June 14, 2006 at 9:38 pm #1290
How does this passage support purgatory?June 14, 2006 at 10:08 pm #6517
It implies that there is forgiveness after death.June 14, 2006 at 10:33 pm #6518
Matthew 12:32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.June 14, 2006 at 10:38 pm #6519
[quote:ztf50t6f]It implies that there is forgiveness after death.[/quote:ztf50t6f]
Don’t get it. ” title=”Confused” />June 14, 2006 at 11:42 pm #6522
I agree, there’s a long stretch to connect this to paradise.June 15, 2006 at 12:08 am #6524
The pertinent part of this Scripture is “[b:t16lmkgx]will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.[/b:t16lmkgx]” The implication is if there are sins that will NOT be forgiven “in the age to come”, then there are sins which WILL be forgiven “in the age to come”, ala purgatory. It would seem superfluous of Jesus to add “neither in this world, or the world to come” if it held no meaning past what he’d already said – he’d already said once in the previous verse and once in the present verse that sins against the Holy Spirit would not be forgiven.June 15, 2006 at 12:56 am #6525
[quote:3r8lg6a2]The pertinent part of this Scripture is “[b:3r8lg6a2]will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.[/b:3r8lg6a2]” The implication is if there are sins that will NOT be forgiven “in the age to come”, then there are sins which WILL be forgiven “in the age to come”, ala purgatory. It would seem superfluous of Jesus to add “neither in this world, or the world to come” if it held no meaning past what he’d already said – he’d already said once in the previous verse and once in the present verse that sins against the Holy Spirit would not be forgiven.[/quote:3r8lg6a2]
First of all, you all know I’m Catholic. But even I have questions about my own faith from time to time.
Why would you imply it to purgatory? Why couldn’t it imply to somewhere else? You might say, what else might he be talking about? And I would say, well I don’t know, but why do you just have to automatically assume it’s purgatory? How do we know for sure if it is purgatory? How do we know for sure, without any ambiguty, that purgatory is what he’s talking about? With all due respect, this, ‘ala purgatory’ conclusion just isn’t working for me.June 15, 2006 at 1:54 am #6528
About Catholics TeamKeymaster
Well, I’m sure other people have thought about it through the centuries and didn’t just go “walla, purgatory!”June 15, 2006 at 2:17 am #6530
[quote:2k210u8h]Well, I’m sure other people have thought about it through the centuries and didn’t just go “walla, purgatory!”[/quote:2k210u8h]
Okay. How about just this then.
Why would you imply it to purgatory? Why couldn’t it imply to somewhere else? You might say, what else might he be talking about? And I would say, well I don’t know, but why do you just have to automatically assume it’s purgatory? How do we know for sure if it is purgatory? How do we know for sure, without any ambiguty, that purgatory is what he’s talking about?June 15, 2006 at 8:31 am #6531
It depends on whether you are taking the verse all by itself or whether you are taking it in the greater context of Scriptural and Traditional and Patristic evidence.
“In the Gospel Our Lord says, “Finish your journey while you still have the light.” And in the words of the Prophet He declares, “In an acceptable time I have heard thee, and in the day of salvation I have helped thee.” St. Paul’s comment on this is: “And here is the time of pardon; the day of salvation has come already.” Solomon, too, says, “Anything you can turn your hand to, do with what power you have; for there will be no work, nor reason, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in the nether world where you are going.” And David adds, “For his mercy endures forever.” From these quotations it is clear that each one will be presented to the Judge exactly as he was when he departed this life. Yet there must be some cleansing fire before judgment, because of some minor faults that may remain to be purged away. Does not Christ, the Truth, say that if anyone blasphemes against the Holy Spirit he shall not be forgiven “either in this world or in the world to come”? From this statement we learn that some sins can be forgiven in this world and some in the world to come. For, if forgiveness is refused for a particular sin, we conclude logically that it is granted for others. This must apply, as I said, to slight transgressions, such as persistent idle talking, immoderate laughter, or blame in the care of property, which can scarcely be administered without fault even by those who know the faults to be avoided, or errors due to ignorance in matters of no great importance. All these faults are troublesome for the soul after death if they are not forgiven while one is still alive. For when St. Paul says that Christ is the foundation, he adds: “But on this foundation different men will build in gold, silver, precious stones, wood grass, or straw…and fire will test the quality of each man’s workmanship. He will receive a reward, if the building he had added on stands firm, if it is burnt up, he will be the loser, and yet he himself will be saved, though only as men are saved as passing by fire.” Although this may be taken to signify the fire of suffering we experience in this life, it may also refer to the cleansing fire of the world to come, and, if one accepts it in this sense, one must weigh St. Paul’s words carefully. When he says that men are saved by passing through fire, he is not referring to men who build on this foundation in iron, bronze, or lead, that is, in mortal sins which are indestructible by fire. He specifies those who build on this foundation in wood grass, and straw, that is, in venial or trivial sins which fire consumes easily'” (Dialogues IV: 41).June 15, 2006 at 12:29 pm #6533
Peace be with you all!
