A moderator never worries about thread hijacking, we just delete the posts of the dissenters.

Goodsamaritan, You have lamented the "verse-slinging" going on. Why is that? Does scripture offend you? It seems you are more focused on secular arguments than scriptural basis.


Anyway,

I absolutely, unequivocally agree with the fact that I am more concerned with scripture(verse slinging, you call it) than anything else, I believe I have stated this already. And here you are more worried about your perceived "Church Fathers" viewpoints, more than you are the bible.

The simple fact that the Catholic Church recognizes Eusebius of Caesaria as a "Church Father" is reason enough to reject your other outrageous claims.

Purgatory is NOT a simple fact to anyone reading the Holy Scriptures by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. However, as read through the eyes of the world, I can understand why someone could imagine one existing.

You can sling all of the intellectual fallen-headedness you want, it does not make the truth of the Holy Spirit null and void.

You are only strengthening my base for rejecting the doctrine of the Catholic Church, I can certainly appreciate that from you.

Scripture is the inerrant word of God so it could never offend me. It is the USE of the word of God which puzzles me. I've given you Scripture to chew on but you still insist on arguing against points which I never made. Why is this, Jim? When I say 'verse slinging', I mean the wanton and arbitrary citation of Scripture as if one verse, taken on its own and absent of the rest of Scripture proves a point. This is the technique the Pharisees utilized and it was condemned by Jesus. Scripture was written for a specific purpose, Jim. Can you tell me what that was?

Jim, this is unfair and I think you know it. I have provided ample Scripture but you seem intent on diverting attention toward my statements about the Church Fathers. YOU make the incorrect judgment that I value these Fathers' works over Scripture despite me never even implying this. By the way, these Fathers did what you have attempted to do--formulate their position from Scripture. But they did one thing which you have chosen NOT to do--defer to the Church which Paul called the 'pillar and foundation of the truth'--when there was disagreement.

Please provide evidence that Eusebius was unqualified or inadequate as a historian and as a Christian. Just because he disagrees with your own private judgment of Christian doctrines is not an ample reason. For argument's sake, let's eliminate Eusebius (whom I never cited). Can you also deny or discount the likes of Augustine, Tertullian, Cyril, Ambrose, Ephraim, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa, and Epiphanius? These men wrote clearly about Purgation before a canon of Scripture even existed. But Jim, you have still not provided what I asked for--ONE Early Church Father who expressely denied Purgatory (as taught by the Catholic Church) or claims it is incompatible with God's Revelation.

You have 3 verses in front of you. You have yet to explain your interpretation of them. You have asserted that you have the Holy Spirit which enables you to know the truth about Scripture (we can deal with that assertion's validity later). Please reconcile any single verse which expressly denies the existence of this process called Purgatory (which you have not yet provided) with the verses I have provided. Then deal with the arguments made from reason, for God is the God of reason as well. If my logic is flawed, then the Holy Spirit residing in you will tell me why.

I am not here to convert you, Jim. Only God can do that. I am here to see to it that the Catholic position with regard to Purgatory is represented truthfully and honestly and to address any misgivings that the doctrine is unscriptural or an invention of the Church. If you choose to address the arguments I've made, I look forward to replying. God Bless.

Ron

2 Tim. 3:15
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Very well, since I have been accused of taking small portions of scripture and not looking at the rest, I shall reciprocate that accusation to yourself:

First of all, there's a lot more you have already missed. What does the first verse of this chapter say?

It has already set the tone to understand that Paul is writing this letter to christians who have not grown, and are still carnal christians.

Next, we see:

I want to point out two things here:

1) Paul is clarifying the importance of Christ as being the center of all things, not man.

and

2)

This has very interesting context, First it again reenforces the deity and autocracy of Christ, and next it debunks your belief that the apostles or disciples are anything more than what they were: In Pauls own words: "Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?"

What am I reading? By his saying, "Who is?", he is clearly stressing the unimportance of himself and a disciple. Not only that, by his words, "even as the Lord gave to every man?" is stressing that they are no more worthy than any other man, not only that, but that noone is to follow them, as they are not Christ. Why did the apostles have to consistently rebuke people for following after them? Why did they always stress Jesus and not themselves? I leave that one alone for you to figure out.

The apostles were nothing more than vessels for the Holy Spirit to work through during their dispensation here on earth. That is it and that is all. They had a purpose to send forth the Gospel as a command from Christ and they fullfilled that.

moving on:

I absolutely love this portion of scripture.

In verse 8 we see the reward a christian will receive as he teaches others about Christ. It is dependant upon the devotion he/she gives to Christ in his/her labor for the Lord during their time here on earth.

In verse 9 we see what we are supposed to be. 1) Husbandry - We are a like a cultivated field to the Lord. We are to keep it free from weeds, fertile, ready to receive the seeds of faith and learning from Him, and 2) Building - We are ultimately to end up being a monument of God's work, we are His building, in fact a temple of His(1 Cor. 3:17).

In verse 10 we are given a warning: "According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon."

Christ has already laid the foundation(see verse 11). We have to be careful what we build on top of that foundation(services to the Lord).

Now we get to the verses that, for some reason, you use to support purgatory.:

The things a man builds upon the foundation of Christ are twofold:

1) Things that he has done for his own pleasure, or anything else not for the Lord
or
2) Things he has done for the glorification of Christ

Verses 12 and 13 show what will happen to see which of the works falls int othe two categories above. I believe this will occur at the Judgment seat of Christ.

Verse 14 shows that whatever the man does for Jesus Christ(the foundation), shall be rewarded with good rewards.

Verse 15 shows that whatever the man does for any other cause save the will of God, after they(works) are tried by fire, will suffer the loss of those rewards given by Christ for serving His will. However, we see in the last part of this verse that He is still speaking of a christian: "but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.". Why is he still saved? Because his foundation was still Jesus Christ, not anything else. He is an example of a severely backslidden Christian whose life was fruitless for the work of Christ and is not receiving any good rewards for it. Yet this still show us the infinite mercy and grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, by this man's salvation!

Looking at verses 16-17 we see the support of verse 9. We are the temple of the Holy Spirit, which means that the Holy SPirit dwells within us, being our guide in liberty. This is why we are no longer under the law. The Holy Spirit within us, is our law. If we are to defile that temple, or be unrepentant in sin, God will destroy our body, as He cannot reside in a sin-filled, or defiled, body/temple.

That is our basis for the belief that the Lord will only allow us to go so far in sin as a christian before taking us out of this world. He will not be mocked(Gal. 6:7), nor will He tolerate His people to dishonor His Holy name which is above every other name(Phl. 2:9).

So, in conclusion, I have absolutely no idea whatsoever why you associate the word, much less the inference of "purgatory" using this scripture.

Jim

Why can I not get you to understand that the reliance upon something because of it's lack of citation in and of itself is fallacy?

If I believed in cattle-twerps, does that make them exist? And what if I gave the argumant that since the early church Fathers did NOT say that "cattle-twerps" did NOT exist, that is proof enough that they did, what would you say to that? You would think I was crazy.

Oh, and before you post on this, think on this one saying before you make the argument of how many "people" believed in purgatory back then. It was a sayign by one of the biggest liars in the world, and look how many people believed him:

In other words, if you tell a lie loud enough and long enough, after a while it may become believable in the minds of those to whom the propaganda is directed. This is the principle behind every form of religious cult, every form of sadistic and brutal dictatorship, and every form of brainwashing: the repetition of a lie to the point of acceptance into the culture of the indoctrinated. In other words, the catholic church.

This post was last modified: Wed Nov 30, 2005 05:14 PM by Jim.

And here we go again. Why is it people have to be "qualified" to be a "historian" or especially a Christian for that matter.

That is good, because it will never happen.

No, I certainly don't believe the Lord would convert someone against their own will, and further, He certainly would not convert someone to false doctrine.

In regard to the truth of purgatory, it ironically exists only in the eyes of the catholic church, so you are perfectly entitled to believe it if you like. Purgatory is not biblical, so I will not believe in it.

I have addressed your arguments biblically, you just don't like what you hear, so you decry it as "not addressed". Your problem that I see is that your arguments lack rationality to me.

Incorrect, Jim. The Orthodox believers also adhere to this state of purification. EVERY Christian believed it until 1500, Jim. Did Christ's Church apostasize even as Paul was penning 1 Corinthians? You have an unbroken line of Christians from Christ, to St. Paul, to Pope Benedict XVI who teach the SAME doctrine with respect to Purgatory but if you choose to ignore it, so be it.

Jim, tell me WHY it is not a rational argument. You make the assertion (and ignore the logic already provided by me) but do not show WHY Purgatory could not exist or a single Christian before 1500 who outright denies that it exists. If you want to argue rationally, then provide logic, not idle assertions.

With regard to the Biblical arguments, I'm struggling to find a single verse of Scripture you've provided that denies Purgatory as a doctrine. You've provided the Catholic Encyclopedia (why you'd accept this source but not the Bible or Early Church Fathers is beyond me) but still no Scripture. Not even a rebuttal of the verses I cited. Perhaps we should move on. God Bless.

Jim, we don't dismiss sources because we don't like what they have to say. We dismiss sources because what they say is a)incorrect b)biased or c)unreliable. Eusebius has a reputation among ALL Christian denominations as a credible source and link to the early Christian Church. If you disagree, then please follow St. Peter's advice and 'sanctify the Lord Christ in your hearts, being ready always to give every one that asketh you a reason'. Give me a reason for your denigration of Eusebius, please. God Bless

Ron

The only reliable source is from the Vatican.....

Why do we need to burn in purgatory if Christ is recorded as saying, just before dying, "It is finished"? What did Christ finish if not salvation? Why did He not say, "It is begun"? How in Hebrews 12:2 could it be said that Christ is the Author AND Finisher if He merely began the process?

Regarding I Corinthians 3:10-15. That passage speaks of our works being burned up, not us.

Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

Go to purgatory if you like, but by the finished work of Christ on the cross, I am going straight to glory!

MNW

Then I will add "other confused people", is that better?:

But everyone for almost 1000 years didn't believe in the inquisition, though, huh?

No they certainly are not(unbroken line), and no they do not(teach the same doctrine). Good, subject closed then. You believe what you want, let us believe what we want.

You see the difference between you and me is that I don't feel like I have do go around to everyone else to try and defend my faith. My faith is strong, and it is based on nothing less than Jesus' blood and righteousness. I am not worried if anyone believes I am apostate, I love the Lord Jesus Christ, who came in the flesh, and died for my sins, and covered them for all eternity. I don't have to worry about sitting in the "waiting room" waiting for someone down here to pray for my sins, who by the way wouldn't even know what those sins were(which is kind of ironic seeing that you have to confess sepcifically what you have done to a priest), to get me into heaven.

Oh brother, here we go again! As soon as you prove that "cattle-twerps" do not exist, I will prove that purgatory doesn't. Kind of hard to disprove a figment of someone's imagination isn't it?

That's funny, because I have yet to see any scripture you have provided that supports it.

What was almost all of his works based solely upon? Origen(Origenes Adamantius) and his Hexapla.

Where was Origen from? Alexandria.

If you are not familiar with Origen, then let me enlighten you. He was the man who criticized Paul's epistles to the early churches, you know the inspired ones from God? Yes, this same self-exaltant man who apparently felt he knew better than the Lord God. Eusebius himself wrote of this thought in your reliable "Ecclesiastical History 6.25.7"

Oh, and it is slightly accepted that he was the possble penner of the Codex Vaticanus, although this cannot be proven, also very coincidental that this codex has been inthe possession of the vatican since it's discovery.

The simple fact that Origen, then hence Eusebius, was more infatutated with philosophy his own views than that of the Antiochan church, so he chose to go on his own afor his translations. But there was one problem. He was in Alexandria, the truth was in Antioch, and he did not even agree, or he challenged even the inspired letters of some of the apostles.

His intentions were good, but it stopped at that, good intentions. Unfortunately his methods of exegesis were Alexandrian/Egyptian.

Do you know what is actually kind of funny? Have you ever heard of the Council of Constantinople in 553 (aka Fifth Ecumenical Council)? Pope Vigilius presiding. Do you know what one of those declarations was during that council? Read:

Do any of those names sound familiar?

So, in other words, if the catholic church believes the writings of Origen, and Eusebius who strongly based his own beliefs upon Origen's writings, then the church itself is anathema!

It has been quoted that:

So do you not see the contradiction here?

Moving on with Eusebius, it is a well known fact that he was a major propent of, and a major contributor to, the First Council of Nicaea.

I will only bring one thought to the forefront here about this council to which he contributed so much.

On the most important topic of this Council was the passover and "Easter". This is the summary of what was decided by the catholics:

Do you know what is interesting about this whole thing? The date they chose was in agreeance with Herod's view of "Easter"(paganism), and was a celebration of none other than the worship of Astarte, Ishtar, and iow, "Easter". The Easter being referred to in the bible was not talking about the Passover. Do you know who Ishtar was? None other than Semiramis, the founder of Ancient Babylonian paganism, of the worship of Tammuz.

And what is the important thing about this? Eusebius helped institute the "Easter" which most people now celebrate. The bunny rabbit and egg are prime symbols of fertility and were even used during babylonian times for such reason.

So there is your "reason" Ron, for the "denigration", which is not denigration at all, but the truth of Eusebius.

Frankly Jim that is a silly point.

There has been a consistant teaching on purgatory in the Catholic Church for 2000 thousand years. It is not an instant creation of somebodys mind. You dealing with a reality. You may not agree but it is a real teaching.

Your 'Cattle Twerps' are mere invention with no historical veracity.

Jim, I am not using Eusebius as an infallible theological authority, I am using him to prove that a certain theology/doctrine existed in the Christian Church. I would never hold up Origen or any other ECF, for that matter, as an infallible authority on Catholic teaching. However, the historical record provided by Eusebius is accepted by all reputable scholars. Wikipedia says this:

And for the record, Origen did not criticize Paul's writings but rather questioned their authenticity. This was not unique to Origen but many ECF's had their own beliefs about the authenticity of certain writings. Considering Origen makes lots and lots of citations of Paul's epistles, i question your assertion. Specificall, regarding 2 Timothy, Origen makes this statement:

With respect to Constantinople, I adhere to its declarations. Origen was anathematized and so were his IMPIOUS writings, not ALL his writings. In fact, many are cornerstones of Christian doctrine (not just Catholic doctrine).

Jim, that's not logical. The Church, given proper authority to determine heresy, condemned a group of Origen's writings and those writings do not make up a single jot or tittle of Catholic doctrine. However, much of what he wrote is valid and declared so by the Church. For example, Jim, would you declare this to be anathema?

This is false. The most important issue was the Arian heresy. The reason the Church chose Easter for this specific date was in order to supplant this Herodian feast day with one that glorified Christ. Do you know of anyone who still celebrates the Herodian feast today? How about the pagan feast around the time of Christmas? It's gone too! The Church made those pagan feasts obsolete precisely because they celebrated their feasts on the same day. If you're gonna link this decision to paganism in the Church, it is up to you to provide a quote from Eusebius or anyone else which admits this. I've heard lots about the pagan link but yet not a single Council or Papal Bull mentions this--why not? I await your attempt to meet your burden of proof.

Which brings us to the final point--NONE of this denies the credibility of Eusebius with respect to his historical documentation, which by all accounts (and even one quote here) is unquestioned as true. The Church doesn't hold up Eusebius as infallible but it does consider his historical credibility to be in highest regard. Now deal with the historical fact of Purgatory existing before, during, and after the life of Christ in His Church, please. God Bless.

Ron

What's sad is that, for someone who holds Scripture in such high esteem, you haven't even bothered to comment on a single passage i've provided. If you want to argue from Scripture, Jim, here's your chance. Deal with the paltry 3 verses i've provided and tell me what they really mean. Then, since you believe all Truth is in the Bible, show me where this interpretation of these verses is found in the Bible. God Bless.

Ron