PDA

View Full Version : Intermediate State/Purgatory



Columcille
05-24-2012, 02:55 PM
The current subject is dealing with the "intermediate state," specifically in dealing with the Western Catholic conception of "purgatory." I wanted to express this doctrine in terms of my own Eastern Catholic/Orthodox understanding rather than through the Scholasticism of Catholicism. "Intermediate State" is a reference of the soul between just after death of the body and the eventual resurrection of our bodies either to eternal ****ation or eternal life.

There are four points I should like to discuss. Instead of answering all four points at one time, I should like to discuss each point seperately until there is closure to move on. Even if we do not agree, I should at least like it to be understood.

1) God is light.

2) To the unrighteous and the righteous alike, this light of God is felt.
2i--to the unrighteous, this light exposes the darkness of their hearts and torments them.
2ii--to the righteous, this light is embraced.

3) A) Sin has two consequences and B) good works only have one consequence.
3Ai--Sin seperates us spiritually from God by virtue of God's holiness.
3Aii--Sin's temporal consequences are felt by others and builds bad character traits.
3Bi--The temporal (positive) consequences of good works is that it builds character and connects us one to another.
3Bii--Good works is not salvaic. Only Christ's sacrifice at Calvary repairs the spiritual relationship to unify us back to God.

4) With death of the righteous, the flesh no longer is tempted.
4i--however, the Soul's character traits that were built on both the indwelling of the Spirit in the performance of good works remains and our temporal works of iniquity with its impurities in the soul must be purged by the fire of God's light.
4ii--this purging in Western Catholics is called the state of "purgatory."
4iii--To the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox, this is an unnecessary cl***ification since we all return to God.


Again, I hope to move from point to point in the discussion so we can find closure or at least an understanding.

Columcille
05-25-2012, 06:25 AM
I was hoping for Dmarie to respond. If you agree with point one, we can move to point two. If you agree with point 2, we will move to point 3. If you agree with point three, then we will talk about point 4.

I just don't see it necessary for me to start talking about point 1, unless there is a point of contention. It would clutter up this particular topical thread. Please let me know if you agree with all points, if you do--then there is really nothing to discuss on purgatory as a stand alone tenet. If there is a topic which purgatory connects to, i.e. the idea of "indulgences" or praying for the dead, this is not the thread to discuss it. I would create a new thread and give you my Eastern Catholic/Orthodox perspective on it and attempt to show the semantical aspects as they are in agreement. The only point of this thread is to express what "purgatory" is and how it relates to the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox perspective.

Dmarie
05-30-2012, 11:28 AM
The current subject is dealing with the "intermediate state," specifically in dealing with the Western Catholic conception of "purgatory." I wanted to express this doctrine in terms of my own Eastern Catholic/Orthodox understanding rather than through the Scholasticism of Catholicism. "Intermediate State" is a reference of the soul between just after death of the body and the eventual resurrection of our bodies either to eternal ****ation or eternal life.

There are four points I should like to discuss. Instead of answering all four points at one time, I should like to discuss each point seperately until there is closure to move on. Even if we do not agree, I should at least like it to be understood.

1) God is light.

2) To the unrighteous and the righteous alike, this light of God is felt.
2i--to the unrighteous, this light exposes the darkness of their hearts and torments them.
2ii--to the righteous, this light is embraced.

3) A) Sin has two consequences and B) good works only have one consequence.
3Ai--Sin seperates us spiritually from God by virtue of God's holiness.
3Aii--Sin's temporal consequences are felt by others and builds bad character traits.
3Bi--The temporal (positive) consequences of good works is that it builds character and connects us one to another.
3Bii--Good works is not salvaic. Only Christ's sacrifice at Calvary repairs the spiritual relationship to unify us back to God.

4) With death of the righteous, the flesh no longer is tempted.
4i--however, the Soul's character traits that were built on both the indwelling of the Spirit in the performance of good works remains and our temporal works of iniquity with its impurities in the soul must be purged by the fire of God's light.
4ii--this purging in Western Catholics is called the state of "purgatory."
4iii--To the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox, this is an unnecessary cl***ification since we all return to God.


Again, I hope to move from point to point in the discussion so we can find closure or at least an understanding.


Greetings & Blessings Columcille.

I have to remember when addressing, that there is a schism of sorts within the "One Holy Church" (Catholicism)...Western (RCC) vs. Eastern.

Can you please further explain-- 3,(B)..."good works only have one consequence".

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
05-30-2012, 01:47 PM
Greetings & Blessings Columcille.

I have to remember when addressing, that there is a schism of sorts within the "One Holy Church" (Catholicism)...Western (RCC) vs. Eastern.

Can you please further explain-- 3,(B)..."good works only have one consequence".

Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie, pick any particular good work as an example. Let us say you feed a hungry person. That is a good work. It pleases God, but this does not save a person. The consequence of this work (which is positive) is that the person you feed is no longer hungry due to the charity provided and the thanksgiving they may give to God for His provision through you. The work has brought you (the good stewart of God's gifts) and the hungry individual (who may offer God a sacrifice of praise or thanksgiving) closer together in mutual love. Even if the person is reprobate and recieves your charity, done in the name of Christ there is glory to God still by your humility in serving others. This is the one consequence. It is a temporal consequence, there is no spiritual consequence in terms of being united to God, as Christ paid this on the cross for us. Christ's sacrifice is not an example, even though it is exemplary, but His sacrifice was made on our behalf because we could never pay that sort of debt due to our human condition.

Dmarie
05-31-2012, 02:55 AM
Dmarie, pick any particular good work as an example. Let us say you feed a hungry person. That is a good work. It pleases God, but this does not save a person. The consequence of this work (which is positive) is that the person you feed is no longer hungry due to the charity provided and the thanksgiving they may give to God for His provision through you. The work has brought you (the good stewart of God's gifts) and the hungry individual (who may offer God a sacrifice of praise or thanksgiving) closer together in mutual love. Even if the person is reprobate and recieves your charity, done in the name of Christ there is glory to God still by your humility in serving others. This is the one consequence. It is a temporal consequence, there is no spiritual consequence in terms of being united to God, as Christ paid this on the cross for us. Christ's sacrifice is not an example, even though it is exemplary, but His sacrifice was made on our behalf because we could never pay that sort of debt due to our human condition.

