The Greek verb does not match the English verb tenses 1:1, and I don’t know how you would express the burning and receiving/suffering differently based on two future events even in English. The Day (it doesn’t actually say “of the Lord”) is when the testing is manifest (φανερον), it says nothing of the time of the testing itself, δοκιμασει.
I do not think the Greek verb is going to define this as past event in any case, and rather than resorting to your own translation, you should argue based upon what your church has given you to read, and both the Douay and NAB have it as future, and the former also says “day of the Lord,” “for the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire,” the “of the Lord” being an interpretative interpolation, which the NAB concurs with in its notes, and there is no problem at all making the testing and receiving rewards to be on the same day-period.
The contextual problem is with making this refer to a trial by fire which occurred at death, as “the day” is what is abundantly supported as being the day of the Lord/God/Christ, and which is associated with burning up chaff, these being false believers, directly or indirectly, and Christians are either making true ones or false. “For behold the day shall come kindled as a furnace: and all the proud, and all that do wickedly shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall set them on fire, saith the Lord of hosts, it shall not leave them root, nor branch. “ (Mt. 4:1; cf. Mt. 3:12; 13:41-43) I think just being in the presence of Christ shall set the lost on fire, (cf. 2Thes. 1:8,9) in that day.
And if it refers to character refinement, as said, it is this world that the Scriptures clearly show as being the place where growth toward practical perfection takes place, from Job to Christ. (Heb. 2:10; 5:9: the latter as having passed all the tests in manifesting He was God) If 1Cor. 3 was only referring to the results of testing of one's faith-character being made manifest, rather than converts passing through or being consumed by the fire on that Day, then that testing would be here.
>1Cor. 3 is not speaking of a particular judgment at one's death<
Says you. It sure is judgment and it sure is particular. Some question remains when the testing itself is occurring.
If the testing itself is occurring in the day of Christ then this is not directly supporting postmortem purgatorial cleansing, which is what you have attempted to make this chapter say in order to support your church, though you disagree with her translation, and have ascribed more definitiveness to this chapter as referring to this than some far greater Roman Catholic authorities. But what Scripture most clearly supports is that 1Cor. 3 is speaking about the day of Christ, and what happens on that day.
>nor of a necessary purgation of character defects<
The purgation is of defective work done in good faith: stubble laid on the foundation of Christ.
You argued before that it was accumulated imperfections, which inferred character defects, and that is what describes purgatory, while 1Cor. 3:13-15 expresses that what is burned is something which should have remained if one was to gain the reward, while the one who loses things attains final full salvation despite this.
>Rather, contextually it is the judgment seat of Christ in which believers are rewarded according to how they built the church, and final salvation is also realized even by those who lost what they should have kept, which was not character defects, but works which reflected such.<
How is it “rather”? You are describing the particular judgment and the purgatorial passage that sometime follows correctly.
It is “rather” as the judgment of works by the fire test and the giving of reward both occur in “that day” period beginning at Christ's return.
>there is a final judgment, in which God “will render to each man according to his works, and according to his acceptance or refusal of grace<
Yes, the rewards are given at the Final Judgment, however our focus is the test by fire in 1 Cor which precedes it (one cannot make manifest something that has not occurred yet).
We disagree. One either dies in the Lord (Rv. 14:13) or you die in your sins, (Jn. 8:24) and the day will manifest that, but the way it does is by the fire which consumes the stubble and not the precious. "As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear." (Matthew 13:40-43)
But the redeemed of the Lord who built the body of Christ by obedient faith will find mercy and rewards:
"The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day: and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou knowest very well." (2 Timothy 1:18)
"For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister." (Hebrews 6:10)
"Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." (2 Timothy 4:8)
>and assurance that a decree is infallible is not based on the strength of the weight of evidence and arguments behind her decrees<
True and false. The Church does not have an illogical faith, so the dogmas of the Church are all consistent between themselves, with earlier beliefs and with the scripture. However, the Church does not prove her dogmas from scripture as that would be a fallacious circular reasoning. The Church reveals the dogmas as she herself discovers them in the nascent form in the original deposit of faith.
These are claims, but the dogmas of the Church are “all consistent between themselves” and Tradition, Scripture and history as she defines them, and you are assured of her veracity because she has defined herself as assuredly infallible when speaking according to her infallibly define formula. Under this premise she can autocratically declare what she will as being infallible, and so it is. She can take one of many traditions and claim one is the DOF, disagreeing with the EO, but if she infallibly declares it so, then it is so because she decreed it so.
And i do understand that while Catholics appeal to Scripture in condescension to us, as if it were what supremely determines doctrine (and often engaging in their own interpretation of it), their goal is to bring us to forsake our appeal to it as such, and instead submit to Rome. But we find Scripture as warranting its claims based upon its evident manifold power, and becoming the standard for obedience and testing truth claimed, and which authority even the instruments and stewards of Scripture must demonstrate subjection to and dependance on, truth being manifest by conformity to it in text and fruit by which men are persuaded as seen in Scripture, which provided for reason as well as the church, etc.
