Purgatory? Why or Why not?

[Dylan Michael]

Computers, Heart Attacks, and Norway are all not in the bible.
There are absolutely no verses to support them.

 

[Hairy Tic]

Just a question about our members on the idea purgatory.

What is purgatory

Do you believe in purgatory

Why or why don't you believe the idea?

## Purgatory burns away the roots of sin in us. It is conventionally compared to a fire - this is an illustration, not a description. Very little has been definitively taught about it, except that

• there is such a "condition" or "place"
• the souls in Purgatory can be assisted by the prayers of the living
• it will not last beyond the Judgement, but is temporary

Those IIRC are the main points.

To see God face to face, which is what is in store for us, would be hell otherwise, because God is "horrifyingly" beautiful, wonderful, good. This is a point many Saints have driven home - and they should know. If they aren't persuasive, there is Moses in Exodus 33:

Moses and the Glory of the LORD

12 Moses said to the LORD, “You have been telling me, ‘Lead these people,’ but you have not let me know whom you will send with me. You have said, ‘I know you by name and you have found favor with me.’ 13 If you are pleased with me, teach me your ways so I may know you and continue to find favor with you. Remember that this nation is your people.” 14 The LORD replied, “My Presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.”
15 Then Moses said to him, “If your Presence does not go with us, do not send us up from here. 16 How will anyone know that you are pleased with me and with your people unless you go with us? What else will distinguish me and your people from all the other people on the face of the earth?”
17 And the LORD said to Moses, “I will do the very thing you have asked, because I am pleased with you and I know you by name.”
18 Then Moses said, “Now show me your glory.”
19 And the LORD said, “I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the LORD, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 20 But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.”
21 Then the LORD said, “There is a place near me where you may stand on a rock. 22 When my glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft in the rock and cover you with my hand until I have passed by. 23 Then I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen.”

Moses could not see God - yet this is the Moses, the greatest of OT Prophets, of whom we also read this, in chapter 34:

The Radiant Face of Moses

29 When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands, he was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the LORD. 30 When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, his face was radiant, and they were afraid to come near him. 31 But Moses called to them; so Aaron and all the leaders of the community came back to him, and he spoke to them. 32 Afterward all the Israelites came near him, and he gave them all the commands the LORD had given him on Mount Sinai. 33 When Moses finished speaking to them, he put a veil over his face. 34 But whenever he entered the LORD’s presence to speak with him, he removed the veil until he came out. And when he came out and told the Israelites what he had been commanded, 35 they saw that his face was radiant. Then Moses would put the veil back over his face until he went in to speak with the LORD.

If God can have that effect on mortal men - what must He be like ? "The Israelites were afraid to come near" Moses - yet he was but a man like themselves. What would they have done, if they had see God's face ?

And then there is us. We are to see what what Moses, for his own safety, was not allowed to see, not for an instant, but for eternity. If a great servant of God like Moses could not see the face of God for even an instant, what purity must we need, what unimaginable holiness, to do so. When Isaiah has his vision of God, he is "undone" by it; it shocks him. Since even the seraphim around the Throne of God "cover their faces", no wonder Isaiah is "undone".

Purgatory is a very great mercy - unimaginably great. Its purpose is to remove from the redeemed every last remaining trace of everything that is unholy in us. If our faith is more precious than gold, yet needs to be refined no less as gold does: how can it be different with us ? Purgatory is our "burning fiery furnace" - & like the three holy children in Daniel 3 who were cast into that, we will completely safe, completely unharmed. Those in Purgatory are saved already - they cannot be lost or tempted. They long for God more than words can say, because so little prevents them seeing God; but that little causes them indescribable suffering.

I believe there is a Purgatory, and I look forward to it. I'm entirely with C.S. Lewis on this - it is a need. Not a luxury, not a Catholic addition, but a need. If there is no Purgatory, all that awaits is Hell; for to be unholy, unclean, impure, in the open Presence of the Holy One, would be Hell. Whatever form Purgatory takes, I want it. C.S. Lewis compares it to removing a tooth: it may well hurt, & hurt enormously, but it is worth it.

"Oh, but our sins have been fully and superabundantly atoned for at the Cross" - they certainly have; that is presupposed.

"So why Purgatory ?" Because (very briefly) the Atonement does not put paid to the roots of sin in the heart of man: it takes away the guilt of sin, but not the tendencies that make our sinnings possible. If it did, there would be no sin among Christians, & no need to confess it, & no need to be forgiven by one another. Nor would the NT speak of these topics - it would not need to. Purgatory is a way in which the Atonement obliterates even our tendencies to sin. Then we can start living properly.

