Purgatory/Gehenna

[fide]

That is not in the least what I did. I was saying that faith in the theological sense is not simply "to take it 'on faith.'"

That use of the word is more like credulousness or compliance, not faith as the word is used in the Bible and by Christianity generally.

My concern was your presumption - or erroneous conclusion - about me in regards to faith. I'm looking for anything different, personally, but in concern for you I urge you to not presume about such matters when you do not understand the interior life of another. It profits you nothing, but costs.

 

[Albion]

My concern was your presumption - or erroneous conclusion - about me in regards to faith. .

Trust me when I say this. I try always not to presume too much, no matter who the other fellow is, but instead go by the words he's put into his post.

In this case, I was actually a bit shocked that you would describe religious faith as you did.

 

[fide]

Trust me when I say this. I try always not to presume too much, no matter who the other fellow is, but instead go by the words he's put into his post.

In this case, I was actually a bit shocked that you would describe religious faith as you did.

What exactly "shocked" you? Please explain.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Hello,

Just requesting explanations of the Catholic teaching on purgatory and Jewish views on what Gehenna means/represents. I know this is a controversial topic so what I’m hoping for are explanations of the teaching rather than any debate of opinions on its validity.

Much appreciated, in advance,

Tom

Here’s what the catechism has to say about purgatory. One thing I’d like to point out is the dates that these councils took place. The earliest being the council of Florence in 1439AD. This is evidence that purgatory was not taught in the church by the apostles or early church fathers. The Orthodox Catholic Church also does not teach purgatory which is another example that it was not taught by the apostles.

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.]"

 

[Major1]

Here’s what the catechism has to say about purgatory. One thing I’d like to point out is the dates that these councils took place. The earliest being the council of Florence in 1439AD. This is evidence that purgatory was not taught in the church by the apostles or early church fathers. The Orthodox Catholic Church also does not teach purgatory which is another example that it was not taught by the apostles.

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.]"

It does not matter what the Catechism says. What matters is what the Bible says and the fact is that there is NOTHING in the Bible about Purgatory.

It is strictly a RCC doctrine.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Hello,

Just requesting explanations of the Catholic teaching on purgatory and Jewish views on what Gehenna means/represents. I know this is a controversial topic so what I’m hoping for are explanations of the teaching rather than any debate of opinions on its validity.

Much appreciated, in advance,

Tom

I also wanted to touch on the subject of prayers for the dead. Many people forget that God is omniscient and omnipresent and because of this He already knows our prayers even before creation. So if we pray for the dead those prayers can still be taken into consideration before or when that person dies.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I

It does not matter what the Catechism says. What matters is what the Bible says and the fact is that there is NOTHING in the Bible about Purgatory.

It is strictly a RCC doctrine.

absolutely agree brother. I posted the catechism to prove the point that it was not taught by the apostles or early church fathers.

 

[Major1]

I

absolutely agree brother. I posted the catechism to prove the point that it was not taught by the apostles or early church fathers.

Thank you. I did not understand that.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Jesus mentions Gehenna 11 times in the Bible and in every case He is referring to Hell. Gehenna is also where they burned garbage. I imagine Jesus used the word Gehenna to describe hell as a place that the Jews could relate to.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Thank you. I did not understand that.

What was the RCC doing during 1439AD? Unfortunately they were persecuting nonbelievers and forcing them to convert to Catholicism. Another thing which is more significant was they were abusing the selling of indulgences. Jesus warned us of false prophets who are vicious wolves disguised as sheep. He said you can identify them by their actions. In my opinion this raises a question as to the guidance of the RCC during that time. We’re they in fact guided by the Holy Spirit? According to an article posted on Catholic.com the RCC does not deny that Jews were forced to convert to Catholicism. Here’s a quote and link for anyone who may be interested.

In the summer of 1391, however, this was shattered in Spain when angry anti-Jewish riots erupted. Whether these riots were racial, nationalistic, or religious in origin—and this is still disputed among historians—the result was mass conversions to Christianity among the Jewish population. There is little doubt that many, if not most, of these conversions were forced. And many certainly converted to save their own lives.

The doctrine of purgatory allowed the RCC to solicit more indulgences in return for prayers to have people released from purgatory.

Secrets of the Spanish Inquisition Revealed | Catholic Answers

 

[tz620q]

Here’s what the catechism has to say about purgatory. One thing I’d like to point out is the dates that these councils took place. The earliest being the council of Florence in 1439AD. This is evidence that purgatory was not taught in the church by the apostles or early church fathers. The Orthodox Catholic Church also does not teach purgatory which is another example that it was not taught by the apostles.

