Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: An Argument for Purgatory.

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,054
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    18

    An Argument for Purgatory.

    Purgatory is defined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church as -

    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 -
    The purification process necessary to attain holiness for heaven is a process that occurs between death and the beatitude of heaven.

    Argument for the Existence of Purgatory.

    The Lords prayer states "Thy will [of the Father] be done in earth, as it is in heaven (Matt 6:5-15; Luke 11:1-13).
    The Father's will is that of God.
    God's will is impeccable (Isaiah 6:3).
    Therefore the Father's will is impeccable.

    What is impeccable is without fault.
    What is without fault is without sin.
    The Father's will is impeccable and thereby without sin.

    Jesus gave Christians the Lord's prayer to show Christians the will of the Father.
    The will of the Father is that Christians have an impeccable will as that of the Father (Matt 5:45, 1 Pet 1:15) and as indicated in the Lord's prayer (Matt 6:5-15; Luke 11:1-13).
    What Jesus gives, is to be followed to attain heaven, for Jesus as God is the perfect teacher.

    Heaven is to see God face to face as the supernatural last end of man.
    To see God face to face, infers man is in God's presence.
    But to be in God's presence is to live a divine life in accord with the will of God (Rom 8).
    To live a divine life in accord with the will of God means those men in heaven must have an impeccable will in union with God.
    Yet we are told by God that men on earth sin and thereby are not impeccable.
    And we are told that the just man sins seven times a day (Prov 24:16).
    Hence men on earth sin regularly and thereby do not have impeccable wills.

    For man to attain the vision of God requires that man die in the state of grace.
    For a man to die in the state of grace means at death, mans will is ordered by grace towards God as the object of man's supernatural love.
    Yet man's loving of God as the supernatural last end of man does not exclude minor sins which can be committed, but which do not remove man being directed towards his true final end.
    For some sins do and other sins do not bring death (1 John 5:16).
    Those sins which bring death are mortal and cause man to love a creature over that of God (Rom 2:12).
    Other sins do not bring death and thereby do not remove the love of God that dominates man's will (Prov 24:16, 1 John 5:16).

    Sins which do not bring death are venial sins.
    Sins which do bring death are mortal sins.
    Men who die in the state of grace may have committed venial sins and thereby have a human will directed towards God as the true final end of man.
    Yet venial sin committed by men in the state of grace infers mans will in the state of grace is not impeccable.
    Yet final beatitude is for men who have an impeccable will in union with the Father (1 John 3:1-3).
    Hence men who die in the state of grace but have committed venial sins are unfit for heaven, for the human will is not impeccable.
    Also men who die in the state of grace but have committed venial sins are unfit for hell, for the human will is correctly directed towards God as the ultimate love of man.
    And hell is the false ultimate end of men who falsely love a creature above that of God when mortal sin is committed.
    Hence the man who dies in the state of grace, is directed towards God, but without an impeccable will, whereby man cannot enter either heaven or hell.

    Hence there is a third state, whereby those men who die in the state of grace, without an impeccable will, in which God removes any imperfection in men to prepare men for heaven.
    For men who die in the state of grace are directed by God to the true ultimate end, though imperfectly with venial sin.
    And God does not act to frustrate His work of grace in men, but always acts to fulfill His work of grace.
    For God does not contradict His own work in men.
    Hence the work of grace performed by God, commenced when men are alive, will continue in men unto the perfection of impeccability.
    Thereby men who die in the state of grace are ordered towards heaven, but because of venial sin, are not fit for heaven, but are further perfected by God in a third state that is neither heaven, nor hell.
    The third state after death is rightly called purgatory by the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
    Hence from the nature of man, venial sin and the impeccability of heaven, purgatory must exist.
    Hence purgatory exists.

    JM

  2. #2
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,438
    Amen (Given)
    1081
    Amen (Received)
    4117
    This should be on the Theology Board too...
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await our execution...