 

[Hairy Tic]

No, its from Spe Salvi. The question is, is there anything about it that is unbiblical?


Scripture talks about judgement, about ultimate encounter with Christ, and about purifying with fire. Do you really need the chapter and verse numbers>

## That is something I've never understood People write posts that are drenched in the Bible, absolutely saturated with its ideas and words & theologies, only to be told that it won't do. Is it because posts are written in that way without the authors' feeling the need to give references, because they assume readers will not need them ?

I think the Pope's ideas in that quotation are as Biblical & NTal as one could desire. And I like that bit at the beginning - it has excellent Biblical support.

If you want to discuss Catholic thinking, it would be a good idea to familarise yourself with some of the main theologians involved. Benedict XVI is the current Pope!


I didn't imply they were. The OP asked about purgatory. I pointed out that how Benedict talks about purgatory is rather different from the picture most people have in their heads. You asked what he said about it. I posted the relevant paragraph from his encyclical. The preceeding paragraph particularly refers to 1 Cor 3, however - like a lot of writing Paul himself, Benedict tends to allude to scripture rather than provide proof-texting references. So you might need to do some of your own work to think through whether or not what he's said is in line with scripture or not.

## I could not agree more with that penultimate sentence. How can one make an argument, if one has at every turn to use only the very words of the Bible ? A parrot could do that - & are not men worth more than many parrots ?

 

[Hairy Tic]

Because...there's no scripture that gives that account.

So, this is a falsehood to believe when we die we go to some waiting room.

If you are willing to believe things that the Bible doesn't even get into...you'll believe some other religious traditions too.

That's all this is... religious tradition from a denomination that is famous for many traditions that aren't in the Bible

## Like the completely unscriptural idea that the disciples were to compose 27 books to add to "God's Perfect Word" ? I couldn't agree more

As for the blasphemous idea that a crucified Jew, declared by Scripture - Deuteronomy 21.23 to be exact - is the Messiah, Saviour & Lord, the sooner we get rid of that anti-Scriptural nonsense the better.

There is only one God, as Scripture says in the Shema; so Jesus of Nazareth cannot be Him. Even Christians admit that Scripture is composed of the Law & the Prophets. Luke 16 mentions them - but says not a syllable about any new-fangled "New Testament". Even Paul says the Scriptures were entrusted to the Jews: & the Jews do not accept this "New Testament"; therefore it is rubbish to call it Scripture - to do that, contradicts Paul's argument. Jeremiah 31:31-34 knows of a "new covenant" - it is to be written on men's hearts, not on paper; that would make it as external as the old covenant. So the 27 books are rejected in advance.

The idea that there is a new Scripture, is anti-Biblical, and only seems valid if one assumes the Christian additions to the TaNaKh of 27 books are genuine Scripture. But that is the point at issue: there is no reason to assume it, unless one is a Christian. And those books are so full of blunders, inconsistencies, historical errors, blasphemies, illogic, unfulfilled predictions, hatred of the Jews, & downright nonsense, that there is no reason to treat them as any more inspired than the ravings of a drunkard. Only Christian bias prevents us calling Jesus a false prophet: for He predicted His coming in glory, twice, within the generation of his hearers.

The point of all that being, that from the POV of first-century Judaism, the Christian additions to the Jewish Bible are no more Biblical than books now outside the Bible in its current two-Testament form. Paul, Matthew, Mark & the rest were as non-Biblical as any Pope. Only a completely unhistorical approach to the NT can hide this. The only reason Evangelicals accept the unBiblical ideas of the NT writers, is that they are Christians & not Jews - & Christians living long after the reception as Scripture in the Church of all the 27 NT writings, at that.