By this logic, the Trinity was not believed prior to the Council of Nicea in 325 AD.

 

[bbbbbbb]

By this logic, the Trinity was not believed prior to the Council of Nicea in 325 AD.

Your problem is that you have no evidence that the doctrine of Purgatory was not invented by the Roman Catholic Church, but was believed by all of Christendom. It is similar to saying that the head of my denomination is the head of all Christians because my Church says so.

 

[BNR32FAN]

By this logic, the Trinity was not believed prior to the Council of Nicea in 325 AD.

Not true because the trinity is directly discussed in John 1:1-14 which was written long before 325AD along with many other verses that I’m sure your aware of. They simply didn’t have a word to describe it. Purgatory on the other hand has no biblical evidence to support it without making assumptions. Take 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 for example. Obviously Paul is using a parable because we cannot literally build on the foundation of Jesus Christ with gold, silver, or jewels. With that being said we must pay attention to how parables are used in the Bible. In every case of a parable being used in the Bible it is always used to support the topic that is currently being discussed. A person would never be talking about a particular subject then give a parable about a completely different subject. For example if I were teaching someone how to ride a bicycle then all the sudden said don’t count your chickens until they hatch that wouldn’t make much sense because the parable doesn’t fit the topic that is being discussed. The person I would be teaching would have no idea what I’m talking about. So let’s examine exactly what Paul was discussing in verses 1-10 before he gave the parable in 11-15.

“Dear brothers and sisters, when I was with you I couldn’t talk to you as I would to spiritual people. I had to talk as though you belonged to this world or as though you were infants in Christ. I had to feed you with milk, not with solid food, because you weren’t ready for anything stronger. And you still aren’t ready, for you are still controlled by your sinful nature. You are jealous of one another and quarrel with each other. Doesn’t that prove you are controlled by your sinful nature? Aren’t you living like people of the world? When one of you says, “I am a follower of Paul,” and another says, “I follow Apollos,” aren’t you acting just like people of the world? After all, who is Apollos? Who is Paul? We are only God’s servants through whom you believed the Good News. Each of us did the work the Lord gave us. I planted the seed in your hearts, and Apollos watered it, but it was God who made it grow. It’s not important who does the planting, or who does the watering. What’s important is that God makes the seed grow. The one who plants and the one who waters work together with the same purpose. And both will be rewarded for their own hard work. For we are both God’s workers. And you are God’s field. You are God’s building. Because of God’s grace to me, I have laid the foundation like an expert builder. Now others are building on it. But whoever is building on this foundation must be very careful.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭3:1-10‬ ‭NLT‬

Paul is writing to the Corinthians to explain that both himself and Apollos were working towards the same goal and they each did the work that The Lord assigned to them. Nowhere is Paul talking about forgiveness of sin or temporal punishment for sin or purification. Paul is talking about how our works will earn us rewards in heaven and regardless of whether our works survive the test of fire we will still be saved. It is our works that are tested by fire not our soul or spirit. Now let's examine 11-15.

“For no one can lay any foundation other than the one we already have—Jesus Christ. Anyone who builds on that foundation may use a variety of materials—gold, silver, jewels, wood, hay, or straw. But on the judgment day, fire will reveal what kind of work each builder has done. The fire will show if a person’s work has any value. If the work survives, that builder will receive a reward. But if the work is burned up, the builder will suffer great loss. The builder will be saved, but like someone barely escaping through a wall of flames.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭3:11-15‬ ‭NLT

Everything Paul says is referring to works. Our works will be tested by fire and if they survive the test of fire we will receive a reward. The reward is not salvation. Our salvation is a free gift from the grace of God. The definition of grace is a free and unmerited favor of God. It cannot be earned. When Paul says we will be saved but like someone barely escaping a wall of flames is a metaphor. Nowhere has Paul mentioned forgiveness of sin or temporal punishment in this entire chapter. The only way to come to the conclusion that Paul is mentioning a place where we must pay for sins after death is by making an assumption because it is not directly discussed. In every case of a biblical reference to purgatory it is either a parable taken out of context of what is being discussed or an assumption with nothing to support it. Nowhere in the bible is purgatory, forgiveness of sin after death, temporal punishment after death, or purification after death directly discussed. Not even the concept of the idea is ever directly discussed. Another example is Matthew 12:32.

“Anyone who speaks against the Son of Man can be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, either in this world or in the world to come.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭12:32‬ ‭NLT‬‬

The catholic church makes the assumption that because Jesus said we will not be forgiven in this world or the world to come if we sin against the Holy Spirit that this indicates there is forgiveness of sin in the world to come. But that is not what Jesus said. In fact Jesus said the exact opposite. He said we won't be forgiven in the world to come. Jesus never said there is forgiveness in the world to come. The catholic church is making an assumption that is not supported by any other scriptures in the bible. Next is Matthew 5:25-26

““When you are on the way to court with your adversary, settle your differences quickly. Otherwise, your accuser may hand you over to the judge, who will hand you over to an officer, and you will be thrown into prison. And if that happens, you surely won’t be free again until you have paid the last penny.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5:25-26‬ ‭NLT

Here Jesus is teaching us that we need to reconcile our differences with others. If we don't forgive others we will not be forgiven. Again the only way someone can come to the conclusion of purgatory from this passage of scripture is by making an assumption because again it is not directly addressed.

““You have heard that our ancestors were told, ‘You must not murder. If you commit murder, you are subject to judgment.’ But I say, if you are even angry with someone, you are subject to judgment! If you call someone an idiot, you are in danger of being brought before the court. And if you curse someone, you are in danger of the fires of hell. “So if you are presenting a sacrifice at the altar in the Temple and you suddenly remember that someone has something against you, leave your sacrifice there at the altar. Go and be reconciled to that person. Then come and offer your sacrifice to God. “When you are on the way to court with your adversary, settle your differences quickly. Otherwise, your accuser may hand you over to the judge, who will hand you over to an officer, and you will be thrown into prison. And if that happens, you surely won’t be free again until you have paid the last penny.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭5:21-26‬ ‭NLT‬‬

Is there really sufficient evidence in this passage to support a doctrine of purgatory? Furthermore the RCC teaches that it is Mary who intercedes for people in purgatory to have them released before they’ve paid for their sins. There is absolutely nothing anywhere in the Bible to support that.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Your problem is that you have no evidence that the doctrine of Purgatory was not invented by the Roman Catholic Church, but was believed by all of Christendom. It is similar to saying that the head of my denomination is the head of all Christians because my Church says so.

If purgatory was believed by the early Christians I have 2 questions. Why did they wait until 1439AD to formulate the doctrine and why doesn’t the Orthodox Catholic Church believe it? Did the Orthodox Church first believe in purgatory then decide they now don’t believe? Highly unlikely.

 

[Albion]

So if we pray for the dead those prayers can still be taken into consideration before or when that person dies.

In which case, we would not be praying for someone who is dead.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Please understand it is not my intention to attack my Roman Catholic brothers & sisters in Christ. My intention is to help others see things from another perspective. Here’s a few more passages of scripture to consider when contemplating the doctrine of purgatory. Please keep in mind that these were from letters written to these people so Paul and the author of Hebrews could not know if these people had unconfessed sins. Also notice that these are written in both the past and present tense indicating that these have already taken place.

“For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin. People are made right with God when they believe that Jesus sacrificed his life, shedding his blood. This sacrifice shows that God was being fair when he held back and did not punish those who sinned in times past, for he was looking ahead and including them in what he would do in this present time. God did this to demonstrate his righteousness, for he himself is fair and just, and he makes sinners right in his sight when they believe in Jesus.”

Romans 3:25-26 NLT

“Yet now he has reconciled you to himself through the death of Christ in his physical body. As a result, he has brought you into his own presence, and you are holy and blameless as you stand before him without a single fault.”

Colossians 1:22 NLT

“Some of you were once like that. But you were cleansed; you were made holy; you were made right with God by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”

1 Corinthians 6:11 NLT

“And Christ lives within you, so even though your body will die because of sin, the Spirit gives you life because you have been made right with God.”

Notice that this is in the very same letter that 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 is in and Paul specifically states in 1 Corinthians 3:3

“for you are still controlled by your sinful nature. You are jealous of one another and quarrel with each other. Doesn’t that prove you are controlled by your sinful nature? Aren’t you living like people of the world?”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭3:3‬ ‭NLT‬‬

Paul proves that these people still sin yet they “have been made right with God”

Romans 8:10 NLT

“Then he says, “I will never again remember their sins and lawless deeds.” And when sins have been forgiven, there is no need to offer any more sacrifices. And so, dear brothers and sisters, we can boldly enter heaven’s Most Holy Place because of the blood of Jesus. By his death, Jesus opened a new and life-giving way through the curtain into the Most Holy Place.”

Hebrews 10:17-20 NLT

If purgatory is in fact necessary then how could these people be reconciled, cleansed, made right with God, stand before God holy and blameless without a single fault and are now able to enter the Most Holy Place? Surely Paul and the author of Hebrews wasn’t writing to people who had already gone through purgatory.

