Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: dartuser
"Here is where you have made a subtle exegetical blunder with the language."

I made no blunder because I do not rely upon forensic exegesis to reshape what Tradition already confirms.

The concept of purgation was widely known throughout the first century Mediterranean. The process of purgation was used in food preparation (i.e.; snails were purged before cooking) Medicine ( i.e.; blood letting induced vomiting, sweating, etc.), population control and even criminal and punishment. It was seen as both cleansing and redemptive. The transition of the soul of a sinner from a condition of sin to a fully cleansed state suitable for entry into heaven was considered a purgation. Purgatory was merely that state of being where/when purgation occurred. The Church never described it as a place.

By the way, it really is silly for Protestants to take a lawyerly approach to the development of the language used to refer to the new ideas of Revelation and try to link the inception of the idea to the branding of it.

Peace be with you.

114 posted on 08/06/2012 1:37:38 PM PDT by Natural Law (Jesus did not leave us a Bible, He left us a Church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]


To: Natural Law
I made no blunder because I do not rely upon forensic exegesis to reshape what Tradition already confirms.

I have to tell you, its frustrating to have a catholic try to argue from the text, then when someone comes around and challenges RCC exegetical conclusions, they just sweep the analysis under the rug of sacred tradition. Your attempt to mold the text to make it say what you want it to say at least tells me that you have some desire to follow the Biblical text, for that you should be commended.

But when you appeal to tradition to justify what is clearly in contradiction to scripture, you are doing just what the leaders and religious people of Jesus' day did.

Matthew 15:1 Then some Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem, saying, 2 "Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread." 3 And He answered and said to them, "And why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? (Mat 15:1 NAS)

He had harsh words for them ...

And thus you invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition. (Mat 15:6 NAS)

Do you understand what it means to invalidate the Word of God? It means "to make it have no effect." By adhering to your traditions you are making the word of God to have no effect in your life.

I realize you have much invested in your religion, perhaps your whole family, friends, your spouse. But if that investment is in the wrong thing, built upon the wrong authority, arrived at through the wrong beliefs ... what will it profit you?

115 posted on 08/06/2012 2:35:10 PM PDT by dartuser ("If you are ... what you were ... then you're not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]

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