>accepted decrees can lack debt and precision, as is substantially the case regarding purgatory and 1Cor. 3, and are still subject to some interpretation<
Yes. No one argued differently. What we know dogmatically is really very little: there is a process of purgation through which some souls go through on their way to heaven.
Indeed. Here. The latter fire on that day of the Lord is not to gain Heaven, but manifest quality of works and to give rewards accordingly.
>The Corinthians are God's building, (v. 9) and Paul's "work," (1Cor. 9:1) which foundation Paul laid, (v. 10) that being Christ, (v. 11) and another buildeth thereon, and how one buildeth thereupon determines the reward. (vs. 12ff)
And that this refers to all is confirmed in the light of the fact that it is the day of Christ when this judgment occurs, (1Cor. 1:18; 3:13)...<
Thank you. That is what I have been arguing: that the special context of the “church builders” – even if one thinks it persists to the “every man” passage, -- still cannot apply in its entirety only to clergy.
True, as here also context clarifies.
>In addition, the last days (plural) is the period of the church age…<
That is interesting but I don’t see how it relates to the issue of Purgatory. Your discourse there seems at first reading tainted with the highly speculative Protestant beliefs, whereas the Church avoids such speculation, especially as regards “two resurrections”.
It distinguished between the “last days” and the “last day,” which is key as to when the fire text and the manner of workmanship is revealed. As far as speculation, that is what Rome does much engage in, from the perpetual virginity and sinlessness and bodily ascension of Mary to purgatory. She just makes such traditions to be doctrine, but which presumption is not new. (Mk. 7:3-13) I do find the support from the CCC for the rise do the the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism, and if final restoration of faith to Israel interesting.
As regards 2 resurrections, that has real support for it, for if the first resurrection happens prior to the 1,000 years (“the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished [and the final battle of the Lord and slaying of the wicked]. This is the first resurrection: Rv. 20:5), then you have two resurrections. The first would be of believers (at the end of the tribulation it seems): “the dead in Christ shall rise first: “Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. So shall we ever be with the Lord.” (1Thes. 4:16,17)
And which believers would then go with the Lord to the battle of Armageddon: "And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean." (Revelation 19:14) “Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their unGodly deeds which they have unGodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which unGodly sinners have spoken against Him.” (Jude. 1:14,15)
After the 1k years you have the final battle (the nations rising up against the camp of the elect) and the final physical slaying of the lost, (Rv. 20:7-10) and then you would have the general resurrection and judgment of Rv. 20:11-15. The latter does not say that it is only for the lost, but the point is that souls were resurrected prior to this. (Rv. 20:4-6)
This period may all be considered the day of the Lord, with the giving of rewards being after the judgment:
“And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth. “ (Rv. 11:18)
Needless to say, this is contrary to the pretrib hypothesis, but all who abase themselves as damned and destitute of any worthiness of eternal life, but cast all their faith in the Lord Jesus to save them by His blood, with a faith that thus follows Him and dies in the Lord, will be with the Lord at death and realize glory, which the Lord shall lead them to.
>The issue is not that some have no works (that they built the church with) that burn, but where is it taught that some in purgatory do not need purification by purgation. The relevant catechisms do not teach this, but they teach the contrary:<
How is it contrary? Canon 1030 says “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”, thus separating those who are “still imperfectly purified” and the rest.
It is contrary because it has no place for a second class in purgatory, in which one “survives the fire unscathed and with a reward and the other loses the accumulated imperfections and sees no particular reward” but “a loss of the direct passage into sainthood,” as you stated earlier, in which it seemed you had one fire but two classes undergoing it in purgatory, which postmortem suffering you have vs. 13-15 referring to, with the fire only being a test for some, but the purifying fire for others. As i understand you now, you make that “the day” to be merely declarative of the results of an earlier fire, that of the “particular judgment” which is asserted to take place at death, but purgatory is the only place i see the CCC teaching a postmortem fire, and which is only for the imperfect believers. In any case, i see the test and the giving of rewards as basically one event, in the future day of Christ.
>Reducing the text to be about a postmortem cleansing fire which precedes entry into Heaven ignores contention about the nature of the suffering and the loss, and its purpose, and its time of this event period<
Well, yes. You are correct: 1 Cor. 3 does not spell out the precise nature of the Purgatory. We don’t know the “nature of the suffering and the loss”. The timing of it we do know because “it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27); and “this day thou shalt be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43), -- and so the individual judgment and entry into heaven are not delayed till the Second Coming. We don’t, however know the duration of the purgatorial cleansing, nor even whether there is a sense of duration to it. The purpose we also know: to allow entry into heaven of those not sufficiently purified in life.
And there are conflicting opinions about the nature and experience of it, but the nature of the attempts to make purgatory the primary subject matter of 1Cor. 3:9-15, as speaking of the purification of the saved by burning off their inferior works, is a negative argument for me as regards purgatory being Scriptural, and i think we have pretty much exhausted this. We can only agree that there is a postmortem test by fire which will burn up inferior works, but i disagree that it is one that commences at death, and that it is for the purpose of holiness so that one can enter Heaven, or that the works are character defects themselves.
The idea of a postmortem purgatorial cleansing in order to attain heaven is one that is based the premise of the need for practical and heart-holiness to see the Lord, and as said, this must be an attribute of saving faith, but either on has this or he does not at death, and thus the focus on sanctification is in this world, were Christ Himself was perfected, in the sense of experience and victory, while the clearest and most explicit statements on the immediate postmortem state of the believer is with the Lord (my understanding of paradise is basically this), but more to come, as the Lord “shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.” (Rv. 7:17) And which reminds me of this beautiful hymn (on of 8,000 hymns written by blind Fanny Crosby!).
Both the Particular Judgment and the Last Judgment are in the future relative to the life of the reader.
I think just being in the presence of Christ shall set the lost on fire […] in that day.
The extended quote about the fire and stubble, by the way, was from Malachi, not Matthew, -- an important distinction since the Old Testament simply did not have the concept of two judgments. Everyone agrees with you on this – this is why there is no reason to think that the combustion occurring in the sight of Christ shall be delayed till the Second Coming. Remember, the Judgment occurs at the time of death; at the Second Coming we have the manifestation of the existing multiple particular judgments to all, and to the living, and the judgment of the living.
the day will manifest that, but the way it does is by the fire which consumes the stubble and not the precious.
These quotes indeed describe fire at the Last Judgment, but note that the fire described in Matthew 13:40-43 is not the fire from which one emerged saved. It is the fact that the fire in 1 Cor. 3 is cleasning rather than annihilating that allows us to the description of the purgatory in it.
Under this premise [the Church] can autocratically declare what she will as being infallible, and so it is.
Well, she has the raw power to do so. It is like a general in the field has the raw power to command his troops to treason. This can be said of any delegated power, but it does not mean that the delegated by Christ power of the church is not legitimately delegated, or that she will lead people to apostasy because technically she can. We live by faith.
their goal is to bring us to forsake our appeal to it as such, and instead submit to Rome
Yes. The reliance on the scripture alone is a vicious circle that ends in loss of faith, and of course you should go to the source of the scripture with all your questions and doubts. That source is Christ in Heaven and His Church on earth.
As far as speculation, that is what Rome does much engage in, from the perpetual virginity and sinlessness and bodily ascension of Mary to purgatory
The Church does not speculate. The Church has the knowledge of the truth revealed to her, and she reveals it to the flock, first through the Christian scripture – which you seem to acknowledge, and also, as the flock matures, through the magisterial teaching every day. “the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you” (John 14:26)
As regards 2 resurrections, that has real support for it
Perhaps. Thanks.
you make that “the day” to be merely declarative of the results of an earlier fire, that of the “particular judgment” which is asserted to take place at death
Yes, correct. I “make that” because the church teaches that.
… but purgatory is the only place i see the CCC teaching a postmortem fire, and which is only for the imperfect believers
You did not turn the page. Here it is:
IV. Hell
1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."610 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.611 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."
1034 Jesus often speaks of "Gehenna" of "the unquenchable fire" reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.612 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"613 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"614
1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."615 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.
1036 The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few."616
Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer darkness where "men will weep and gnash their teeth."617
610 1 ⇒ Jn 3:14-15.
611 Cf. ⇒ Mt 25:31-46.
612 Cf. ⇒ Mt 5:22, ⇒ 29; ⇒ 10:28; ⇒ 13:42, ⇒ 50; ⇒ Mk 9:43-48.
613 ⇒ Mt 13:41-42.
614 ⇒ Mt 25:41.
615 Cf. DS 76; 409; 411; 801; 858; 1002; 1351; 1575; Paul VI, CPG # 12.
616 ⇒ Mt 7:13-14.
617 LG 48 # 3; ⇒ Mt 22:13; cf. ⇒ Heb 9:27; ⇒ Mt 25:13, ⇒ 26, ⇒ 30, ⇒ 31 ⇒ 46.
We can only agree that there is a postmortem test by fire which will burn up inferior works,
That is not a small agreement, actually. You seem to agree with the kernel of the teaching on the purgatory, but you have questions about its timing and precise nature. Everyone does. The Church actually teaches little about the purgatory because there is little we know.
Scripture explicitly confirms that Israel was uniquely the instrument of Divine written revelation and the stewards of it, (Rm. 3:2; 9:4) yet Scripture explicitly confirms that they were not assuredly infallible, nor was this needed in order for writings to be established as Divine, and for truth to be preserved.
That is because the Jews rejected Christ and became the persecutors of the Church. To say that someone (Luther?) came and condemned the Church in the same way as Christ came and condemned the Jews is to stop believing in Christ as one Savior for all ages, Who also promised the victory to the Church, and destruction to her enemies.
The Truth of God today is established as being the church of the living God today only insofar as it manifests conformity to the Scriptures in doctrine, love, holiness and in power, with the gospel of grace effecting manifest regeneration with its fruits.
Of course. This is why I am Catholic, and you -- you must become.