Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What is the Difference between Sheol, Hades, and Gehennah?
Kosher Gospel ^ | Rev. Mark Alterman

Posted on 10/20/2010 5:23:03 PM PDT by wmfights

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 last
To: annalex

I think we are talking past each other here. Look at the definitions below.

Cleansing; To free from dirt, defilement, or guilt; purge or clean.
Reveal; To make known by supernatural or divine means

The definition of cleansing is to purge or clean. When most people hear the word purgatory it, to them, means that one is purged of their sins. The Bible teaches that when a person accepts Jesus as their savior they are washed clean of their sins through the shed blood of Jesus. In other words, no further cleansing is necessary. Jesus sacrifice was complete and final.

The passage we are talking about refers to revealing the works done which will last. Some works will not last because of impure intentions or error in theology or simple false doctrines. Upon ones death those works which do not last have simply been revealed.

So while you and I may be in agreement, I believe that too many people believe that some of their sins will be purged from them after death. By that I mean that they don’t understand that Jesus paid for those sins and they don’t carry those sins with them if they have asked for forgiveness.


61 posted on 10/25/2010 6:47:39 AM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Like I said in the previous post, of course “revealing” in itself does not mean “cleansing”. However, in the context of the allegory with the burning house both revealing and cleansing occur: the pure material is revealed because it is freed from the impurities, which burn out.

The Purgatory is not purging of sins. The blood of Jesus purges the sins. Someone in the Purgatory already has his sins forgiven, — or else he would be in Hell and not in Purgatory. This is expressed in the passage on hand by the fact that he is like a building on a solid foundation. He ends up saved. He is forgiven, but not yet perfect, like the building is on a solid foundation but has hay and stubble here and there. If he were burdened by sin he would be a different allegory: he would be like a building whose foundation is cracked or flooded.

So what are these things that burn? They are indeed false beliefs (to believe in something false is not always a sin), but also what in modern parlance is called “emotional baggage”: residual anger, despair, pride, — things the believer had confessed and has repented of, but that still are imperfections on his character. An analogy often used is this: let us say one has a tumor and he goes to a dcotor and the tumor is removed. That is confession and absolution of sin. Now, there remains a hole in his body. He is no longer sick of the tumor, but he is not healed either. He is imperfect. The Purgatory heals that scar.

On the fact that many Catholics don’t know their own faith — don’t get me started...


62 posted on 10/25/2010 6:06:31 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: annalex

I guess we will just agree to disagree.


63 posted on 10/25/2010 6:27:15 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

People agree to disagree when they have no method to argue further. For example, I think that the moon is made of cheese and you think it is made of a pancake and since none of us was on it, we agree to disagree. Here, however, we have a scripture and the method that you, Protestants, yourselves promote: checking what the scripture says. We did and I explained that the passage speaks of purgatory. You, however, wanted to talk of some other passages, then you pretended it speaks of ministers only, then you said that is reveals without purifying, then you told me what you think purgatory is, and that thing you think it is is indeed not in the passage. None of that was reading the passage for what is says. So no, you disagree, but it is the scripture you profess to have an interest in that you disagree with, not me.


64 posted on 10/26/2010 5:42:20 AM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: annalex

>> So no, you disagree, but it is the scripture you profess to have an interest in that you disagree with, not me.<<

It’s the interpretation of the Scripture that we disagree on. The only thing I use is Scripture to interpret Scripture. If it makes you feel more comfortable to think that I disagree with Scripture I don’t guess it matters much to me however.


65 posted on 10/26/2010 5:58:30 AM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

Sometimes it is a matter of interpretation but not in this case. There is no coherent interpretation of 1 Cor. 3:9-15 that explains the fact that the man is a believer, his life work is revealed by God, the inferior works are removed, and he ends up in Heaven, — yet avoids the concept of purgatory.


66 posted on 10/26/2010 5:02:52 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson