Second-chance Purgatory?

[thecolorsblend]

Do you ever do anything with your time instead of blurting into a conversation between two others just to tell them what they said is their opinion and Correct them? I see you doing all over here.

The messages were posted publicly.

I'd be more alarmed if he barged in one PM's. I'd also be kind of impressed too, tbh.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Do you ever do anything with your time instead of blurting into a conversation between two others just to tell them what they said is their opinion and Correct them? I see you doing all over here.

Please just stop trying to create debates and hear your energy into helping bear the burdens of Brothers and sisters in need. It's fine to discuss some of these things and the only reason I got involved with this with Chevy is because I've never had anyone ever actually demonstrate or show the teachings of Purgatory. I've only had one mention Maccabees (which is never quoted anywhere else in the Bible or New Testament), and others that the concept is there but never once gives a demonstration of how they have concluded that.

Now I kindly ask you not to butt into any of my conversations with an attempt to tell me how wrong I am. I don't give into these types of things because it only causes resentment and negativity that is not needed. I'm here to fellowship with others and speak of the Love of Jesus and what He opened me to, a new life of peace, freedom, Grace, Mercy, passion, Love for my Creator and my neighbors and even my enemies. Because of Jesus blood that was shed for me, I can walk with My Father and know Him and be led by Him to glorify Him in my Life and that everything will reflect Him, everything He is. I'm here to begin sharing my Genesis road with other Christians looking for support along the way. I'm here to give them wisdom of what it takes and What Father does in and with the Trials. I'm here to uplift my Brothers and Sisters so that can be built up and not been shattered with tons of Religious bondage and explanations be thrown at them, forcing them to jump through all the theological hoops in order to be right with God. I'm looking for the sick and weary, so that I can encourage them to fasten themselves more upon the Bread of Lord Jesus Christ so that they may eat of His Flesh and be strengthened and grow in Love, Peace, joy and Grace. I'm not interested in the intellectual Bible Scholar that can tell you every joy and tittle of their brand of Christianity and How it is the perfect, I'm interested in the broken and contrite. That's who Jesus healed, and that's why I want to bring the broken to him with prayers and supplications and with the very Love, deed, and compassion that Jesus gave them. Brothers and sisters need to be uplifted and encouraged, not beat over the head with know it all religion.

Thank you for your time and If you have any questions or would like for me to pray for something in your life, I will be here.
I love you.
~Cyrus Dabar

Is this forum not a place for Christian debate? If not, maybe you're in the wrong place. If it is, maybe it's not your place to decide when and where I can contribute.
You say, in your discourse that y ou're looking for the sick and weary, etc. AND SO AM I. My purpose here is to diffuse the lies told about the Catholic Church, and I won't stop doing that. I am not combative, and if you disagree, that's your privilege, but it's simply put out there for others, maybe, to consider. If you do, great. If not, that's great, too. I'm not a know-it-all. I learn, as well. But again, I won't allow someone to spout lies about my faith. Sorry for you.

 

[Calvin_1985]

Is this forum not a place for Christian debate? If not, maybe you're in the wrong place. If it is, maybe it's not your place to decide when and where I can contribute.
You say, in your discourse that y ou're looking for the sick and weary, etc. AND SO AM I. My purpose here is to diffuse the lies told about the Catholic Church, and I won't stop doing that. I am not combative, and if you disagree, that's your privilege, but it's simply put out there for others, maybe, to consider. If you do, great. If not, that's great, too. I'm not a know-it-all. I learn, as well. But again, I won't allow someone to spout lies about my faith. Sorry for you.

I only asked for an explanation by a demonstration out of the Bible, why is that such a difficult thing to do?

 

[Calvin_1985]

The messages were posted publicly.

I'd be more alarmed if he barged in one PM's. I'd also be kind of impressed too, tbh.

You guys don't get it. It isn't about him coming into other conversations by others, it's how and what it is being done.

