Purgatory

[Mountainmike]

Some people do think that.
Like everyone from the first church till the reformation.
Orthodox speak of purgation.
Jews prayed for the dead that “ their sins may be forgiven”

As a mystery all any can do is say it is a place or state where prayer is effective, and I and you are not pure enough for heaven
You don’t like the name.
Neither do I.

It was only ditched when Luther started chucking bits of bible that didn’t suit his new religion, and king Henry didnt like Christian marital fidelity and morality, so he started his religion too.

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


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.


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

 

[Valletta]

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)

 

[Valletta]

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.

You were there?

 

[Valletta]

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)

You have been taken in by misleading and outright false information. First, the Catholic Church rejected all apocryphal texts when the 73 books of the Bible were chosen by the Catholic Church in the late 300s.
As to the Deuterocanonicals, the list including those books was approved by Councils at Hippo and Carthage in the late 300s. Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to the Bishop of Toulouse in 405 A.D. which included the list, the list was re-affirmed at Carthage in 419 A.D., by the Council of Florence 1442 A.D., and by the Council of Trent in 1546 A.D.
As to your numbered list of accusations, I need go no further than your first point: "Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language." This is absolutely false, proved wrong by the Dead Sea Scrolls. Perhaps you could take the time to read about the Dead Sea Scrolls and then I would be glad to go through the others on your list. I am saddened that such easily refuted statements are still posted today on anti-Catholic websites. Let's approach the truth as brothers in Christ.

 

[parousia70]

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???

Indeed it is. Which is why I brought up Futurism.
Futurism requires one abandon what is written in the word of God in favor of the traditions of men, yet for some reason that doesn’t seem to bother you one bit???

If you can’t apply your argument above consistently, and instead want to pick and choose as to which topics it applies and to which topics it can be ignored, based solely on your previously held bias, then it’s an argument with no foundation.

 

[Albion]

You were there?

I know the history...and don't you start telling me that Catholics like yourself never refer to history or talk about what the Early Church Fathers, etc. did in the past.

 

[concretecamper]

I know the history

be careful everyone. He claims to have a doctorate.

.and don't start telling me that Catholics like yourself never refer to history or talk about what the Early Church Fathers said or what the Church did in the past

so there!

 

[Hmm]

be careful everyone. He claims to have a doctorate.

It wouldn't surprise me if he has, and the same would be true for some here on the other side of the debate. I generally find that the more informed someone is, the more civil they are.

 

[concretecamper]

It wouldn't surprise me if he has, and the same would be true for some here on the other side of the debate. I generally find that the more informed someone is, the more civil they are.

well if that is the standard, it indicates much less.

Along with civility, I also think being truthful in discussions is of the utmost importance and displays maturity of intellect.[/QUOTE]

 

[Major1]

Indeed it is. Which is why I brought up Futurism.
Futurism requires one abandon what is written in the word of God in favor of the traditions of men, yet for some reason that doesn’t seem to bother you one bit???

If you can’t apply your argument above consistently, and instead want to pick and choose as to which topics it applies and to which topics it can be ignored, based solely on your previously held bias, then it’s an argument with no foundation.

I am afraid that I can not agree with your opinion. From what I have read from your posts, you do not project to even know what "futurism" actually is. It is actually the exact opposite of what you just posted.

Futurism is simply the eschatology of a "pre-tribulation rapture", in which born again believers are to be removed from the world, prior to a seven-year period of great tribulation that is to beset the rest of humanity which is exaxtly what is found in the Books of Jeremiah and Daniel as well as the Revelation. Futurism is also "pre-millennial", expecting that Christ will return to rule and reign on earth for a period of a thousand years, in a temple that is to be built on the temple mount in Jerusalem.

Instead of "Abandoning" what is written in the Word of God...IT requires the reader to actually accept WHAT IS WRITTEN in the Word of God.

Traditions of men originate in the hearts of sinners and the Word of God originates in the heart of God. If you do not know the difference between the two....then may the Lord bless you!

 

[Major1]

It wouldn't surprise me if he has, and the same would be true for some here on the other side of the debate. I generally find that the more informed someone is, the more civil they are.

I agree with that!

 

[Major1]

You have been taken in by misleading and outright false information. First, the Catholic Church rejected all apocryphal texts when the 73 books of the Bible were chosen by the Catholic Church in the late 300s.
As to the Deuterocanonicals, the list including those books was approved by Councils at Hippo and Carthage in the late 300s. Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to the Bishop of Toulouse in 405 A.D. which included the list, the list was re-affirmed at Carthage in 419 A.D., by the Council of Florence 1442 A.D., and by the Council of Trent in 1546 A.D.
As to your numbered list of accusations, I need go no further than your first point: "Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language." This is absolutely false, proved wrong by the Dead Sea Scrolls. Perhaps you could take the time to read about the Dead Sea Scrolls and then I would be glad to go through the others on your list. I am saddened that such easily refuted statements are still posted today on anti-Catholic websites. Let's approach the truth as brothers in Christ.

No sir I have not. Anyone can go the source I listed as well as about 12 more and verify exactly what I posted.

