Purgatory

[concretecamper]

11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13 each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is. 14 If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through

for those who reject this part of scripture as referring to purging after death, what do you propose this scripture is talking about.

 

[bbbbbbb]

If your position is that it doesn't exist, why do you even care whether its a refining fire or a refreshing shower? when you Argue that it's not one but the other, it renders your claim that it doesn't exist, moot.

Do you also get mad when Santa Claus is played by a black man?

Purgatory assuredly is an invented theology and I am always curious as to what the Catholic Church teaches concerning Protestants (separated brethren for whom salvation is possible) and Purgatory. If Protestants can be saved according to Catholic theology, do they also get to go to Purgatory or do they go directly to heaven since they never believed in Purgatory? If they go to Purgatory, do they get a cold shower instead of a nice warm shower?

I like the modern Chinese culture. They are busily embracing all things American and have adopted American Christmas customs, albeit they are all secular without the slightest whiff of Christianity. They have stereotyped images of Santa Claus in their store windows well into late spring. They have not yet picked up the Easter bunny.

 

[Albion]

2 Maccabees, which implies purgatory, was included in every Bible from the time the Catholic Church chose the 73 books of the Bible in the 300s up until "reformation" times.

But that passage doesn't come close to describing or referring to Purgatory, regardless of what name is assigned to the place.

In reality, it is about certain Jews who prayed that their fallen comrades would be loosed from their sins. This doesn't teach us that there is such a place or state of being, just that some people were observed praying this way. Many people today who are not even religious have been known to make such a petition...just in case.

In addition, you know that Purgatory isn't supposed to be a place where everyone pays for his sins and then goes on to heaven. It's supposedly a place (or state) in which venial sins--ones that wouldn't prevent the person from being saved--are "paid" off. The OT Hebrews didn't even have such a concept of sin as that.

 

[bbbbbbb]

But that passage doesn't come close to describing or referring to Purgatory, regardless of what name is assigned to the place.

In reality, it is about certain Jews who prayed that their fallen comrades would be loosed from their sins. This doesn't teach us that there is such a place or state of being, just that some people were observed praying this way. Many people today who are not even religious have been known to make such a petition...just in case.

In addition, you know that Purgatory isn't supposed to be a place where everyone pays for his sins and then goes on to heaven. It's supposedly a place (or state) in which venial sins--ones that wouldn't prevent the person from being saved--are "paid" off. The OT Hebrews didn't even have such a concept of sin as that.

Picky, picky, picky. We all know that however obscure a biblical reference might be, it is better than nothing (or is it?).

 

[parousia70]

Picky, picky, picky. We all know that however obscure a biblical reference might be, it is better than nothing (or is it?).

Well, if Futurists, by the millions, can take the Biblical Phrase: "Must shortly come to pass for the time is near" and claim it means the exact opposite: "Must not take place for thousands of years for the time is far off", then I guess anyone can claim the Bible says whatever they want it to say and still remain a faithful, saved Christian...

Funny how people only seem to object to it happening when the think other people are doing it, but find it perfectly OK, and even necessary, when they do it themselves...

 

[bbbbbbb]

Well, if Futurists, by the millions, can take the Biblical Phrase: "Must shortly come to pass for the time is near" and claim it means the exact opposite: "Must not take place for thousands of years for the time is far off", then I guess anyone can claim the Bible says whatever they want it to say and still remain a faithful, saved Christian...

Funny how people only seem to object to it happening when the think other people are doing it, but find it perfectly OK, and even necessary, when they do it themselves...

Nice attempt at deflection. Unfortunately, nobody on this thread has attempted their views pro or con regarding Futurism. You may wish to start a new thread on the topic. As we all know, there is no biblical understanding or teaching regarding the RCC concept of Purgatory.

 

[parousia70]

Nice attempt at deflection. Unfortunately, nobody on this thread has attempted their views pro or con regarding Futurism. You may wish to start a new thread on the topic.

Well, it speaks to the overall appeal to the authority of scripture as it is written, and the veracity of ones own claims that they abide by such authority in a greater manner than another. As this is seems to be The only peg the anti-purgatory folks have to hang their hat on, testing the bounds and consistency of such logic seems well within the scope of the thread topic to me.

Plus, I already brought Up, and indeed squarely placed the blame on futurism for the unresolvability of this issue within Christendom way back on page 3....

As we all know, there is no biblical understanding or teaching regarding the RCC concept of Purgatory.