 

[thecolorsblend]

You guys don't get it. It isn't about him coming into other conversations by others, it's how and what it is being done.

CF has an ignore feature. I have two members on my list. If he bothers you that much, you could add him to your ignore filter.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I only asked for an explanation by a demonstration out of the Bible, why is that such a difficult thing to do?

I've done just that. 1 Maccabees, 1 Corinthians 3:10-15. And as my brother said:

Give account of our entire lives, for every word and thought, for what purpose exactly? If a state such as purgatory does not exist then one would only seemingly need to account for two things on judgment day: 1) has the person committed any sin, no matter how small and 2) has the person "accepted Jesus into his heart as Lord and Savior" as some like to say. The answer to 1) is obviously yes. The answer to (2) decides your fate.

So for what purpose would a person need to account for every action, word, and thought he has done during his entire life? Seemingly, this would be done only to determine the amount of reward that a person will receive when he gets to heaven, while denying the possibility of any discipline for any evil things that he has done (since purgatory does not exist, after all).

 

[chevyontheriver]

That comes down to a question of who has authority to determine the Word. But that is a topic for at least a different thread, if not a different folder.

Yes, it does have to do with who has the authority to determine the canon of Scripture. And yes, this thread is about a misunderstanding about purgatory and not about the canon of Scripture.

 

[chevyontheriver]

It occurred after the close of the OT canon.

What year are you believing the OT canon was closed?

 

[Root of Jesse]

You guys don't get it. It isn't about him coming into other conversations by others, it's how and what it is being done.

What is being done that you're objecting to? You asked a question, which must be answered by someone who believes the issue at hand, so I answered it.
Here's another way to look at it:
Every one of us Christians is working out our salvation, and will need to do so until the moment we die. But we all have sinned, and while Jesus saved us, forgave us, and refuses to convict us, we must make restitution for the wrongs we have committed, if any. A merciful God would not create mankind to fail, so He gives us a place for purification, sort of a sweat lodge go get rid of any impurities. Another way to look at it is the way gold, for all its beauty, must be purified to be made valuable.
Purgatory is not a second chance-when you die, you're either going to hell or heaven. If you're in friendship with God (as defined by Him, not us), you will attain heaven, but you may have to be purified before you get there.

 

[Tutorman]

Only after you show me that I may only believe those things that are specified in Scripture.

They will never show you but beat around the bush rather than admit the truth

 

[Dave-W]

What year are you believing the OT canon was closed?

Somewhere in the range of 450 to 400 bc

 

[Calvin_1985]

What is being done that you're objecting to? You asked a question, which must be answered by someone who believes the issue at hand, so I answered it.
Here's another way to look at it:
Every one of us Christians is working out our salvation, and will need to do so until the moment we die. But we all have sinned, and while Jesus saved us, forgave us, and refuses to convict us, we must make restitution for the wrongs we have committed, if any. A merciful God would not create mankind to fail, so He gives us a place for purification, sort of a sweat lodge go get rid of any impurities. Another way to look at it is the way gold, for all its beauty, must be purified to be made valuable.
Purgatory is not a second chance-when you die, you're either going to hell or heaven. If you're in friendship with God (as defined by Him, not us), you will attain heaven, but you may have to be purified before you get there.

That's a description of the belief, I'm asking for a demonstration from it from scripture, not an explanation as to why it must be true.

 

[Calvin_1985]

I've done just that. 1 Maccabees, 1 Corinthians 3:10-15. And as my brother said:

Neither of those have anything to do with a purgatory. I've read them. There is nothing in them that even remotely resembles what is implied by the Roman Catholic Doctrine.

 

[chevyontheriver]

The apocrypha is definitely Historical and gives us some insights into Israel during the time of no prophets,

Yup.

but it is (no)t scripture.

According to the largest branches of Christianity those books ARE Scripture. And for most of Christian history, well over a eleven hundred years, they have been uncontestedly part of the canon. And there are good reasons to consider those books canon. Your opinion is noted, but it is not the majority opinion.

