The Doctrine of Purgatory in Catholic Biblical Perspective
- Thread starter Berserk
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Mungo , how convenient to NOT read my "rant" because then you would have to respond and I could see how that would be difficult for one who is not given what to say by the Holy Spirit . I never fear, because it is not I who speaks but He who is within me . And He who is within me is greater than he who is in the world. The only thing that becomes clear in forums for the most part is , people really do not fear God but rather the mob mentality that is within denominations. it fears looking bad before men rather than God. it bullies and brushes off and calls itself Christianity . News Flash.... " I know Mine and Mine know ME" GET THE PICTURE?!!
Yes, I get the picture.
You not only lack Christian Charity but come across as very arrogant.
No you didn't. But since you think you did I will respond to what you clearly said that is wrong and do you the Christian Charity of giving answer again. So, sit back and let the Holy Spirit school you in scriptural doctrine.
Actually you just do not like my tune. It seems you only like to dish it out, but cannot take it. And I am arrogant? You brush off, then IRONICALLY and hypocritically tell me I am arrogant .I read what you posted therefore, considered what you said before I responded .As I said you just did not like my right back at you.
1Corinthians 2:14-16 Spiritual Wisdom
…14The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God. For they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15The spiritual man judges all things, but he himself is not subject to anyone’s judgment. 16“For who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to instruct Him?” But we have the mind of Christ.…
Clearly your beef is with Christ. I only pointed out that there are flaws in the Catechism and used scripture to show that , what was laid by the Elect predestined Jew is what all doctrine must be built upon because it is the foundation (Jesus Christ) and you are mad. You can only come back with "I know you are but what am I " type remarks without any spiritual insight and Wisdom . Clearly a natural man. How about some real response in truth which could disprove what I say. Alas you will not come out with that because TRUTH is in my corner and does not war against itself.
Nondenom40
Active Member
Nondenom40
Active Member
Taken
Well-Known Member
The facts are Mary Believed, Mary was highly favoured, Mary was willing to serve the Lord in the manner the angel conveyed...AND the Lord was WITH her and the Spirit of the Lord Came UPON her.
You say she was completely, perfectly endowed with grace....
So?
You say Kecharitomene is a Title given Mary...
So?
It is NOT a BIG SECRET, it was a ONE TiME spectacular and miraculous event for the Lord to come forth OUT from God IN HeAVEN and enter Mary's Womb and then come forth OUT (in the FLESH) from a Human womans WOMB.
It is NOT a BIG SECRET, people in the OT believed, and were Willing to serve the Lord according to the manner He desired, the Lord was WITH them and the Spirit of Lord was UPON Them.
It is NOT a BIG SECRET, Jesus FORETOLD of the 'INDWELLING" Holy Spirit that WOULD come "AFTER" He departed "this world" and "returned to Heaven".
AFTER Jesus 'ASCENDED' Back UP to "Heaven", a Large gathering took place In Jerusalem, ON The Day of Pentecost...the Disciples, Mary, other believers all gathered TOGETHER Received the "INDWELLING" Holy Spirit, just as Jesus had foretold.
While you emphasize Mary being "perfectly endowed with Grace"....Jesus emphasized a persons "Conversion" and Receiving of the Indwelling of Holy Spirit...as to that WHICH is the Paramount Act of God, for a person to become made WHOLE, Free from Sin, and Forever Alive IN Christ....
And much as you TRY to make that apply to Mary, BEFORE Jesus' Ascension...THAT IS NOT WHAT SCRIPTURE TEACHES.
Acts 1
Acts 2
Glory to God,
Taken
Well if you must know I am going back and forth doing my household duties and playing tag here. I will get back to what you posted for sure.
God Bless!
CovenantPromise said:
"Can one be highly favored and it not mean full of grace?"
nondenom said"
"Of course. Mary is a great example. But then so are all believers in Jesus. Highly favored does not mean full of grace. This is just basic grammar 101. Which makes the rest of your post moot."
CP says:
No not at all. Highly favored does, according to the language of heaven 101 mean to be in grace. Better get to knowing that any favor is GRACE. Being that, to be in anyone's good favor -(God's) in this case is to be in Good Grace with Him. And He is the one who extends that.
BY DEFINITION:
In someone's good graces definition, elegance or beauty of form, manner, motion, ... of favor, especially by a superior: It was only through the dean's grace that I could get through to the next phase. The DEAN of all is God in this case.
And NO the grace she received is not the same in delivery as the grace we receive. She is the Immaculate Conception of the faith. First because she is an elect , predestined of Jews from whom all the faith has come. Second because in her is the completion of the Covenant promise . She was chosen from upon the Moon=OC to be clothed with the New Covenant the Sun. In her is the union of all because the creator of all came to be of the lineage of David (Son of David ) through her sanctified flesh. In her is united both covenants making all complete. The moon OC has no light of it's own without the Greater , being lesser. It has no light of itself without the Sun which the NC is represented by in the book of Rev.All the OC prophecies and language are only understood in the light of the New Covenant. She being the sign of EMMANUEL is the continual sign of God to direct us to Christ - Savior. By her guidance we come to the fullness of the Male Child coming to dwell within man. Hence , "God with us". She is a direct descendant of David as is Joseph . That makes her of Jewish royalty . Christ is the Son of David, meaning of his lineage in flesh due to her and also by adoption through Joseph. That too is a mystery, that has a meaning (concerning adoption;)).
