the same day and hour as Saint Bernard. After his death, he appeared to his bishop and said to him, "Know, Monsignor, that at the very hour I passed away, thirty-three thousand people also died. Out of this number, Bernard and myself went up to heaven without delay, three went to purgatory, and all the others fell into Hell." (Emphasis added)

Keeping your baptismal promise is difficult enough for Catholic, let alone a Protestant who knows little about the sacramental grace of baptism and the need for confession. So does a Protestant who has kept his baptismal and died in a state of grace go to purgatory after he dies? Only God can judge that state of a person's soul, but based on sound rational speculatio we can say, probably because the soul died without complete obedience to God, being subject to the Church established by Him to reconcile Humanity to Him. I find it odd that a non-Catholic is ridiculing the saving power of baptism, when so many Protestants attack the Catholic Church for rejecting the once-saved-always-saved heresy.

Also the claim, wherever it comes form, that the "current Catholic teaching that Purgatory is nothing more difficult than a refreshing shower..." is a complete and total lie. Just the fact that Purgatory delays the joy of Eternal Life with God, gives you an idea of how painful Purgatory is! The Saints are clear that the flames of Purgatory are identical to the fires of hell, it's true that there is in some sense peace and even joy Purgatory, due to the fact that the souls in Purgatory know that Heaven is guaranteed, but still it's best to do anything in one's power to conform to Christ!

 

[kepha31]

Descriptions and doctrine regarding purgatory developed over the centuries. Those who believe in purgatory interpret Bible passages such as 2 Maccabees 12:41-46 (not accepted as Scripture by Protestants but recognized by Orthodox and Catholics), 2 Timothy 1:18, Matthew 12:32, Luke 16:19-26, Luke 23:43, 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 and Hebrews 12:29 as support for prayer for the dead, an active interim state for the dead prior to the resurrection, and purifying flames after death. The first Christians looked forward to the imminent return of Christ and did not develop detailed beliefs about the interim state.[ Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press 2005] Gradually, Christians, especially in the West, took an interest in circumstances of the interim state between one's death and the future resurrection. Christians both East and West prayed for the dead in this interim state, though theologians in the East refrained from defining it. Augustine distinguished between the purifying fire that saves and eternal consuming fire for the unrepentant. Gregory the Great established a connection between earthly penance and purification after death. All Soul's Day, established in the 10th century, turned popular attention to the condition of departed souls. I suppose this is where you arrive at your erroneous conclusion regarding the source of purgatory.

Specific examples of belief in purification after death and of the communion of the living with the dead through prayer are found in many of the Church Fathers.[ A Concise Dictionary of Theology, p.27] I’ll list a few. Irenaeus (c. 130-202) mentioned an abode where the souls of the dead remained until the universal judgment, a process that has been described as one which "contains the concept of... purgatory."[ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.31.2] Both St. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215) and his pupil, Origen of Alexandria (c. 185-254), developed a view of purification after death;[ Gerald O'Collins and Edward G. Farrugia, A Concise Dictionary of Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000) p. 27; cf. Adolph Harnack, History of Dogma vol. 2, trans. Neil Buchanan (London, Williams & Norgate, 1995) p. 337; Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 6:14] this view drew upon the notion that fire is a divine instrument from the Old Testament, and understood this in the context of New Testament teachings such as baptism by fire, from the Gospels, and a purificatory trial after death, from St. Paul. [Jacques Le Goff, The Birth of Purgatory (University of Chicago Press, 1984) p. 53; cf. Leviticus 10:1-2, Deuteronomy 32:22, 1 Corinthians 3:10-15].

Origen, in arguing against soul sleep, stated that the souls of the elect immediately entered paradise unless not yet purified, in which case they passed into a state of punishment, a penal fire, which is to be conceived as a place of purification.[ Adolph Harnack, History of Dogma vol. 2, trans. Neil Buchanan (London: Williams & Norgate, 1905) p. 377] For both Clement and Origen, the fire was neither a material thing nor a metaphor, but a "spiritual fire".[Jacques Le Goff, The Birth of Purgatory (University of Chicago Press, 1984) pp. 55-57; cf. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 7:6 and 5:14] An early Latin author, Tertullian (c. 160-225), also articulated a view of purification after death.[ Gerald O'Collins and Edward G. Farrugia, A Concise Dictionary of Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000) p. 27; cf. Adolph Harnack, History of Dogma vol. 2, trans. Neil Buchanan (London, Williams & Norgate, 1995) p. 296 n. 1; George Cross, "The Differentiation of the Roman and Greek Catholic Views of the Future Life", in The Biblical World (1912); Tertullian De Anima] In Tertullian's understanding of the afterlife, the souls of martyrs entered directly into eternal blessedness, whereas the rest entered a generic realm of the dead. There the wicked suffered a foretaste of their eternal punishments,[ A. J. Visser, "A Bird's-Eye View of Ancient Christian Eschatology", in Numen (1967) p. 13] whilst the good experienced various stages and places of bliss wherein "the idea of a kind of purgatory… is quite plainly found," an idea that is representative of a view widely dispersed in antiquity. Later examples, wherein further elaborations are articulated, include St. Cyprian (d. 258),[ Cyprian, Letters 51:20; Gerald O'Collins and Edward G. Farrugia, A Concise Dictionary of Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000) p. 27] St. John Chrysostom (c. 347-407),[ John Chrysostom, Homily on First Corinthians 41:5; Homily on Philippians 3:9-10; Gerald O'Collins and Edward G. Farrugia, A Concise Dictionary of Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000) p. 27] and St. Augustine (354-430), [Augustine, Sermons 159:1, 172:2; City of God 21:13; Handbook on Faith, Hope, and Charity 18:69, 29:109; Confessions 2.27; Gerald O' Collins and Mario Farrugia, Catholicism: the story of Catholic Christianity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003) p. 36].