  3. Amen Adrift amen'd this post.
  4. #3
    Thanks Old Man... Bill the Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Central VA
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    13,599
    Amen (Given)
    6968
    Amen (Received)
    7217
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnMartin View Post
    Purgatory is defined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church as -



    The purification process necessary to attain holiness for heaven is a process that occurs between death and the beatitude of heaven.

    Argument for the Existence of Purgatory.

    The Lords prayer states "Thy will [of the Father] be done in earth, as it is in heaven (Matt 6:5-15; Luke 11:1-13).
    The Father's will is that of God.
    God's will is impeccable (Isaiah 6:3).
    Therefore the Father's will is impeccable.

    What is impeccable is without fault.
    What is without fault is without sin.
    The Father's will is impeccable and thereby without sin.

    Jesus gave Christians the Lord's prayer to show Christians the will of the Father.
    The will of the Father is that Christians have an impeccable will as that of the Father (Matt 5:45, 1 Pet 1:15) and as indicated in the Lord's prayer (Matt 6:5-15; Luke 11:1-13).
    What Jesus gives, is to be followed to attain heaven, for Jesus as God is the perfect teacher.
    Here's where this is broken. Faith through grace is all that is required to attain heaven.


    Heaven is to see God face to face as the supernatural last end of man.
    To see God face to face, infers man is in God's presence.
    But to be in God's presence is to live a divine life in accord with the will of God (Rom 8).
    To live a divine life in accord with the will of God means those men in heaven must have an impeccable will in union with God.
    Yet we are told by God that men on earth sin and thereby are not impeccable.
    Men in heaven are not men on earth.

    And we are told that the just man sins seven times a day (Prov 24:16).
    Hence men on earth sin regularly and thereby do not have impeccable wills.
    And when we die, the just are perfected in Christ. Not us but Him within us.

    For man to attain the vision of God requires that man die in the state of grace.
    For a man to die in the state of grace means at death, mans will is ordered by grace towards God as the object of man's supernatural love.
    Which salvation purchased. When we die, we are with the Lord.

    Yet man's loving of God as the supernatural last end of man does not exclude minor sins which can be committed, but which do not remove man being directed towards his true final end.
    For some sins do and other sins do not bring death (1 John 5:16).
    Those sins which bring death are mortal and cause man to love a creature over that of God (Rom 2:12).
    Other sins do not bring death and thereby do not remove the love of God that dominates man's will (Prov 24:16, 1 John 5:16).

    Sins which do not bring death are venial sins.
    Sins which do bring death are mortal sins.
    Men who die in the state of grace may have committed venial sins and thereby have a human will directed towards God as the true final end of man.
    Yet venial sin committed by men in the state of grace infers mans will in the state of grace is not impeccable.
    False. God does not hold our sins against us when we believe in Him. Therefore, those of us who sin while in the state of grace are forgiven, and do not have to wait for them to be so.

    Yet final beatitude is for men who have an impeccable will in union with the Father (1 John 3:1-3).
    Hence men who die in the state of grace but have committed venial sins are unfit for heaven, for the human will is not impeccable.
    Nonsense. The blood of Christ covers a multitude of sins. We do not require a period of time for our sins to be burned off of us. Forgiveness is instantaneous.

    Also men who die in the state of grace but have committed venial sins are unfit for hell, for the human will is correctly directed towards God as the ultimate love of man.
    And hell is the false ultimate end of men who falsely love a creature above that of God when mortal sin is committed.
    Hence the man who dies in the state of grace, is directed towards God, but without an impeccable will, whereby man cannot enter either heaven or hell.
    False. A man who is Christ's is His indeed. He stands righteous before God covered by the blood of Christ. There is no holding area where we get "cleaned up".

    Hence there is a third state, whereby those men who die in the state of grace, without an impeccable will, in which God removes any imperfection in men to prepare men for heaven.
    For men who die in the state of grace are directed by God to the true ultimate end, though imperfectly with venial sin.
    And God does not act to frustrate His work of grace in men, but always acts to fulfill His work of grace.
    For God does not contradict His own work in men.
    Hence the work of grace performed by God, commenced when men are alive, will continue in men unto the perfection of impeccability.
    Thereby men who die in the state of grace are ordered towards heaven, but because of venial sin, are not fit for heaven, but are further perfected by God in a third state that is neither heaven, nor hell.
    The third state after death is rightly called purgatory by the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
    Hence from the nature of man, venial sin and the impeccability of heaven, purgatory must exist.
    Hence purgatory exists.

    JM

    Yeah, no.


    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals --- Manya the Holy Szin --- The Quintara Marathon ---

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common --- Stephen R. Donaldson ---

  5. Amen Cerebrum123, Christianbookworm amen'd this post.
  6. #4
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    39,764
    Amen (Given)
    3686
    Amen (Received)
    18593
    Where in the bible does it talk about saved people going to purgatory? Or mention purgatory at all?

  7. #5
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    336
    Amen (Given)
    148
    Amen (Received)
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill the Cat View Post
    Here's where this is broken. Faith through grace is all that is required to attain heaven.
    Which is not in dispute, the question is whether there is a waystation between.

    And when we die, the just are perfected in Christ. Not us but Him within us.
    Why then is the time of perfection put at the return of Christ, not at the moment of death?

    Being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus. Php 1:6.

    He will also keep you firm to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ 1 Co 1:8.

    But we know that when Christ appears,*we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure. 1 Jn 3:2–3.

    When we die, we are with the Lord.
    Yes, but in what state?

    God does not hold our sins against us when we believe in Him. Therefore, those of us who sin while in the state of grace are forgiven, and do not have to wait for them to be so.
    But the subject here is sanctification, not forgiveness.

    There is no holding area where we get "cleaned up".
    The one who is victorious will not be hurt at all by the second death. Re 2:11.

    Which implies, what, if we are not victorious over sin in this life?

    Blessings,
    Lee

  8. #6
    tWebber Obsidian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    TN
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,169
    Amen (Given)
    362
    Amen (Received)
    118
    Here is a hole in your unbiblical argument:

    1 Corinthians 15:52
    ...in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

  9. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,054
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill the Cat View Post
    False. God does not hold our sins against us when we believe in Him. Therefore, those of us who sin while in the state of grace are forgiven, and do not have to wait for them to be so.

    Yet final beatitude is for men who have an impeccable will in union with the Father (1 John 3:1-3).
    Hence men who die in the state of grace but have committed venial sins are unfit for heaven, for the human will is not impeccable.
    Nonsense. The blood of Christ covers a multitude of sins. We do not require a period of time for our sins to be burned off of us. Forgiveness is instantaneous.
    Your statements are based upon the false notion of justification by faith alone. Faith alone theology according to the reformers as embraced by Calvinists includes the debunked theory of the double imputation theory as part of a great exchange. The theory was rather easily debunked on the Posing Problems in the Westminster confession of Faith thread -

    As Richard Lints as the Andrew Mutch Distinguished Professor of Theology and Vice President for Academic Affairs, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, says -

    At the heart of the Protestant consensus about the Gospel for the last 500 years is claim that our sins are imputed to Christ, and Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us. This is “double imputation”. Others have called it the “Great Exchange”. Christ has died in our place, and in exchange we have been given new life in Christ. Scratch below the surface though and an interesting question emerges. Is there a transfer of righteousness – from one bank account to another in this process? This is to ask, what gets “exchanged” in the Great Exchange?

    The exchange is an exchange of verdicts rather than an exchange of moral character. Christ is “declared a sinner” at the cross. He is not actually a sinner nor is there any transfer of our sins to him. Whatever else one might want to say about Christ’s moral character, he has remained steadfastly faithful to his Father in heaven and was obedient to the point of death. Christ receives the verdict of death because he stands “in our place” at the cross. This is the meaning of the “imputation of sin”. So by contrast, we are “declared righteous” not because we are actually righteous or faithful, but because we stand in Christ’s place before God. The imputation of Christ’s righteousness is not to participate in one of God’s essential attributes but rather to be the beneficiaries of Christ’s messianic work.

    There is no “transfer” of righteousness in salvation but rather a declaration that sinners are all that Christ is – not that sinners actually are all that Christ is.
    The above quote has many problems with regard to the following -

    1) Christ is “declared a sinner” at the cross. Who does the declaring and why? Is it the Father who does so? Why declare Christ a sinner anyway? After all, the Father is God and need not do this, for He could have chosen another way to have Christ suffer on the cross.

    2) Christ is “declared a sinner” at the cross. If the Father does the declaring, the Father has made a false statement, causing the Father to sin. Christ is then dying on the cross to save the Father from His own sin. Such is impossible, for the Father cannot sin.

    3) Christ is “declared a sinner” at the cross. If the Father has made a false statement, then Christ is involved in the Father acting to sin, making Christ's action on the cross an occasion of sin. Because Christ knew the Father would sin, Christ should not have died on the cross, contrary to the Father's will to save the Father from sinning to save men from sin.

    4) Christ is “declared a sinner” at the cross. But this only means Christ is declared a sinner for the sins of those who have faith. For those who do not have faith, Christ is not their savior. Hence the Father only declares Christ a sinner for the sins of the faithful, but not for the sins of the unfaithful. Somehow the Father has decided to declare Christ a sinner for those being save, but not for those not being saved. Hence the Father must make the declaration and thereby sin for the elect, and not declare for the unsaved and thereby not sin for the non elect. So for anyone to go to heaven, the Father is their sinful father. For those who go to hell the Father is the sinner who has chosen not to declare and not sin, but in not declaring for them, has decided to abandon them. In abandoning them He has decided not to be a Father, and thereby sin against them. The convoluted outcomes of the Father imputing sin to Christ at the cross shows the Reformed doctrine to be false.

    5) Sinners are declared righteous. Again, if the Father does the declaring of righteousness, then He is involved in a lie and becomes the sinner. The cross then becomes a series of logical problems that end up making God into a sinner who needs to be saved from the salvation process.
    Other problems with the double imputation theory are also taken from the same thread -

    Furthermore, the process of imputing sin to Jesus infers -

    1) God’s law becomes the ultimate measure of God’s acts, which are known to be a fiction in the context of imputing sin to Jesus. Yet God is the ultimate measure of all and is not measured by any law. Therefore the theory of imputation of sin means God is both under the law and acts disconcordant to the law. Such actions by God make God into a creature, who acts under law and is judged by law.

    2) God’s law becomes a strict measure of human sin against God’s uncompromising righteousness. But simultaneously God’s law is broken by the same righteous, uncompromising God, who makes a fictional legal judgement about the imputation of sin to Jesus, which is itself a breach of law. The intrinsic contradiction within the theory of double imputation invalidates the theory.

    3) God’s imputation of sin to Jesus is required to explain why Jesus suffered on the cross. Jesus suffering is His part in removing the just condemnation of God against sinners. Hence suffering caused by men on Jesus removes the breaches of law over the elect. This process means suffering and death removes an imputation of sin to the sinner and places the imputation of righteousness to the sinner. So the application of suffering to Jesus is required to remove the imputation of sin to Jesus, yet there is no legal basis for suffering of one man (be Him the God-man as Jesus) that actually causes God to be moved to impute righteousness to another man. Therefore the theory is based upon a lack of supporting evidence from the law that suffering of another can cause the imputation of righteousness to another. Hence the double imputation theory is merely a fiction invented by the reformers.

    4) The legal imputation of sin must be a lawful act by God, for God always acts lawfully. Yet the legal imputation of sin to one who has not sinned is to state with legal force that a someone has breached the law without having done so. Hence the legal imputation of sin to another, is unlawful and cannot be done by the biblical God. Hence the double imputation theory is merely a fiction invented by the reformers apart from the biblical God.

