Posted on 03/13/2019 6:40:19 AM PDT by Antoninus
In part one of this post, I looked at the vision of Perpetua—one of the earliest authentic Christian documents to describe directly a Purgatory-like state and to highlight the efficacy of prayer petitions for the dead.
Others writing during the patristic age also expounded upon this idea in more or less detail, among them St. Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, St. Augustine of Hippo, and St. Caesarius of Arles. One of the most clear references to Purgatory appears in a late 4th century work by Saint Gregory of Nyssa, entitled: “On the Soul and the Resurrection”. St. Gregory writes:
“For [God], the one goal is this: the perfection of the universe through each man individually, the fulfillment of our nature. Some of us are purged of evil in this life, and some are cured of it through fire in the after-life, some have not had the experience of good and evil in life here….The different degrees of virtue or vice in our life will be revealed in our participating more quickly or more slowly in the blessedness we hope for. The extent of the healing with depend on the amount of evil present in each person. The healing of the soul will be purification from evil and this cannot be accomplished without suffering…”Building upon this notion about 200 years later, another Gregory—Pope Saint Gregory the Great—was the first to set forth the notion of Purgatory as Catholics now understand it. As part of his famous Dialogues, he wrote:
“…It is plain that in such state as a man departs out of this life, in the same he is presented in judgment before God. But yet we must believe that before the day of judgment there is a Purgatory fire for certain small sins: because our Savior says, “That he which speaketh blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, that it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come [Matthew 12:32].”Here we see Gregory offering a scriptural proof for Purgatory, out of the mouth of Jesus Himself. He elaborates on this point, citing Saint Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians, chapter 3:
“Out of which sentence we learn, that some sins are forgiven in this world, and some other may be pardoned in the next: for that which is denied concerning one sin, is consequently understood to be granted touching some other. But yet this, as I said, we have not to believe but only concerning little and very small sins, as, for example, daily idle talk, immoderate laughter, negligence in the care of our family (which kind of offenses scarce can they avoid, that know in what sort sin is to be shunned), ignorant errors in matters of no great weight: all which sins be punished after death, if men procured not pardon and remission for them in their lifetime: for when St. Paul said, that “Christ is the foundation:” and by and by added: “And if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble: the work of every one, of what kind it is, the fire shall try. If any man's work abide which he built thereupon, he shall receive reward; if any man’s work burn, he shall suffer detriment, but himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.”Gregory then goes on to explain St. Paul’s meaning, drawing a distinction between what we would later call mortal and venial sins:
“For although these words may be understood of the fire of tribulation, which men suffer in this world: yet if any will interpret them of the fire of Purgatory, which shall be in the next life: then must he carefully consider, that the Apostle said not that he may be saved by fire, that buildeth upon this foundation iron, brass, or lead, that is, the greater sort of sins, and therefore more hard, and consequently not remissible in that place: but wood, hay, stubble, that is, little and very light sins, which the fire doth easily consume. Yet we have here further to consider, that none can be there purged, no, not for the least sins that be, unless in his lifetime he deserved by virtuous works to find such favor in that place.” [Dialogues, Book 4:39]
III. THE FINAL PURIFICATION, OR PURGATORY
1030 All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.
1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.606 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:607
1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."609 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.610 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:
Uh; because they had no assurance of salvation??
......”which goes beyond what Rome officially teaches, is a amazing example of just what I referred to, a wanton wresting of Scripture to support a tradition of men following their programming”......
Islam does the same thing with their Quran...via the hadiths etc......
Several denominations are works denominations.
Since cut-and-paste of dueling scripture isn’t leading us anywhere, how about taking a step back to look at what made Purgatory needful? It’s tied in to infant baptism.
The early princes of the church believed baptism was necessary to achieve heaven at death. So infant baptism was instilled to cover that base. All was well, for a while.
Then some over-thinking malcontent decided that while sin was sin, sinning in a state of post-baptismal grace was more sinful than sinning unredeemed. What to do?
Well, it was pretty obvious. Hold off on baptism until you can get your sinning in and get baptized just before dying. All was well, for a while.
Then some prince fell off his horse, hit his head on a rock, and died unbaptized. Yikes. What to do?
Then a pragmatic believer convinced the other princes to invent a space where post-baptismal sins could be worked off. Sort of a celestial chain gang.
Say hello to Purgatory.
Bravo!
Or, for example, for a fellow to use Scripture to demonstrate that we are saved by faith as a reason to “sin boldly.” Am I right?
***
That is an absolute falsehood.
For someone who spent the entire upthread yelling at us to read Gregory, you sure as literal hell didn’t actually read what Luther wrote to discern what he actually meant instead of cherry-picking.
That’s rather hypocritical, isn’t it?
x
That's not my argument (nor was it Luther's) that genuine faith isn't demonstrated in a changed and progressively holier life. No, it's the idea as Gregory seems to promote in the quote you provided that our works - however virtuous - do not merit for us eternal life. We cannot earn nor deserve salvation no matter how piously we behave. That really is the basis for why Purgatory was/is rejected as a dogma of the Christian faith. Our salvation is made sure because of the precious blood of our Savior Jesus Christ who died in our place. He is who makes propitiation for our sins and not anything we do. Only by the shedding of blood is there atonement for the soul.
BTW...should you desire to understand the actual meaning behind the "sin boldly" snippet from Martin Luther, I invite you to read https://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/search?q=sin+boldly
It has always puzzled me why some RCs on this forum resort to condemning non-Catholics for rejecting some of their dogmas but make no mention of the Eastern Orthodox (as well as many Roman Catholics if they're honest) who also don't accept them. All we are trying to do here is say WHY we disagree with a certain one (Purgatory in this case) and base our argument on what the Scriptures say. That's NOT being divisive or fractious. Seems to me there is a woeful lack of humility in Rome's defenders who act as if "they" are the only right ones.
yeppers.
Roman Catholics: the original NPCs.
GERMAN MAN BAD.
“We don’t have to be perfect to go to heaven...”
Revelation 21:27. We will be perfect in Heaven. After all “we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is” (1 John 3:2).
“...because Satan and his angels appear before God in heaven and they have no purity in works or nature to be allowed before God.”
An allegorical opening to Job is not proof that Satan can enter Heaven. After all why would God bother throwing Satan out of Heaven if He was just going to let him back in over Job?
“If the trials of fire didn’t perfect you while you lived in your body what makes you think fire can burn away impurities afterward?”
1) Don’t assume the fires are to be taken as literal flames on that side of the divide.
2) If God can use cloths that Peter touched to heal people (Acts 19:12), I don’t see why He couldn’t use a fire He created to cleanse souls with grace. It all belongs to Him. He can do whatever He wants. How is it any different than baptism? Grace cleanses the soul, but water is outwardly used. To me it just sounds like Zechariah 13:9.
Seriously, have you never read Isaiah chapter 6:
6 Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with tongs from the altar. 7 With it he touched my mouth and said, “See, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away and your sin atoned for.”
A burning coal was used by an angel sent by God to take away the guilt of sin from Isaiah. Go ahead and explain away that one.
Finally a plethora of purported proof texts for Purgatory by the "Scripture Catholic" polemicist, illustrating some of the depths of egregious Catholic extrapolation.
Some of these attempts have already been refuted, and the wanton RC wresting (which actually overall gets worse as he proceeds) often goes beyond what Rome officially teaches, ascribing Scriptures as teaching Roman Catholic Purgatory that are not officially taught, and even contrary to what some other Catholics (including Bible scholars) interpret. Nor is the author simply presenting his sophistry as probable or even as possible supports for RC Purgatory, but time and time again he outlandishly asserts that each text actually refers to Purgatory. However, for what it is worth, in time let me expose them one by one, by the grace of God. Note that for the sake of my arthritic fingers Roman Catholic (since in EO tradition this belief tends to be different ) Purgatory will be referred to as RCP.
I. A State After Death of Suffering and Forgiveness Matt. 5:26,18:34; Luke 12:58-59 – Jesus teaches us, “Come to terms with your opponent or you will be handed over to the judge and thrown into prison. You will not get out until you have paid the last penny.” The word “opponent” (antidiko) is likely a reference to the devil (see the same word for devil in 1 Pet. 5:8) who is an accuser against man (c.f. Job 1.6-12; Zech. 3.1; Rev. 12.10), and God is the judge. If we have not adequately dealt with satan and sin in this life, we will be held in a temporary state called a prison, and we won’t get out until we have satisfied our entire debt to God. This “prison” is purgatory where we will not get out until the last penny is paid.
So the devil is the one who was wronged, a brother in Mat. 5:26 and the "fellowservants" who saw what was done" by the forgiven servant to his fellow servant-debtor in Mat. 18:34, whom he "went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt?"
Well, the devil is the accuser of the brethren in seeking to gloat over man's dishonoring of God, versus validly seeking personal justice as one one injured, and if you actually want to properly exegete Scripture rather than compelled it as an abused servant to support your church, then you need to pay attention to context, in which the adversary is the brother or servant injured. And the teaching is not at all, that of dealing with Satan in order to avoid punishment, but of dealing with your brother and fellowservant according to the grace you have received yourself.
That aside, a man having been forgiven a massive unpayable debt himself, throwing poor man who owed a mere fraction of that and who pleads for mercy (the fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him) into prison till he pay all is hardly a venial sin, but is more the nature of a grave matter, a mortal sin by a supremely culpable soul.
" To knowingly, stubbornly refuse to forgive such a soul pleading for mercy but taking him to court and sent to prison for a mere small debt is a denial of faith, thus such a one has no claim to salvation and will face the consequences of Hell.
But of-course you may want to disagree, since this disallows the account of Mat. 18:34 - which cannot be separated from the others as defines what this prison is - from being analogous to RCP, since that is for forgiven souls who have some expiation to make for venial sins (and the account at issue is about a human person paying for his or her sins), while the description here is of more of a "mortal sin.
Yet even if you must make this a "venial sin," neither was this a man forgiven of his sin here but who had some more satisfaction to make to God and purification to be realized, as per RCP, for instead he is punished to pay for what he had been forgiven, like as one who had denied the faith and remained impenitent and forfeited what faith obtained, (Hebrews 3:12; 10:26-49) and as one not finding any mercy.
Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:29)
Also, Catholics argue that "heōs" (till) can mean forever, and that is it anything less must have as its premise that the debt can be paid. However, since the evil servant owed ten thousand talents (if these were silver talents, as is probable, then the sum owed by the servant was 15,180,000, or about 3,421, 875 British sterling, circa 1880’s) then it is hardly likely he could have ever paid it, and together with moral nature of this denial of faith, the intimation is that of a soul being sentenced in the lake of fire, according to his deed.
Thus this is a poor argument for RCP, even by itself, while nowhere in the record of how the NT church understood the gospels is this postmortem punishment of believers taught, especially commencing at death.
Matt. 5:48 – Jesus says, “be perfect, even as your heavenly Father is perfect.” We are only made perfect through purification, and in Catholic teaching, this purification, if not completed on earth, is continued in a transitional state we call purgatory.
Which is even more isolationist eisegesis, for the context is exhortation to be like God, such as in "Love your enemies," and not a requirement that "unless you become as perfect in character as God then you shall in no way be with God in Heaven," which is just what is being read into this text.
And which plainly contradicts what Scripture teaches as regards who shall enter Heaven and on what basis. For Paul himself stated that for him as well as all believers that to absent from the Lord was to be present with the Lord, (Philippians 1:23; 2 Co. 5:8) ) even though admitted he was not perfect, (Philippians 3:11) though he yearned to be as much like a resurrected believer in this life as he will be when Christ shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself. (Philippians 3:21)
Which is at the return of Christ, not after some indeterminate period in purifying punishments in RCP which he teaches the contrary of.
For again, wherever Scripture clearly speak of the next conscious reality for believers then it is with the Lord, (Lk. 23:43 [cf. 2Cor. 12:4; Rv. 2:7]; Phil 1:23; 2Cor. 5:8 [“we”]; 1Cor. 15:51ff'; 1Thess. 4:17) Note in the latter case all believers were assured that if the Lord returned, which they expected in their lifetime, so would they “ever be with the Lord,” though they were still undergoing growth in grace, as was Paul. (Phil. 3:7f)
And the next transformative experience that is manifestly taught is that of being like Christ in the resurrection. (1Jn. 3:2; Rm. 8:23; 1Co 15:53,54; 2Co. 2-4) At which time is the judgment seat of Christ, which is the only suffering after this life, which does not begin at death, but awaits the Lord's return, (1 Corinthians 4:5; 2 Timothy. 4:1,8; Revelation 11:18; Matthew 25:31-46; 1 Peter 1:7; 5:4) and is the suffering of the loss of rewards (and the Lord's displeasure) due to the manner of material one built the church with, which one is saved despite the loss of such, not because of. (1 Corinthians 3:8ff)
In addition, the whole premise that suffering itself perfects a person is specious, since testing of character requires being able to choose btwn alternatives, and which this world provides. Thus it is only this world that Scripture peaks of here development of character, such as "Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations." (1 Peter 1:6)
Matt. 12:32 – Jesus says, “And anyone who says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but no one who speaks against the Holy Spirit will be forgiven either in this world or in the next.”
Which has already been denied. For the world or age to come easily refer to that which Catholicism denies, that of the literal thousand year reign of Christ (after the resurrection of the elect):
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (Revelation 20:4)
But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. (Revelation 20:5)
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. (Revelation 20:6)
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, (Revelation 20:2)
Luke 12:47-48 – when the Master comes (at the end of time), some will receive light or heavy beatings but will live. This state is not heaven or hell, because in heaven there are no beatings, and in hell we will no longer live with the Master.
Once again, this refers to punishment in the lake of fire, ( "and they were judged every man according to their works." (Revelation 20:13), and thus the described sentencing was of a unfaithful servant who has departed from the faith: "The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. " (Luke 12:46
Note that the RC apologist leaves out v. 46, which is the text which actually defines where this punishment takes place - with the unbelievers! Strike 4.
Luke 16:19-31 – in this story, we see that the dead rich man is suffering but still feels compassion for his brothers and wants to warn them of his place of suffering. But there is no suffering in heaven or compassion in hell because compassion is a grace from God and those in hell are deprived from God’s graces for all eternity. So where is the rich man? He is in purgatory.
This is really a stretch: A place of solace, Abraham's bosom, where Lazarus is "comforted," is supposed to be RCP! Rather, rather than engaging in more isolationist eisegesis, by comparing Scripture with Scripture, we see that these OT saints as Lazarus those who awaited the redemption of Christ by which both OT and NT believers enter Heaven. "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." (Hebrews 10:4) Thus "the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing." (Hebrews 9:8) But, "Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent." (Matthew 27:50-51) "Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things." (Ephesians 4:9-10) By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. (1 Peter 3:19-20) "And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.' (Matthew 27:52-53)
1 Cor. 15:29-30 – Paul mentions people being baptized on behalf of the dead, in the context of atoning for their sins (people are baptized on the dead’s behalf so the dead can be raised). These people cannot be in heaven because they are still with sin, but they also cannot be in hell because their sins can no longer be atoned for. They are in purgatory.
This no more supports RCP than the Mormonic use of it supports their actual baptism for the dead. Instead it supports was it was invoked for, that of their being a resurrection which some ("they," not "we") thought postmortem baptism would effect, but with nothing inferred as RCP. For contrary to the polemic that asserts "These people cannot be in heaven because they are still with sin," the fact is that according Cath belief, those who are baptized are clean from all sin, and have no sin dept, and thus would go directly to Heaven if they died that instant (though since the sin nature is all too alive they yield to it, then they must once again become good enough to enter Heaven thru RCP).
The RC can object that baptism for the dead for the dead does not cleanse from sin, but neither does Catholicism believe in baptism for the dead, and thus this objection would be a case of invoking a foreign doctrine for support and then requiring it to conform to Cath. belief to make it work!
These verses directly correspond to 2 Macc. 12:44-45 which also shows specific prayers for the dead, so that they may be forgiven of their sin. Which is simply not referring to RCP, for the fact is that the offerings for those who died due to mortal sin in hope that they may see the resurrection (of the just), yet which those in purgatory are assured of anyway, and thus the offerings were not that they may escape from purgatory . "Now under the coats of every one that was slain they found things consecrated to the idols of the Jamnites, which is forbidden the Jews by the law. Then every man saw that this was the cause wherefore they were slain. ..they saw before their eyes the things that came to pass for the sins of those that were slain" - 2 Maccabees 12:40,42) For which mortal sinners according to Rome there is no hope.
Phil. 2:10 – every knee bends to Jesus, in heaven, on earth, and “under the earth” which is the realm of the righteous dead, or purgatory.
So now RCs assign a spatial existence to RCP, as "under the earth?" Why not, since the RC apologist have no problem going beyond what Rome officially teaches. Yet this is not RCP in which souls are being released as we speak, but it refers to the end time great confession:
And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever. (Revelation 5:13)
But if under the earth means RCP, then rather than this simply referring to all creation, from angels of Heaven to demons of Hell affirming the Lordship of God - the former as a matter of affection and the latter lost compelled by fact - then you could create even another spiritual abode of the death, that of "such as are in the sea, and all that are in them!" A whale of a cult. And a RC wresting of Scripture.
2 Tim. 1:16-18 – Onesiphorus is dead but Paul asks for mercy on him “on that day.” Paul’s use of “that day” demonstrates its eschatological usage (see, for example, Rom. 2.5,16; 1 Cor. 1.8; 3.13; 5.5; 2 Cor. 1.14; Phil. 1.6,10; 2.16; 1 Thess. 5.2,4,5,8; 2 Thess. 2.2,3; 2 Tim. 4.8). Of course, there is no need for mercy in heaven, and there is no mercy given in hell. Where is Onesiphorus? He is in purgatory.
Which is simply more wanton wishful argument-by-assertion ("He is in purgatory"), for this a not prayer to God by Paul (which Paul knows how to describe: Eph. 3:14), but an desire expressed to those he writes to, nor is there anything here said about someone in RCP, in which case Paul should be eliciting prayers for the poor suffering soul. But to the contrary, consistent with Paul's pointing to the Lord's return, "in that day," which Paul consistently presents as the next event after this life, at which time is the judgment of Christ believers as to the rewards, and which the "scripture Catholic seems ignorant of. Thus Paul's focus here is on that, with the hope for mercy not being presently for a soul in RCP, but at the judgment seat of Christ.
Heb. 12:14 – without holiness no one will see the Lord. We need final sanctification to attain true holiness before God, and this process occurs during our lives and, if not completed during our lives, in the transitional state of purgatory.
"Without holiness no one will see the Lord," of which RCP is simply extrapolated, for indeed without holiness no one will see the Lord, for faith without works is dead, and saving faith bears fruit, "things that accompany salvation," (Hebrews 6:9) which includes holiness of character. And once again at the resurrection God "shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." (Philippians 3:21)
Which is in contrast to requiring perfection of character in this life or in RCP in order to be in Heaven with the Lord. If so, then the next conscious reality for imperfect souls could not be with the Lord after death or at His second coming, whatever comes first, which is what the Holy Spirit teaches. (Lk. 23:43 [cf. 2Cor. 12:4; Rv. 2:7]; Phil 1:23; 2Cor. 5:8 [“we”]; 1Cor. 15:51ff'; 1Thess. 4:17) Do you think all the Thessalonians were so perfect in character in the 1st c. that at the Lord's return they were told "so shall we ever be with the Lord?" (1 Thessalonians 4:17)
Heb. 12:23 – the spirits of just men who died in godliness are “made” perfect. They do not necessarily arrive perfect. They are made perfect after their death. But those in heaven are already perfect, and those in hell can no longer be made perfect. These spirits are in purgatory. wanton isolationist eisegesis
Which is one more example of another RC recourse, that of reading assertions of RCP into passages that are of ambiguous meaning (and not even officially definitive by Rome), while contextually, being made perfect is not referring to character development or expiation, and if so, then all the men listed ("these all:" Hebrews 11:39), including Enoch - who was taken up, not down under the earth which is where the RC apologist places RCP - needed to go thru RCP, and which thus does not leave much hope for anyone else going direct, yet Rome states "The patriarchs, prophets and certain other Old Testament figures have been and always will be honored as saints in all the Church's liturgical traditions." (CCC 61)
But instead of "perfect" referring to character development or expiation via RCP, contextually it is preceded by "God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect ." (Hebrews 11:40) Together with this we can see reference to a completion that awaited the the resurrection of Christ and the institution of the new covenant (a main theme in Hebrews, mentioned also in 12:24) and opening up Heaven and the beginning the church:
But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things .) And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; (Ephesians 4:7-11)
The leading of captivity captive and giving gifts unto men to "fill all things" goes together with "ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels," (Hebrews 12:22) in which is the fulfillment of the journey of OT saints is seen, which could not be made complete until then. It was at this time that Paradise, Abraham's bosom (a place of comfort, not RCP) was opened (related: "And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many: Matthew 27:52-53) so that OT saints could be with God and to which NT believers go to be with at death,
Thus Paradise, Abraham's bosom is actually the closest thing to RCP, yet distinctively different since it is a place of comfort, of consolation as Luke 16:19-33 shows. In addition, Paradise being opened, it is now Heaven:
And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. (2 Corinthians 12:3-4) wanton isolationist eisegesis
Regardless if anyone does not see this as explained, RCP is simply disallowed on the basis of the fact that all OT saints would be the supposed RCP, while character development is not what perfect contextually refers to.
1 Peter 3:19; 4:6 – Jesus preached to the spirits in the “prison.” These are the righteous souls being purified for the beatific vision. Which nowhere even intimates a place of "purifying punishments" (Indulgentiarum Doctrina; cp. 1. 1967) as RCP is said to be, and what "the spirits in the “prison is cohesively explained above" (see under Luke 16 and Heb. 12:23). Thus this is but another strike out for the so-called "scripture Catholic."
Rev. 21:4 – God shall wipe away their tears, and there will be no mourning or pain, but only after the coming of the new heaven and the passing away of the current heaven and earth. Note the elimination of tears and pain only occurs at the end of time. But there is no morning or pain in heaven, and God will not wipe away their tears in hell. These are the souls experiencing purgatory.
Which assertion once again displays ignorance of the judgment of believers at the return of their Lord, detailed in 1 Cor. 3:8ff, which is the only suffering after this life that is taught in the inspired revelation of what the NT church believed and how they understood the gospels. In which, as explained at length in post 49, believers will suffer the loss of rewards, and thus the grievous displeasure of their Lord, for works they attempted to build the church with (as all believers are doing, even if indirectly) but which could endure the fiery test the Lord subjects them to.
Thus indeed there will be sorrow and mourning in the afterlife before God makes all things new, but it is not RCP, and which the judgment seat of Christ is not, even for the simple reason that it awaits the second coming of Christ, versus commencing at death. In which the believer shall be saved despite the loss of works, and not because of them.
Rev. 21:27 – nothing unclean shall enter heaven. The word “unclean” comes from the Greek word “koinon” which refers to a spiritual corruption. Even the propensity to sin is spiritually corrupt, or considered unclean, and must be purified before entering heaven. It is amazing how many Protestants do not want to believe in purgatory. Purgatory exists because of the mercy of God. If there were no purgatory, this would also likely mean no salvation for most people. God is merciful indeed.
The Greek word for “unclean” means moral uncleaness, such as Mt. 15:19,20, "evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies," but it does not mean one must become perfect as God is in character, which is what the RC apologist has essentially argued (under be perfect as God is), or else neither admittedly imperfect Paul (Phil. 3:12) nor entire churches could be told that the next conscious reality after this life will be that of being with the Lord. (Phil 1:23; 2Cor. 5:8 [“we”]; 1Cor. 15:51ff'; 1Thess. 4:17)
For believers, "he that is dead is freed from sin," (Romans 6:7) with their spirit going to be with God, while as regards this vile corruptible sinful body, that will be dealt with at the return of the Lord, (Phil. 3:21) not mythical RCP.
Luke 23:43 – many Protestants argue that, because Jesus sent the good thief right to heaven, there can be no purgatory. There are several rebuttals. First, when Jesus uses the word “paradise,” He did not mean heaven. Paradise, from the Hebrew “sheol,” meant the realm of the righteous dead. This was the place of the dead who were destined for heaven, but who were captive until the Lord’s resurrection. Second, since there was no punctuation in the original manuscript, Jesus’ statement “I say to you today you will be with me in paradise” does not mean there was a comma after the first word “you.” This means Jesus could have said, “I say to you today, you will be with me in paradise” (meaning, Jesus could have emphasized with exclamation his statement was “today” or “now,” and that some time in the future the good thief would go to heaven). Third, even if the thief went straight to heaven, this does not prove there is no purgatory (those who are fully sanctified in this life – perhaps by a bloody and repentant death – could be ready for admission in to heaven).
This is both private interpretation ignorance which actually is on the side of annihilationism. It is actually esteemed Catholics who also believe that the contrite criminal of Luke 23 went to be with the Lord that day. Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary states : .
Christ was pleased by a special privilege, to reward the faith and confession of the penitent thief with a full discharge of all his sins, both as to the guilt and punishment, and to introduce him, immediately after death, into the happy society of the saints, whose limbo (that is, the place of their confinement) was now made a paradise by our Lord's going thither. (Challoner) --- The soul of the good thief was that same day with Jesus Christ, in the felicity of the saints, in Abraham's bosom, or in heaven, where Jesus was always present by his divinity. (St. Augustine) --- St. Cyril, of Jerusalem, says he entered heaven before all the patriarchs and prophets. St. John Chrysostom thinks that paradise was immediately open to him, and that he entered heaven the first mankind. (Tom. v. homil. 32.), justifying this by arguing that he made expiation for anything due him (even though even in RC conversion their is not supposed to be any sins from before conversion) and was purified by his suffering
And trying to change the wording from “Verily I say unto thee today you thou shalt be with me in paradise” to say “ Verily I say unto thee today, thou shalt be with me in paradise” hardly makes grammatical sense. Both men were dying "today," and thus the Lord would not be telling him tomorrow, and thus the only issue is when the contrite criminal will be remembered when Christ enters into His kingdom (which was the request). Which is why "today" is stated. It is annihilationism which tries the RC's spin on this.
As for the third attempt, that of allowing that the thief went straight to heaven as not disproving there is no purgatory under the premise that he was "fully sanctified in this life," that makes of mockery of his prior polemic in which he argued for RCP based upon a requirement that one be perfect as God. For the idea that suffering for a few hours on the cross would make one perfect in character is simply unScriptural and absurd. Perfect of heart and character takes place in the context of suffering temptations, in which one either compromises to gain escape or endures. Christ suffered being tempted by the devil after 40 days of absolute fasting, but did not compromise, thank God (I cannot say the same has always been true of me).
Gen. 50:10; Num. 20:29; Deut. 34:8 – here are some examples of ritual prayer and penitent mourning for the dead for specific periods of time. The Jewish understanding of these practices was that the prayers freed the souls from their painful state of purification, and expedited their journey to God.
"they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation," That is reading what the RC wants into Scripture, while ascribing what he does as being "The Jewish understanding" is disingenuous for that is only allowed view within traditional belief, and Judaism has little dogma about afterlife. And Catholics scorn Jewish understanding when it comes to which books are Scripture (while sound affirmation is based on their heavenly qualities and attestation).
In any case, the determintive interpretive authoritative source for us is the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (including how they understood the OT and gospels), is Scripture, especially Acts thru Revelation. Which simply does not teach RCP, despite the emphasis upon holiness and conformity to Christ, and the afterlife, and which contradicts RCP.
Baruch 3:4 – Baruch asks the Lord to hear the prayers of the dead of Israel. Prayers for the dead are unnecessary in heaven and unnecessary in hell. These dead are in purgatory.
And another apocryphal book tells a a spurious fantastic tale, with a a women, Sarah, who has lost seven husbands because Asmodeus, the demon of lust, and "the worst of demons," abducts and kills every man she marries on their wedding night before the marriage can be consummated! And about a man, Tobias, who was sleeping with his eyes open while birds dropped dung into in his eyes (sound sleeper!) and blinded him. And who later is attacked by a fish leaping out of the river to devour him! But Raphael has him capture it and later he burns the fish’s liver and heart to drive away the demon Asmodeus away to Upper Egypt, enabling him and Sarah to finally consummate his marriage. No thanks.
Zech. 9:11 – God, through the blood of His covenant, will set those free from the waterless pit, a spiritual abode of suffering which the Church calls purgatory.
Really? Now RCP, under the earth, is a pit with no water, yet what Scripture teaches as spiritual understanding is that Hell is the place of no water, and that damned souls destined for there are delivered from it by faith in the blood of His covenant, and not placed in it!
2 Macc. 12:43-45 – the prayers for the dead help free them from sin and help them to the reward of heaven. Those in heaven have no sin, and those in hell can no longer be freed from sin. They are in purgatory. Luther was particularly troubled with these verses because he rejected the age-old teaching of purgatory. As a result, he removed Maccabees from the canon of the Bible.
Which is just more propaganda, for besides as shown before, 2 Macc. 12:43-45 simply does not teach RCP, and NAB RC scholarship even admits this, Luther was not required to hold Maccabees as Scripture, nor was any RC until after his death, and many did not .
II. Purification After Death By Fire Heb. 12:29 – God is a consuming fire (of love in heaven, of purgation in purgatory, or of suffering and damnation in hell).
Which is simply wanton extrapolation. God is indeed a consuming fire as shown in many places, such as 1 Cor. 3:8-15, but never in RCP.
1 Cor. 3:10-15 – works are judged after death and tested by fire. Some works are lost, but the person is still saved. Paul is referring to the state of purgation called purgatory. The venial sins (bad works) that were committed are burned up after death, but the person is still brought to salvation. This state after death cannot be heaven (no one with venial sins is present) or hell (there is no forgiveness and salvation).
1 Cor. 3:15 – “if any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.” The phrase for “suffer loss” in the Greek is “zemiothesetai.” The root word is “zemioo” which also refers to punishment. The construction “zemiothesetai” is used in Ex. 21:22 and Prov. 19:19 which refers to punishment (from the Hebrew “anash” meaning “punish” or “penalty”). Hence, this verse proves that there is an expiation of temporal punishment after our death, but the person is still saved. This cannot mean heaven (there is no punishment in heaven) and this cannot mean hell (the possibility of expiation no longer exists and the person is not saved).
1 Cor. 3:15 – further, Paul writes “he himself will be saved, “but only” (or “yet so”) as through fire.” “He will be saved” in the Greek is “sothesetai” (which means eternal salvation). The phrase “but only” (or “yet so”) in the Greek is “houtos” which means “in the same manner.” This means that man is both eternally rewarded and eternally saved in the same manner by fire.
1 Cor. 3:13 – when Paul writes about God revealing the quality of each man’s work by fire and purifying him, this purification relates to his sins (not just his good works). Protestants, in attempting to disprove the reality of purgatory, argue that Paul was only writing about rewarding good works, and not punishing sins (because punishing and purifying a man from sins would be admitting that there is a purgatory).