To disagree with interpretations of Sacred Scripture is one thing but to assert the Church snatched the concept of purgatory out of thin air in the 10th century is disingenuous.

Good post."disingenuous". I would use stronger words but it's against the rules. Too many separated brethren dismiss or ignore the ECF unless it is an out-of-context snippet to suit an agenda. This can be frustrating in discussions with certain Protestants who are divorced from the early church, have little or no knowledge of history (i.e. how we got the Bible canon), and no concept of doctrinal development. "I don't read traditions of men" or "it's not inspired therefore meaningless." These are excuses that amount to intellectual suicide IMO. What they don't realize is that rejection of the doctrine of purgatory is a 16th century invention based on Martin Luther's straw man fallacies, a false man made tradition.

Purgatory: Refutation of James White (1 Corinthians 3:10-15)

 

[Albion]

Albion, I stated that to be fair to the Greek position they retracted their statement and I went on to state that I believe the Orthodox Church now follows the Confession of Dositheus (1672). I never implied that the Greeks accepted the Council of Florence for if they had then they would be part of the Roman Catholic Church.

Right. And my comment was meant to say only that the Council of Florence has no part in Orthodox theology, so there's really no place for it in this discussion.

that the two doctrines at that time were nearly identical and had been the accepted teaching of the Church for 1500 years.

Yes, but they are not and have not been "nearly identical." In typical Orthodox fashion (which is to their credit, I think) their stance is a general concept while the Roman stance is a grossly over-defined and unscriptural one.

And that latter stance IS what "Purgatory" is.

The Roman concept is what created Purgatory; no other concept of an intermediate state of purification, etc. is "Purgatory," not any more than it would be correct to call the Archbishop of Canterbury the "Anglican Pope" simply because he is the leader and is in Apostolic Succession from St. Peter.

"No," we would all object upon hearing that. There are critical differences remaining, we'd say. The similarities, as far as they go, are not enough.

But when it comes to Purgatory, people seem to want to take the view that "'close' counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and Purgatory.

 

[Albion]

Descriptions and doctrine regarding purgatory developed over the centuries.

That reads like an admission that it wasn't known as it came to be until the late Middle Ages (as was said) and that its nature, functioning, and etc. is largely unScriptural (as was also said).

 

[kepha31]

Right. And my comment was meant to say only that the Council of Florence has no part in Orthodox theology, so there's really no place for it in this discussion.
Yes, but they are not and have not been "nearly identical." In typical Orthodox fashion (which is to their credit, I think) their stance is a general concept while the Roman stance is a grossly over-defined and unscriptural one.
And that latter stance IS what "Purgatory" is.

No, it is not.

The Roman concept is what created Purgatory; no other concept of an intermediate state of purification, etc. is "Purgatory," not any more than it would be correct to call the Archbishop of Canterbury the "Anglican Pope" simply because he is the leader and is in Apostolic Succession from St. Peter.

"No," we would all object upon hearing that. There are critical differences remaining, we'd say. The similarities, as far as they go, are not enough.

But when it comes to Purgatory, people seem to want to take the view that "'close' counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and Purgatory.

You seem to want to reject the primitive form of purgatory found in Judaism. Jesus and Paul elaborated on that, so your claim that "The Roman concept is what created Purgatory" is an absolute falsehood. Rejection of purgatory is a 16th century doctrinally anti-semitic invention. Luther's hatred for Jews shows in his teachings.

 

[kepha31]

That reads like an admission that it wasn't known as it came to be until the late Middle Ages (as was said) and that its nature, functioning, and etc. is largely unScriptural (as was also said).

It has repeatedly been demonstrated as scriptural, you just can't remove your Protestant blinders. Brian Sellers makes no such admission, he is showing consistent and developed teaching. Do you read into scripture with the came lunacy you read into posts? Again, you have no concept of doctrinal development and have nothing to do with the general consensus of the ECF.