 

[perrfekt]

thats some big font there lol. but to touch on the reference given earlier about what benedict says, the only place in scripture where that is mentioned, it is speaking of the day of judgement, when mans works are put to the fire, and those things he has done selfishly and not soley for God, will be burned away, but those things which have been done not for selfish reasons, but for the Glory of God, will be preserved and are described as the believers reward. these being gold, silver, and precious gems, of which we are given a crown as a reward.

to believe that you must suffer for your own sins undermines the perfect sacrifice that Jesus offered, and to call it unworthy in the eyes of God the Father. the bible does plainly say "the blood of Christ cleanses us from all unrighteousness." doesn't say most or some, but all. so on the day of judgement, if we are cleansed of all unrighteousness, what is there to judge? nothing, for we are not under the law, but under grace. those who do not believe will be judged according to the law, and will be found guilty.

as far as the perpetual argument of whether or not something is heretical because it is not in scripture is mostly irrelivent. where scripture is silent, so should also be the believer in terms of doctrine. but if anything adds to scripture that changes or adds doctrines, well revelation 21 is pretty clear on that. (could be rev 22)

 

[MrPolo]

to believe that you must suffer for your own sins undermines the perfect sacrifice that Jesus offered

Christ's sacrifice does not automatically spare the justified from temporal punishments. One of many proofs in Scripture for that is that even the elect undergo temporal death---which is a consequence of original sin. Another proof is all the references in Scripture calling for the sanctification of even those who are already justified. And Purgatory is the final sanctification that perfects us to ever be in the heavenly condition. None of the passages in Scripture on sanctification undermine Christ's sacrifice, and neither does Purgatory.

 

[sheina]

There is no purgatory!

According to Roman Catholic theology, purgatory is a place or state where Christians go after death to suffer for sins not cleansed during their earthly existence. After an unspecified time of purgation, the soul is thought to go to Heaven. It is said to be a place of suffering.

The good news is purgatory doesn't exist....Jesus Christ paid our sin debt in full on the cross of Calvary:

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Hebrews 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Nobody is "purged" by fire...our sins were "purged" by the blood of Jesus Christ, once for all!

Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Jesus' blood cleanses the believer from all sin and gives him perfect righteousness before God. No true believer will ever suffer fiery torment for his own sins:

2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

1 Peter 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

 

[MrPolo]

Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

This is a fine example of misunderstanding Purgatory. This passage (nor the others) in any way deny the need for final sanctification before entering the eternal heavenly state. Nor is the sanctification done at Purgatory done by any other power than the sacrifice of Christ which was accomplished once for all. The above verse actually supports Purgatory because it teaches the need for sanctification.

For those who do not know the official basic Catechism definition, it is as follows:

CCC#1030 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.​

As stated earlier, those who believe Purgatory is an affront to Christ's sacrifice must necessarily argue that all passages in Scripture teaching sanctification also are an affront to Christ's sacrifice---which of course, they are not, and neither is the final sanctification in Purgatory. For example, all of you who are bound for heaven but still stumble and sin now and then will have that imperfect tendency removed permanently prior to your entrance into heaven.

 

[perrfekt]

Hebrews 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

This is a fine example of misunderstanding Purgatory. This passage (nor the others) in any way deny the need for final sanctification before entering the eternal heavenly state. Nor is the sanctification done at Purgatory done by any other power than the sacrifice of Christ which was accomplished once for all. The above verse actually supports Purgatory because it teaches the need for sanctification.

For those who do not know the official basic Catechism definition, it is as follows:

CCC#1030 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.
​

As stated earlier, those who believe Purgatory is an affront to Christ's sacrifice must necessarily argue that all passages in Scripture teaching sanctification also are an affront to Christ's sacrifice---which of course, they are not, and neither is the final sanctification in Purgatory. For example, all of you who are bound for heaven but still stumble and sin now and then will have that imperfect tendency removed permanently prior to your entrance into heaven.

by quoting this, then following with your discourse, you contradicted what you opened with. the burden of proof lies upon you to show biblical evidence for this doctrine. a lack of biblical evidence, and supporting the position by church tradition, is a very weak argument. the term "once for all" is not an abstract phrase. to break it down to even simpler direct terms, there was one sacrifice, which paid for all sin. so how if the debt has been paid, can one be left still owing more? catholicism is an extra biblical faith. it has added non cannon books (apocrypha) and relies heavily upon church tradition for beliefs and practices that are not found in, nor supported within the 66 books of the cannonized bible.

can you provide biblical evidence for the doctrine of purgatory?

 

[MrPolo]

by quoting this, then following with your discourse, you contradicted what you opened with.

I'm sorry, I don't follow that sentence because it is stated without explanation.

But of course I can demonstrate it Biblically, and not just with the Scriptural text of 2 Maccabees which for some reason you apparently dismiss de facto. But the concept of Purgation for example:

Heb. 12:7-10 Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as his children. For what children are not disciplined by their father? 8 If you are not disciplined—and everyone undergoes discipline—then you are not legitimate, not true sons and daughters at all. 9 Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of spirits and live! 10 They disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, in order that we may share in his holiness.​

Now if what Christ did was "for all" in the sense that you mean it, then why would God need to chastise people who are already His children because they aren't at the degree of holiness they should be? Doesn't God know He doesn't need to make any of those who are already His children any holier? Why is He punishing them? Doesn't God know Jesus paid all debt?