It doesn't flow by the same method that the Canon of 66 books do.

What on earth does that mean? Can you quantify this 'flow' assertion?

I look at the apocrypha just as I would say a Hymn. It may be about The Lord and honoring Him and about the many aspects of Him, but it isn't scripture. It could be considered an extension of what Father has done in the person to testify, but that doesn't mean it is scripture.

Sounds like opinion, kind of the same way as those who might say that none of Scripture rings true. What I'm saying is that your opinion seems incredibly subjective.

The Bible isn't the only way Yahweh speaks, but it is the confirmation of What He does speak.

I'll buy that I guess.

I would say to the fact that purgatory is drawn from an insulation from a passage of Maccabees, that I wouldn't base anything on it for the same reason that the Mormons believe Joseph Smith is prophesied in the The OT.

The prayers for the dead found in Maccabees are a historical record of the wider Hebrew practice of prayers for the dead, which is still Jewish practice today. And have been Christian practice all along. So how does that work? We know it is appointed to be judged as saved or damned based on our situation at the moment of death. We know that our prayers are not going to save a person after they die if they died damned. And yet Christians from every century have prayed for the dead. That is what implies purgatory, and that we can assist those who are being purified there. It's historically well attested including in Scripture as the Maccabees shows, and continual in practice for Jews and Christians.

Here is what Augustine says about it:
There is no doubt that the dead are helped by the prayers of holy Church, by the saving sacrifice, and by alms dispensed for their souls; these things are done that they may be more mercifully dealt with by the Lord than their sins deserve. The whole Church observes the custom handed down by our fathers: that those who died within the fellowship of Christ’s body and blood should be prayed for when they are commemorated in their own place at the holy sacrifice, and that we should be reminded that this sacrifice is offered for them as well. (Sermon 172:2 [date unknown; 393~430])

Typically you guys say that purgatory was invented in the middle ages. It is older than that, as I hope I have convinced you. But this thread was not to convince anyone of purgatory. Just to explore whether there is any second chance in purgatory. I think that has clearly been answered as 'no'.

I wasn't asking for the specefic word Purgatory, but a demonstration from scripture that gives a clear picture. The "Trinity" is found all throughout scripture, but the word never exists in any Scripture. It can be demonstrated from the very beginning of Genesis and seen all throughout as well as Testified of within Creation itself. I won't elaborate on these things as of now, but if you would like me to, I will.

No need. I accept that the Trinity is real. And yet the concept of the Trinity took a long time to develop. It isn't as simple as someone picking up the NT and reading of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. You read the NT through the lens of the councils of Nicea and Constantinople. You really do, whether aware of it or not. The Jehovah's Witnesses read the same verses through a different lens. You might claim to read it with no lens, but you do read it through the lens of Nicea and Constantinople. And it is proper that you use that lens because it was historically developed by believers who knew the Tradition of the apostles. They got it right. The Arian and JW position actually makes some sense to a Scripture Alone perspective, but that is not how to properly look at it. The proper way is how the plain people of Alexandria did. Their grandparents learned it from their grandparents that Jesus was really God, and not some fancy creation just short of God.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Somewhere in the range of 450 to 400 bc

You are reading some different history than I have read! My reading is that it was not closed by the Jewish authorities until late first century AD to mid second century AD. And that in reaction against Christianity. I would give you that the Torah, just the Torah, was accepted as canonical by about 400 BC.

 

[Calvin_1985]

Yup.

According to the largest branches of Christianity those books ARE Scripture. And for most of Christian history, well over a eleven hundred years, they have been uncontestedly part of the canon. And there are good reasons to consider those books canon. Your opinion is noted, but it is not the majority opinion.

What on earth does that mean? Can you quantify this 'flow' assertion?

Sounds like opinion, kind of the same way as those who might say that none of Scripture rings true. What I'm saying is that your opinion seems incredibly subjective.

I'll buy that I guess.

The prayers for the dead found in Maccabees are a historical record of the wider Hebrew practice of prayers for the dead, which is still Jewish practice today. And have been Christian practice all along. So how does that work? We know it is appointed to be judged as saved or damned based on our situation at the moment of death. We know that our prayers are not going to save a person after they die if they died damned. And yet Christians from every century have prayed for the dead. That is what implies purgatory, and that we can assist those who are being purified there. It's historically well attested including in Scripture as the Maccabees shows, and continual in practice for Jews and Christians.

Here is what Augustine says about it:
There is no doubt that the dead are helped by the prayers of holy Church, by the saving sacrifice, and by alms dispensed for their souls; these things are done that they may be more mercifully dealt with by the Lord than their sins deserve. The whole Church observes the custom handed down by our fathers: that those who died within the fellowship of Christ’s body and blood should be prayed for when they are commemorated in their own place at the holy sacrifice, and that we should be reminded that this sacrifice is offered for them as well. (Sermon 172:2 [date unknown; 393~430])

Typically you guys say that purgatory was invented in the middle ages. It is older than that, as I hope I have convinced you. But this thread was not to convince anyone of purgatory. Just to explore whether there is any second chance in purgatory. I think that has clearly been answered as 'no'.

No need. I accept that the Trinity is real. And yet the concept of the Trinity took a long time to develop. It isn't as simple as someone picking up the NT and reading of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. You read the NT through the lens of the councils of Nicea and Constantinople. You really do, whether aware of it or not. The Jehovah's Witnesses read the same verses through a different lens. You might claim to read it with no lens, but you do read it through the lens of Nicea and Constantinople. And it is proper that you use that lens because it was historically developed by believers who knew the Tradition of the apostles. They got it right. The Arian and JW position actually makes some sense to a Scripture Alone perspective, but that is not how to properly look at it. The proper way is how the plain people of Alexandria did. Their grandparents learned it from their grandparents that Jesus was really God, and not some fancy creation just short of God.

Prayers for the dead practice by ahead doesn't it make it something Biblically addressed as practice given by God to Moses and Israel. Israel, several times throughout their History practiced rituals and believed things that were not of Gods word.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Prayers for the dead practice by ahead doesn't it make it something Biblically addressed as practice given by God to Moses and Israel. Israel, several times throughout their History practiced rituals and believed things that were not of Gods word.

But it IS Biblically addressed. Your opinion is that it isn't Biblical because your Protestant forefathers ripped out those books because they didn't like what they said. That is assuming your conclusion, that it isn't Biblical because you took it out of the Bible because you didn't want it in the Bible.

In this case the practice is shown in Scripture to be a good thing. Those who prayed for these dead soldier acted "in an excellent and noble way" and what they did was "holy and good". That's Second Maccabees 12. It is not a condemned practice nor a neutral practice. It is a good practice.

It's settled Scripture that has been settled for as long as the Septuagent was in existence. Actually, there now appears to have been a Hebrew language original to the books of Maccabees. Not surprising given that the Maccabean revolt was a revolt against the Greeks, a movement back to Hebrew orthopraxy in a way similar to what Ezra and Nehemiah did generations before. You can rightly say that there were many times Israel and Judea slid into bad practices. It's true, even to the extent of worshiping Moloch. But the Maccabean revolt was not one of those times. It was the opposite of one of those times. It was a return to right practice, a time of purification. A time to kick out those pork loving Greeks who were defilers of the temple.

There is another instance of prayers for the dead I forgot to include, and that is Paul's prayers for Onesiphorus in 2 Tim 1: 16-18.

I wonder, when you consider that no unclean thing can enter heaven (Rev 21:27), whether you can look at yourself as you are right now and say that you are clean enough to enter heaven right now? Or if you can say that other Christians, even on their deathbeds breathing their last breath, are clean enough to pass directly into the presence of God all pure. I know I'm not ready for that. How do you go from who you are to becoming pure enough for God? It is the redemptive and sanctifying work of Jesus that will get you to that point, but are you honestly there yet? Are you sure you will get to that point by the time you breathe your last breath?

