Heresy on Christianchat

[Maynard]

Why do we need to be purged of sin(go to purgatory) to enter Heaven if the part of us that has sinned isn't going there?

Good morning, Mark.

In that case then why was it necessary that Christ go to the cross as expiation for our sins? If we could get to heaven anyway, since as you say "the part of us that has sinned isn't going there", then there would be no need to be covered in the blood of Christ, according to your logic. Man is body and soul, and while our earthly/unglorified bodies are made of dust, it is our eternal souls that are judged for what we have done in this life.

This is a description of the relationship between body and soul, from the Catechism of the Catholic Church (362-368)...

II. "BODY AND SOUL BUT TRULY ONE"
362 The human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. the biblical account expresses this reality in symbolic language when it affirms that "then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being."[SUP]229[/SUP] Man, whole and entire, is therefore willed by God.
363 In Sacred Scripture the term "soul" often refers to human life or the entire human person.[SUP]230[/SUP] But "soul" also refers to the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him,[SUP]231[/SUP] that by which he is most especially in God's image: "soul" signifies the spiritual principle in man.
364 The human body shares in the dignity of "the image of God": it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit:[SUP]232[/SUP]
Man, though made of body and soul, is a unity. Through his very bodily condition he sums up in himself the elements of the material world. Through him they are thus brought to their highest perfection and can raise their voice in praise freely given to the Creator. For this reason man may not despise his bodily life. Rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and to hold it in honour since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day [SUP]233[/SUP]
365 The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the "form" of the body:[SUP]234[/SUP] i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.
366 The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God - it is not "produced" by the parents - and also that it is immortal: it does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final Resurrection.[SUP]235[/SUP]
367 Sometimes the soul is distinguished from the spirit: St. Paul for instance prays that God may sanctify his people "wholly", with "spirit and soul and body" kept sound and blameless at the Lord's coming.[SUP]236[/SUP] The Church teaches that this distinction does not introduce a duality into the soul.[SUP]237[/SUP] "Spirit" signifies that from creation man is ordered to a supernatural end and that his soul can gratuitously be raised beyond all it deserves to communion with God.[SUP]238[/SUP]
368 The spiritual tradition of the Church also emphasizes the heart, in the biblical sense of the depths of one's being, where the person decides for or against God.

Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText

 

[mark54]

Good morning, Mark.

In that case then why was it necessary that Christ go to the cross as expiation for our sins? If we could get to heaven anyway, since as you say "the part of us that has sinned isn't going there", then there would be no need to be covered in the blood of Christ, according to your logic. Man is body and soul, and while our earthly/unglorified bodies are made of dust, it is our eternal souls that are judged for what we have done in this life.

But if Christ is in you your body is dead because of sin, yet your Spirit is alive because of righteousness

Rom8:10


My Spirit has been pardoned, not my body.

 

[mark54]

Good morning, Mark.

In that case then why was it necessary that Christ go to the cross as expiation for our sins? If we could get to heaven anyway, since as you say "the part of us that has sinned isn't going there", then there would be no need to be covered in the blood of Christ, according to your logic. Man is body and soul, and while our earthly/unglorified bodies are made of dust, it is our eternal souls that are judged for what we have done in this life.

We will be judged for reward, not where we spend eternity:

Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life
John 5:24

 

[Maynard]

We will be judged for reward, not where we spend eternity:

Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life
John 5:24

Those are nice one-liner's from our Lord that you posted, but we need to understand His teachings within the entire context of holy scripture, not simply nit-pick those passages which appeal to us while disregarding those passages which condemn.

 

[mark54]

Those are nice one-liner's from our Lord that you posted, but we need to understand His teachings within the entire context of holy scripture, not simply nit-pick those passages which appeal to us while disregarding those passages which condemn.

For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. [SUP]25 [/SUP]Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. [SUP]26 [/SUP]Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself(we need to understand the context obviously)
Heb9:24-26

What is your righteousness before God?

 

[7seven7]

"The Church of Rome teaches that those dying in the communion of the Church, who have not in this life made full satisfaction for their sins, or acquired sufficient merit to entitle them to admission into heaven, do at death pass into a state of suffering, there to remain until due satisfaction is made and proper purification is effected. There is no necessary termination to this state of purgatory but the day of judgment or the end of the world. It may last for a thousand or many thousands of years. But Purgatory is under the power of the keys. The sufferings of souls in that state may be alleviated or shortened by the authorized ministers of the Church. There is no limit to the power of men who are believed to hold the keys of heaven in their hand, to shut and no man opens, and open and no man shuts. Of all incredibilities the most incredible is that God would commit such power as this, to weak, ignorant, and often wicked men."


Hodge, Charles (2012-04-14). Systematic Theology (All 3 Parts Complete) (Kindle Locations 5369-5380). . Kindle Edition.


Is my Catholic sister in error when she tells me that purgatory is no longer a Roman Catholic Doctrine?

I'm going to answer this one first, then come back to your next comment later. First, lets have a look at the guy who wrote this shall we?

"A Presbyteriantheologian, he was a leading exponent of historical Calvinism in America during the 19th century. He was deeply rooted in the Scottish philosophy of Common Sense Realism. He argued strongly for the authority of the Bible as the Word of God. Many of his ideas were adopted in the 20th century by Fundamentalists and Evangelicals.[SUP][1]"

Now, this is what he says that the Catholic church teaches...." The sufferings of souls in that state may be alleviated or shortened by the authorized ministers of the Church."

Now let me tell you TRUTHFULLY what the Catholic Church teaches, brother! Straight out of the Catechism. Please read carefully so you don't misinterpret anything!

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.[SUP]604[/SUP] 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:[SUP]605[/SUP]
As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.[SUP]606[/SUP]
1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."[SUP]607[/SUP] From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.[SUP]608[/SUP] The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:
Let us help and commemorate them. If Job's sons were purified by their father's sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.[SUP]609
[/SUP]
Now, tdrew777, this is just ONE example of one of another denominations leaders misleading his people in regards to what the Catholic Church teaches. This, unfortunately, happens alot.[/SUP]

 

[BarlyGurl]

BarlyGurl, I didn't say we can't be forgiven for original sin. I said the effects of original sin can NOT be washed away. As a result of Adams disobedience (the original sin), we have had the following gifts from God Almighty taken from us :

*IMMORTALITY
*IMPASSIBILITY (freedom from suffering)
*INTEGRITY (freedom from disordered passions)
*INFUSED KNOWLEDGE

BarlyGurl, my point was that the loss of these gifts were the result of Adams disobediance, and have been lost forever. Okay... that's nice to know, thanks. My bible says we got those things back in Christ.

 

[7seven7]

Grudem does not compare theological schools, but politely gives references so that readers can dig deeper. Copied below are his references posted after the chapter on the Trinity. Can you recommend his Roman Catholic references?

"Sections in Evangelical Systematic Theologies
1. Anglican (Episcopalian) 1882–92 Litton, 91–108 1930 Thomas, 20–31, 90–99
2. Arminian (Wesleyan or Methodist) 1875–76 Pope, 1:253–87; 2:101–5 1892–94 Miley, 1:223–75 1940 Wiley, 1:394–439 1960 Purkiser, 143–44, 199–203 1983 Carter, 1:127–29, 375–414 1983– Cottrell, 3:117–74 1987–90 Oden, 1:181–224
3. Baptist 1767 Gill, 1:187–245 1887 Boyce, 125–66 1907 Strong, 304–52 1917 Mullins, 203–13 1976–83 Henry, 5:165–213 1983–85 Erickson, 321–42
1987–94 Lewis/Demarest, 1:251–88
4. Dispensational 1947 Chafer, 1:272–347; 5:7–38; 6:7–46 1949 Thiessen, 89–99 1986 Ryrie, 51–59
5. Lutheran 1917–24 Pieper, 1:381–404 1934 Mueller, 147–60
6. Reformed (or Presbyterian) 1559 Calvin, 1:120–59 (1.13) 1861 Heppe, 105–32 1871–73 Hodge, 1:442–534 1878 Dabney, 174–211 1887–1921 Warfield, BTS, 22–156; SSW, 1:88–92; BD, 133–74 1889 Shedd, 1:249–332 1937–66 Murray, CW, 4:58–81 1938 Berkhof, 82–99 1962 Buswell, 1:103–29
7. Renewal (or charismatic/Pentecostal) 1988–92 Williams, 1:83–94

Sections in Representative Roman Catholic Systematic Theologies
1. Roman Catholic: Traditional 1955 Ott, 50–75
2. Roman Catholic: Post-Vatican II 1980 McBrien, 1:343–66"



Grudem, Wayne (2009-05-18). Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (pp. 259- 260). Zondervan. Kindle Edition.

I dont understand what you mean by "can you recommend his Roman Catholic references?" If you would like me to give you my opinion on his work, can you please send me a link where I can read his stuff? But before I do that, brother, we need to remember the following about this man:

Grudem holds to noncessationist Charismatic beliefs and was at one time a qualified supporter of the Vineyard Movement and one of the main apologists and spokesmen for reuniting Charismatic, Reformed, andEvangelical churches.

So I doubt his work is going to be very reliable when it has anything to do with the Catholic Church, as most Charismatic, Reformed, and Evangelical movements are against the Catholic Church, as is so obvious in what they teach you guys. But please, send me the link of the above texts and I would love to have a read of them and talk more about it. God bless you Brother!

 

[7seven7]

BarlyGurl, I didn't say we can't be forgiven for original sin. I said the effects of original sin can NOT be washed away. As a result of Adams disobedience (the original sin), we have had the following gifts from God Almighty taken from us :

*IMMORTALITY
*IMPASSIBILITY (freedom from suffering)
*INTEGRITY (freedom from disordered passions)
*INFUSED KNOWLEDGE

BarlyGurl, my point was that the loss of these gifts were the result of Adams disobediance, and have been lost forever. Okay... that's nice to know, thanks. My bible says we got those things back in Christ.

We really got immortality and impassibility back? When? And why are we still dying? lol And why do women still suffer in childbirth? lol You lost me on this one BarlyGurl. When I said forever, I meant forever here on Earth BTW. Just clearing that up. Love You Sis!

 

[crossnote]

Like who? Tell me and I will answer you!

We can start with the Inquisitions but you most likely deny they had Rome's approval.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Inquisition is such a harsh word. The church prefers to call them interviews and insists they were done out of love.

We can start with the Inquisitions but you most likely deny they had Rome's approval.

 

[7seven7]

We can start with the Inquisitions but you most likely deny they had Rome's approval.

Brother, I have a good reply to this one that might even teach you a thing or two about the Inquisitions. But I really have to go to class right now and i promise to reply when I get back tonight. Just one thing. Please don't speak to me in a bitter tone. I see this as a discussion, not an argument. Whether you like it or not, we are brothers in Christ, and I love you. God bless.

 

[BarlyGurl]

We really got immortality and impassibility back? When? And why are we still dying? lol And why do women still suffer in childbirth? lol You lost me on this one BarlyGurl. When I said forever, I meant forever here on Earth BTW. Just clearing that up. Love You Sis!

Ohhhh... just here on earth? I think I understand where your coming from. An yes we got thoem back... why don't you see it, because people fail to recieve it. Dying?... I have already died and know I live in Christ. The death of this body... I actually consider it to be an exciting and welcomed transition...hallelujah

 

[7seven7]

Inquisition is such a harsh word. The church prefers to call them interviews and insists they were done out of love.

Sarcasm! One of the lowest forms or respect. I'm sure you make Christ REAL happy when you do that, buddy. You'll get the truth about the Inquisitions a little later. Don't panic.

 

[7seven7]

Ohhhh... just here on earth? I think I understand where your coming from. An yes we got thoem back... why don't you see it, because people fail to recieve it. Dying?... I have already died and know I live in Christ. The death of this body... I actually consider it to be an exciting and welcomed transition...hallelujah

You need to understand that when the gifts were taken from us because of Adam's sin, the gift of immortality was that of an earthly state.
*IMPASSIBILITY (freedom from suffering)
*INTEGRITY (freedom from disordered passions)
*INFUSED KNOWLEDGE

We had all these gifts here on earth, sister. We have eternal life in Christ, of course! But here one earth, all these gifts were taken from us because of original sin. You missed the point. But never mind, I get the impression you really don't want to get the point anyway.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I GOT me a LIVE one!

Sarcasm! One of the lowest forms or respect. I'm sure you make Christ REAL happy when you do that, buddy. You'll get the truth about the Inquisitions a little later. Don't panic.

 

[BarlyGurl]

We had all these gifts here on earth, sister. We have eternal life in Christ, of course! But here one earth, all these gifts were taken from us because of original sin. You missed the point. But never mind, I get the impression you really don't want to get the point anyway.

It isn't that I don't get it... it's a fundamental lack of agreement... but your presentation is nice.

 

[7seven7]

I GOT me a LIVE one!

Do I really look like that fish? Far out! I need to lose some weight

 

[7seven7]

We can start with the Inquisitions but you most likely deny they had Rome's approval.

OK, brother. To start off, I want to say that no one enters this conversation with clean hands. The Catholic Church has had corruption in it in the past, and done some wrong things. But as you will see, the protestants haven't been innocent either. So if you're claiming that the Catholic Church is evil because of some corrupt members (which you will find anywhere where there is the human element), then you will have to make the same judgement on the Protestant Church too. Here is some information I found about the Spanish inquisition:

The 16th century was a brutal period. The use of torture and execution by burning at the stake was common in Catholic and Protestant Europe. In the Elizabethan courts of Protestant England, people were hung, drawn and quartered for hearing Mass in their own homes (remember how you mentioned martyrdom in your earlier comment?).
Furthermore, not only was the Mass illegal in Elizabeth England but anyone who did not attend anglican services was fined. Anyone who refused to take the Oath of Supremecy after two refusals was executed. To convert to Catholicism was high treason; priests could be executed if caught; informers roamed the country reporting on priests and Catholic activity.

About the Spanish Inquisition:
The Spanish Inquisition was established in 1478 and is the most famous, or infamous, of all Inquisitions. In 1492, Spain was finally united as a single country after nearly 8 centuries of struggle against the Moors. Queen Isabella knew that Spains unity depended upon a strong Church. She set about halting many abuses.
One of the more serious problems faced by Isabella was the number of Jews and Moors who had pretended to convert to the Catholic religion without really believing in it. These false converts had risen to high positions in government and Church, and many were secretly plotting the downfall of Isabella, Spain and the Church.
The method chosen by Isabella to find these agents was the Inquisition. What is often overlooked is that the Spanish Inquisition was instituted for persons who proffessed to be Catholics and not for practicing Jews or Moslems. It also aimed to unearth and bring to penance bigamists, adulterers, heretics (like me apparently), blasphemers and other baptized men and women who violated the teachings of the Catholic Church.
At first there were abuses, with many people being falsely accused, tortured and imprisoned. Popes Leo X, Paul III, Paul IV and Sixtus IV condemned these abuses. Pope Leo X, for example, excommunicated the Catholic tribunal at Toledo and ordered the arrest of the witnesses who appeared before it for perjury.New judges were appointed,headed by the Dominican friar Thomas de Torquemanda. He reformed procedures, making them more lenient, improving prison conditions and personally heard appeals. Torquemanda was pious and just, and certainly does not deserve the reputation foisted upon him by slanderers who have an "axe to grind" against all things Catholic.
The 16th century was a brutal period. The use of torture and execution by burning at the stake was common in Catholic and Protestant Europe. In the Elizabethan courts of Protestant England, people were hung, drawn and quartered for hearing Mass in their own homes (remember how you mentioned martyrdom in your earlier comment?).
Furthermore, not only was the Mass illegal in Elizabeth England but anyone who did not attend anglican services was fined. Anyone who refused to take the Oath of Supremecy after two refusals was executed. To convert to Catholicism was high treason; priests could be executed if caught; informers roamed the country reporting on priests and Catholic activity.

Mate, I'm not saying that everybody in the Catholic Church is perfect. But Her teachings are true and just! Here's what the Catechism says about the past:

2298 In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors.

Brother! Nobody comes into this discussion about violence with clean hands. Including the Protestants. God bless.

 

[PS]

OK, brother. To start off, I want to say that no one enters this conversation with clean hands. The Catholic Church has had corruption in it in the past, and done some wrong things. But as you will see, the protestants haven't been innocent either. So if you're claiming that the Catholic Church is evil because of some corrupt members (which you will find anywhere where there is the human element), then you will have to make the same judgement on the Protestant Church too. Here is some information I found about the Spanish inquisition:

The 16th century was a brutal period. The use of torture and execution by burning at the stake was common in Catholic and Protestant Europe. In the Elizabethan courts of Protestant England, people were hung, drawn and quartered for hearing Mass in their own homes (remember how you mentioned martyrdom in your earlier comment?).
Furthermore, not only was the Mass illegal in Elizabeth England but anyone who did not attend anglican services was fined. Anyone who refused to take the Oath of Supremecy after two refusals was executed. To convert to Catholicism was high treason; priests could be executed if caught; informers roamed the country reporting on priests and Catholic activity.

About the Spanish Inquisition:
The Spanish Inquisition was established in 1478 and is the most famous, or infamous, of all Inquisitions. In 1492, Spain was finally united as a single country after nearly 8 centuries of struggle against the Moors. Queen Isabella knew that Spains unity depended upon a strong Church. She set about halting many abuses.
One of the more serious problems faced by Isabella was the number of Jews and Moors who had pretended to convert to the Catholic religion without really believing in it. These false converts had risen to high positions in government and Church, and many were secretly plotting the downfall of Isabella, Spain and the Church.
The method chosen by Isabella to find these agents was the Inquisition. What is often overlooked is that the Spanish Inquisition was instituted for persons who proffessed to be Catholics and not for practicing Jews or Moslems. It also aimed to unearth and bring to penance bigamists, adulterers, heretics (like me apparently), blasphemers and other baptized men and women who violated the teachings of the Catholic Church.
At first there were abuses, with many people being falsely accused, tortured and imprisoned. Popes Leo X, Paul III, Paul IV and Sixtus IV condemned these abuses. Pope Leo X, for example, excommunicated the Catholic tribunal at Toledo and ordered the arrest of the witnesses who appeared before it for perjury.New judges were appointed,headed by the Dominican friar Thomas de Torquemanda. He reformed procedures, making them more lenient, improving prison conditions and personally heard appeals. Torquemanda was pious and just, and certainly does not deserve the reputation foisted upon him by slanderers who have an "axe to grind" against all things Catholic.
The 16th century was a brutal period. The use of torture and execution by burning at the stake was common in Catholic and Protestant Europe. In the Elizabethan courts of Protestant England, people were hung, drawn and quartered for hearing Mass in their own homes (remember how you mentioned martyrdom in your earlier comment?).
Furthermore, not only was the Mass illegal in Elizabeth England but anyone who did not attend anglican services was fined. Anyone who refused to take the Oath of Supremecy after two refusals was executed. To convert to Catholicism was high treason; priests could be executed if caught; informers roamed the country reporting on priests and Catholic activity.

Mate, I'm not saying that everybody in the Catholic Church is perfect. But Her teachings are true and just! Here's what the Catechism says about the past:

2298 In times past, cruel practices were commonly used by legitimate governments to maintain law and order, often without protest from the Pastors of the Church, who themselves adopted in their own tribunals the prescriptions of Roman law concerning torture. Regrettable as these facts are, the Church always taught the duty of clemency and mercy. She forbade clerics to shed blood. In recent times it has become evident that these cruel practices were neither necessary for public order, nor in conformity with the legitimate rights of the human person. On the contrary, these practices led to ones even more degrading. It is necessary to work for their abolition. We must pray for the victims and their tormentors.

Brother! Nobody comes into this discussion about violence with clean hands. Including the Protestants. God bless.

Which to my mind means that nobody was acting in accordance with the teaching of Jesus. It is my firm belief that in order to be able to call ourselves Christians we need to act according to the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ and according to that definition none of the above could truly call themselves Christians. That is a hard thing to say I know but we are specifically instructed not to murder and those who do are breaking the sixth commandment and stand condemned before God, neither do they have any excuse because they all knew the word of God.

You are right, not only were their hands dirty, their hands were sinful like their hearts.