Of course, this text shows that even those who are already God's children need to be made holier. This is called sanctification. And that's echoed in the last sentence of the Catechism paragraph I just cited you. The concept of an instantaneous perfection is fictitious, as we see in Scripture, and simply in watching good fellow Christians who still stumble and sin now and then. That is not a quality compatible with the perfection of heaven in which no such blemish can enter (Rev. 21:27).

As I said already (which went unaddressed), the Bible speaks of the need for sanctification quite a bit, even after initial justification. That of course takes nothing away from Christ's sacrifice but is an extension of its effects. For by no other power can sanctification occur either.

Another way to look at it is to ask yourself: Do I still sin occasionally? The answer is yes. Then ask, is that quality compatible with heaven? The answer is no. So somewhere between earth and heaven, there will be a transformation.

 

[perrfekt]

I'm sorry, I don't follow that sentence because it is stated without explanation.

But of course I can demonstrate it Biblically, and not just with the Scriptural text of 2 Maccabees which for some reason you apparently dismiss de facto. But the concept of Purgation for example:

Heb. 12:7-10 Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as his children. For what children are not disciplined by their father? 8 If you are not disciplined—and everyone undergoes discipline—then you are not legitimate, not true sons and daughters at all. 9 Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of spirits and live! 10 They disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, in order that we may share in his holiness.
​

Now if what Christ did was "for all" in the sense that you mean it, then why would God need to chastise people who are already His children because they aren't at the degree of holiness they should be? Doesn't God know He doesn't need to make any of those who are already His children any holier? Why is He punishing them? Doesn't God know Jesus paid all debt?

Of course, this text shows that even those who are already God's children need to be made holier. This is called sanctification. And that's echoed in the last sentence of the Catechism paragraph I just cited you. The concept of an instantaneous perfection is fictitious, as we see in Scripture, and simply in watching good fellow Christians who still stumble and sin now and then. That is not a quality compatible with the perfection of heaven in which no such blemish can enter (Rev. 21:27).

As I said already (which went unaddressed), the Bible speaks of the need for sanctification quite a bit, even after initial justification. That of course takes nothing away from Christ's sacrifice but is an extension of its effects. For by no other power can sanctification occur either.

Another way to look at it is to ask yourself: Do I still sin occasionally? The answer is yes. Then ask, is that quality compatible with heaven? The answer is no. So somewhere between earth and heaven, there will be a transformation.

firstly, there still is not mention within scripture of purgatory. the only thing i know of that speaks of the transition between earth and heaven is found in 2Corinthians 5:8 which says that to be absent from the body, is to be present with the lord.

about sanctification, and to be specific about this scripture you've posted, you are lacking context. The context in which this scripture is speaking, begins with telling the believers whom this was written to (persecuted jewish christians) that they are being watched by non-believers, and to endure and hold to their faith as a whitness. then goes on to model Christ to them, in his suffering, who overcame and to remember this for encouragement. it then moves to remind the believers that they are the children of God, and that God will disipline them out of love (not punishment), that they may grow in their faith, that when the time comes that they may face death (which was very common with the persecution of the early church at this time) that they may hold strong in their faith, and not waiver.

it then describes esau, who discarded his inheritence (which here is an analogy for their salvation) that when the time came for him to claim it, he could not, and was not able to repent for it was too late (after death). it is speaking in the end that at the moment when those believers faced death, to not refuse Jesus, and via metaphor will "shake" the heavens and the earth making that which cannot be shaken all that remains." and that since we are inheriting a kingdom that cannot be shaken, live in grace, in reverence and with Godly fear (not fear likened to being scared, but in the wake of the understanding of his awesome power), and ends by referring to God as an all consuming fire, or pure holiness.

the writer is not saying that sanctification is for their eternal holiness, but that they may grow in faith, producing good works as a result of this faith, that others may come to believe even when faced with death. believers are made perfect, and do not suffer the wrath of God, which is punishment reserved for the non believer. Romans 5:9 says "Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him." How then if we are saved from the wrath of God will we still experience is wrath because the blood of Christ is as you say lacking? furthermore, 1John 1:7 says "But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin." context here says that to say you have not sinned, we call God a liar, and that those who say they have fellowship with Christ but walk in darkness, are liars. verse 9 says "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." there is no mention of anything here other than to confess our sin, and he will cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

i'm seeing a lack of purgatory. and please use scripture within context. its easy to twist things to get a point out, but if it is true, then there will be scripture to evidence it.

