Posted on 10/29/2011 3:31:02 PM PDT by RnMomof7
Catholics who believe a purifying fire will purge away their sins are deluded victims of a fatal fabrication. The invention of a place for purification of sins called Purgatory is one of the most seductive attractions of the Roman Catholic religion. Pastor John MacArthur of Grace Community Church described this deceptive hoax brilliantly. He said: "Purgatory is what makes the whole system work. Take out Purgatory and it's a hard sell to be a Catholic. Purgatory is the safety net, when you die, you don't go to hell. You go [to Purgatory] and get things sorted out and finally get to heaven if you've been a good Catholic. In the Catholic system you can never know you're going to heaven. You just keep trying and trying...in a long journey toward perfection. Well, it's pretty discouraging. People in that system are guilt-ridden, fear-ridden and have no knowledge of whether or not they're going to get into the Kingdom. If there's no Purgatory, there's no safety net to catch me and give me some opportunity to get into heaven. It's a second chance, it's another chance after death" (from "The Pope and the Papacy").
The Origin of Purgatory
There was no mention of Purgatory during the first two centuries of the church. However, when Roman Emperor Theodosius (379-395) decreed that Christianity was to be the official religion of the empire, thousands of pagans flooded into the Church and brought their pagan beliefs and traditions with them. One of those ancient pagan beliefs was a place of purification where souls went to make satisfaction for their sins.
The concept became much more widespread around 600 A.D. due to the fanaticism of Pope Gregory the Great. He developed the doctrine through visions and revelations of a Purgatorial fire. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia (CE), Pope Gregory said Catholics "will expiate their faults by purgatorial flames," and "the pain [is] more intolerable than any one can suffer in this life." Centuries later, at the Council of Florence (1431), it was pronounced an infallible dogma. It was later reaffirmed by the Council of Trent (1564). The dogma is based largely on Catholic tradition from extra- biblical writings and oral history. "So deep was this belief ingrained in our common humanity that it was accepted by the Jews, and in at least a shadowy way by the pagans, long before the coming of Christianity" (CE). It seems incomprehensible that Rome would admit to using a pagan tradition for the defense of one of its most esteemed "Christian" doctrines.
The Deception of Purgatory
Purgatory comes from the Latin word “purgare,” which means to make clean or to purify. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines purgatory as "a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God’s grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions." They must be purified of these "venial" sins before they can be allowed into heaven. Here we see Catholicism perpetuating the seductive lie of Satan by declaring "you will not surely die" when you commit venial sins (Gen. 3:4). The Council of Trent dares to declare that "God does not always remit the whole punishment due to sin together with the guilt. God requires satisfaction and will punish sin...The sinner, failing to do penance in this life, may be punished in another world, and so not be cast off eternally from God." (Session 15, Can. XI). Those Catholic Bishops had the audacity to declare that the suffering and death of God's perfect man and man's perfect substitute was not sufficient to satisfy divine justice for sin.
The Motivation for Purgatory
Over the centuries billions of dollars have been paid to Roman Catholic priests to obtain relief from imaginary sufferings in Purgatory's fire. The Catholic clergy has always taught that the period of suffering in Purgatory can be shortened by purchasing indulgences and novenas, buying Mass cards and providing gifts of money. When a Catholic dies, money is extracted from mourning loved ones to shorten the deceased's punishment in Purgatory. When my dear old dad passed away as a devout Catholic of 79 years, I was amazed at the hundreds of Mass cards purchased for him by well-meaning friends. We have heard of other Catholics who have willed their entire estates to their religion so that perpetual masses could be offered for them after they die. It is no wonder that the Catholic religion has become the richest institution in the world. The buying and selling of God's grace has been a very lucrative business for the Vatican.
Another motivation for Rome to fabricate the heretical doctrine of Purgatory is its powerful effect on controlling people. Ultimately, the enslavement and subjugation of people is the goal of every false religion, and Purgatory does exactly that. The concept of a terrifying prison with a purging fire, governed by religious leaders, is a most brilliant invention. It holds people captive, not only in this life but also in the next life. Catholic clergy will not say how many years people have to suffer for their sins or how many Masses must be purchased before they can be released from the flames. This dreadful fear and uncertainty is the most ruthless form of religious bondage and deception!
Another motivation for Rome to fabricate the heretical doctrine of Purgatory is its powerful effect on controlling people. Ultimately, the enslavement and subjugation of people is the goal of every false religion, and Purgatory does exactly that. The concept of a terrifying prison with a purging fire, governed by religious leaders, is a most brilliant invention. It holds people captive, not only in this life but also in the next life. Catholic clergy will not say how many years people have to suffer for their sins or how many Masses must be purchased before they can be released from the flames. This dreadful fear and uncertainty is the most ruthless form of religious bondage and deception!
Another motivation for Rome to fabricate the heretical doctrine of Purgatory is its powerful effect on controlling people. Ultimately, the enslavement and subjugation of people is the goal of every false religion, and Purgatory does exactly that. The concept of a terrifying prison with a purging fire, governed by religious leaders, is a most brilliant invention. It holds people captive, not only in this life but also in the next life. Catholic clergy will not say how many years people have to suffer for their sins or how many Masses must be purchased before they can be released from the flames. This dreadful fear and uncertainty is the most ruthless form of religious bondage and deception!
Biblical Support for Purgatory
There is absolutely none! In fact, neither the word nor the concept of sin-purifying fire is found in Scripture. The Vatican was confronted with this in the 16th century when the Reformers protested its practice of buying and selling of God's grace through indulgences. Backed into a corner, the Council of Trent added the apocryphal books to its canon of Scripture. Rome now declares there is scriptural support for purgatory in the apocryphal book of Second Maccabees. The council ignored the fact that the Jewish scribes never recognized the apocryphal books as inspired or part of the Hebrew Scriptures. They were never included because of their many historical, theological and geographical errors. Since God is not the author of error, He obviously did not inspire the writers of the Apocrypha. This is why the Apocrypha was never included in the original canon of 66 books. ..........."
The Biblical Rebuke of Purgatory
God's Word leaves absolutely no possibility for sin to be purged away by anything other than the blood of Jesus Christ. The beloved apostle John penned these words with irrefutable clarity. He wrote, "The blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin" and "all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:7, 9). John did not say "some" sins or "most" sins, but all sin! This soundly rebukes the need for a sin-purging fire. God's Word also declares, "All things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Heb. 9:22). When Jesus "made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Heb. 1:3). Those who desire to have their sins purged need to trust a person, not a place. The blood of Christ is the only cleansing agent for sin! Those who come to the cross of Christ must come with empty hands of faith, bringing nothing but their sins.
Every blood-bought believer is instantly present with their Redeemer at the moment of death. To be "absent from the body" is to be "at home with the Lord" (2 Cor. 5:6-8). This good news was affirmed by the Lord Jesus with the promise He gave to the repentant thief at Calvary. He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43). This habitual sinner did not need a fire to purge his sins.
Catholics who believe in Purgatory need to be asked: "Who is in charge of releasing souls from the purging fire?" It cannot be God because of His promise to believers. "Their sins and iniquities I will remember no more" (Heb. 10:17). After conversion, God no longer counts sins against His children (2 Cor. 5:19).
Purgatory is a travesty on the justice of God and a disgraceful fabrication that robs Christ Jesus of His glory and honor. He alone satisfied divine justice, once and for all, by the perfect and finished sacrifice of Himself. The fatal deception of Purgatory blinds Catholics from the glorious Gospel of grace. It is one of Satan's many lies which keep his captives from knowing and trusting the sufficiency of Jesus Christ. It is Christ alone that will present us "faultless before the presence of his glory" (Jude 24).
In fact, according to the Nicene fathers Peter never was a Bishop or Pope.
"Now concerning those bishops which have been ordained in our lifetime, we let you know that they are these:--James the bishop of Jerusalem, the brother of our Lord; upon whose death the second was Simeon the son of Cleopas; after whom the third was Judas the son of James. Of Caesarea of Palestine, the first was Zacchaeus, who was once a publican; after whom was Cornelius, and the third Theophilus. Of Antioch, Euodius, ordained by me Peter; and Ignatius by Paul. Of Alexandria, Annianus was the first, ordained by Mark the evangelist; the second Avilius by Luke, who was also an evangelist. Of the church of Rome, Linus the son of Claudia was the first, ordained by Paul [Anti Nicene Fathers, Volume VII, Book VI, Sec. IV, XLVI)Roberts, Alexander and Donaldson, James, Ante-Nicene Fathers: Volume VII:]
And according to Hippolytus the first Pope was Linus not Peter.
1. James the Lord's brother, bishop of Jerusalem.
2. Cleopas, bishop of Jerusalem.
3. Matthias, who supplied the vacant place in the number of the twelve apostles.
4. Thaddeus, who conveyed the epistle to Augarus.
5. Ananias, who baptized Paul, and was bishop of Damascus.
6. Stephen, the first martyr.
7. Philip, who baptized the eunuch.
8. Prochorus, bishop of Nicomedia, who also was the first that departed, believing together with his daughters.
9. Nicanor died when Stephen was martyred.
10. Timon, bishop of Bostra.
11. Parmenas, bishop of Soli.
12. Nicolaus, bishop of Samaria.
13. Barnabas, bishop of Milan.
14. Mark the evangelist, bishop of Alexandria.
15. Luke the evangelist.
These two belonged to the seventy disciples who were scattered by the offence of the word which Christ spoke, "Except a man eat my flesh, and drink my blood, he is not worthy of me." But the one being induced to return to the Lord by Peter's instrumentality, and the other by Paul's, they were honoured to preach that Gospel on account of which they also suffered martyrdom, the one being burned, and the other being crucified on an olive tree.
16. Silas, bishop of Corinth.
17. Silvanus, bishop of Thessalonica.
18. Crisces (Crescens), bishop of Carchedon in Gaul.
19. Epaenetus, bishop of Carthage.
20. Andronicus, bishop of Pannonia.
21. Amplias, bishop of Odyssus.
22. Urban, bishop of Macedonia.
23. Stachys, bishop of Byzantium.
24. Barnabas, bishop of Heraclea.
25. Phygellus, bishop of Ephesus. He was of the party also of Simon.
26. Hermogenes. He, too, was of the same mind with the former.
27. Demas, who also became a priest of idols.
28. Apelles, bishop of Smyrna.
29. Aristobulus, bishop of Britain.
30. Narcissus, bishop of Athens.
31. Herodion, bishop of Tarsus.
32. Agabus the prophet.
33. Rufus, bishop of Thebes.
34. Asyncritus, bishop of Hyrcania.
35. Phlegon, bishop of Marathon.
36. Hermes, bishop of Dalmatia.
37. Patrobulus, bishop of Puteoli.
38. Hermas, bishop of Philippi.
39. Linus, bishop of Rome.
40. Caius, bishop of Ephesus.
41. Philologus, bishop of Sinope.
(Hippolytus, Book XLIV; ON The Twelve Apostles Where Each OF Them Preached, And Where HE Met His End.)
Did you notice the first Pope listed? Did you also notice that Peter’s name is not even on that list?
I do not have the honor of having gone to UGA. I took the name Mad Dawg when one of my ewes got rabies and all three of us had to have the shots— which aren’t that bad any more.
The very idea of rabid sheep still makes me laugh. It’s like when I named one of my sweeter rams “Fang.”
I would go this far toward you: in the 16th century the idea of indulgences was perverted and drawn into the effort to raise money, I think to build St. Peter’s in Rome. I don’t have all my books at hand, darn it, or I could refer you to the page in Chadwick’s (non-Catholic) history of the Church which claims to present the first recorded indulgence which the Pope granted to nuns who especially impressed him with their piety. I don’t THINK he was counting on income from that grant.
I think a friend ‘borrowed’ that book anyway. It was in my pickup, and he borrowed my pickup, and then he told me it was a good book. Looks suspicious to me! :-)
Not an exact quote, but still equally wrong.
We are called to alms in Acts and particularly in the Books of Tobit and Sirach (which is one of the reasons Luther tore them out of the Bible) and and to restitution for our wrongs, this is particularly emphasized in Numbers 5. Does it matter whether that restitution or charity is with our sweat or the proceeds for our labors or whether for our own transgressions or for those of others?
Words like "false" "wrong" "error" do not attribute motive.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Again, maam/sir/whatever, I can read. I can read the scriptures and they tell anyone who can understand written language that it’s so.
There’s no point in belaboring this, I’m a protestant calvinist who knows he knows he’s saved, and it’s my view that we, the members of the RCC and I are brothers and sisters in Christ, regardless of our petty squabbles.
I have an older sister, as hard as that is to imagine, who’s daughter, (brought up in an evangelical church), married a guy who was Catholic. My sister had hissy fits, she couldn’t believe her girl was losing her salvation over such a thing as “love”. My council was to love all of them. We all, you and I, my fellow FRiend believe Christ is our savior and died on the Cross for our sins, and we are relying on that fact for our salvation. Our ancillary differences of opinion do not cancel that critical fact out.
We may want to argue about it in Heaven, but I’m of the mind that we’ll have better things to do.
Surely no one is surprised.
Should you not offer something for the readers to reason why this article is mistaken?
Except....more ridiculous....
I've come to the mind that the early church did in fact incorporate pagan practices to aid in conversion.
I always heard it was:
When a coin within the coffer rings
Another soul from purgatory springs.
But it must have been in German anyway.
Well my FRiend, I’m not sure if I said it on this thread or not, but, I’m assured of one thing: My RCC friends and I both count on the sacrifice of Christ on the cross for our salvation and in the end that’s all that matters.
I’m sure the Lord God is amused by our petty squabbles and well certainly have better things to do in paradise than to rehash differences that we’ve thought so important here on earth.
Would it be disingenuous of me to buy some asbestos underware, just in case I may have the small end of the stick?
I would appeal to the saint of the catacombs when dealing with some of the long hairs around here....
It’s fun, the flock of ferals has genes from a long ago departed Himalayan— long hair Siamese-y guy, at least phenotypically. Now they’re mostly tabbies, tortoiseshells, calicos, and marmalades — but more tan than orange.
But the Siamese physique and the long hair crop up pretty frequently.
I m better, thank you, but not all better. Weak and tired and afraid to eat. I am supporting the bottled water industry today.
Last night God decided to teach me a little about carnal purgation. Do I need to say more? I hope not. :-)
You think I was arguing? LOL.
My post #94: "Whatever.."
My post #285: "I’m ok with you believing it, though."
My post #305: "You believe it, I don't." (Tagline: "I believe in opinions on opinion forums, but you are free to disagree about that."
FRiend, I did not even attempt to bring you around to my way of thinking. You may have a low threshold for argument, there. (NTTAWWT! YMMV!)
Bless you for saying that. It will be good to drink straight from the true well.
I wanna be buried in Nomex!
I wouldn't take the list of Hippolytus, the first antiPope too seriously. All credible scholars and historians unanimously agree that St. Peter, appointed by Jesus, was the first Bishop of Rome and Pope.
Well mine is just as valid as the one the Pope comes up with.
>>>>Well mine is just as valid as the one the Pope comes up with.
No, it isn’t.
There was a great study in Scientific American back in the late 70's that linked human migration history to the specific traits of feral cats in various locations around the planet. The study struck me because it discussed polydactyl (six-toed) cats and we had a large male six-toed cat when I was a kid. Since reading it I have paid more attention to the types of cats I have seen around the world and I have learned a lot of local history that way.
****All credible scholars and historians unanimously agree that St. Peter, appointed by Jesus, was the first Bishop of Rome and Pope.****
If we wanted to get Technical and biblical, the first leader of the Church was James the Dirty (never bathed) of Jerusalem.
Even Peter feared him when Peter came from the conversion of Cornelius, and James made the decisions when St Paul went to Jerusalem to free the Gentiles from circumcision.
OK, I’m sure you think you’re right, but I’m just as sure that this guy who is wearing the pointy hat is just an elected official in an organized bureaucracy who’s principle aim is mixed.
I do know the the Pope is no better than I am and, while I may respect his Grace as a clergyman, I’m not prepared to accept that he speaks for God.
It’s an ongoing enterprise dedicated to it’s own continuance, not necessarily saving souls.
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.