 

[kepha31]

Notice that His prayers to father Abraham were futile. Same with Catholic prayers to saints. Futile. No wonder you all invented purgatory.

You miss the point, or I should say, evading the point.
Luke 16:24
This is the Abraham of the Bible — long dead by that time –, being asked to do something by a “rich man” (16:19, 22), traditionally known as Dives (which is simply a Latin word for “rich man”). His answer was, in effect, “no” (16:25-26). Having failed in that request, Dives prays to him again for something else:
Luke 16:27-28
His request is again declined (16:29). He argues with Abraham (16:30), but Abraham reiterates that what he asks is futile (16:31). All of this reveals to us that not only can dead saints hear our requests; they also have some measure of power to carry them out on their own (though no doubt by God’s power). Abraham is asked to “send” a dead man to appear to the rich man’s brothers, in order for them to avoid damnation.

Abraham doesn’t deny that he is able to potentially send Lazarus to do such a thing; he only denies that it would work (by the logic of “if they don’t respond to greater factor x, nor will they respond to lesser factor y”). Therefore, it is assumed in the story that Abraham had the ability and authority to do so on his own. And this is all taught, remember, by our Lord Jesus, yet denied by you.

The fact that Dives is dead (in the story they are both in Hades or Sheol: the intermediate netherworld) is irrelevant to the argument at hand, since standard Protestant theology holds that no one should make such a request to anyone but God. He’s asking Abraham to send Lazarus to him, and then to his brothers, so that they can avoid his own fate.

That is very much a prayer: asking for supernatural aid from those who have left the earthly life and attained a greater perfection. Also, rather strikingly (and disturbingly for Protestant theology), God is never mentioned in the entire story of Lazarus and the rich man. It’s all about Dives asking / praying to Abraham for two different requests.

Protestant theology also generally teaches that we can’t talk to anyone who is dead, let alone make intercessory requests to them. Yet King Saul talked to the dead prophet Samuel (1 Sam 28:12-15), (that your theology must deny) Moses and Elijah appeared at the Mount of Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-3), the “Two Witnesses” of Revelation (11:3-13) came back to life again (and talked to folks); so did those who rose after Jesus’ Resurrection (Mt 27:50-53), etc.(that your theology must deny)

One reply is to maintain that “this is only a parable” – therefore we are told that it doesn’t “prove” anything. But many Bible commentators agree that it’s not a parable. Parables don’t use proper names: let alone that of a familiar historical figure like Abraham. They’re also prefaced by a statement (usually by the Bible writer, not Jesus) that the words following are to be considered a “parable.” Nor do I recall any other parables referring to Hades. They are in almost all instances quite “earthy” illustrations: often using agricultural and master / servant word pictures.

But even if we grant for the sake of argument that it is a parable, the difficulties for Protestants are not overcome at all, since even parables cannot contain things that are theologically false, lest Jesus be guilty of leading people into heresy by means of untrue illustrations or analogies.

In fact, my contention would be even stronger if it is a parable, for in a non-parable, a person could do or say something theologically incorrect. But in a parable taught by an omniscient Jesus, Who is God, in an inspired, infallible revelation, falsehood could not be “enshrined.” What Jesus is teaching His hearers cannot contain theological error, and arguments by analogy (basically what the parables are) cannot contain false principles.

We conclude, then, that Jesus sanctioned “prayer to” dead men for requests. That is the traditional notion of “communion of saints.”

 

[Root of Jesse]

Few truer words were ever written.

One of the great ironies that I find in Roman Catholic theology is that non-Catholics can be saved if they have been properly baptized. The issue becomes one of if there might be non-Catholics going to heaven because of their baptism, do they need to pass through Purgatory to get there?

Given current Catholic teaching that Purgatory is nothing more difficult than a refreshing shower to cleanse oneself of residual effects of sin, then who needs to worry at all?

Who says you have to worry if you go to Purgatory??? If you go to Purgatory, next stop is heaven.

 

[Monk Brendan]

So is it kind the resting place mentioned in the bible? Where the dead are stated to rest until JESUS returns and raises them up?

Jesus said He was not for the dead, but for the living. The people that have died in faith have already been raised to eternal life.

 

[Monk Brendan]

I see so my views are among the minority I guess even as far as judgment goes and who it's for. And appreciate the clarification wasnf sure where the belief of purgetory fits in all that

Look, as Jesus told us, there are some teachings that are hard--like divorce. Obviously, this is a teaching that is difficult, and some people simply will not take it to heart. May a gracious God have mercy on all of us.

 

[JESUS=G.O.A.T]

Look, as Jesus told us, there are some teachings that are hard--like divorce. Obviously, this is a teaching that is difficult, and some people simply will not take it to heart. May a gracious God have mercy on all of us.

I get what you're saying here but i'm having trouble relating it to my comment on purgatory can you explain what it has to do with it?