 

[BNR32FAN]

In which case, we would not be praying for someone who is dead.

We can pray for someone who is alive or dead it doesn’t matter. God knows every prayer we will pray even before creation.

 

[tz620q]

Your problem is that you have no evidence that the doctrine of Purgatory was not invented by the Roman Catholic Church, but was believed by all of Christendom. It is similar to saying that the head of my denomination is the head of all Christians because my Church says so.

I was pointing out the difference between belief and doctrine and how one is codified in the other. I have no problem with Purgatory for I believe in it. It is the non-believers who seem to be on here trying to justify their lack of belief by showing their lack of doctrine. We stand in the light and proclaim our beliefs for all to see, even to the point of having a non-Catholic quote from the Catechism to start this discussion. But if I asked for the detractors to state their beliefs, where would I find them and how would they justify them, short of falling back on their own opinions. That is why this sort of discussion is useless; because it is approached by those who don't believe trying to establish non-belief in those who do. Their sure defense is merely restating that they don't believe to all proofs presented. It is not a discussion between competing beliefs at all. I can think of no more futile endeavor than trying to educate the obstinate and soften a hatred that truly befuddles me. If you don't believe in this, then fine; but why make such an effort to tear down the beliefs of others with no more incentive than to rob them of their certainty. What do you offer in return that is so much better? All I can see is a lack of any true explanation for how a totally depraved sinner is suddenly a spotless dweller in Heaven.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It is not hate that motivates me but compassion for my brothers and sisters in Christ. If people believe in purgatory to cleanse them of sin where does Jesus’ sacrifice play a role in our salvation? Purgatory teaches that not all of our sins are cleansed by Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross and they must pay for them by suffering in purgatory after death. If this is true then Jesus’ sacrifice doesn’t fully cleanse us of sin and teaches people to not fully rely on Jesus’ sacrifice as their one and only means of salvation. Believing in purgatory is not necessary for salvation. If such a place does exist what are the consequences of not believing in it? Surely someone who believes that Jesus Christ paid for all their sins will not be condemned for not believing in purgatory because that person has put all their trust in Jesus as their one and only savior and atonement for sin. Now on the other hand if a person doesn’t put all their trust in Jesus as their one and only savior and means of atonement and believes in purgatory could that person be condemned? I believe it is possible because they did not fully rely on Jesus Christ as their only means of salvation and instead expect to pay for their sins through their own suffering. So the doctrine of purgatory presents a very dangerous alternative. It’s similar to the debate with atheists about which is more dangerous to believe in God and be wrong or to not believe in God and be wrong? If you believe in God and your wrong you’ve lost nothing. If you don’t believe in God and your wrong you’ve lost everything. If you believe in purgatory and your wrong you didn’t fully trust in Jesus as your one and only savior. If you don’t believe in purgatory you have trusted in a Jesus as your one and only savior. Why take a chance of being wrong if there are no consequences for not believing in purgatory but could very well be consequences for not believing in Jesus Christ as your one and only savior?

 

[bbbbbbb]

I was pointing out the difference between belief and doctrine and how one is codified in the other. I have no problem with Purgatory for I believe in it. It is the non-believers who seem to be on here trying to justify their lack of belief by showing their lack of doctrine. We stand in the light and proclaim our beliefs for all to see, even to the point of having a non-Catholic quote from the Catechism to start this discussion. But if I asked for the detractors to state their beliefs, where would I find them and how would they justify them, short of falling back on their own opinions. That is why this sort of discussion is useless; because it is approached by those who don't believe trying to establish non-belief in those who do. Their sure defense is merely restating that they don't believe to all proofs presented. It is not a discussion between competing beliefs at all. I can think of no more futile endeavor than trying to educate the obstinate and soften a hatred that truly befuddles me. If you don't believe in this, then fine; but why make such an effort to tear down the beliefs of others with no more incentive than to rob them of their certainty. What do you offer in return that is so much better? All I can see is a lack of any true explanation for how a totally depraved sinner is suddenly a spotless dweller in Heaven.

I think the differences expressed here are, in good measure, related to the basis for the doctrine of Purgatory. As you have pointed out, most Catholics, such as yourself, are content to believe the doctrine primarily because your church teaches it and, secondarily, because of the general logic used to support it. Those who disagree do not lack faith but do not perceive the reason to accept a doctrine developed by one branch of the Christian faith, nor do they accept the logic because it flies in the face of the revelation of God through the Bible. Then, of course, there is the historical aspect. As has been pointed out, this is not a doctrine which arose in the early years of Christian history, but arose within one branch of Christianity many centuries after orthodox Christian dogmas had been established.