The angel Gabriel was making a pronouncement of what was about to happen. At her "YES" it is fulfilled. Not before her consent. Faith is a dance in which one follows God's lead.
nondenom said:
"To be specific. Her 'yes' was in response to a command, not a question. The text says 'you will...', not 'will you...'"
CP says:
Makes no difference to me pointing out her Yes. Who said one cannot reject a Command of God? You do by not esteeming her and honoring our Elect mother. So your point?" Man behold your mother , woman behold your son" and from that moment that apostle took her into his home. QUESTION ARE THE APOSTLES ALL LIKE MINDED? DO THEY HAVE THE MIND OF CHRIST, yes or no? Does the Body have the mind of Christ?
Luke 1:46
Mary's Song
45Blessed is she who has believed that the Lord’s word to her will be fulfilled.” 46Then Mary said: “My soul magnifies the Lord, 47and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior!…
She wasn't, thats how. Mary's IC is a fabrication told by rome, not scripture. Not a hint in all of Gods word about mary being sinless from her mothers womb. Youre simply connecting dots that don't exist.
nondenom said:
A. Catholic doctrine is not correct. Its flawed, and that greatly!
B. She rejoiced in God her savior because she is a sinner in need of salvation, just like you and I.
CP says:
A. They have a surface flaw in regards to her and that does not make them not precious gems who sincerely believe. They just need polish and fitting.
They still preserve the heart of the Law 'LOVE' "and the greatest of these is LOVE". They show her love in the manner Commanded.
B. You are more than flawed what you do goes to the heart of the matter 'LOVE' and that you do not have for her, in the manner of Christ .
c. no kidding , she needed a Savior, she said so, that is who she rejoices in.
What is clear nondenom is, you can not read full context. You have the spirit of division . Hence, why you picked and chose from what I said what you want, ignoring the context in which I expressed. Without full context you only have pretext. And that is all your sects stance is built on -pretext:a reason given in justification of a course of action that is not the real reason.
You lack real reason , you cannot grasp the heart of the matter because your pretext is not the full context of Christ's doctrine. Therefore , you have no justification in the Lord. The course of your actions is to destroy the heart of the matter .
Pretext is without substance. Hence, why God is going to shake you off like fleas.
nondenom's response:
Said the bible nowhere. Lurkers behold, eisegesis at its best.
CP says:
Said the bible what , nowhere? It is said everywhere that favor is Grace even in definition. Get a dictionary! What you assert is the only eisegesis in this
discussion.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases. It is commonly referred to as reading into the text.
But I argue , I can not even give you that because you cannot even read the text of the Word at all. Bottom line Mercy comes with Grace and that is favor. And she is HIGHLY FAVORED BY GOD=BEEN Graced by His Intimate presence.
Continued.....
Last edited:
Luke 1:46-55 Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)
46 And Mary said,
Mary’s Song of Praise
“My soul magnifies the Lord,
47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
48 for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden.
For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed;
49 for he who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is his name.
50 And his mercy is on those who fear him
from generation to generation.
51 He has shown strength with his arm,
he has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts,
52 he has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree;
53 he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent empty away.
54 He has helped his servant Israel,
in remembrance of his mercy,
55 as he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his posterity for ever.
THIS IS AWESOME!!!
46 And Mary said,
Mary’s Song of Praise
“My soul magnifies the Lord,
47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
48 for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden.
For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed;
49 for he who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is his name.
50 And his mercy is on those who fear him
from generation to generation.
51 He has shown strength with his arm,
he has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts,
52 he has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree;
53 he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent empty away.
54 He has helped his servant Israel,
in remembrance of his mercy,
55 as he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his posterity for ever.
THIS IS AWESOME!!!
Absolution takes away sin, but it does not remedy all the disorders sin has caused. AND NIETHER DOES "FAITH ALONE", where no satisfaction is required, contrary to Scripture and reason. Great post, Mungo. Unfortunately, it falls on deaf ears.
Oh please. You should know by now that the patriarchs are types and precursors of the coming Messiah. Of course HIS KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD. That then should concern you. Clearly He has a KINGDOM and therefore there are positions and they should be respected because they are Christ appointed.
Each term has a broader, different meaning that overlaps. Reconciliation occurs after God's justice is satisfied, after penance is properly carried out. The last penny will be paid in this life or the next. The exegesis of "prison" took just as long to develop as did the doctrine of Original Sin. So "prison" or purgatory cannot be rejected on the basis of later development, because Original Sin was also a later development.
The way Jesus used the term "prison" was understood by His hearers to be in line with Jewish tradition, which is rejected by Protestantism. How would you define "prison" without inventing a new doctrine?
Mungo's "stance" is in keeping with CCC2357-2359 The Catechism is based on Scripture, there are over 50 references to Scripture in the footnotes just on one page. References that are not explicitly scriptural are to official documents that are also loaded with Scripture references. Following reference to reference means the Catechism is an organic whole, not mere ink and paper. The Catechism is a summary of Church teaching both/and a point of further research. The Church has the same right to write and interpret her teachings as does Calvin wrote his Institutes, or any of the reformers who wrote numerous confessions of faith.
Furthermore, CCC2357-2359 is found on one section expounding on THE SIXTH COMMANDMENT, is a teaching on human sexuality. It reveals to me why our whole culture hates the Catholic Church.
Fashioning weapons from out-of-context snippets to attack the Church is a form of virtual witchcraft IMO. The Bible never does that.
Catholics don't read the Catechism the same way you read Scripture. The Catechism is not "above the word of God"; that is false dichotomous thinking and fear mongering born out of the 16th century's illogical, unworkable, unbiblical and unhistorical premise of "sola scriptura", invented by one mentally disturbed man who was angry with the Pope.
Last edited:
That's nice I am not Protestant.Carry on!Each term has a broader, different meaning that overlaps. Reconciliation occurs after God's justice is satisfied, after penance is properly carried out. The last penny will be paid in this life or the next. The exegesis of "prison" took just as long to develop as did the doctrine of Original Sin. So "prison" or purgatory cannot be rejected on the basis of later development, because Original Sin was also a later development.
The way Jesus used the term "prison" was understood by His hearers to be in line with Jewish tradition, which is rejected by Protestantism. How would you define "prison" without inventing a new doctrine? Mungo's "stance" is in keeping with CCC2357-2359 The Catechism is based on Scripture, there are over 50 references to Scripture in the footnotes just on one page. References that are not explicitly scriptural are to official documents that are also loaded with Scripture references. Following reference to reference means the Catechism is an organic whole, not mere ink and paper. The Catechism is a summary of Church teaching both/and a point of further research. The Church has the same right to write and interpret her teachings as does Calvin wrote his Institutes, or any reformers who write numerous confessions of faith.
Fashioning weapons from out-of-context snippets to attack the Church is a form of virtual witchcraft IMO.
Catholics don't read the Catechism the same way you read Scripture. The Catechism is not "above the word of God"; that is false dichotomous thinking and senseless fear mongering born out of the 16th century's illogical, unworkable, unbiblical and unhistorical premise of "sola scriptura", invented by one mentally disturbed man who was angry with the Pope.
Mungo , all you post does not change 2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is God-breathed and is profitable for doctrine, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
The Catechism has useful doctrine and I never said it did not .I have read it. I said, any truth it holds is based upon the foundation, it does not replace the foundation. And does have some flaws that's all I said. I agree with all truth.
And you and the Protestants need to get something else to do. Take one of these "love Pill" and call Christ in the morning .
All Scripture is God-breathed and is profitable for doctrine, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
The Catechism has useful doctrine and I never said it did not .I have read it. I said, any truth it holds is based upon the foundation, it does not replace the foundation. And does have some flaws that's all I said. I agree with all truth.
And you and the Protestants need to get something else to do. Take one of these "love Pill" and call Christ in the morning .
Episcopalian?
You should quote Mungo instead of making false assumptions. The reformers leaned toward a more historical-grammatical hermeneutics and technically ignored 2 Timothy 3:16.
2 Timothy 3
[14] But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, (Tradition)
knowing from whom you learned it (Magisterium)
[15] and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. (Scriptures)
[16] All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
[17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
Note verse 14-15. It admonishes Timothy to do three things:
1) Remember what you have learned and firmly believed (Tradition)
2) Know from whom you learned it (Magisterium)
3) Know you have the Scriptures
The Bible on St. Paul's list comes in third, not first. He actually gives here the traditional Catholic teaching on the three sources of sound teaching.
In verse 15 he goes into an excursus on the Bible. This brief excursus emphasizes the value of the Bible and recommends a fourfold method of exegesis. This verse was used in the pre-Reformation Church as a proof text for the Quadriga which was the standard Catholic approach to the Bible. Still taught today. The Quadriga method used the following four categories:
- Literal/Literary (teaching) - the text as it is written
- Analogical (reproof) - matters of faith
- Anagogical (correction) - matters of hope/prophecy
- Moral (training in righteousness) - matters of charity
The 'reformers' rejected the BIBLICAL fourfold method of exegesis in favor of a more literal approach, and ignored 2 Tim 3:16!!!
"Profitable" does not mean "exclusive". Who is the "man of God"??? Scripture doesn't support the notion that the man of God is any individual believer. Everywhere in Scripture the man of God is one who is ordained, or called directly by God followed by signs and wonders.
Last edited:
Similar threads