    5) God has inverted the natural order of justice and legally imputed sin to one whom is most unworthy of such an act. As the inversion is against the nature of God, the double imputation theory is merely a fiction invented by the reformers apart from the biblical God.

    6) The imputation of sin to Jesus is against the divine majesty, which requires that God as the best will always be known by God as the best. By God imputing sin to Jesus, God knows Jesus as something other than the best. Therefore because the double imputation theory is against the majesty of God, the theory is false.

    7) The imputation of sin to Jesus causes God to be most unmerciful to Jesus and most merciful to those who do not deserve the mercy. The theory then requires that God’s justice and mercy is said to be consistent with His nature as righteous, but is also most capricious. Capricious for the most just receives the harshest punishment and the most unjust is not punished. The capricious nature of God required in the double imputation theory means the theory is a false theory.

    8) God imputing sin to Jesus means God must have acted to impute sin for a time, and then stop imputing sin to Jesus at another time. Such an action by God, means God’s mind about who Jesus is, must have changed. Yet God’s mind never changes. Hence the double imputation theory means God must change His mind about what Jesus is (sinner or God), and is then a false theory.

    9) The imputation of sin to Jesus within the theory, is an act of God promoted by those who constructed a systematic theology outside the biblical text. As the reformers acted to construct the new theology, they did so without any legitimate authority or mandate from God to do so. Hence the theory implies that because the Reformers taught the double imputation theory without any regard for divine authority, anyone can give assent or freely chose to dissent from the theory without fear of sinning against God. Yet the Reformers taught the double imputation theory was part of the Gospel. Hence due to the lack of authority associated with the theory, there is no reason to give assent to the theory as actually being the real gospel, other than merely the opinion of those who invented the theory, and those who freely chose to embrace the theory. As the theory is not contained within any divinely authoritative institution, the theory cannot be from God and is therefore most certainly not the gospel as its adherents claim it to be. Hence the double imputation theory is a false theory.

    10) The imputation of sin to Jesus is contained within the doctrine of justification by faith alone. Hence faith is not only required to believe Jesus died and rose from the dead to take away men’s sins, but that also Jesus became as sin in our place. The reformed understanding of justification means faith requires men to not only believe Jesus died and rose from the dead, but that God imputed sin to Jesus as part of the cross-resurrection event. But to redefine the cross that requires an imputation of sin to Jesus means the reformers have redefined what it means to have saving faith. Saving faith is changed from the biblical faith in the God of love, who does not deceive, to the nominalist god of Calvin and Luther who require faith to be ordered to giving assent to their own invented theory and not what God has revealed about the redemption in divine revelation. Hence because the double imputation theory requires a false, redefinition of faith, the theory is itself false.

    11) Imputation of sin to Jesus means God acts in a non-legal way to legally impute sin to one who does not have sin. Such a non-legal act by God is against the nature of the reformers god, who always acts righteously and therefore legally. Hence the double imputation theory is a false theory which requires God to act against the nature of God as taught by the reformers.

    The process if imputing righteousness to sinners infers -

    1) Righteousness could easily be infused into the sinner, making the sinner ontologically righteous, but God chose not to do so. As God always acts in the best way to manifest His perfections, the double imputation theory requires that the imputation of Christ’s righteousness must manifest God’s perfections. Yet God’s action requires that He call sinners righteous when they are sinners. Such an act means God’s acting in the manner of a legal fiction promotes the perfections of mercy and righteousness. Yet God’s declaration does neither. For God to act in accord with a legal fiction is to defect from perfection and resemble the imperfection of a sinful creature. Hence the double imputation theory requires that God imitate sinners and not act as the biblical God with divine perfection. Therefore the double imputation theory is false.

    2) Biblically righteousness is said to be infused into the sinner as new life through regeneration (Titus 3:5) or law of the Spirit who gives life (Rom 8:2). Such action by God within men, brings about the life of God within men, to help them overcome sin. According to God’s action within men, they are made righteous (Rom 5:19) in the new Adam. The new life within men then makes the double imputation theory both 1) superfluous, for men are regenerated and God does not need to call sinner righteous, and 2) inconsistent with what God does. God makes men righteous and then calls them righteous in accord with His work within men. Hence the double imputation theory is a false theory.