As many have demonstrated, there is indeed Biblical teaching that people use to support understanding the RCC Concept of Purgatory...other people use the same Biblical teaching to support something else entirely. This discrepency in understanding and interpretation is nothing new in Christianity and certainly is not a problem limited to the topic of Purgatory.

The question circles back to what I said above... It comes down to Who's understanding of the teaching is correct and How do we determine who's claims of correctness of understanding have greater veracity?

 

[Major1]

Baiting is not supposed to be allowed yet there it is. Obviously he is just repeating the same refuted arguments and added some name calling. It is so ridiculous, here the accusation is that Saint Augustine supposedly disagrees with Catholic teaching yet Catholics are accused of not looking at things independently--the argument is refuted without need of a Catholic to step in.

I for one have no idea what you are talking about. I always thought "baiting" was something I did when I go fishing.

If you were in some way referring tome, I was just agreeing with "bbbbbb" comment.
No more no less.

 

[Major1]

We Don't even Need 2 Maccabees when we have the implication spelled out in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15:

11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13 each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is. 14 If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.

The idea of 1 Corth. 3:11-15 being the foundation for Purgatory is actually non-existent!

IF.....IF that is your position then you have NO position at all.

The Scripture you posted simply means that if you are generally an honest Christian, just like everyone else but have weaknesses, you will suffer loss of a REWARD but will still be saved yourself.

Paul uses gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay and stubble as examples of building materials. Teachers who build their converts or their congregations with gold, silver and precious stones will see their work (their congregations) preserved when judged by God, but those that build with wood, hay or stubble will see their work destroyed in the fire.

On that day of judgment, everyone will be able to see which of the teachers have been preaching pure Christian doctrine, as the teachers will be judged by what “sort” of work they produce (1 Corinthians 3:13). Those that build on wood, hay, and stubble mean teachers who depart from scripture by teaching inadequate or superficial interpretations of His word through less than perfect motivations or understanding. These people minister with inadequate materials, and though God will save the teachers personally, their congregations will not have a strong enough foundation to survive the hardships of the Christian life.
1 Corinthians 3:15 Meaning of Verse with Simple Commentary – ConnectUS (connectusfund.org)

 

[Major1]

Well, it speaks to the overall appeal to the authority of scripture as it is written, and the veracity of ones own claims that they abide by such authority in a greater manner than another. As this is seems to be The only peg the anti-purgatory folks have to hang their hat on, testing the bounds and consistency of such logic seems well within the scope of the thread topic to me.

Plus, I already brought Up, and indeed squarely placed the blame on futurism for the unresolvability of this issue within Christendom way back on page 3....



As many have demonstrated, there is indeed Biblical teaching that people use to support understanding the RCC Concept of Purgatory...other people use the same Biblical teaching to support something else entirely. This discrepency in understanding and interpretation is nothing new in Christianity and certainly is not a problem limited to the topic of Purgatory.

The question circles back to what I said above... It comes down to Who's understanding of the teaching is correct and How do we determine who's claims of correctness of understanding have greater veracity?

YOU said...........
" As this is seems to be The only peg the anti-purgatory folks have to hang their hat on, testing the bounds and consistency of such logic seems well within the scope of the thread topic to me."

I have said along with others that............
"Th reason we oppose Purgatory is that there is absolutely no Scripture in which it is found anywhere in the Word of God. I and others have said repeatedly that Purgatory is a 100% man made theology and has NO logic whatsoever.......to "us".

 

[Major1]

Well, it speaks to the overall appeal to the authority of scripture as it is written, and the veracity of ones own claims that they abide by such authority in a greater manner than another. As this is seems to be The only peg the anti-purgatory folks have to hang their hat on, testing the bounds and consistency of such logic seems well within the scope of the thread topic to me.

Plus, I already brought Up, and indeed squarely placed the blame on futurism for the unresolvability of this issue within Christendom way back on page 3....



As many have demonstrated, there is indeed Biblical teaching that people use to support understanding the RCC Concept of Purgatory...other people use the same Biblical teaching to support something else entirely. This discrepency in understanding and interpretation is nothing new in Christianity and certainly is not a problem limited to the topic of Purgatory.

The question circles back to what I said above... It comes down to Who's understanding of the teaching is correct and How do we determine who's claims of correctness of understanding have greater veracity?

YOU said.............
"It comes down to Who's understanding of the teaching is correct and How do we determine who's claims of correctness of understanding have greater veracity?"

I for one disagree. I think that it comes down to WHO believes and accepts what is written in the Word of God and WHO believes and accepts the traditions of MEN over the Word of God.

Isn't that actually what we are talking about???