 

[MrPolo]

the writer is not saying that sanctification is for their eternal holiness, but that they may grow in faith, producing good works as a result of this faith, that others may come to believe even when faced with death. believers are made perfect, and do not suffer the wrath of God

To your first sentence, I don't think the text reads as you claim. It says: "he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness." Other translations read the same. The rest of what you said is all fine too, God wants us to have faith and work well, but that doesn't take away the purpose of the chastisement--even you want to say it is out of love, which I agree with. So the rest of your post claiming chastisement is about love is moot, since we can agree on that. Sanctification is about God's love, even if it produces suffering in us (which is referred to in many passages of Paul and Peter). So if we agree on that, I can't see why you would consider Purgatory unbliblical in light of the perfection of heaven. Remember what I said about even the faults of earthly Christians. And if you go a few sentences further in Heb. 12:23 you will see the author addressing the "spirits of just men made perfect" along side other heavenly characters.

As to perfection, remember, Paul was pretty specific that he had not attained perfection (Philippians 3 is all about him stating that explicitly and how he must suffer and press on toward the prize he has yet to attain).

 

[perrfekt]

quite simply put, can or will God be in a place that has sin? no

so how then can a believer be indwelled by the Holy Spirit if they are not considered perfect and unclean in the sight of God?

to stem a possible moot point, in the OT, there is never a mention of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit once the way Christ explained it, but states "the Spirit of the Lord was upon them" meaning not indwelled, but means rest upon. oikeō, which is a hebrew word found in the OT, which means inner part directly translated. this scripture though is in reference to a prophecy of the coming messiah.

you still bear the burden of proof here. show a singular verse in be bible, that tells of a purgatory, or a need to be cleansed from sin after death. sanctification is not equivalent to purgatory. to imply that it is impossible to be sanctified without purgatory, is saying that God does not have the ability to do so before death.

 

[Dark_Lite]

catholicism is an extra biblical faith. it has added non cannon books (apocrypha) and relies heavily upon church tradition for beliefs and practices that are not found in, nor supported within the 66 books of the cannonized bible.

can you provide biblical evidence for the doctrine of purgatory?

Apparently you have a shallow understanding of Church history. The deuterocanon (not apocrypha) was accepted by Christianity up until the Reformation when the Protestants decided to remove them. Also, you may the assumption that Sola Scriptura is true. Sola Scriptura in itself is circular. You rely on Tradition for the canon, but then proclaim that the canon is the final rule. Doesn't make sense.

But anyway, I digress.

 

[perrfekt]

Apparently you have a shallow understanding of Church history. The deuterocanon (not apocrypha) was accepted by Christianity up until the Reformation when the Protestants decided to remove them. Also, you may the assumption that Sola Scriptura is true. Sola Scriptura in itself is circular. You rely on Tradition for the canon, but then proclaim that the canon is the final rule. Doesn't make sense.

But anyway, I digress.

the deuterocanon you mention was added to the catholic cannon centuries after the cannon of 66 books we have today was cannonized. the original cannon was comprised of the text that were in current circulation, that were fully in agreement with the rest of the bible. the other books not cannonized were not done so because they did not agree with scripture fully. simply put, it is not a matter of tradition, but scholarship. protestants simply use the original cannon. and yes, solo scriptura. 2Timothy 3:16-17.

 

[Jay217]

the deuterocanon you mention was added to the catholic cannon centuries after the cannon of 66 books we have today was cannonized. the original cannon was comprised of the text that were in current circulation, that were fully in agreement with the rest of the bible. the other books not cannonized were not done so because they did not agree with scripture fully. simply put, it is not a matter of tradition, but scholarship. protestants simply use the original cannon. and yes, solo scriptura. 2Timothy 3:16-17.

The Deutrerocanon was used by Jews for centuries before their modern canon they formed what we call the Hebrew Bible. Both of them Were Considered Legitimate, so ergo the added books are indeed inspired. There are reasons why these books were not in mainstream circulation at the time when the cannon was formed.

If you look at the books that were excluded that were in deuterocanon there are similarities in the books. Many Were Written in Greek, The 'English' of the time. The Jewish Council excluded many of the books due to fact it wasn't in Hebrew.

Then there are Books like Maccabees that were written in Hebrew but was still excluded why? If your religion is barely legal to practice under your pagan roman overloads the last thing you wish to do is promote 1 Maccabees message which is to always rebel against Pagan rulers...

Ever wondered Why Solomon's Song was accepted (with is sexual references) but Solomon's Wisdom was denied

 

[perrfekt]

typical. badmouth scripture to make the pope look better. you should look into the history of the cannon. but still, show purgatory in scripture.

 

[Jay217]

typical. badmouth scripture to make the pope look better. you should look into the history of the cannon. but still, show purgatory in scripture.

How was I bad mouthing scripture? Best of all where in all my post where did i even mention the Pope??? Yes i did look into the history hence my post.

To show scripture, well I'm pretty sure you claimed that all those previous quotes on cleansing fire is not purgatory. and so that'd be kind of redundant...

I really do like the words of Rev 21:27 that Mr Polo Had said -
[BIBLE]Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.[/BIBLE]

Nothing Impure can enter heaven, as Heaven is perfect. So if the ones written in the Lamb's book of life have sinned at anytime and didn't repent for it they are impure and must be cleansed of their sins before entering heaven. To say otherwise is going against Catechism, scripture, and common sense. Something Perfect can't have something imperfect about it.

 

[barryrob]

Just a question about our members on the idea purgatory.



What is purgatory

Do you believe in purgatory

Why or why don't you believe the idea?

What is urgatory in the book Orpheus—A General History of Religions states: "St.　Augustine had held that there was an intermediate state of probation between future felicity and damnation, that of the purification of souls by fire.
This is the Orphic [pagan Greek] and Virgilian [pagan Roman] doctrine of Purgatory: there is not a word about it in the Gospels. .　.　. The doctrine of Purgatory .　.　. was formulated in the sixth century, and proclaimed a dogma of the Church by the Council of Florence (1439)." The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: "The Catholic doctrine on purgatory is based on tradition, not Sacred Scripture." With regard to Limbo, Rome’s Cardinal Ratzinger admits that it is "only a theological hypothesis."​

 

[tHANKFUL and undeserving]

How was I bad mouthing scripture? Best of all where in all my post where did i even mention the Pope??? Yes i did look into the history hence my post.

To show scripture, well I'm pretty sure you claimed that all those previous quotes on cleansing fire is not purgatory. and so that'd be kind of redundant...

I really do like the words of Rev 21:27 that Mr Polo Had said -
[bible]Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.[/bible]

Nothing Impure can enter heaven, as Heaven is perfect. So if the ones written in the Lamb's book of life have sinned at anytime and didn't repent for it they are impure and must be cleansed of their sins before entering heaven. To say otherwise is going against Catechism, scripture, and common sense. Something Perfect can't have something imperfect about it.

When The Lord credited Abrahams faith as righteousness in the old testament, he showed that through faith alone you are justified, declared righteous.
Man as a whole and for all time fell to sin in the beginning, "sin entered the world through one man." We are imperfect and naturally sinful, So christ came and "become for us wisdom from God -that is, our righteousness, holiness, and redemption. 1 COR 1:30

"And you are of Christ, and Christ is of God" 1 COR 3:23

How would the above verse be possible if something perfect could not have something imperfect about it? It is through faith in Christ we are justified and made perfect, not at judgement day when this world and everything in it will pass away, but now and forever, through faith, not because of anything we have done or didnt do.

as for sanctification: Paul speaks of it when he speaks of himself:

"to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles with the priestly duty of proclaiming the Gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, SANCTIFIED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT." ROM 15:16

So it says that when the Gospel of the Lord is preached (Christ crucified) Faith comes (by the Holy Spirit), followed by sanctification by the holy spirit, all coming by faith. Not any kind of purgatory where your "burned" righteous. The Lord has done all work neccessary for us to enter heaven, whats left is faith, which is gracefully given by the Holy Spirit.

Finally, when Christ comes on the last day, (it is true this planet, universe, and present state is reserved for fire) it says nothing about a purging fire that sanctifies us, but destroys this world and everything in it. We will meet The Lord in the air and the sheep will be seperated from the goats, then the sheep will be with the Lord forever and ever, there is no sanctifying final fire on the day of judgement, the day of judgement is For Christ to declare those with faith in him righteous (sheep) and enter life, and those without that saving faith, (goats) to eternal damnation. There is nothing about sanctification in any of this picture the Bible paints for us on the last day. There is no purgatory, Christ accomplished all on Calvary.