You can deny all you want to but historical facts are just that and they can not be twisted or used to deceive.

 

[Major1]

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


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.


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

As you have seen my friend......some believe that if they continue to say the say false thing over and over, at some time it actually becomes the truth.

It reminds me of a used car salesman.......
"This is a great, one owner car that has no problems and has never been in an accident".

 

[Valletta]

No sir I have not. Anyone can go the source I listed as well as about 12 more and verify exactly what I posted.

You can deny all you want to but historical facts are just that and they can not be twisted or used to deceive.

So you didn't bother to read about the Dead Sea scrolls? I wanted to let you find your own source, but I'll just tell you, there are Hebrew versions of Tobit and Sirach represented in the Dead Sea Scrolls, your statement 1 is obviously false. I don't doubt you found it in twelve places. VanderCam's "Dead Sea Scrolls Today, written in 1994, won the Biblical Archaeology Society's Publication Award for the Best Popular Book on Biblical Archaeology. He also wrote "The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible" in 2012. Vandercam is part of the international team, you don't have to read his books, there is a mention of Sirach written in Hebrew in the following review:

J.C. VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible

 

[Valletta]

No sir I have not. Anyone can go the source I listed as well as about 12 more and verify exactly what I posted.

You can deny all you want to but historical facts are just that and they can not be twisted or used to deceive.

Does the New World Encyclopedia contradict VanderKam?
"The Wisdom of Ben Sira (or The Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach or merely Sirach), also called Ecclesiasticus (not to be confused with Ecclesiastes) is an apocryphal book written in Hebrew c. 180–175 B.C.E., attributed to Yeshua/Jesus ben Sira (born c. 170)."
Ben Sira - New World Encyclopedia

 

[Major1]

So you didn't bother to read about the Dead Sea scrolls? I wanted to let you find your own source, but I'll just tell you, there are Hebrew versions of Tobit and Sirach represented in the Dead Sea Scrolls, your statement 1 is obviously false. I don't doubt you found it in twelve places. VanderCam's "Dead Sea Scrolls Today, written in 1994, won the Biblical Archaeology Society's Publication Award for the Best Popular Book on Biblical Archaeology. He also wrote "The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible" in 2012. Vandercam is part of the international team, you don't have to read his books, there is a mention of Sirach written in Hebrew in the following review:

J.C. VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible

Since you seem to be obsessed witht teh books of the Apocrypha, allow me to give you just one example of why they are Occultist and must be rejected.

From Enoch 40:9.........
"seen and whose words I have heard and written down?’ And he said to me: ‘This first is Michael, the merciful and long-suffering: and the second, who is set over all the diseases and all the wounds of the children of men, is Raphael: and the third, who is set over all the powers, is Gabriel: and the fourth, who is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life, is named Phanuel."

Who is the angel RAPHAEL? Please consult your Bible and tell me where to find this angel.

Who is the angel PHANUEL? Again, where in the Bible can I find this angel????

Since this angel named Phanuel, is spoken of in this book, let alone an angel who is set over the repentance of those who inherit eternal life, shouldn't we be able to locate him or them in the Word of God???/ Dosen't that strike you are very odd?????

It should because is is what God calls Blasphemy!! That statement in itself contradicts everything the Word of God teaches.

We read in 1st Timothy 2:5 that Jesus Christ is the ONLY Mediator between God and men, not some angel named Phanuel... "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."

Repentance is strictly between a man and Jesus Christ alone. Only Jesus died for our sins, and shed His blood to pay for them (1st Peter 1:18-19); therefore, we must be diligent to guard and defend against LIARS and imposters who would lead people to believe otherwise. 1st John 2:22 clearly indicts all Christ-deniers as LIARS, guilty before God.

 

[Valletta]

Since you seem to be obsessed witht teh books of the Apocrypha, allow me to give you just one example of why they are Occultist and must be rejected.

From Enoch 40:9.........
"seen and whose words I have heard and written down?’ And he said to me: ‘This first is Michael, the merciful and long-suffering: and the second, who is set over all the diseases and all the wounds of the children of men, is Raphael: and the third, who is set over all the powers, is Gabriel: and the fourth, who is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life, is named Phanuel."

Who is the angel RAPHAEL? Please consult your Bible and tell me where to find this angel.

Who is the angel PHANUEL? Again, where in the Bible can I find this angel????

Since this angel named Phanuel, is spoken of in this book, let alone an angel who is set over the repentance of those who inherit eternal life, shouldn't we be able to locate him or them in the Word of God???/ Dosen't that strike you are very odd?????

It should because is is what God calls Blasphemy!! That statement in itself contradicts everything the Word of God teaches.

We read in 1st Timothy 2:5 that Jesus Christ is the ONLY Mediator between God and men, not some angel named Phanuel... "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."

Repentance is strictly between a man and Jesus Christ alone. Only Jesus died for our sins, and shed His blood to pay for them (1st Peter 1:18-19); therefore, we must be diligent to guard and defend against LIARS and imposters who would lead people to believe otherwise. 1st John 2:22 clearly indicts all Christ-deniers as LIARS, guilty before God.

We were working on your listed claims starting at number one. I still would be happy to go down the list one at at time. Consider contacting the locations you found the incorrect information and, in the light of the Ten Commandments God has given us all, ask if they would make a correction. Are we finished with your numbered list of claims? As to your accusation of being "obsessed" with those particular books realize that for most of my life I never knew Protestants had taken the Catholic list while keeping the same order but dropping some books for their version of the Bible. It never occurred to me to treat those books as any different than any other of the OT books.

 

[Albion]

Since you seem to be obsessed witht teh books of the Apocrypha, allow me to give you just one example of why they are Occultist and must be rejected.

From Enoch 40:9.........
"seen and whose words I have heard and written down?’ And he said to me: ‘This first is Michael, the merciful and long-suffering: and the second, who is set over all the diseases and all the wounds of the children of men, is Raphael: and the third, who is set over all the powers, is Gabriel: and the fourth, who is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life, is named Phanuel."

Who is the angel RAPHAEL? Please consult your Bible and tell me where to find this angel.

Who is the angel PHANUEL? Again, where in the Bible can I find this angel????

Since this angel named Phanuel, is spoken of in this book, let alone an angel who is set over the repentance of those who inherit eternal life, shouldn't we be able to locate him or them in the Word of God???/ Dosen't that strike you are very odd?????

It should because is is what God calls Blasphemy!! That statement in itself contradicts everything the Word of God teaches.

We read in 1st Timothy 2:5 that Jesus Christ is the ONLY Mediator between God and men, not some angel named Phanuel... "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."

Repentance is strictly between a man and Jesus Christ alone. Only Jesus died for our sins, and shed His blood to pay for them (1st Peter 1:18-19); therefore, we must be diligent to guard and defend against LIARS and imposters who would lead people to believe otherwise. 1st John 2:22 clearly indicts all Christ-deniers as LIARS, guilty before God.

After all gets said and done, there is a difference of opinion about the books of the Apocrypha. The Jews of ancient times were divided themselves on the question of them being inspired...or not. And the Christian churches accepted them only provisionally, WHICH IS WHY THE RCC COULD REWORK THE APOCRYPHA AND ELIMINATE SOME OF THOSE BOOKS shortly after the Lutheran reformation occurred.

But defenders of Purgatory will, of course, make 2 Maccabees a big issue since there is virtually nothing in the other 66 books that bears upon the subject. And if that could be found somewhere in these books, it would not have taken the Roman Catholic Church until the 15th century to fashion the concept of a Purgatory.

But in the end, there is no way to break that impasse.

Purgatory (defined in whatever way the speaker chooses) can be defended by reference to the Apocrypha, although that's more about prayer for the dead than anything like a Purgatory; and opponents of a Purgatory as traditionally defined will understandably find no evidence for it in the Bible, period.

 

[Major1]

After all gets said and done, there is a difference of opinion about the books of the Apocrypha. The Jews of ancient times were divided themselves on the question of them being inspired...or not. And the Christian churches accepted them only provisionally, WHICH IS WHY THE RCC COULD REWORK THE APOCRYPHA AND ELIMINATE SOME OF THOSE BOOKS shortly after the Lutheran reformation occurred.

But defenders of Purgatory will, of course, make 2 Maccabees a big issue since there is virtually nothing in the other 66 books that bears upon the subject. And if that could be found somewhere in these books, it would not have taken the Roman Catholic Church until the 15th century to fashion the concept of a Purgatory.

But in the end, there is no way to break that impasse.

Purgatory (defined in whatever way the speaker chooses) can be defended by reference to the Apocrypha, although that's more about prayer for the dead than anything like a Purgatory; and opponents of a Purgatory as traditionally defined will understandably find no evidence for it in the Bible, period.

I agree and you are as usual correct.

 

[Major1]

We were working on your listed claims starting at number one. I still would be happy to go down the list one at at time. Consider contacting the locations you found the incorrect information and, in the light of the Ten Commandments God has given us all, ask if they would make a correction. Are we finished with your numbered list of claims? As to your accusation of being "obsessed" with those particular books realize that for most of my life I never knew Protestants had taken the Catholic list while keeping the same order but dropping some books for their version of the Bible. It never occurred to me to treat those books as any different than any other of the OT books.

"WE" are working????

I am so very pleased to know that you have a helper!

As for me, it is just me and me alone.

Now, there are NO "claims" to be worked on.

What I posted for you was directly from the book of Enoch which is right here on my book case.

What I posted about Raphael and Phanuel is straight from the devils pen and it is heresy and if you do not see that, then all I can say is....may the Lord bless you!

I only said "Obsessed" because you have made that your fall back source on Purgatory as has ALL other Catholic believers.

Please do not believe me.....YOU read look those scriptures up and read them for yourself.

IF you choose to accept that there is an angel named Phanuel who is in charge of your eternal soul........go right ahead.

I on the other hand am going to stick with Jesus Christ.

The point is.....if there is that much false heresy in ONE chapter of ONE book of the Apochrapha....how much more is there?????