1 Cor. 3:17 – but this verse proves that the purgation after death deals with punishing sin. That is, destroying God’s temple is a bad work, which is a mortal sin, which leads to death. 1 Cor. 3:14,15,17 – purgatory thus reveals the state of righteousness (v.14), state of venial sin (v.15) and the state of mortal sin (v.17), all of which are judged after death.
Which coup de gras has been and is utterly invalidated as referring to RCP already, and is a supreme example of the wanton eisegesis by a polemicist whose driving interest is not determining what a text says, but how he can force it to support the doctrine of his church-god.
1 Peter 1:6-7 – Peter refers to this purgatorial fire to test the fruits of our faith.
What is he reading? The text refers to THIS LIFE, and with the Lord's return being the next even, not some postmortem purifying punishments commencing at death:
Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations: That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ: (1 Peter 1:6-7)
Jude 1:23 – the people who are saved are being snatched out of the fire. People are already saved if they are in heaven, and there is no possibility of salvation if they are in hell. These people are being led to heaven from purgatory.
Which is simply absurd: the context is about saving lost Hell-bound souls in this life, not intercession for believers in the next:
And of some have compassion, making a difference: And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. (Jude 22-23)
Rev. 3:18-19 – Jesus refers to this fire as what refines into gold those He loves if they repent of their sins. This is in the context of after death because Jesus, speaking from heaven, awards the white garment of salvation after the purgation of fire (both after death).
Which is more blatant out of context reading into the text, for these letters are is written to living believers in earthly locations, and the exhortations here are to repentance while they are living, lest He "spue thee out of my mouth!" (Revelation 3:16) Which is what the RC polemics are fit for.
Dan 12:10 – Daniel refers to this refining by saying many shall purify themselves, make themselves white and be refined.
Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. (Daniel 12:10)
Which purifying in Scripture occurs in this life, and there is nothing in this text which makes this referring to to the afterlife.
Wis. 3:5-6 – the dead are disciplined and tested by fire to receive their heavenly reward. This is the fire of purgatory.
Actually the text of this apocryphal book (but maybe the best) also says, "But the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and there shall no torment touch them ," (Wis 3:1) while the discipline they realized is in the past tense. "As gold in the furnace hath he tried them, and received them as a burnt offering." (Wis 3:6)
Sirach 2:5 – for gold is tested in the fire, and acceptable men in the furnace of humiliation.
Again, there is nothing in this text which makes this referring to the afterlife. The RC apologist seeks RCP in every closet.
Zech. 13:8-9 – God says 2/3 shall perish, and 1/3 shall be left alive, put into the fire, and refined like silver and tested like gold. The ones that perish go to hell, and there is no need for refinement in heaven, so those being refined are in purgatory.
Which contextually is simply not referring to the afterlife, but to the latter-day repentance of Israel (which even the CCC affirms) and her trial on the earth during the Tribulation in the Day of the Lord.
And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. (Zechariah 12:10)
Mal. 3:2-3 – also refers to God’s purification of the righteous at their death.
Which also refers not to RCP but the future coming of the Lord
But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap: And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness. (Malachi 3:2-3)
That's it. This compilation has been the most wanton extensive egregious eisegesis by a RC I have ever dealt with, whose driving interest is evidenced as not determining what a text says, but how he can force it to support the doctrine of his church-god. And thus is serves as an argument against being a RC. Moreover, the posting of which also impugns all who invoke it as scriptures which teach RCP.
May God peradventure grant all such "repentance to the acknowledging of the truth." (2 Timothy 2:25)
Well obviously we aren't talking about Hebrew or Greek, are we? You cited a section from your Catechism that MISQUOTES the New Testament - using the English word "expiate/expiation" instead of "propitiate/propitiation". The words are not the same just as the purpose for the blood atonements referred to in the Old Testament (as a covering for sin) were not the same as that of the New Testament where the blood of Christ does not "cover" our sin, it takes it away/removes it and never needs to be repeated.
And the words have related meanings. Hence, when you use the catechism you’ll discover the index says the subject “Propitiator” can be found in paragraph 433: 433 The name of the Savior God was invoked only once in the year by the high priest in atonement for the sins of Israel, after he had sprinkled the mercy seat in the Holy of Holies with the sacrificial blood. The mercy seat was the place of God’s presence.25 When St. Paul speaks of Jesus whom “God put forward as an expiation by his blood”, he means that in Christ’s humanity “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself.”26
Yes, they are related, but, again, the Catechism misquotes Romans 3. Christ is put forward as the PROPITIATION/atoning sacrifice for our sins and Paul reiterates the difference between the Old Testament sacrificial system and that of the New Covenant:
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.