    3) Righteousness is imputed to sinners who according to Calvin and Luther did not have free will after the fall. As such, because men do not have free will, sin is not from men’s choice, but from men’s sin nature. Yet for sin to exist without free will is against the nature of sin, which implies a free act by the sinner, by which God then imputes the guilt of sin and the associated punishment. Therefore, for righteousness to be imputed to the sinner, the Calvinist/Lutheran version of what a sinner is, means sin is unjustly imputed to the sinner, who really has not control over his own actions and cannot ever act freely to sin. Therefore, because the double imputation theory requires a false understanding of the nature of sin, righteousness imputed to the sinner by God is both unnecessary and a false solution to a false problem. As such, the double imputation theory is a false theory.

    4) Righteousness is imputed to sinners, whereby the sinner remains a sinner. Thus righteousness is only ever credited to an account and not infused within the sinner to make the sinner into a saint. Yet it is said that the sinner is fit for heaven, for the sinner has been saved from sin by Jesus within the double imputation theory. The justice the sinner has imputed is the same justice the sinner will have when he gets to heaven. Yet biblically nobody will ever see God unless he is holy. As such, righteousness in heaven cannot be an extrinsic righteousness imputed to the sinner, but must be a righteousness infused within the sinner, making the man into a holy saint, fit for entrance into heaven. The legal imputation of Christ’s righteousness to the sinners account only has any application if the sinner is infused with grace and the Holy Spirit. Yet such is the doctrine of infused righteousness of the Catholic Church, which was rejected by the Reformers. As such, the double imputation theory is inconsistent with the nature of heaven and therefore false.

    5) Righteousness is imputed to sinners by faith alone, yet faith is never discussed as being perfect or imperfect, like the strict requirements of keeping the law. Hence within the double imputation theory, God requires perfection within the law, but nothing is said about the perfection or imperfection of faith, which could be quite imperfect, for the sinner remains a sinner and must always acts with an imperfect intention - as Calvin taught. Yet if faith is perfect, then men can do perfect acts pleasing to God, whilst remaining sinners. If imperfect, then imperfect human acts are pleasing to God, contrary to the requirements of the law as taught by Calvinism.

    The nature of faith within the double imputation theory is contrary to the nature of all other human acts within the theory that are said to be as dung before the Holy God. Yet God is somehow satisfied with only faith, regardless of its imperfection. For it is well recorded in history that many Protestants had faith, then lost faith, inferring faith was at some time imperfect. So the double imputation theory teaches imperfect human acts are unlawful and therefore sinful, but permits imperfect human acts of faith which save, whilst God always requires perfection within the law. Evidently the double imputation theory is eclectic regarding the nature of human acts as imperfect which both cause condemnation and justification. Therefore the theory is false trough the fallacy of eclecticism.

    Comment - The entire process of imputing sin to Jesus, imputing righteousness to sinners, all done by faith alone, to sinners who do not have free will is almost completely false. Perhaps the only two truths that are contained within the theory are Jesus died and rose from the dead. Even so, these two truths are contained within a theory that is so false, that the Jesus who died and rose from the dead, did so for false reasons, making the cross a fiction that achieved nothing.

    One other criticism of the theory - the theory requires that God's law be perfectly kept all the time. The theory also teaches God is a Trinity of persons. Hence the theory assumes the supernatural (SN) life within God is real. This (SN) life implies that those who get to see God face to face, see Him as a Trinity. So even if men kept the 10 commandments perfectly they still would not be albe to see God, for only men granted grace of divine sonship can see God. Keeping the law perfectly would only bring man to a natural end as the true end of keeping laws within human nature. But by assuming the SN life of God is true, the theory requires that not only is man required to keep the law, but even if he did, he still would not get to heaven. Hence the premise within the theory of mans requirement to keep the law is superfluous to the end of the theory, which is the justification of man and final glorificaion in heaven. In other words, the theory is inconsistent with its appliction of the meaning of what the law is, and is consequently illogical.

