Praying for the dead [Purgatory]

CIN ^ | Father Brian Van Hove, SJ

[Siobhan]

.v.15 clearly indicates that the writer is speaking of works performed by each person, not the person himself.

Your gloss on 1 Corinthians3:15 is mistaken. It refers to the person not the works.

[CCWoody]

Do you figure that Paul might have got more converts if he had tried the Catholic method? BTW, I can't seem to find this on the 12 painless ways to evangelize thread.

[CCWoody]

Heb.10:14 ... One of my favorite verses! Perfected Forever--past tense everywhere except in Rome.

[JMJ333]

Let me try it this way with your post about the inspired word of God: The bible wasn't accumulate until the year 382 at the Council of Rome, under Pope Damasus I. However, early Christians promulgated doctrine, as witnessed by the quotes. Many of these same doctors sat on the council that approved which canons went into the bible.

I understand tht many protestants do not accept anything extraneous to the Bibl--view it as non-authoritative, unnecessary, or wrong—and may well hinder one in coming to God.

Catholics, on the other hand, recognize that the Bible does not endorse this view and that, in fact, it is repudiated in Scripture. The true "rule of faith"—as expressed in the Bible itself—is Scripture plus apostolic tradition to which were entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles, along with the authority to interpret Scripture correctly.

The New Testament is not the entire basis of the Christian faith since the Christian faith existed and flourished for years before the first book of the New Testament was written. The books of the New Testament were composed decades after Christ ascended into heaven, and it took centuries for there to be general agreement among Christians as to which books comprised the New Testament.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

1 Cor. 3:15 If any man's work shall be bured, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so by fire.

[JMJ333]

St woody! Would you care to tell us why this teaching was accepted until your man decided to reinvent Christianity? Can you make a post without a slap at Rome? I doubt it. You're too petty and simple-minded for real debate.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Catholics, on the other hand, recognize that the Bible does not endorse this view and that, in fact, it is repudiated in Scripture.

Could you please give me the scripture you are referring to here. Thanks.

Becky

[JMJ333]

AM: cc comes on every catholic thread and has no debate to offer. He starts fights because he couldn't debate himself out of a wet paper bag. He slams Catholics with each post with his sneering disdain. I wish he would stay off the threads since he has nothing to contribute but scorn and condemnation.

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Your gloss on 1 Corinthians3:15 is mistaken. It refers to the person not the works.

If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire [1 Cor. 3:15].

You see the contrast: “If any man’s work abide” which he built on the foundation, he shall receive a reward; if any man’s work goes up in smoke, he will suffer a terrible loss, but he himself will be saved. He does not lose his salvation if he is on the foundation, which is trust in Christ, even though he receives no reward.

Friend, what are you building today? What kind of material are you using? If you are building with gold, it may not be very impressive now. If you are building an old haystack, it will really stand out on the horizon, but it will go up in smoke. I like to put it like this: there are going to be some people in heaven who will be there because their foundation is Christ but who will smell as if they had been bought at a fire sale! Everything they ever did will have gone up in smoke. They will not receive a reward for their works.

Now if you are a carnal Christian, you cannot expect a reward because you have not been rightly related to God through the Word of God. The carnal Christian is the one who does not know the Word of God. You see, one can identify the three categories which Paul mentions by their relation to the Word of God. The natural man says it is foolishness. The spiritual man discerns the Word, and it gives him spiritual insight. The carnal Christian says, “Let’s have a banquet and not a Bible study.” Or he says, “Let’s listen to music rather than to the teaching of the Word of God.” That is the way you can identify the carnal Christian.

BigMack

[Siobhan]

You've got the grammar jumbled.

[Siobhan]

You are re-writing Scripture in your commentary -- which is incorrect.

[Siobhan]

I believe protestants have an edition of the Bible called the Amplified Bible. That should show you the sentence structure and syntax in respect of the Greek original.

[JMJ333]

Its repudiated by scripture itself...that is when you recognize scripture for what it is and what it isn't.

It wasn’t intended to be an instructional tool for converts. In fact, not one book of the Bible was written for non-believers. The Old Testament books were written for Jews, the New Testament books for people who already were Christians.

The Bible is not a catechism or a full-scale theological treatise. If you look at the books of the New Testament, you won’t find one that spells out the elements of the faith the way catechisms do or even the way the ancient creeds did. Most of the epistles were written to local churches that were experiencing moral and/or doctrinal problems. Paul and most of the other New Testament writers sent letters to these local churches in order to rectify these problems. There was no attempt on the part of the writers to impart a vast body of basic doctrinal instruction to non-believers nor even to simply summarize everything for the believers who received the letters.

How do you explain the early church doctors and apostles promulgating doctrine before the bible was put together?

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Well, correct me and let me see where you say I am wrong.

becky

[JMJ333]

Big mac?? What happened to Becky?

Or is that another name you go by? =)

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

You are re-writing Scripture in your commentary -- which is incorrect.

Ok, I gave you what I believe it says in my commentary, would you be kind enough to give me your commentary and show me where mine is incorrect, or what the verse means to you.

BigMack

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Big mac?? What happened to Becky?

Shes still here, I'm her husband. LOL.

BigMack

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

Amplified:

But if any person work is burned up [under the test] he will suffer the loss [of it all, losing his reward], though he himself will be saved, but only AS [one who has passed] through fire.

Becky

[JMJ333]

Okay! Gottcha! Two for the price of one!

[Matchett-PI]

JMJ: "The books of the New Testament were composed decades after Christ ascended into heaven, and it took centuries for there to be general agreement among Christians as to which books comprised the New Testament."


"In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son...". [Heb. 1:1-2]

God's speaking to us by his Son is the _culmination_ of his speaking to mankind and is _his greatest and final revelation_ to mankind.

(The exceptional greatness of the revelation that comes through the Son, far exceeds any revelation in the Old Covenant as noted over and over again in the first and second chapters of Hebrews.)

Once the writings of the New Testament apostles and their authorized companions were completed, we have everything that God wants us to know about the life, death, & resurrection of Christ, and its meaning for the lives of believers _for all time_. In this way Hebrews 1&2 shows us why no more writings can be added to the Bible after the time of the New Testament. The canon is now closed.

It is not accidental that the apostle John wrote that warning (about adding or subtracting to the words of Scripture) in the very last chapter of the very last book of the Bible. [Rev.22:18-19]

For many books, their placement in the canon is of little consequence. But just as Genesis must be placed first (because it tells us of creation), so Revelation must be placed last (because its focus is to tell us of the future and God's new creation). The events described in Revelation are historically subsequent to the events described in the rest of the New Testament and require that Revelation be placed where it is.

Thus, it is not appropriate for us to understand this exceptionally strong warning at the end of Revelation as applying in a secondary way to the whole of Scripture.

Placed here, where it must be placed, the warning forms an appropriate conclusion to the entire canon of Scripture. Along with Heb.1&2 and the history-of-redemption perspective implicit in those verses, this broader application of Rev.23:18-19 also suggests to us that we should expect no more Scripture to be added beyond what we already have.

The warning God gave through John in Rev.22 shows that God himself places supreme value on our having a correct collection of God-breathed writings, no more, no less. He's quite able to see to it that we have them. The closed canon we have today is God's doing. What we have didn't depend on men.

In fact, some of the earliest writers CLEARLY distinguished the difference between what they wrote and the writings of the apostles. In A.D.110, Ignatius said, "I do not order you as did Peter and Paul; THEY WERE APOSTLES, I am a convict; they were free, I am even until now, a slave".

Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would see to it that the disciples would be able to remember and record without error all that he had said to them when he was with them. [John 14:26; 16:13. See also: 2 Pet.3:2; 1 Cor.2:13; 1 Thess.4:15; and Rev. 22:18-19].

So in compiling the canon of Scripture, the work of the early church was not to bestow divine authority or even ecclesiastical authority upon some merely human writings --- but to RECOGNIZE the divinely authored characteristics of writings that already had such a quality.

This is because the ultimate criterion of canonicity is divine authorship --- (as Jesus promised) --- NOT human or ecclesiastical approval.

CAVEAT: I realize that unless one has "the mind of Christ" he will consider the infallible Word of God (Scripture) as "foolishness" and won't be able to discern spiritual truth from error, so what I wrote above is only for those who have "ears to hear".