 

[concretecamper]

The idea of 1 Corth. 3:11-15 being the foundation for Purgatory is actually non-existent!

IF.....IF that is your position then you have NO position at all.

The Scripture you posted simply means that if you are generally an honest Christian, just like everyone else but have weaknesses, you will suffer loss of a REWARD but will still be saved yourself.

Paul uses gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay and stubble as examples of building materials. Teachers who build their converts or their congregations with gold, silver and precious stones will see their work (their congregations) preserved when judged by God, but those that build with wood, hay or stubble will see their work destroyed in the fire.

On that day of judgment, everyone will be able to see which of the teachers have been preaching pure Christian doctrine, as the teachers will be judged by what “sort” of work they produce (1 Corinthians 3:13). Those that build on wood, hay, and stubble mean teachers who depart from scripture by teaching inadequate or superficial interpretations of His word through less than perfect motivations or understanding. These people minister with inadequate materials, and though God will save the teachers personally, their congregations will not have a strong enough foundation to survive the hardships of the Christian life.
1 Corinthians 3:15 Meaning of Verse with Simple Commentary – ConnectUS (connectusfund.org)

thank you for the non Authoritative explanation. It doesn't make any sense to me but then again I didnt think it would.

"Th reason we oppose Purgatory is that there is absolutely no Scripture in which it is found anywhere in the Word of God

you oppose the Church's interpretation of Paul.

 

[Major1]

2 Maccabees, which implies purgatory, was included in every Bible from the time the Catholic Church chose the 73 books of the Bible in the 300s up until "reformation" times.

Really. Isn't it true that at the Council of Trent (1546) the Roman Catholic institution pronounced the apocryphal books sacred?????

Isn't it also true that they asserted that the apocryphal books together with unwritten TRADITIONS are of God and are to be received and venerated as the Word of God????

So now you have the Bible, the Apocrypha and Catholic Tradition as co-equal sources of truth for the Catholic. So then since that IS the truth, then In reality, it seems obvious that the Bible is the last source of truth for Catholic believers.

Roman Catholic doctrine comes primarily from tradition stuck together with a few Bible names. In my reading of Catholic materials, I find notes like this:.......
"You have to keep the Bible in perspective."

From written productions, not my opinion, it is clear that Catholics have been deceived into not believing that the Bible is God's complete revelation for man.

The books of the Apocrypha should not be accepted for many reason and a few are that-

1. Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language (the Old Testament was written in Hebrew). All Apocryphal books are in Greek, except one which is extant only in Latin.
2. None of the apocryphal writers laid claim to inspiration.
3. The apocryphal books were never acknowledged as sacred scriptures by the Jews, custodians of the Hebrew scriptures (the apocrypha was written prior to the New Testament). In fact, the Jewish people rejected and destroyed the apocrypha after the overthow of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
4. The apocryphal books were not permitted among the sacred books during the first four centuries of the real Christian church.
5. The Apocrypha contains fabulous statements which not only contradict the "canonical" scriptures but themselves. For example, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in three different places.
6. The Apocrypha includes doctrines in variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.

Jesus never quoted from the Apocrypha.
The Apostles never quoted from the Apocrypha.
Why the Apocrypha Isn't in the Bible. (jesus-is-lord.com)

1. Why the Apocrypha Isn't in the Bible. (jesus-is-lord.com)

 

[Major1]

Sure...It's one thing to debate what goes on in Hades/Sheol/Purgatorio, it's completely another to claim that place no longer exists as the pre Resurrection- pre Judgment holding place for souls.

It is one thing to debate anything but it is deceptive to claim that a debate is about a place THAT NO LONGER ESISTS AS THE PRE RESURRECTION HOLDING PLACE.

I do not know about anyone else, but I am saying that Purgatory "Never" existed in the 1st place so there is no debate of ...."NO longer exists".

Luke 16 God tells us that the place of "Torments" in Sheol was where the spirits of the lost were. There is NO Bible record that any of those lost souls have left "Torments".

Revelation 20 tells us that AFTER the 1000 year Rule of Christ, then the 2nd Resurrection will remove all the lost spirits to be judged and ALL of them will then be thrown into the Lake of Fire because they are LOST and death ended any chance of accepting Christ.

There is NO place in the Scriptures where a lost man is given a 2nd chance to be saved after death.

Now you can believe any and all Catholic teachings you want to. You can post on every wed forum site known to man. You can preach till the cows come home that there is a Purgatory.

However, YOU can not prove it by ANY Bible Scripture because there are none.

 

[Mountainmike]

Jewish prayers for the dead have always been. That means ( some of) the dead are in a place where prayer is effective.

It is why ALL the early church believed in purgation until the reformation.
The difference between catholics and orthodox is how they describe a mystery.

That the soul is not yet purified for heaven

Easterners describe purgation as a process , rather than a notional place, but the difference if any being they Regard it more as hospital than prison, but they too pray for the dead.

Catholicism didn’t introduce the apocrypha, which were always there, reformatonists removed them.

The Septuagint From which Jesus PROVABLY quoted historically can be shown to contain Maccabees.
It is there! If you remove it you oppose what Jesus considered to be scripture!

moreover the “ festival of dedication” referred in John, is Hanukkah. A part of Judaism, Jesus was there! So you cannot write off Maccabees. It is the description of what Jesus celebrates in John - and never spoke out against! He came to fulfill not abolish the law.

The unbiblical, illogical- provably false & antihistorical sola scriptura is your problem.

Prayers for dead were true from the first Christians Until the reformation , when many Protestants then made up their own religions based on their own reading of scripture, those disputes causing Protestant churches to splinter into thousands of bits.
They all consider “ they know better” whilst believing in a myriad of Different things

That wont cut it for me. Its apocrypha and secondly my understanding cant find purgatory from that chapter.

 

[Albion]

Jewish prayers for the dead have always been. That means ( some of) the dead are in a place where prayer is effective.

It is why ALL the early church believed in purgation until the reformation.

None, however, believed in "Purgatory."

We/you can continue to redefine Purgatory or pick out one characteristic here or there and call it proof, until they make it seem like it's something other than it supposedly is. However, the fact remains that Purgatory was not believed in by the early church or by the ancient Hebrews.

 

[Mountainmike]

The Catholic Church has little to say about it other than prayer is effective after death for some, and souls must be purified for heaven. They give the place or state a name, purgatory, but it is a mystery, the eastern call it purgation.

And in that definition ALL believed it.

Judaism prayed for the dead , it was never abolished.
Jesus never spoke out against it.

Maccabees was in the bible Jesus quoted from!

You changed it from the Judaist beliefs , we did not.

None, however, believed in "Purgatory."

We--or Catholics here--can continue to redefine Purgatory until they make it seem like something other than it is, but the fact remains that Purgatory was not believed in by the early church.

 

[Albion]

The Catholic Church has little to say about it other than prayer is effective after death, and souls must be purified for heaven

That's the new, but unofficial, position that has gradually been adopted by many clergy, etc. It's not what Purgatory, if taught as it had been proclaimed in the Middle Ages and taught up until our own lifetimes, is all about. So if "Purgatory" is the issue rather than what happens to the soul after death, then we must say that Purgatory is not real.

Judaism prayed for the dead , it was never abolished.

Maccabees was in the bible Jesus quoted from!

Prayer for the dead is not Purgatory. We can start another thread if we want to discuss the merits of praying for the dead.

 

[Mountainmike]

That's the new, but unofficial, position that has gradually been adopted by many clergy, etc. It's not what Purgatory, if taught as it had been proclaimed in the Middle Ages and taught up until our own lifetimes, is all about. So if "Purgatory" is the issue rather than what happens to the soul after death, then we must say that Purgatory is not real.



Prayer for the dead is not Purgatory. We can start another thread if we want to discuss the merits of praying for the dead.

people in heaven won’t benefit from prayer, those dying do.
So there is a state in between.
Judaism , Catholicism , orthodox all believed it.

We could open a thread on reformationist abuse of early church doctrine if you like, but reformationist splinter doctrines change so fast it would be hard to keep up!

So why don’t you even accept the bible Jesus considered scripture?
Septuagint with Maccabees. But Luther did like messing with bits of scripture that didn’t support his man made doctrines.

 

[Albion]

people in heaven won’t benefit from prayer, those dying do.
So there is a state in between.

No, all you've shown is that some people THINK there is such a state.

Judaism , Catholicism , orthodox all believed it.

You're only fooling yourself with that. Most Jews do not believe anything of the sort and the Orhtodox belief is definitely not Purgatory. Put another way, out of the thousands of Christian church bodies that exist, only yours believes or believed in Purgatory.

We could open a thread on reformationist abuse of early church doctrine if you like, but reformationist splinter doctrines change so fast it would be hard to keep up!

Just like Roman Catholic teachings? Limbo, Purgatory, women readers and "Eucharistic Ministers," divorce and remarriage, etc. etc.