    Stated another way, the theory is based upon a premise that requires men to perfectly keep the law, but then ignores the consequence of what would occur if men actually did perfectly keep the law - they still would not get to heaven. Yet the theory assumes the perfectly keeping the law would bring men to heaven. Hence the theory requires a false understanding of what the law is and what would occur if the law was kept. The theory implies that if the law was kept perfectly then men would go to heaven, when in fact it has been revealed in the bible that God has elevated men to the SN life of God in heaven. As the SN life of heaven is above keeping any law, even by perfectly keeping the law, does not conclude to men would get to heaven. Hence the theory requires a false understanding of what the law does when promulagated by God and what keeping the law does for men. Hence the theory is false.

    Staed in short - the final end of perfectly keeping the law is only a natural beatitude and not the SN beatitude of the biblical heaven, where the Trinity is seen face to face. The theory assumes the Trinity would be seen if men perfectly kept the law, when such is not possible. For natural acts have natural ends, and heaven is not a natural end, but a SN end, above the natural end of the law.
    The Reformed teaching on justification is unbiblical, illogical, unrealist, anti human and requires a notion of God that is untenable.

    What then is the biblical and historical teaching on justification? When we go to history we find the historical church teaches the true nature of justification in session six of the council of Trent. A part of which is presented below.

    CHAPTER VII.

    What the justification of the impious is, and what are the causes thereof.

    This disposition, or preparation, is followed by Justification itself, which is not remission of sins merely, but also the sanctification and renewal of the inward man, through the voluntary reception of the grace, and of the gifts, whereby man of unjust becomes just, and of an enemy a friend, that so he may be an heir according to hope of life everlasting.

    Of this Justification the causes are these: the final cause indeed is the glory of God and of Jesus Christ, and life everlasting; while the efficient cause is a merciful God who washes and sanctifies gratuitously, signing, and anointing with the holy Spirit of promise, who is the pledge of our inheritance; but the meritorious cause is His most beloved only-begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, who, when we were enemies, for the exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, merited Justification for us by His most holy Passion on the wood of the cross, and made satisfaction for us unto God the Father; the instrumental cause is the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified; lastly, the alone formal cause is the justice of God, not that whereby He Himself is just, but that whereby He maketh us just, that, to wit, with which we being endowed by Him, are renewed in the spirit of our mind, and we are not only reputed, but are truly called, and are, just, receiving justice within us, each one according to his own measure, which the Holy Ghost distributes to every one as He wills, and according to each one's proper disposition and co-operation.

    For, although no one can be just, but he to whom the merits of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ are communicated, yet is this done in the said justification of the impious, when by the merit of that same most holy Passion, the charity of God is poured forth, by the Holy Spirit, in the hearts of those that are justified, and is inherent therein: whence, man, through Jesus Christ, in whom he is ingrafted, receives, in the said justification, together with the remission of sins, all these (gifts) infused at once, faith, hope, and charity. For faith, unless hope and charity be added thereto, neither unites man perfectly with Christ, nor makes him a living member of His body. For which reason it is most truly said, that Faith without works is dead and profitless; and, In Christ Jesus neither circumcision, availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by charity. This faith, Catechumen's beg of the Church-agreeably to a tradition of the apostles-previously to the sacrament of Baptism; when they beg for the faith which bestows life everlasting, which, without hope and charity, faith cannot bestow: whence also do they immediately hear that word of Christ; If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Wherefore, when receiving true and Christian justice, they are bidden, immediately on being born again, to preserve it pure and spotless, as the first robe given them through Jesus Christ in lieu of that which Adam, by his disobedience, lost for himself and for us, that so they may bear it before the judgment-seat of our Lord Jesus Christ, and may have life everlasting.
    The Catholic doctrine of purgatory fits well with the nature of man, sin, atonement, God and heaven. The Reformation doctrine has many problems as shown above.

