Posted on 08/09/2015 11:06:27 AM PDT by Old Yeller
The Bible never speaks of a place where one can go to be purified of his sin. Rather, it always speaks of a Person to whom we can go to be purified: Jesus Christ. God tells us that those who refuse to trust Christ to cleanse them from their sins are condemned: Whoever believes in Him avoids condemnation, but whoever does not believe is already condemned for not believing in the name of God's only Son (John 3:18). There are only two choices: Whoever believes in the Son has life eternal. Whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but must endure the wrath of God (John 3:36; See also Revelation 20:15; Luke 16:19-31, especially verse 26). Anyone who accepts Christ is completely saved: There is no condemnation now for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). Saying that there is no condemnation, certainly eliminates the flames of purgatory.
Another passage which clearly excludes the idea of purgatory is, their sins and transgressions I will remember no more (Hebrews 10:17). If, as the Bible says, God no longer remembers the sins of those who are in Christ, He does not punish them for these sins. To do so would be saying that Christ had not made full payment for them and that God the Father still remembered them. (See also Romans 5:8-11; Hebrews 10:14-18; Psalm 103:12).
Anyone who does not believe that Christ has completely saved him, has not completely trusted Christ to save him. That is, he does not believe that Christ's sacrifice has paid for all of his sins, and thinks he must pay for some of them himself. However, we are saved when we stop trusting what we can do, and start trusting Christ to save us.
The idea that Christ's sacrifice is not sufficient to cleanse us from all of our sins would condemn a great sinner such as the thief who was crucified with Jesus to suffer a long time in purgatory if not for all eternity in hell! Instead, there was nothing left over that Christ's death on the Cross did not cover. When the thief placed his trust in Christ, Jesus said to him, I assure you: this day you will be with me in paradise (Luke 23:43).
If purgatory existed, and the mass helped people to get out, the rich would have a tremendous advantage by being able to pay for masses to shorten their suffering. The poor instead, would be left to the mercy of the occasional priest who might say an unpaid mass for them. One ex-priest wrote, "If we really believed that the mass would save people from the flames of purgatory, would we make them pay for it? I would even save a dog if I saw one in a fire, and I would never even think of asking to be paid!"
Purgatory was evidently a pagan idea. Virgil, the pagan Latin poet who lived 70 - 19 B.C. divided the departed souls into three different places in his writings: One for the good, one for the damned, and a third where the less bad could pay for their sins. Since the idea of purgatory existed outside of the church before it came into the church, it is probable that it was brought in by contact with pagans like Virgil. There was a great influx of non-Biblical ideas into the church around 300 A.D. when the Roman Emperor Constantine took many unsaved people in as members of the church.
In any event, there is no mention of purgatory in the Bible. Some would try, however, to make the idea sound somewhat Biblical by referring to 2 Maccabees 12:41-45, a passage in one of the apocryphal books written between the times of the Old and New Testaments. These books were never accepted as part of the Hebrew Old Testament, nor quoted in the New Testament, but they are included in the Catholic Bible, though usually with an explanation that they are of a less inspired category. Apart from this passage in 2 Maccabees, the apocrypha is little used by the Catholic church to support a doctrinal position.
It is important to notice that this passage does not speak of purgatory at all, but actually condemns idolatry, particularly the practice of wearing little images on a necklace or such. Hebrew soldiers were found wearing this sort of thing after a battle, and their buddies, on making this discovery, realized that they had died in the sin of idolatry. They then counseled prayer for their souls. The Roman Catholic position is that prayer for them would have been unnecessary if they were in heaven and useless if they were in hell, so there must be another place. The logic seems good, but the result contradicts the clear teaching of the inspired Scripture. Contradicting inspired Scripture with a philosophical response based on an apparent inference from the Apocrypha is a very weak argument indeed. The very word "Apocrypha," which comes from the Greek word for hidden, has come to mean "false," or "of doubtful authorship."
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”
That's just filthy PROT teaching!
Come to the Eternal city!
Embrace the Light of Rome!!
Only SHE can help the dead in their travails!!!
You are entitled to your opinion. But you are missing the meaning.
Prophets would refer to anyone who foretells the future as their source would be the spirit mentioned in the scripture.
A prophet is an individual who is claimed to have been contacted by the supernatural or the divine, and to speak for them, serving as an intermediary with humanity, delivering this new found knowledge from the supernatural entity to other people.
When I first heard this scripture many years ago it was while working with a woman and her two grandparents suddenly appeared. They had both been long dead. They had blue eyes and silver hair and spoke normally, but the knot in my stomach told me to be cautious. Suddenly the words “Do you believe that Jesus was born in the flesh?” came out of my mouth. They could not answer the question, but dodged it with “We know Jesus.” My voice uttered the question again, at which time their blue eyes turned to black and then to red as their true nature came out.
My experience is that it works and has far greater application than you mention.
All three men you named accepted the “Real Presence”, based on that is this something you will now accept?
II was pretty sure you would ignore that post. I would like an answer though.
As promised...
It's one of the reasons I don't like the ECFs. There only consistency is inconsistency. But sometimes when discussing with catholics I like to use catholic sources.
A better position on this would have been to use the Word.
Matthew 23:35 NASB)
....that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
In this we see Christ referencing the beginning and ending of the Hebrew bible. From Genesis to Chronicles.
The Hebrew bible did not contain the apocrypha. Hence, Jesus is not including the apocrypha as Scripture.
“But if you persist in accepting all spirits, you will end up failing to discern the Holy Spirit.”
Your statement makes no sense... I do not accept all spirits, I discern them.
1 Corinthians 2:14New International Version (NIV)
14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
Recommend you read about the Docetics whom John was addressing in this letter.
Not sure what version of the Bible you are using but it is not my experience that satan is transformed into light.
My experience is that he tries to imitate the light. I have experienced this many times.
2 Corinthians 11:14 New International Version (NIV)
14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
2 Corinthians 11:14 American Standard Version (ASV)
14 And no marvel; for even Satan fashioneth himself into an angel of light.
2 Corinthians 11:14 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
14 No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
2 Corinthians 11:14 New American Bible (Revised Edition) (NABRE)
14 And no wonder, for even Satan masquerades as an angel of light.
2 Corinthians 11:14 New Revised Standard Version, Anglicised Catholic Edition (NRSVACE)
14 And no wonder! Even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
I see that the King James version is:
2 Corinthians 11:14 New King James Version (NKJV)
14 And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.
My experience differs from that translation. And it does not fit as satan cannot be light.... If he were light he would not be satan... He is a trickster and often tries to imitate that he is of the light, but only to blind people who are not filled with Holy Spirit.
It was the “Third Heaven”
2 Corinthians 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows.
Kind of a cop out answer, I generally don't expect that from you, but it is your prerogative.
Matthew 23:35 NASB) ....that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
In this we see Christ referencing the beginning and ending of the Hebrew bible. From Genesis to Chronicles.
The Hebrew bible did not contain the apocrypha. Hence, Jesus is not including the apocrypha as Scripture.
That presents a problem for the non-Catholics. The Jewish scriptures are given in this order The Torah (The Law), The Prophets, and finally the Writings.
If we go strictly by Jesus's words in Matthew that leaves out the last old testament prophet Malachi, and all of the Writings. This means you would not have Psalms, Proverbs, Job, The song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Ester, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles.
Please do not take my word for it. I used both the Stone Edition Tanch and the Oxford edition of the Jewish study Bible.
How do yo know if they have the Light of God in them???
Kind of a cop out answer, I generally don't expect that from you, but it is your prerogative.
I don't see it as a cop out as I can point to a lot of positions where Catholics agree with a statement by the ECFs but then reject other things they say when the ECFs are opposed to Catholicism.
The ECFs are interesting reading, but any theology they present I compare with the Word.
They're all over the place it seems on the issues.
That presents a problem for the non-Catholics. The Jewish scriptures are given in this order The Torah (The Law), The Prophets, and finally the Writings.
If we go strictly by Jesus's words in Matthew that leaves out the last old testament prophet Malachi, and all of the Writings. This means you would not have Psalms, Proverbs, Job, The song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Ester, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles.
The link below has the Hebrew Bible with the Law, the Prophets and the Writings...including all the books you say are omitted.
http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Heb-Xn-Bibles.htm
My textbook, "Old Survey Testament" has the Hebrew Bible along with the listing of the catholic bible and protestant bible.
It took has the Torah (5), Prophets (8), Writings (11). This list also includes the books you note are omitted in your references. I do not have those available but would be interested in seeing them if you have a readily available link.
In either case Jesus did reference Genesis to Chronicles when He mentioned Abel to Zechariah. From this He was referencing the Hebrew Bible from the above link from catholic resources.
Christ did not mention Malachi or the "Writings" in Matthew. Yes the Tanach and the JSB both contain the writings, but a strict literal meaning of Christ words would require the elimination of the Writings.
Is that more clear?
http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Heb-Xn-Bibles.htm
The above link shows the order of the Hebrew Bible as arranged by the Hebrews....not how we have it today.
Seriously, you Are not understanding what I am saying at all. Christ’s words would REMOVE 11 entire books. There would be no “Writings”, because of the order of the Jewish canon. The “Writings” come after the books Jesus named. They would not be included in the canon if we use His literal words.
What is the order of the Hebrew canon?
This is my last post on the matter, if you don't understand now there is nothing more that I can say.
The order is Torah, Prophets, and Writings last. The list of books according to a literal reading of Christ's words ends with Zechariah. HE LEAVES OUT THE WRITINGS, HE ONLY INCLUDED THE TORAH ADN THE PROPHETS,(and not even all of those).HE DID NOT INCLUDE THE WRITINGS.
This book comes last in the Hebrew Bible under the Writings.
Have you even looked at the link I've provided? It's even a catholic source. http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Heb-Xn-Bibles.htm
TORAH
The Five Books of Moses:
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy
NEVI’IM
The Prophets:
Joshua
Judges
1 Samuel
2 Samuel
1 Kings
2 Kings
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Ezekial
The Twelve Minor Prophets:
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi
KETHUVIM
The Writings:
Psalms
Proverbs
Job
The Song of Songs
Ruth
Lamentations
Ecclesiastes
Esther
Daniel
Ezra
Nehemiah
1 Chronicles
2 CHRONICLES
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.