[quote:1bey70yr]I agree, there’s a long stretch to connect this to paradise.[/quote:1bey70yr]
Well Purgatory isn’t really paradise. It is the proofing/curing/quickening if you will for any temporal sin carried after death.
[quote:1bey70yr]Don’t get it. [/quote:1bey70yr]
This is from an apologetics class I took and:
[quote:1bey70yr]It depends on whether you are taking the verse all by itself or whether you are taking it in the greater context of Scriptural and Traditional and Patristic evidence. [/quote:1bey70yr]
is absolutely correct. This is but a part of the Scriptural support of the Sacred Tradition of Purgatory. All Scripture quotes should be used to consider this. Like law anyone part viewed on it’s own does not contain the entire basis of evidence to support a claim. I give a list[/url:1bey70yr] of Scriptural passages that support Purgatory.
Now from my class on this topic this is what we can learn from this passage:
[quote:1bey70yr][i:1bey70yr]Jesus implies that some sins cannot be forgiven in the next world.[/i:1bey70yr] Sin cannot be forgiven in Hell. There is no sin to be forgiven in Heaven. Any of the sin in the next world can only occur in Purgatory.[/quote:1bey70yr]
Kind of a Pythagorean Theorem, A squared plus B squared equals C squared. One must under stand that when Christ speaks of the [b:1bey70yr][i:1bey70yr]Next Age[/i:1bey70yr][/b:1bey70yr] he is speaking of Eternal Life, Heaven. Forgiveness, such as in The Sacrament of Reconciliation, is during the [b:1bey70yr][i:1bey70yr]First or Present Age[/i:1bey70yr][/b:1bey70yr] which is our current Age. Once we leave this Age and if we carry sin with us, where and when is it forgiven if we cannot have sin in Heaven? The presumption is Purgatory.
Most Sacred Tradition is based on a combination of Scriptural passages and great insight, 2000 years worth, has be used to study and understand some of the more obscure clues left to us. I hope this helps in some way. God Bless!June 15, 2006 at 1:49 pm #6537
[quote:2i379emw]How do we know for sure, without any ambiguty, that purgatory is what he’s talking about? With all due respect, this, ‘ala purgatory’ conclusion just isn’t working for me.[/quote:2i379emw]
I wasn’t meaning that the doctrine of purgatory is fully proved or justified by the Scripture in question, Mat 12:32 – just that the principles associated with what Christ was saying are congruent with the doctrine of purgatory so far as forgiveness of sins pre/post earlthly life go. As others have said here, purgatory doesn’t rise or fall on any one Scriptural proof text, rather on the whole of the Scriptural evidence, as well as the testimony of time, aka Tradition.
There are many senses that Scriptures are interpreted according to, such as the literal, allegorical, moral, and anagogical (check out the Catechism[/url:2i379emw] concerning these). I don’t think Jesus was speaking directly about purgatory in Mat 12:32, but I dont’ think he need be doing so for it to be pertinent to the topic of purgatory. The end of the gospel of Mathew reads “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” – I think Jesus’ immediate concern was the order he was giving to the deciples to go out and baptize folks and teaching them, but the verse is also used for proof of the doctrine of the Trinity. I wouldn’t read Mathew 12:32 or 28:19 and say “shazam, purgatory!” or “viola, Trinity!”, but those doctrines are certainly to be found in principle (not necessarily [i:2i379emw]fully[/i:2i379emw] explained) in said verses, as well as a number of others.June 15, 2006 at 2:01 pm #6538
Sacred Tradition, I thought, was not meant to be used to interpret Scripture. Rather Scripture gives rise to Sacred Tradition through the councils and creeds of our early fathers. If Sacred Tradition is a lense with which we must read Scripture then it only works if the lense itself is infallable, otherwise reading into the text through any form is up for criticism. Fred, honestly, I don’t know why I said the thing about purgatory about paradise, I was actually thinking that the age to come might be the age without sin (heaven) but I was not sure about this interpretation of “age to come” so I left it at that.
I don’t buy this verse to back up purgatory, sorry fellas. It’s too unclear. However, I do find it to back up the Tradition’s interpretation of it. There are other portions of Scripture that suggest there is a place before heaven/paradise, but even the connection to “purgatory” is sketchy; we are left to rationalize it since we cannot find it. Most theologians say “let’s face it, the concept of purgatory is not exactly like the doctrine of the Trinity,” both of which are not explicitly mentioned in Scripture, but unlike purgatory, the doctrine of the Trinity is witnessed and is crucial to the Christian faith.
Theologically (and from philosophically) purgatory is quite rational as Fred so wonderfully explained.
*Sigh* Everytime Jesus opens his mouth I find myself being frustrated, “what are you saying to us?” I yell out… other times, “would you just speak in plain 21st century English!!” lol. All the Koine Greek knowledge in the world would not help us to understand fully what He has said. Funny how Jesus Christ is God’s revelation to us and yet, there is so much revealed that we cannot grasp.
Oh, I’m not sure the Solomon quote relates to purgatory (Benedict wrote); “Solomon, too, says, “Anything you can turn your hand to, do with what power you have; for there will be no work, nor reason, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in the nether world where you are going.” This nether world reflects the ANE belief that the soul (which is the person; both mind and body) is like a flame that is extinguished through death. Ancient Israel hardly dreamed up anything close to the Greek philosophical ideas of the eternal soul, and especially the Christian concept of purgatory. We should not read into the text too much. Quite simply Solomon is stating that we should work hard while we’re alive because all our reason, knowledge, and wisdom will be gone when we enter sheol. Ancient Israel just barely starting thinking of the Resurrection of the Dead after the Exile. [/i]June 15, 2006 at 3:47 pm #6539
[color=darkblue:16s4lwbf]I had the luxury to ask this very question to Tim Staples in person.
He said[/color:16s4lwbf] [b:16s4lwbf][color=red:16s4lwbf]”Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is to reject God’s grace non-stop”[/color:16s4lwbf][/b:16s4lwbf]. [color=darkblue:16s4lwbf]Anyone who is not in Grace has no life in him. So it is true that this sin is unforgivable.[/color:16s4lwbf]June 15, 2006 at 9:00 pm #6544
[quote:3uiqcbla][color=darkblue:3uiqcbla]I had the luxury to ask this very question to Tim Staples in person.
He said[/color:3uiqcbla] [b:3uiqcbla][color=red:3uiqcbla]”Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is to reject God’s grace non-stop”[/color:3uiqcbla][/b:3uiqcbla]. [color=darkblue:3uiqcbla]Anyone who is not in Grace has no life in him. So it is true that this sin is unforgivable.[/color:3uiqcbla][/quote:3uiqcbla]
Who is Tim Staples?June 15, 2006 at 9:06 pm #6545
[quote:1n5lzqhk]Who is Tim Staples?[/quote:1n5lzqhk]June 15, 2006 at 9:17 pm #6546
[quote:2ceh3h5d]Sacred Tradition, I thought, was not meant to be used to interpret Scripture[/quote:2ceh3h5d]
Quite the opposite. Scripture is Sacred Tradition that has been written down, particularly concerning the New Testament. As the teachings of Scripture are culled from Tradition, Tradition is definitely meant to interpret Scripture.
[quote:2ceh3h5d]Rather Scripture gives rise to Sacred Tradition through the councils and creeds of our early fathers[/quote:2ceh3h5d]
Sacred Tradition stems from the direct teachings of Christ and His Apostles. Councils and Creeds recognize and proclaim the Tradition we have received but they do not give rise to it. They have elucidated upon our understanding of Tradition though, such as the more complete formulation of the Doctrine of the Trinity at Nicaea.
[quote:2ceh3h5d]If Sacred Tradition is a lense with which we must read Scripture then it only works if the lense itself is infallable, otherwise reading into the text through any form is up for criticism[/quote:2ceh3h5d]
True. And Sacred Tradition, owing to its divine source and the protection of the Holy Spirit in its transmission, is infallible. It is this protection that renders the decisions of the Councils infallible in recognizing and proclaiming Tradition.
[quote:2ceh3h5d]Oh, I’m not sure the Solomon quote relates to purgatory[/quote:2ceh3h5d]
Only isofar as it shows that “one will be presented to the Judge exactly as he was when he departed this life.” It is part of the premise from which the necessity/existence of purgatory is then argued.
Also, I forgot to cite the author of my quotation was Pope St. Gregory the Great. The work (Dialogues IV: 41) is correct.
[quote:2ceh3h5d]Who is Tim Staples?[/quote:2ceh3h5d]
A Catholic apologist and convert from the Church of Christ (I believe). He used to write a column called Nuts & Bolts for Envoy Magazine (I believe).June 16, 2006 at 12:02 am #6553
Here is where I can’t participate. Sacred Tradition for Catholics is from teh point of origin in Scripture and is continued through the Church making the Churches interpretation as primary as the Scripture (thanks to the recent “infallability of the Pope”). Most Protestants believe that Scripture alone is primary, and that Sacred Tradition (this is for Protestants) = the decisions of the early Church (Apostles, Nicenet, etc. creeds and docrines). Sacred Tradition in the Protestant sense is still over-ruled by Scripture if it is found in error, but because it is Sacred Tradition, they were guided by the Holy Spirit (hopefully, or we’re all going to hell!) therefore we trust the doctrines of the Trinity, for example.
Minor differences, let’s not forget what we share in common, but I represent different views on Sacred Tradition.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.