    JM

  10. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,054
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    Where in the bible does it talk about saved people going to purgatory? Or mention purgatory at all?
    Purgatory may be derived from many biblical concepts such as -

    The concept of curse within the old covenant contains the notion of punishment for sin.

    “If you will not listen to me … if you spurn my statutes, and if your soul abhors my rules, so that you will not do all my commandments, but break my covenant, then I will do this to you: I will visit you with panic, with wasting disease” (vv. 14–16a).

    - Leviticus 26:14-39
    The principle of temporal punishment carries over into the NT, whereby such punishment is given in the form of penance for sin in this life and of not fully complete, continuing into the next life. For example, St Paul instructs the sinful man to be subject to Satan -

    1 Corinthians 5:1-10King James Version (KJV)

    5 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
    2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
    3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
    4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
    5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
    6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
    7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
    8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
    The temporal punishment for fornication is the destruction of the flesh by Satan. The man suffers punishment under the authority of the Church, through St Paul, who issues the instruction to be carried out so the man may be saved on the final day.

    Dave Armstrong also has a good article entitled 25 Bible Passages on Purgatory. Some of the passages are -

    Psalm 66:12 Thou didst let men ride over our heads; we went through fire and through water; yet thou hast brought us forth to a spacious place.
    This verse was considered a proof of purgatory by Origen [4] and St. Ambrose, [5] who posits the water of baptism and the fire of purgatory.

    Ecclesiastes 12:14 For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.
    Isaiah 4:4 When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion and cleansed the bloodstains of Jerusalem from its midst by a spirit of judgment and by a spirit of burning. (see also Isaiah 1:25-26)

    This purgation made in the spirit of judgment and of burning is understood of Purgatory by St. Augustine, in the 20th Book of the City of God, chapter 25. And in fact this interpretation is favoured by the words preceding, in which mention is made of the salvation of men, and also by the end of the chapter, where the repose of the blessed is spoken of; wherefore that which is said — “the Lord shall wash away the filth” — is to be understood of the purgation necessary for this salvation. And since it is said that this purgation is to be made in the spirit of heat and of burning, it cannot well be understood save of Purgatory and its fire. [6].

    Isaiah 6:5-7 And I said:”Woe is me! for I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts.” Then flew one of the seraphim to me, having in his hand a burning coal which he had taken with tongs from the altar. And he touched my mouth, and said: “Behold, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away, and your sin forgiven.“
    The temporal punishment for sin carries into the next life where Christians are tested by fire before entering into heaven -

    1 Corinthians 3:11-15 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble – each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.

    This is a clear and obvious allusion to purgatory, or at least, even for the most skeptical person, something exceedingly similar to it. Thus thought the Fathers, such as St. Cyprian, [25] St. Ambrose,[26] St. Jerome, [27] St. Gregory the Great, [28] Origen, [29] and St. Augustine:

    Lord, rebuke me not in Your indignation, nor correct me in Your anger [Psalm 38:1]. . . . In this life may You cleanse me and make me such that I have no need of the corrective fire, which is for those who are saved, but as if by fire . . . For it is said: He shall be saved, but as if by fire [1 Corinthians 3:15]. And because it is said that he shall be saved, little is thought of that fire. Yet plainly, though we be saved by fire, that fire will be more severe than anything a man can suffer in this life. [30]
    There is plenty of biblical evidence for purgatory.

    JM

  11. #9
    tWebber Christianbookworm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northern Hemisphere
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    8,763
    Amen (Given)
    5113
    Amen (Received)
    1619
    Let's see. Justification, sanctification, and glorification. I was saved, am being saved, will be saved. Santification is the part that requires some effort from us.
    If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

  12. #10
    tWebber Obsidian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    TN
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,169
    Amen (Given)
    362
    Amen (Received)
    118
    The Bible specifically says that glorification happens in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye. The Bible is God's word. God doesn't lie. Hence, the Catholic Church is lying to you.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •