Purgatory!

[catholichomeschooler]

And would you like to explain to us why you believe preservation of the saints is a problem for you?

You didn't address these:

Matt 24:13
But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

Luke 21:19
Stand firm, and you will win life.

Romans 2:7
7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

Gal 6
7Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. 9Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up.

And here are more:

John 15:6 "If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch, and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned".

2 Chronicles 15:2 "If you search for him, he will let himself be found by you; but if you leave him, he will leave you".

2 Timothy 2:12 "If we endure, we shall also reign with Him; If we deny Him, He also will deny us".

2 Peter 2:20-21 "They were made free from the evil in the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. But if they return to evil things and those things control them, then it is worse for them than it was before. Yes, it would be better for them to have never known the right way than to know it and to turn away from the holy teaching that was given to them."

 

[Albion]

Matt 24:13
But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

OK. We agree that the Elect will endure to the end...and therefore be saved. What's the problem?

Romans 2:7
7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

Same thing . Those who persist are the Elect, and of course, the Elect are those chosen for eternal life.

There's nothing in these verses that conflicts with the position I've taken.

 

[catholichomeschooler]

OK. We agree that the Elect will endure to the end...and therefore be saved. What's the problem?


Same thing . Those who persist are the Elect, and of course, the Elect are those chosen for eternal life.

There's nothing in these verses that conflicts with the position I've taken.

You are distorting scripture. The persistence and endurance comes BEFORE election.


A man reaps what he sows. Right?

 

[South Bound]

You didn't address these:

I didn't "address" them because you didn't explain what I'm supposed to be addressing. What issue am I supposed to address? I get that they're Bible verses that support the preservation of the saints and I agree with them, but you still haven't explained why you believe preservation of the saints to be problematic.

Ball's in your court, Catholic.

 

[catholichomeschooler]

I didn't "address" them because you didn't explain what I'm supposed to be addressing. What issue am I supposed to address? I get that they're Bible verses that support the preservation of the saints and I agree with them, but you still haven't explained why you believe preservation of the saints to be problematic.

Ball's in your court, Catholic.

You didn't address them because they expressly refute the preservation of the saints.

Does a man reap what he sows?

Is he who endures saved, or does the one who is saved endure?

 

[South Bound]

You didn't address them because they expressly refute the preservation of the saints.

I see. So, you believe they refute preservation of the saints? Do you believe Christ keeps that which the Father has given Him?

Does a man reap what he sows?

Yep.

Is he who endures saved, or does the one who is saved endure?

Both.

 

[catholichomeschooler]

I see. So, you believe they refute preservation of the saints? Do you believe Christ keeps that which the Father has given Him?



Yep.



Both.

What comes first, reaping or sowing?

 

[South Bound]

What comes first, reaping or sowing?

Wouldn't the syntax indicate that reaping follows sowing?

Before you go on, could you please explain the point of these questions and why you won't answer my questions?

 

[Rhamiel]

If I do, will you admit that the two Catholic sources I provided you that state that the purpose of Purgatory is for the sinner to expiate his own sins are correct?

I found the sources that you are quoting

I believe you are taking them out of context, the proper context has allready been explained to you.

The Second Vatican Council, p. 63, says, "The truth has been divinely revealed that sins are followed by punishments. Gods holiness and justice inflict them. Sins must be expiated. This may be done on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and trials of this life and, above all, through death. Otherwise the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments."

CCC 1475 says "In the communion of saints, "a perennial link of charity exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth. Between them there is, too, an abundant exchange of all good things." In this wonderful exchange, the holiness of one profits others, well beyond the harm that the sin of one could cause others. Thus recourse to the communion of saints lets the contrite sinner be more promptly and efficaciously purified of the punishments for sin."

 

[South Bound]

I found the sources that you are quoting

I believe you are taking them out of context

I didn't take them out of context. In the case of CCC1475, I quoted the entire thing.

the proper context has allready been explained to you.

So, "expiate their sin" doesn't mean "expiate their sin"?

 

[catholichomeschooler]

Wouldn't the syntax indicate that reaping follows sowing?

Before you go on, could you please explain the point of these questions and why you won't answer my questions?

No one can snatch from Jesus, but we can walk away from him.


Eze. 33
23"Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live? 24"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.

 

[South Bound]

No one can snatch from Jesus, but we can walk away from him.

Really? How does a born again believer, regenerated, the old nature crucified and given a new nature, indwelt by the Holy Spirit walk away from Jesus?

Could you please tell us why 1 John 2:19 doesn't mean that "walking away from Christ" is evidence that one was not saved in the first place?

Eze. 33
23"Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live? 24"But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die.

You realize you're trying to apply an Old Covenant principle to New Covenant salvation, right? Do you know that in the Old Testament, men were not saved as we are today, that their sins were merely covered, while we are regenerated and indwelt by the Holy Spirit?

 

[SMA12]

I didn't take them out of context. In the case of CCC1475, I quoted the entire thing.



So, "expiate their sin" doesn't mean "expiate their sin"?

Catholic theology clearly states that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient to save us from the eternal consequences of our sin. This is why once a soul reaches purgatory, that soul has already reached salvation and will reach Heaven.

In purgatory, the soul is being purified from the temporal consequences of sin. There is a big difference between temporal and eternal. We know that nothing imperfect will enter Heaven, correct? Yet, even though Christ already died for us and person accepts that sacrifice, we still sin. IOW we have been saved from the eternal consequences, yet still need to be purified of the temporal consequences before entering Heaven. This process of purification, whatever it is, is what we Catholics call Purgatory.

This is the context you must interpret the CCC with to understand that "expiate their sin" refers to the temporal effects of sin, not the eternal, which has already been sufficiently paid by Christ. If you claim to be saved, yet still sin you have to account for the fact that nothing imperfect will enter Heaven.

 

[Albion]

I found the sources that you are quoting

I believe you are taking them out of context, the proper context has allready been explained to you.

FWIW, I came upon this part of the conversation "cold" and it immediately looked to me that the following statements:

The Second Vatican Council, p. 63, says, "The truth has been divinely revealed that sins are followed by punishments. Gods holiness and justice inflict them. Sins must be expiated. This may be done on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and trials of this life and, above all, through death. Otherwise the expiation must be made in the next life through fire and torments or purifying punishments."

CCC 1475 says "In the communion of saints, "a perennial link of charity exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth. Between them there is, too, an abundant exchange of all good things." In this wonderful exchange, the holiness of one profits others, well beyond the harm that the sin of one could cause others. Thus recourse to the communion of saints lets the contrite sinner be more promptly and efficaciously purified of the punishments for sin."

offer no opening for thinking the meaning is other than that punishment, torment, and fire, describe the Catholic Purgatory.

The word "purified" appears, of course, but it is clearly described as a purification that is accomplished through punishments. The idea of the "celestial mudroom" or some kind of brief orientation session has no support in these statements.

 

[Rhamiel]

Albion

and I don't see any opening there for thinking the meaning is other than that punishment, torment, and fire, describes the Catholic Purgatory.

ok, I am fine with that idea of Purgaotry

the debate is over, who is the active party in Purgaotry? the sinner cleansing his own sins, or Divine Justice and Divine Mercy (Grace) working upon the sinner

Catholic Theology teaches that it is God who is the active force in purgatory, not the individual

 

[South Bound]

Catholic theology clearly states that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient to save us from the eternal consequences of our sin. This is why once a soul reaches purgatory, that soul has already reached salvation and will reach Heaven.

Then what's the point of expiating one's sin in Purgatory?

In purgatory, the soul is being purified from the temporal consequences of sin.

But if Christ has already perfected those whom He sanctifies, what's left to purify? Doesn't Christ's blood cleanse us from all sin?

There is a big difference between temporal and eternal.

Where does the Bible make the distinction between "temporal sins" and "eternal sins"?

We know that nothing imperfect will enter Heaven, correct? Yet, even though Christ already died for us and person accepts that sacrifice, we still sin.

IOW we have been saved from the eternal consequences, yet still need to be purified of the temporal consequences before entering Heaven.

What verse is that?

This process of purification, whatever it is, is what we Catholics call Purgatory.

My people call it maize.

This is the context you must interpret the CCC with to understand that "expiate their sin" refers to the temporal effects of sin, not the eternal, which has already been sufficiently paid by Christ.

If it's been sufficiently paid, then what's left to pay for?

If you claim to be saved, yet still sin you have to account for the fact that nothing imperfect will enter Heaven.

Am I the only one who's noticed that I've provided verses that show that Christ's blood cleanses from all sin, not just the "temporal" one, that Christ perfected us, that Christ's righteousness is imputed to us, while you've provided exactly zero verses?

 

[catholichomeschooler]

Really? How does a born again believer, regenerated, the old nature crucified and given a new nature, indwelt by the Holy Spirit walk away from Jesus?

Could you please tell us why 1 John 2:19 doesn't mean that "walking away from Christ" is evidence that one was not saved in the first place?



You realize you're trying to apply an Old Covenant principle to New Covenant salvation, right? Do you know that in the Old Testament, men were not saved as we are today, that their sins were merely covered, while we are regenerated and indwelt by the Holy Spirit?

Salvation is a process, not an event.


We are not saved until we die in God's good grace.


FYI:

2 Peter 2:20-21 "They were made free from the evil in the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. But if they return to evil things and those things control them, then it is worse for them than it was before. Yes, it would be better for them to have never known the right way than to know it and to turn away from the holy teaching that was given to them."

1 Timothy 1:19 "Keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and their faith has been shipwrecked".

 

[Albion]

Salvation is a process, not an event.

Then please know that when we say someone is 'saved' it means he is assured of making it to Heaven. I hope that clarifies this matter sufficiently.

 

[catholichomeschooler]

Then please know that when we say someone is 'saved' it means he is assured of making it to Heaven. I hope that clarifies this matter sufficiently.

We say that we are being saved.

Presumption is the sin of assuming that nothing we do will disqualify us from the narrow gate.

 

[SMA12]

Then what's the point of expiating one's sin in Purgatory?

Nothing imperfect enters Heaven, as I said.

But if Christ has already perfected those whom He sanctifies, what's left to purify? Doesn't Christ's blood cleanse us from all sin?

So you have not sinned since accepting Christ? You are already perfect? Then I guess Purgatory is not necessary for you.

Where does the Bible make the distinction between "temporal sins" and "eternal sins"?

1. Where in the Bible does it say everything must be explicitly mentioned in the Bible? The word Trinity is not explicitly mentioned, but can be implicitly understood. Same with Purgatory.

2. 1 John 5:14-17 talks about the difference, but you have already misunderstood what I said. Temporal vs. Eternal effects of sin. You need only logic to understand this. You have accepted Christ's sacrifice to save you from sin, yet you I am sure you admit you still sin. So there are still temporal effects of sin that affect you, even though Christ has already saved you from sin eternally.

What verse is that?

Rev 21:27 Nothing unclean shall enter Heaven.
Heb 12:23 Souls in Heaven are perfect.

So unless your soul is already perfect, there needs to be a perfection that takes place sometime between this life and your entrance into Heaven.

My people call it maize.

Please explain.

If it's been sufficiently paid, then what's left to pay for?

Temporal effects, I have been through this.

Am I the only one who's noticed that I've provided verses that show that Christ's blood cleanses from all sin, not just the "temporal" one, that Christ perfected us, that Christ's righteousness is imputed to us, while you've provided exactly zero verses?

If so, then why do you still sin after having accepted Christ. Your soul is not yet perfect, yet those in Heaven are. How do you account for the discrepancy?