 

[Calvin_1985]

Bit it IS Biblically addressed. Your opinion is that it isn't Biblical because your Protestant forefathers ripped out those books because they didn't like what they said. That is assuming your conclusion, that it isn't Biblical because you took it out of the Bible because you didn't want it in the Bible.

In this case the practice is shown in Scripture to be a good thing. Those who prayed for these dead soldier acted "in an excellent and noble way" and what they did was "holy and good". That's Second Maccabees 12. It is not a condemned practice nor a neutral practice. It is a good practice.

It's settled Scripture that has been settled for as long as the Septuagent was in existence. Actually, there now appears to have been a Hebrew language original to the books of Maccabees. Not surprising given that the Maccabean revolt was a revolt against the Greeks, a movement back to Hebrew orthopraxy in a way similar to what Ezra and Nehemiah did generations before. You can rightly say that there were many times Israel and Judea slid into bad practices. It's true, even to the extent of worshiping Moloch. But the Maccabean revolt was not one of those times. It was the opposite of one of those times. It was a return to right practice, a time of purification. A time to kick out those pork loving Greeks who were defilers of the temple.

There is another instance of prayers for the dead I forgot to include, and that is Paul's prayers for Onesiphorus in 2 Tim 1: 16-18.

I wonder, when you consider that no unclean thing can enter heaven (Rev 21:27), whether you can look at yourself as you are right now and say that you are clean enough to enter heaven right now? Or if you can say that other Christians, even on their deathbeds breathing their last breath, are clean enough to pass directly into the presence of God all pure. I know I'm not ready for that. How do you go from who you are to becoming pure enough for God? It is the redemptive and sanctifying work of Jesus that will get you to that point, but are you honestly there yet? Are you sure you will get to that point by the time you breathe your last breath?

Whatever, it's apparent you want to just argue. If I told you my story, you wouldn't believe me and you would appeal to your Roman Catholicism to try prove why I am wrong.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Whatever, it's apparent you want to just argue. If I told you my story, you wouldn't believe me and you would appeal to your Roman Catholicism to try prove why I am wrong.

Er, if I don't agree with you it's me that wants to argue? I appealed to history, that the canon of Scripture for most of Christian history has included books that your people have revised out of your canon. That prayers for the dead have been an established part of Hebrew and Christian faith, that those prayers imply that there is a thing called purgatory or else they wouldn't make sense. It's not just 'Roman Catholicism' but all of Catholicism, and all of Orthodoxy that support the full canon and support prayers for the dead. What appears to be your view, rejecting purgatory, rejecting books of the Bible, is a newcomer idea that has finally managed 500 years. I am not going to capitulate to such a new teaching, while you seem to be locked into it. We could leave it at that. Besides, the thing this thread is actually about is whether purgatory is a 'second chance'. I think it has been shown that whatever it is, it isn't a second chance at salvation.

 

[Calvin_1985]

Er, if I don't agree with you it's me that wants to argue? I appealed to history, that the canon of Scripture for most of Christian history has included books that your people have revised out of your canon. That prayers for the dead have been an established part of Hebrew and Christian faith, that those prayers imply that there is a thing called purgatory or else they wouldn't make sense. It's not just 'Roman Catholicism' but all of Catholicism, and all of Orthodoxy that support the full canon and support prayers for the dead. What appears to be your view, rejecting purgatory, rejecting books of the Bible, is a newcomer idea that has finally managed 500 years. I am not going to capitulate to such a new teaching, while you seem to be locked into it. We could leave it at that. Besides, the thing this thread is actually about is whether purgatory is a 'second chance'. I think it has been shown that whatever it is, it isn't a second chance at salvation.

You don't know what I believe or my story. You assume a lot of things about me.