The Doctrine of Purgatory in Catholic Biblical Perspective

[Marymog]

What about him?

Did he not succeed Judas?

 

[reformed1689]

Did he not succeed Judas?

He did. But there were requirements of him being an apostle. Requirements that no person today can fulfill.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You gave plenty of out of context scripture interpreted wrongly by Popes and Bishops who often err and contradict one another.

Sooooo, the Bible says that TRUE faith is embodied by the person who:

- is baptized (Matt. 28:19-20, John 3:5, Rom. 2:29, Rom. 6:1-11, Col. 2:12-17, 1 Peter 3:21)
- picks up his cross daily to follow him (Matt. 16:24, Luke 9:23)
- performs works of mercy and charity (Matt. 19:21, 25:31–46, Luke 18:22)
- obeys His commandments (John 14:15, 15:10)
- does the will of the Father (Matt. 7:21, James 1:22)
- suffers with Christ (Matt. 10:38, 16:24, Mark 8:34, John 12:24, Rom. 8:17, 2 Cor. 1:5-7, Eph. 3:13, Phil. 1:29, 2 Tim. 1:8, 1 Peter 2:19-21, 4:1-2)

However – YOU claim that this is simply “out of context” and “interpreted wrongly” by Popes and Bishops.

Care to explain HOW these verses have been “interpreted wrongly” and “out of context”??
I’m ALL ears . . .

 

[Mungo]

ummm it is you who holds to water baptism makes us clean not me

Ummmm you are trying to divert.
You denied that the blood of Christ cleanses us from sin.
I showed the scripture to prove you were wrong.

 

[reformed1689]

Sooooo, the Bible says that TRUE faith is embodied by the person who:

- is baptized (Matt. 28:19-20, John 3:5, Rom. 2:29, Rom. 6:1-11, Col. 2:12-17, 1 Peter 3:21)
- picks up his cross daily to follow him (Matt. 16:24, Luke 9:23)
- performs works of mercy and charity (Matt. 19:21, 25:31–46, Luke 18:22)
- obeys His commandments (John 14:15, 15:10)
- does the will of the Father (Matt. 7:21, James 1:22)
- suffers with Christ (Matt. 10:38, 16:24, Mark 8:34, John 12:24, Rom. 8:17, 2 Cor. 1:5-7, Eph. 3:13, Phil. 1:29, 2 Tim. 1:8, 1 Peter 2:19-21, 4:1-2)

However – YOU claim that this is simply “out of context” and “interpreted wrongly” by Popes and Bishops.

Care to explain HOW these verses have been “interpreted wrongly” and “out of context”??
I’m ALL ears . . .

It says those are SIGNS of true faith. It does NOT say those things are what saves a man.

 

[Marymog]

Not exactly. But there is a right to challenge the church if the church gets it wrong and goes against Scripture. Scripture trumps the church.

Hi David,

Putting your theory into practice: You previously suggested that you (and all believers) are the church. When YOU decide what the church got wrong and it goes against Scripture that makes YOU the decider. You have just then trumped Scripture.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

He did. But there were requirements of him being an apostle. Requirements that no person today can fulfill.

Hi David,

The Apostles adhered to the sound doctrines that Jesus taught them. Matthias met the requirements of being an apostle because he adhered to the sound doctrines of the Apostles teachings.

Did Timothy adhere to the sound doctrines that the Apostles taught?

Mary

 

[BreadOfLife]

It says those are SIGNS of true faith. It does NOT say those things are what saves a man.

You’re moving the goalposts again, Davy.

We were talking about what TRUE FAITH is – not what salvation is.
STICK to the argument at hand.

I have presented a solid Scriptural argument about true faith – and HOW the Bible describes it.
CAN you refute this??

 

[BreadOfLife]

You’re moving the goalposts again, Davy.

We were talking about what TRUE FAITH is – not what salvation is.
STICK to the argument at hand.

I have presented a solid Scriptural argument about true faith – and HOW the Bible describes it.
CAN you refute this??

Crickets . . .

 

[Taken]

Cherry-picking my posts again?

Yep, responding to what you said about the topic, and not all your other gobblygook.

If you were to post everything I said instead is a tiny snippet – you would see that I was talking about Mary’s status as “Kecharitomene”.
“Completely, perfectly and enduringly endowed with grace.”

You have repeatedly stated YOUR OPINION...
I don't agree with you in THAT:
Being "completely, perfectly and enduringly endowed with grace"...Applied to Mary at her natural birth, nor does Scripture say or imply such.

I don't agree with you in THAT:
Being "completely, perfectly and enduringly endowed with grace" MEANS naturally born Sinless, nor does Scripture say or imply such.

Anyway – THANK YOU for proving once again that you have to LIE in order to make your point . . .

Anyway - I did not LIE, and what a weirdo that you would be thankful had you been lied to, which just adds to your twisted way of thinking.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Taken]

Leave simple "belief" to the demons.
True Faith is ACTION . . .

Belief is the Act of a person.
Faith given TO a person having Belief, is the Act of God Giving that person Faith FOR believing.

Leave simple "belief" to the demons

Pfft!

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Taken]

TRANSLATION:
"I have NO refutation for the Biblical truth yo have presented."

That's what I thought . . .

Good Grief...Is it BEYOND your ability to simply let stand what people speak for themselves...?

And how ridiculous....You then comment what you said for others, IS what you THOUGHT...

No kidding, Your words, from Your thoughts.

LOL

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yep, responding to what you said about the topic, and not all your other gobblygook.



You have repeatedly stated YOUR OPINION...
I don't agree with you in THAT:
Being "completely, perfectly and enduringly endowed with grace"...Applied to Mary at her natural birth, nor does Scripture say or imply such.

I don't agree with you in THAT:
Being "completely, perfectly and enduringly endowed with grace" MEANS naturally born Sinless, nor does Scripture say or imply such.



Anyway - I did not LIE, and what a weirdo that you would be thankful had you been lied to, which just adds to your twisted way of thinking.

Glory to God,
Taken

“Weirdo”?
It’s hilarious how YOU constantly accuse me of “name-calling” – yet it’s YOU who engages in name-calling and NOT me. “Weirdo”, “dunce”, “idiot”, etc. – you’re FULL of them.

As for Scripture NOT implying that Mary was born sinless – that is incorrect.
It doesn’t explicitly say that she was but it certainly does IMPLICITLY. Remember – Scripture teaches us BOTH explicitly AND implicitly.

It is explicitly taught by Scripture that Mary gave birth to the New Covenant, Jesus. Therefore, Mary is the Ark of the New Covenant – the fulfillment of the Ark of the Covenant. Here is a Scriptural comparison of the Type and Fulfillment between the Old Ark and the New Ark:

OT - The Word was written by God on Tablets of Stone (Ex. 25:10) placed inside the Ark (Deut. 10:1)
NT - The Word of God became Flesh (John 1) conceived inside Mary (Luke 2:38) Mary carried the Word of God.

OT - "Who am I that the Ark of my Lord should come to me?" (2 Sam. 6:9
NT - "Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

OT - The When the Ark carrying the Word of God returned “David was leaping and dancing before the Lord” (2 Sam. 6:14)
NT - When Mary came into Elizabeth's presence carrying the word of God, the baby “leaped for joy” in Elizabeth's womb (Luke 2:38)

OT - The Ark carrying the Word of God is brought to the house of Obed-Edom in the hill country if Judea for 3 months, where it was a blessing. (2 Sam. 6:11)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) carrying the Word of God goes to Elizabeth's house in the hill country if Judea for 3 months, where she is a blessing (Luke 1:56)

OT - The Ark is captured (1 Sam 4:11) and brought to a foreign land and later returns (1 Sam 6:13)
NT - Mary (the new Ark) is exiled to a foreign land (Egypt) and later returns (Matt. 2:14)

OT - The On the Day of the Dedication of the Temple which Solomon built, there were 120 priests present (2 Chron. 5:11). The Ark of the covenant was carried into the Temple (2 Chron. 5:7) and fire came down from Heaven to consume the burnt offering (2 Chron. 7:7).
NT - The On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 disciples of Jesus present in the Upper Room (Acts 1:15). Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Ark of the NEW Covenant was also present while the Holy Spirit came down as tongues of fire (Acts 2:3).

The Ark of the Covenant was purified and blessed inside and out when it was created.
It is fitting that the Ark of the NEW Covenant would ALSO be purified and blessed during her creation.
The Angel’s greeting of “Kecharitomene” supports this position.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Belief is the Act of a person.
Faith given TO a person having Belief, is the Act of God Giving that person Faith FOR believing.



Pfft!

Glory to God,
Taken

The Bible is clear that Faith =Belief+Obedience.

Anything less is NOT faith . . .

 

[reformed1689]

Hi David,

The Apostles adhered to the sound doctrines that Jesus taught them. Matthias met the requirements of being an apostle because he adhered to the sound doctrines of the Apostles teachings.

Did Timothy adhere to the sound doctrines that the Apostles taught?

Mary

The requirement that Matthias also had to meet was that he had been with the original 12 the entire ministry of Jesus life.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Good Grief...Is it BEYOND your ability to simply let stand what people speak for themselves...?

And how ridiculous....You then comment what you said for others, IS what you THOUGHT...

No kidding, Your words, from Your thoughts.

LOL

Glory to God,
Taken

It’s called deductive reasoning.
You can come to a fairly accurate conclusion when a person puts out a clear signal.

It’s similar to when a child swears that he didn’t eat that last piece of chocolate cake in the refrigerator – yet he had
chocolate frosting and cake crumbs stuck to his face.

Kinda like when YOU run away every time I ask you to address “Kecharitomene”. I can deduce that you simply DON’T have a valid response . . .

 

[reformed1689]

We were talking about what TRUE FAITH is – not what salvation is.
STICK to the argument at hand.

No, we were talking about whether or not sola fide is biblical. It is. I'm not moving the goalposts, you are.

I have presented a solid Scriptural argument about true faith – and HOW the Bible describes it.
CAN you refute this??

No, I said the SAME THING about true faith is EVIDENCED by our works. But that does not negate sola fide.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No, we were talking about whether or not sola fide is biblical. It is. I'm not moving the goalposts, you are.

No, I said the SAME THING about true faith is EVIDENCED by our works. But that does not negate sola fide.

And the fact remains that NONE of the verses you presented support Sola Fide – that salvation is by Faith ALONE.

You actually accused me of “Heresy” yet you cannot show HOW this is “heretical”.
That’s your quandary.

The same is true for Sola Scriptura. It cannot be shown by the very Scriptures that this false doctrine claims are our “SOLE” Authority.

 

[BreadOfLife]

The requirement that Matthias also had to meet was that he had been with the original 12 the entire ministry of Jesus life.

And WHY do you think that was a requirement for the successor of Judas?

 

[Marymog]

The requirement that Matthias also had to meet was that he had been with the original 12 the entire ministry of Jesus life.

Hi David,

I agree, and Scripture makes it clear, that was the requirement of the Apostles to replace Judas. Using your logic, that only men who were with the original 12 could continue the unbroken teaching of the sound doctrine of the Apostles, means that the sound doctrine of their teachings would cease once all those men are dead. Do you sincerely believe that once all those men were dead that sound doctrine was not taught anymore?

You dodged my original question: Did Timothy adhere to the sound doctrines that the Apostles taught?

Mary