Greetings.

Your explantation is understood, and I see where you are leading with this.

You are speaking of these "good works" as a meritorius
means,...an added grace...towards one's own, (or another's), purification and..."final cleansing." This is self-atonement, and this is not relying on the sufficiency of Christ. He paid the price...in FULL, and it is as you say Columcille, "...His sacrifice was made on our behalf because we could never pay that sort of debt due to our human condition." "By one sacrifice He has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." What further purifying or purging is needed? Our standing is "made perfect" and sealed in Christ. We are "being made holy", that is our sanctification.

What do you think Christ means when He says...

"I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do." (John 17:4)

"The blood of Jesus, His Son, purifies us from all sin." (IJohn 1:7)

"Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." (Romans 8:1)

What more can we add to our Savior's "finished"work...NOTHING.

I guess I've said to much again, but I cannot follow your lead on this. You are tieing "points" of TRUTHS with "Shades" of Truth. I know you do not understand it this way, but ...Scripture clearly says otherwise.
*The doctrine of Purgatory is a Tradition, born out of the Middle Ages, and it is not of the Scriptures. It is an outright affront to the sufficiency and completed work of Christ.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
05-31-2012, 06:24 AM
Greetings.

Your explantation is understood, and I see where you are leading with this.

You are speaking of these "good works" as a meritorius
means,...an added grace...towards one's own, (or another's), purification and..."final cleansing." This is self-atonement, and this is not relying on the sufficiency of Christ. He paid the price...in FULL, and it is as you say Columcille, "...His sacrifice was made on our behalf because we could never pay that sort of debt due to our human condition." "By one sacrifice He has made perfect forever those who are being made holy." What further purifying or purging is needed? Our standing is "made perfect" and sealed in Christ. We are "being made holy", that is our sanctification.

What do you think Christ means when He says...

"I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do." (John 17:4)

"The blood of Jesus, His Son, purifies us from all sin." (IJohn 1:7)

"Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus." (Romans 8:1)



Blessings...Dmarie

I am answering your question below that I made bold, Italics, and underlined in your quote:

The purification of us from the blood of Jesus, the finishing work on the cross, was a spiritual cleansing not a temporal one. Perhaps I should change the wording a little between "spiritual" and "temporal." When I say "temporal" it is regarding something that is temporary and is related to things as they affect our character. Think of the "spiritual" as more like the "holy of holies" in the temple. God resides in us in that innermost sanctuary, but people still come into the outergate and not all can enter into the Levitical inner chambers. If "It is Finished" for our cleansing, why do we still sin as Christians? The cleansing therefore is a more lasting eternal quality (spiritual in nature for God is spirit) by which we are accepted because Christ is our spiritual "scapegoat." This does not change the fact that we still commit sins in this mortal flesh, that there are character traits that are impure due to the habits of a person's choices and experiences.


Not related to your question, but as a matter to ponder in relating to me:


For me, you cloud the whole discussion by adding words that are not layman in nature. Why bog the discussion down with Western terms? I am Eastern Catholic, I like the mysteries as they present themselves and not worrying about disecting them and seeing how they opperate. I don't have to know that there are billions of atoms in a chair to comfortably sit in one. It is the same with the mysteries of God. He is holy, we are not; yet he calls us to be holy, but it is through Him we become so. Can the mind comprehend this? I think only the heart understands this when experiencing God's vibrant presence when it is open to receive in loving submission.

I underlined the question so you can answer it. Try not to load the answer with 10 cent coined Western terminology. Speak as a lay person so I can understand you better. You get confused with the points in the OP because you try to throw in Catholicism's Scholastic terminology. Remember, I am here trying to present an Eastern Catholic view of "purgatory," which I think is an unnecessary term.

Dmarie
05-31-2012, 03:22 PM
I am answering your question below that I made bold, Italics, and underlined in your quote:

The purification of us from the blood of Jesus, the finishing work on the cross, was a spiritual cleansing not a temporal one. Perhaps I should change the wording a little between "spiritual" and "temporal." When I say "temporal" it is regarding something that is temporary and is related to things as they affect our character. Think of the "spiritual" as more like the "holy of holies" in the temple. God resides in us in that innermost sanctuary, but people still come into the outergate and not all can enter into the Levitical inner chambers.

Hello Columcille.
Oh, YES WE CAN. The veil was "torn" so that we may now enter the "holy of holies" because of Christ's sacrifice. He was the "propitiation" for our sins...all of them..., and because of this, He has made the way for us that we may now enter the holy of holies.
"Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holoiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full ***urance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from and evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful."



If "It is Finished" for our cleansing, why do we still sin as Christians? The cleansing therefore is a more lasting eternal quality (spiritual in nature for God is spirit) by which we are accepted because Christ is our spiritual "scapegoat." This does not change the fact that we still commit sins in this mortal flesh, that there are character traits that are impure due to the habits of a person's choices and experiences.

YES, "It is Finished" for our cleansing from all our sins,..."For by one offering He has PERFECTED FOREVER those who are BEING SANCTIFIED." We are now Perfect in our STANDING with God,...[B][I]"In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of Promise." Yes, we still sin, but as the Scriptures go on to clearly say that we are continuing "being sanctified." In Christ, we are saved, and NOT will be saved. We are forever sealed to Him, and it is out of this graditude for His gift of salvation that we live our lives...our good works, being a product of our obedience and thanksgiving to Him.


Not related to your question, but as a matter to ponder in relating to me:


For me, you cloud the whole discussion by adding words that are not layman in nature. Why bog the discussion down with Western terms? I am Eastern Catholic, I like the mysteries as they present themselves and not worrying about disecting them and seeing how they opperate. I don't have to know that there are billions of atoms in a chair to comfortably sit in one. It is the same with the mysteries of God. He is holy, we are not; yet he calls us to be holy, but it is through Him we become so. Can the mind comprehend this? I think only the heart understands this when experiencing God's vibrant presence when it is open to receive in loving submission.

Is this not a CATHOLIC forum? Please forgive me if I "cloud" the terminologies for you between the "WEST" and "EAST"-it is not my intention to "cloud", but to clarify...using the Scriptures. Oh, the web of Catholicism!

I underlined the question so you can answer it. Try not to load the answer with 10 cent coined Western terminology. Speak as a lay person so I can understand you better. You get confused with the points in the OP because you try to throw in Catholicism's Scholastic terminology. Remember, I am here trying to present an Eastern Catholic view of "purgatory," which I think is an unnecessary term.

**Columcille, I do prayerfully consider my answers, and they are provided with what the Scriptures have to say, and I do not base them on my loaded usage of "...10 cent coined Western terminology."
BTW, I thought you Were concerned about "bisecting." the "process" of this "Intermediate State." Is this not the reasoning for you listing all your "points"?---to "bisect" this "process", one point at a time?

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
05-31-2012, 04:44 PM
**Columcille, I do prayerfully consider my answers, and they are provided with what the Scriptures have to say, and I do not base them on my loaded usage of "...10 cent coined Western terminology."
BTW, I thought you Were concerned about "bisecting." the "process" of this "Intermediate State." Is this not the reasoning for you listing all your "points"?---to "bisect" this "process", one point at a time?

Blessings...Dmarie

First of all, there is only one mediator between God and Man and that is Jesus Christ. It He who has entered the Holy of Holies according to Hebrews 9.11-12. "But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption." Second of all, I stated that the Holy of Holies resides in our frame. The Temple had three courts, I believe this symbolizes the body (outer court), soul (inner court), and spirit (with the soul as God's resting place within us). So while Christ sits at the right hand of God, He is in heaven, while we still reside in our earthly frame. This is a mystery. We have confidence to approach Him, to enter into the Holy of Holies by His blood because just prior to the verse you quoted the author of Hebrews quotes the O.T. saying, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them" (Hebrews 10.16). If you recall in the O.T., in the tent where the Holy of Holies presided was the Ark of the Covenant where the Law was placed, along with Manna, and the rod of Aaron. “This is what the Lord has commanded: ‘Take an omer [portion for one man] of manna and keep it for the generations to come, so they can see the bread I gave you to eat in the desert when I brought you out of Egypt.’” (Exodus 16:32) “And the Lord said to Moses, ‘Put back the staff of Aaron before the testimony, to be kept as a sign for the rebels, that you may make an end of their grumblings against me, lest they die.’” (Numbers 17:10) "You shall put the mercy seat on top of the ark, and in the ark you shall put the testimonies I will give you." (Exodus 25.21) This is now no longer the temple made by hands, but has been fulfilled by God residing in our frame.

We have confidence to approach Him, but we are not the High Priest to have made that sacrifice, but he does reside in us.

I have not responded to your questions regarding my points. That was only meant to discuss in bit size bits rather than talking about the whole thing. The point is, you don't seem to be reading my points. I had to bring in Hebrews and the O.T. p***ages to demonstrate a point since you quoted Hebrews 10. You demonstrated that we can enter into the Holy of Holies, which is within our temple. In fact, I stated this very thing
God resides in us in that innermost sanctuary,
You instead focused on the later quote within that sentence, but did not really deal with the issue of sinfulness in our fleshly bodies and our souls, which I again am restating is symbolic of the outer court and inner court repectively. The Holy of Holies is the most sacred place where sin cannot preside. You haven't dealt with the sin issue of the flesh or of the soul, only you focus on the spiritual chamber of the Holy of Holies.

Columcille
06-01-2012, 04:48 PM
May not reply until Sunday evening, Army National Guard this week for me.
Don't think I am shirking any response from you.

Ok, I am back. However, my heart is not here as it was before. My wife told me Friday, prior to my leaving for the National Guard, that she wanted to talk to me. She showed me, what I thought was an electronic thermometer, but it was a pregnancy test kit that show two white lines parallel to each other. I asked, "what is this?" and she told me to look at the wrapper. Well... it seems my life is going to radically change with a different kind of rite of p***age.

Dmarie
06-04-2012, 07:58 AM
May not reply until Sunday evening, Army National Guard this week for me.
Don't think I am shirking any response from you.

Ok, I am back. However, my heart is not here as it was before. My wife told me Friday, prior to my leaving for the National Guard, that she wanted to talk to me. She showed me, what I thought was an electronic thermometer, but it was a pregnancy test kit that show two white lines parallel to each other. I asked, "what is this?" and she told me to look at the wrapper. Well... it seems my life is going to radically change with a different kind of rite of p***age.

Blessings Columcille...and radical "electronic thermometer" congradulations!
Please know that I will be keeping you, and your family in my prayers.
God's safety, to you my friend.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-04-2012, 03:21 PM
Blessings Columcille...and radical "electronic thermometer" congradulations!
Please know that I will be keeping you, and your family in my prayers.
God's safety, to you my friend.

Blessings...Dmarie

Well, it wasn't electronic after all, just looked like in shape to one of the electric thermometers we have. Alright, now back to the ring. I think I heard the bell; put up 'em up!

Dmarie
06-06-2012, 10:06 PM
We have confidence to approach Him, but we are not the High Priest to have made that sacrifice, but he does reside in us.

I have not responded to your questions regarding my points. That was only meant to discuss in bit size bits rather than talking about the whole thing. The point is, you don't seem to be reading my points. I had to bring in Hebrews and the O.T. p***ages to demonstrate a point since you quoted Hebrews 10. You demonstrated that we can enter into the Holy of Holies, which is within our temple. In fact, I stated this very thing
You instead focused on the later quote within that sentence, but did not really deal with the issue of sinfulness in our fleshly bodies and our souls, which I again am restating is symbolic of the outer court and inner court repectively. The Holy of Holies is the most sacred place where sin cannot preside. You haven't dealt with the sin issue of the flesh or of the soul, only you focus on the spiritual chamber of the Holy of Holies.

Greetings Columcille and Welcome Back.
Please forgive my delay also. I've attempted to log in several times only to have to log out again.
Well, here we go...so,... you put 'em up! :p

I focused on the latter part of your quote, because I did not agree with it, and you did say in your first post..."I should like to discuss each point seperately until there is closure to move on." So, if it's still OK, I'd like to point to these 2 specific statements I did not agree with:

1)- "...but people still come into the outer gate and not all can enter into the Levitical chambers."

2)- [B][I]The cleansing therefore is a more lasting eternal quality

*1)- I have ***umed "the people" you are referring to in your first statement, are those in Christ. You were vague on this. If my ***umption is correct,... again, I base my response on the following scripture- (Heb.10:19,20):

If we are in Christ, we are thoroughly cleansed, and we all can "enter into the Holiest." Jesus speaks of us as His "brethren",..."Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh."
When we believe and accept this truth by faith, and as His "brethren", we all "may now enter the Holiest." Jesus, as our High Priest, has "perfected forever", that is, our "standing" or our "position" in, and with Christ...we are now justified. So now being "perfected forever",(this speaks in past tense- it's done, "it is finished."), the Scriptures say this..."For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified." (Heb.10:14)

*2)- When we believe and accept Christ and His [B][I]finished sacrifice for sins, we are thoroughly cleansed of our sins- past, present, and future..."But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God." (Heb.10:12)... "Now, where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin." (Heb.10:18) Jesus "sat down", it's done, "it is finished." We are now in Christ, and we are now new creations in Christ, and we are now in need of sanctification. This ties in with the latter part of Heb.10:14- "those who are being sanctified." That is, we are being made holy. How we think now, how we respond now, how we live our lives now. Yes, as long as we are in these bodies, we will sin, but our sin has been dealt with...on the cross!..."it is finished.", and we now have an Advocate with the Father who has made "a new and living way" for us, so that we are no longer condemed..."There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus..." (Rom.8:1)... "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (IJohn 1:9)

Again, I did answer your questions in regards to the spiritual and the fleshly sins. Please re-read my previous response. You will find the same scriptures, along with these additional ones, but overall, my response is the same, with a little more elaboration...OK, OK, alot more elaboration.

So, why would we need to still go to this Intermediate State Columcille, even after the Scriptures have clearly spoken to the sufficient work of Christ? How can you still figure this?
This is man work, and his adding to Christ's completed work and saying that... it's not finished.

Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie
06-06-2012, 10:25 PM
Greetings.

After having "sat down", is Christ going to have to "stand" back up again, and again, and again...determining, and saying to each soul... OK, you can now leave the "Intermediate-State"? Is this not a total degradation to the sufferings and work of Christ?

"But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God...." (Heb.10:12)

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-07-2012, 04:34 AM
Dmarie, the "intermediate state" is the time between bodily death and bodily resurrection. It is not used interchangably with "purgatory." The term "Intermediate State" is a matter of discussion about what happens to the soul during that time. Hence, our "outer court" has been shed by death. I mainly use the temple structure as a means of allegorizing the nature of the temple, meaning us both individually and collectively based on Paul's stating that we are God's temple. As I have already mentioned in Point #3 Bii,
"3Bii--Good works is not salvaic. Only Christ's sacrifice at Calvary repairs the spiritual relationship to unify us back to God." Christ work is sufficient in uniting us to God. I have nowhere said any different as though good works contributes to that sacrifice. In fact, #3Bi clearly states this also.
3Bi--The temporal (positive) consequences of good works is that it builds character and connects us one to another. The only thing that good works does is build one's character and connects us closer to each other. Where have I stated it does anything other?

Dmarie
06-08-2012, 11:47 AM
Dmarie, the "intermediate state" is the time between bodily death and bodily resurrection. It is not used interchangably with "purgatory." The term "Intermediate State" is a matter of discussion about what happens to the soul during that time. Hence, our "outer court" has been shed by death. I mainly use the temple structure as a means of allegorizing the nature of the temple, meaning us both individually and collectively based on Paul's stating that we are God's temple. As I have already mentioned in Point #3 Bii, Christ work is sufficient in uniting us to God. I have nowhere said any different as though good works contributes to that sacrifice. In fact, #3Bi clearly states this also. The only thing that good works does is build one's character and connects us closer to each other. Where have I stated it does anything other?

Greetings, and Blessings.

Yes, you do say that "Christ's work is sufficient in uniting us to God.", but at the same time you are denying it by adding an additional step or process to the sufficient work of Christ and our unification to Him, again, by adding this Intermediate State.

Please, let's discuss "what happens" in this Intermediate State, and please explain what exactly needs to take place in order for that soul to finally be deemed cleansed and fit to inhabit heaven. Do not "works" of prayer, m***es, perserverence, etc. also need to be done in order for this soul to leave this place? Please explain "what happens."

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-08-2012, 12:41 PM
Greetings, and Blessings.

Yes, you do say that "Christ's work is sufficient in uniting us to God.", but at the same time you are denying it by adding an additional step or process to the sufficient work of Christ and our unification to Him, again, by adding this Intermediate State.

Please, let's discuss "what happens" in this Intermediate State, and please explain what exactly needs to take place in order for that soul to finally be deemed cleansed and fit to inhabit heaven. Do not "works" of prayer, m***es, perserverence, etc. also need to be done in order for this soul to leave this place? Please explain "what happens."

Blessings...Dmarie

There are various positions in regards to the "Intermediate State." The Seventh Day Adventists believe in "soul sleep." I tend to think that there are many who simply ignore the subject altogether recognizing that the soul returns to God, especially for the Christian. There are many verses that talk about those who are asleep, there are several also that discuss about being alive in God. Typically, asleep appears to mention the state of their bodies rather than their souls. Whereas, even Christ demonstrates their awareness in the Rich Man and Lazarus as well as affirming in the Gospel of John that Abraham saw his day and was glad in chapter 8.

Now, if you can show me where I have stated that works add to Christ's sacrifice, please show me in my posts where I have stated such. It seems you are putting words in my mouth of things I have not said, but rather saying you know more about Eastern Catholicism's position. So far, you are confusing the nature of works as having some spiritual merit toward one's salvation as though this is Catholic. "Meritorious Works" has no salvaic quality. Works that are meritorious are such that exhibit the Scriptures saying their is a reward one receives in their stewardship, just as in the Gospel there are several servants who invested the master's money and one hid it in the ground "knowing that the Master does not sow where he does not reap" and this servant was cast out for not even investing it in the bank to draw interest. Do not confuse the two.

Thirdly, the whole point of the OP is to discuss that there is a state of purging. Hence, I am not going into the side topics until after there is an understanding that something happens within the Intermediate Period. If you think there is a purging within the soul while in the presence of God, then you have come to the Eastern Catholic understanding. If you think a soul has attained purity in God's kingdom, then at what point has the purging taken place? If you think the purging happens in this life, why do yet Christians sin? If you think that a Christian, in God's kingdom can retain their impurities in their soul while being covered by Christ, as though the covering hides sinfulness, then sin continues in heaven under the guise of Christ's righteousness. This I would reject utterly as false.

Dmarie
06-09-2012, 04:47 AM
There are various positions in regards to the "Intermediate State." The Seventh Day Adventists believe in "soul sleep." I tend to think that there are many who simply ignore the subject altogether recognizing that the soul returns to God, especially for the Christian. There are many verses that talk about those who are asleep, there are several also that discuss about being alive in God. Typically, asleep appears to mention the state of their bodies rather than their souls. Whereas, even Christ demonstrates their awareness in the Rich Man and Lazarus as well as affirming in the Gospel of John that Abraham saw his day and was glad in chapter 8.

Now, if you can show me where I have stated that works add to Christ's sacrifice, please show me in my posts where I have stated such. It seems you are putting words in my mouth of things I have not said, but rather saying you know more about Eastern Catholicism's position. So far, you are confusing the nature of works as having some spiritual merit toward one's salvation as though this is Catholic. "Meritorious Works" has no salvaic quality. Works that are meritorious are such that exhibit the Scriptures saying their is a reward one receives in their stewardship, just as in the Gospel there are several servants who invested the master's money and one hid it in the ground "knowing that the Master does not sow where he does not reap" and this servant was cast out for not even investing it in the bank to draw interest. Do not confuse the two.

Thirdly, the whole point of the OP is to discuss that there is a state of purging. Hence, I am not going into the side topics until after there is an understanding that something happens within the Intermediate Period. If you think there is a purging within the soul while in the presence of God, then you have come to the Eastern Catholic understanding. If you think a soul has attained purity in God's kingdom, then at what point has the purging taken place? If you think the purging happens in this life, why do yet Christians sin? If you think that a Christian, in God's kingdom can retain their impurities in their soul while being covered by Christ, as though the covering hides sinfulness, then sin continues in heaven under the guise of Christ's righteousness. This I would reject utterly as false.

Greetings & Blessings.

So if you believe that the soul returns to God, then you do agree with what the Scripture says... "We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord." (2Cor.5:8) This says nothing about an Itermediate State. You die, you either go to be with the Lord, or you go to eternal separation and ****ation from Him.

This Intermediate State is a WORK Columcille, to further purge and purify, a soul, and when you adhere to this teaching, you are in fact endorsing and professing this added "process" for the purification of the soul. This is phariseetical. No mincing words here. Again, this is a further work man has added to what Christ had already deemed as sufficient. His death on the cross was sufficient. Why on earth would a soul who has professed Christ, and has been sealed with His Holy Spirit have to go to this place of purging?... "Christ in me"-He is the "guarantee of our inheritence." Does not Jesus say "Come to me all you who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest." Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me for I am gentle and lowly in heart and you will find rest for your souls." (Math.11:28,29) Agan, you will find my scriptural support in my 2 previous posts in dealing with the sin issue. "Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin." (Heb. 10:18) So, is there further need for an offering for sin? This verse says...NO.
Please re-read my previous posts.

Where is the Scriptural evidence for this teaching?

Blessings....Dmarie

Columcille
06-09-2012, 08:36 AM
Greetings & Blessings.

So if you believe that the soul returns to God, then you do agree with what the Scripture says... "We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord." (2Cor.5:8) This says nothing about an Itermediate State. You die, you either go to be with the Lord, or you go to eternal separation and ****ation from Him.

This Intermediate State is a WORK Columcille, to further purge and purify, a soul, and when you adhere to this teaching, you are in fact endorsing and professing this added "process" for the purification of the soul. This is phariseetical. No mincing words here. Again, this is a further work man has added to what Christ had already deemed as sufficient. His death on the cross was sufficient. Why on earth would a soul who has professed Christ, and has been sealed with His Holy Spirit have to go to this place of purging?... "Christ in me"-He is the "guarantee of our inheritence." Does not Jesus say "Come to me all you who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest." Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me for I am gentle and lowly in heart and you will find rest for your souls." (Math.11:28,29) Agan, you will find my scriptural support in my 2 previous posts in dealing with the sin issue. "Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin." (Heb. 10:18) So, is there further need for an offering for sin? This verse says...NO.
Please re-read my previous posts.

Where is the Scriptural evidence for this teaching?

Blessings....Dmarie

Dmarie, again, the "Intermediate State" is the time between your mortal body's death and your bodily resurrection when Christ returns. You seem to keep getting this confused. It is not "purgatory" it is not "soul sleep," "Intermediate State" is ONLY the discussion about what happens between it, not specifically endorcing any view as soul sleep or purgatory. It is just a reference of time between bodily death and bodily resurrection. Until you get this understanding, you are going to misconstrue a lot. Stick with my points.

Dmarie
06-10-2012, 03:34 PM
Dmarie, again, the "Intermediate State" is the time between your mortal body's death and your bodily resurrection when Christ returns. You seem to keep getting this confused. It is not "purgatory" it is not "soul sleep," "Intermediate State" is ONLY the discussion about what happens between it, not specifically endorcing any view as soul sleep or purgatory. It is just a reference of time between bodily death and bodily resurrection. Until you get this understanding, you are going to misconstrue a lot. Stick with my points.

Hello & Blessings.

Again, let's discuss this.
Please explain to me "where is your Scriptural evidence" for this dogma? Why does a soul have to go to this place? What happens in this place? If this "place" is so important, why didn't Jesus teach about this place? Why didn't any of the apostles teach about this?

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-10-2012, 10:17 PM
Hello & Blessings.

Again, let's discuss this.
Please explain to me "where is your Scriptural evidence" for this dogma? Why does a soul have to go to this place? What happens in this place? If this "place" is so important, why didn't Jesus teach about this place? Why didn't any of the apostles teach about this?

Blessings...Dmarie

Point 1.
1 John 1:5: This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.
John 1.5,9: 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.
9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.

The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light, And upon those who sat in the region and shadow of death Light has dawned.” Matthew 4:16

Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path. Psalm 119:105


There is a lot more scripture verses that equate God as a light of a divine nature. There is also how that light is perceived, both by the righteous as David expresses in the Psalms as well as the wicked percieving it not. Already this is expressed in the Gospel of John that I have already stated above which leads to the second point.

Point 2.

2i) There are those who rebel against the light; They do not know its ways Nor abide in its paths. *** 24:13

The light of the righteous rejoices, But the lamp of the wicked will be put out. Prov 13:9

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isaiah 5:20

2ii) For with You is the fountain of life; In Your light we see light. Psalm 36:9

For the Lord will be your everlasting light…. Isaiah 60:20


Now granted... "light" is used as figurative speech. It is not the "literal" sense of which I speak about but as it reveals the character of God. God is light, and perhaps when we come before him this light may be very literal as well, but in our present bodies such a radiance is considered in the O.T. to be a flame that would kill us. Indeed, Moses did not see the full glory of God, yet his face had to be covered due to the radiance of his face. Can you imagine what it would be like for us when our souls return to God? When we are clothed in incorruptable flesh at the resurrection? I certainly cant, but the figurative speech and its literalness with Mose's face, certainly points to God's holiness.

Dmarie
06-12-2012, 02:39 AM
Point 1.
1 John 1:5: This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.
John 1.5,9: 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.
9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.

The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light, And upon those who sat in the region and shadow of death Light has dawned.” Matthew 4:16

Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path. Psalm 119:105


There is a lot more scripture verses that equate God as a light of a divine nature. There is also how that light is perceived, both by the righteous as David expresses in the Psalms as well as the wicked percieving it not. Already this is expressed in the Gospel of John that I have already stated above which leads to the second point.

Point 2.

2i) There are those who rebel against the light; They do not know its ways Nor abide in its paths. *** 24:13

The light of the righteous rejoices, But the lamp of the wicked will be put out. Prov 13:9

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isaiah 5:20

2ii) For with You is the fountain of life; In Your light we see light. Psalm 36:9

For the Lord will be your everlasting light…. Isaiah 60:20


Now granted... "light" is used as figurative speech. It is not the "literal" sense of which I speak about but as it reveals the character of God. God is light, and perhaps when we come before him this light may be very literal as well, but in our present bodies such a radiance is considered in the O.T. to be a flame that would kill us. Indeed, Moses did not see the full glory of God, yet his face had to be covered due to the radiance of his face. Can you imagine what it would be like for us when our souls return to God? When we are clothed in incorruptable flesh at the resurrection? I certainly cant, but the figurative speech and its literalness with Mose's face, certainly points to God's holiness.

Greetings.

I agree...God is Holy.

So,...where is the teaching of the "Intermediate State" in any of these Scriptures. You have not answered any of my questions.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-12-2012, 04:26 AM
Greetings.

I agree...God is Holy.

So,...where is the teaching of the "Intermediate State" in any of these Scriptures. You have not answered any of my questions.

Blessings...Dmarie

I guess I have to make a simple sketch to demonstrate the meaning.



Christian view:
mortal state of being | intermediate state of being | immortal state of being
Fleshly living----------soul returns to God...............bodily resurrection

Athiest view:
Mortal state of being | death
Fleshy living...............no soul (annihilation)

There is no "intermediate state" of being for the Athiest because there is no bodily resurrection, death ends life.

Buddhist view:
Mortal state|death... Rebirth in another mortal state|death.... Rebirth(...)... Nirvana (enlightenment).

Buddhists may have multiple intermediate states between rebirths, good luck asking how karma fits in to all this, I cannot get a strait answer on any aspect of a soul much less a sense of conscious state of personal responsibility to justice.


I'm only trying for you to see here that The intermediate state is a concept about what happens between (intermediate) states of being (state). You keep confusing the state of being as a place... As though it is like a place. Indeed there is perhaps a place or places where a soul resides within that state of being, but that part of what the discussion seeks to look into. The intermediate state is again only that state of being between a person's death and their bodily resurrection. I don't use the term purgatory as I BELIEVE ALL SOULS GO BACK TO GOD. I am emphasizing this because you think I have not answered your question. The scriptures I use to determine this is one for the Christian as Paul clearly teaches that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. For the ungodly, the verses are a little more subtle, since they do not have communion with God their souls leave their mortal bodies, but regardless of where they are ... God is omnipresent... So that they are still going to God who gave them their existence. I have also given the verses of God is light, and how God's light is perceived already in a previous post.

intermediate definition:

late Middle English: from medieval Latin intermediatus, from Latin intermedius, from inter- ‘between’ + medius ‘middle’.
intermediate ˌɪntə'miːdɪət
► adjective
coming between two things in time, place, character, etc.: an intermediate stage of development | a cooled liquid intermediate between liquid and solid.


state definition:

Noun--
1. the particular condition that someone or something is in at a specific time:

Dmarie
06-14-2012, 01:35 PM
I guess I have to make a simple sketch to demonstrate the meaning.



Christian view:
mortal state of being | intermediate state of being | immortal state of being
Fleshly living----------soul returns to God...............bodily resurrection

Athiest view:
Mortal state of being | death
Fleshy living...............no soul (annihilation)

There is no "intermediate state" of being for the Athiest because there is no bodily resurrection, death ends life.

Buddhist view:
Mortal state|death... Rebirth in another mortal state|death.... Rebirth(...)... Nirvana (enlightenment).

Buddhists may have multiple intermediate states between rebirths, good luck asking how karma fits in to all this, I cannot get a strait answer on any aspect of a soul much less a sense of conscious state of personal responsibility to justice.


I'm only trying for you to see here that The intermediate state is a concept about what happens between (intermediate) states of being (state). You keep confusing the state of being as a place... As though it is like a place. Indeed there is perhaps a place or places where a soul resides within that state of being, but that part of what the discussion seeks to look into. The intermediate state is again only that state of being between a person's death and their bodily resurrection. I don't use the term purgatory as I BELIEVE ALL SOULS GO BACK TO GOD. I am emphasizing this because you think I have not answered your question. The scriptures I use to determine this is one for the Christian as Paul clearly teaches that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. For the ungodly, the verses are a little more subtle, since they do not have communion with God their souls leave their mortal bodies, but regardless of where they are ... God is omnipresent... So that they are still going to God who gave them their existence. I have also given the verses of God is light, and how God's light is perceived already in a previous post.

intermediate definition:

late Middle English: from medieval Latin intermediatus, from Latin intermedius, from inter- ‘between’ + medius ‘middle’.
intermediate ˌɪntə'miːdɪət
► adjective
coming between two things in time, place, character, etc.: an intermediate stage of development | a cooled liquid intermediate between liquid and solid.


state definition:

Noun--
1. the particular condition that someone or something is in at a specific time:


Greetings & Blessings Columcille.

Your statement regarding the "concept" of the Intermediate State" seems to conflict with what your Synod states:

"The Confession of Dositheus"

"We believe that the souls of those that have fallen asleep are either at rest or in torment, according to what each has done,-for when they are seperated from their bodies, they depart immediately either to joy, or to sorrow and lamentation, though confessedly neither their enjoyment nor condemnation are complete. For after the common resurrection, when the soul shall be united with the body, with which it had behaved itself well or ill,
each shall receive the completion of either enjoyment or of condemnation."

"And the souls involved in mortal sins, who have not departed in despair but while still living in the body, though without bringing forth any fruits of repentance, have repented-by pouring forth tears, by kneeling while watching in prayers, by afflicting themselves, by relieving the poor, and finally by showing forth by their works their love towards God and their neighbor, and which the Catholic Church has from the beginning rightly called satisfaction- [their souls] depart into Hades, and there endure the punishment due to the sins they have committed. But they are aware of their future release from there, and are delivered by the Supreme Goodness, through the prayers of the Priests, and the good works which the relatives of each do for their Departed; especially the unbloody Sacrifice benefiting the most; which each offers particularly for his relatives that have fallen asleep, and which the Catholic and Apostolic Church offers daily for all alike. Of course, it is understood that we do not know the time of their release. We know and believe that there is deliverance for such from their direful condition, and that before the common resurrection and judgment, but when we know not"

This Synod certainly does speak of a place that the departed go to..., "Hades" and "there".

"concept", definition:
n. and idea, especially a generalized idea of a cl*** of objects; a thought, a general notion.

Columcille, my reason for being on this forum is to point all Catholics to what the Scriptures have to say, and to reason from them,...and to do so in an un-condescending way. So, if I tend to use "two-bit Western terminology", please forgive me, it is not my purpose nor is it my intention to confuse or confound, but it is simply my background and what I am familiar with. I am making more of an effort to familiarize myself with the Eastern Orthodox terminologies, and stances.
I do understand that there are some doctrinal differences between the East and the West, and a deep schism because of this, however, ultimately... they both still "...walk with the successor of Peter." (one of your bishops, Bishop John Elya).

Now, back to the discussion at hand...the Intermediate State.
Even if terms are not agreed upon between the East & West, there is still what seems to be an agreed upon place. Again, whether defined or not, these departed souls, after undergoing their own "Particular Judgement", do go to a designated place, and this ties in with the mutual agreement of "indulgences", and "prayers for the dead". To cite one of your bishops again, Bishop John Elya says:

"Clearly, both East and West, we believe that our prayers benefit the dead"
"We pray that the journey will be free from pain and diabolical attack."
"The idea of temporal punishment due to sin is not entirely foreign to our Eastern theology. In some Eastern cultures...the Church prays for the dissolution of any bonds that would keep the deceased tied, in a temporal way, to the corpse or to an intermediate state of purification."
*This "state" strongly seems to describe a "place" and certainly not a notion, or "concept" as you described it.

Again, I agree God is holy and He is light.
Your given usage of Scriptures does not in any way support the teaching of this "Intermediate State", but it instead describes the attributes of our Great God and Savior. The Scriptures do describe the "believer" as "a light in the Lord." "For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light." (Eph.5:8)
Jesus also refers to His children as being lights..."You are the light of the world. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven." (Mat. 5:14,16)

The Scriptures clearly teach that when we come to Christ through faith, and we have Him in our hearts, and we are sealed with His Holy Spirit, we are no longer condemned...in any way, nor to any other place other than to HIM.

"There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus...." (Romans 8:1)

*This "Intermediate State" is not Scriptural, but is a product, a notion, a "concept" of man, and not of God. It has no basis in Scripture.
The Catholic Church, even within itself, cannot agree upon its terminology, definition, or discription, so how can it, even at all, enforce it as a dogma on its followers?

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-14-2012, 02:04 PM
Again, please try and understand that the conceptualization of "Intermediate State" encomp***es all Christian ideas of what happens between time of death and the time of resurrection. You will not see "intermediate state" in Scripture because the words are not meant to define, but as a means of discussion. Could you please stop using "intermediate state" as synonomous of anything other than a state between our mortal death and bodily resurrection. I keep telling you over and over again and it does not seem to click.

Intermediate State can mean different points of view, but each view can fit under the ***le.

For instance,

The Seventh Day Adventist view:

Corruptible state..... intermediate state..... Incorruptible state
bodily death........... soul sleep (soul in God, but unconscience) ... bodily resurrection

Catholic view:

Corruptible state.... intermediate state..... incorruptible state
bodily death.......... Hell (wicked)/Purgatory and Heaven (righteous).... bodily resurrection

Jehovah Witness:
Corruptible state.... (no intermediate state due to no bodily resurrection)
bodily death...... annihilation (wicked)/spirit body--no bodily resurrection

Now answer me this....
Do you believe there is no intermediate state whatsoever? Because if you don't, you don't believe in the resurrection as the example of the Jehovah Witness, athiests, and many others heresies believe. If you think holding on to no intermediate state is orthodox, then please explain what happens between death and bodily resurrection. I am finding it really hard to get you to understand this concept.

Dmarie
06-14-2012, 02:21 PM
Blessings.

In the words of the Apostle Paul: "For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain." (Philip.1:21)

Paul speaks of "being hard-pressed" between choosing to be with Christ, or to remain. (Philip.1:23) He spoke condfidently in that he knew that to depart meant that he would immediately be with the Lord...no "lay-overs"...anywhere!

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-14-2012, 02:32 PM
Blessings.

In the words of the Apostle Paul: "For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain." (Philip.1:21)

Paul speaks of "being hard-pressed" between choosing to be with Christ, or to remain. (Philip.1:23) He spoke condfidently in that he knew that to depart meant that he would immediately be with the Lord...no "lay-overs"...anywhere!

Blessings...Dmarie

I understand that Dmarie, but to die is gain, does that mean Paul goes immediately to bodily resurrection? Or does his soul return to God and is awaiting the bodily resurrection? If the bodily resurrection happens when Christ returns, then obviously his soul after death is somewhere while we, in the corrupted flesh, remain in the present moving toward Christ's second advent. No matter how you slice it, you believe in some sort of intermediate state or you don't believe in the resurrection. It may not be same as the Catholic Church nor be the same as the Seventh Day Adventist... but either you believe in some sort of intermediate state or you don't. Again, if you don't, there is no resurrection in your opinion. What happens when we die and await the resurrection?

Dmarie
06-14-2012, 05:57 PM
I understand that Dmarie, but to die is gain, does that mean Paul goes immediately to bodily resurrection? Or does his soul return to God and is awaiting the bodily resurrection? If the bodily resurrection happens when Christ returns, then obviously his soul after death is somewhere while we, in the corrupted flesh, remain in the present moving toward Christ's second advent. No matter how you slice it, you believe in some sort of intermediate state or you don't believe in the resurrection. It may not be same as the Catholic Church nor be the same as the Seventh Day Adventist... but either you believe in some sort of intermediate state or you don't. Again, if you don't, there is no resurrection in your opinion. What happens when we die and await the resurrection?

Greetings, C.

I understand what you are asking, and I thought I had made it clear that...I do not believe in this Intermediate State. In my posts I have repeatedly stated that-- it is not Scriptural, there are no "lay-overs," Jesus never taught about it, the Apostles never taught about it...where have I not made this clear? I have asked you several times to please cite for me in Scripture where this teaching is, and you in turn have cited Scriptures pertaining to the nature and attributes of God. Yes, He is holy, and He is light.

I do believe in the bodily resurrection. After death,[/I] "...to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord." Our soul and our spirit are with the Lord, and we await, in His presence, with Him, until that day of our bodily resurrection...when our bodies are "...raised in incorruption." (ICor.15:42).

***On the Mount of Transfiguration in Mathew 17, the Bible speaks of Jesus appearing in His glorified state..."...and He was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light. And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him." This p***age speaks of Moses and Elijah appearing with Jesus in a "form" that was recognizable to Peter, James and John. Moses and Elijah also spoke with Jesus. This p***age clearly tells us, and shows us that we will be with the Lord, also awaiting, the day that the Bible tells us that we will put on our "spiritual bodies" that is , our resurrected bodies.***

"But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ's at His coming." (ICor.15:20-23)

"Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed- in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incoruuption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

When we are born, we are born spiritually dead.

When we come to Christ, through faith in Jesus, were are made spiritually alive. This is what Jesus referred to as being "born-again." When we die in Christ, "...to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord." "And the spirit will return to God who gave it." (Eccl.12:7) We are "with the Lord"... our soul and spirit, awaiting to "put on" our resurrected (spiritual) bodies..."...corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."

If one refuses to come to Christ, they will die in their sins, and will suffer eternal seperation and ****ation from Christ. Awaiting in Hell, for judgement and their resurrected (spiritual) bodies, which will be "put on" and made to suffer eternal punishment..."...corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."

-So, if we die in Christ...we wait in Heaven with Christ for our resurrected bodies, and our judgement of our works/ rewards.
-If one dies apart from Christ...they wait in Hell for judgement and their resurrected bodies.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-14-2012, 06:30 PM
Greetings, C.

I understand what you are asking, and I thought I had made it clear that...I do not believe in this Intermediate State. In my posts I have repeatedly stated that-- it is not Scriptural, there are no "lay-overs," Jesus never taught about it, the Apostles never taught about it...where have I not made this clear? I have asked you several times to please cite for me in Scripture where this teaching is, and you in turn have cited Scriptures pertaining to the nature and attributes of God. Yes, He is holy, and He is light.

I do believe in the bodily resurrection. After death,[/I] "...to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord." Our soul and our spirit are with the Lord, and we await, in His presence, with Him, until that day of our bodily resurrection...when our bodies are "...raised in incorruption." (ICor.15:42).



Dmarie, You just admitted to there being an "Intermediate State." I have been telling you all along what the "Intermediate State" is. I made italics the word "this" in your bold and underline statement because you are still implying the Intermediate State is Purgatory, which is only one of several perceptions underneath this umbrella. In a way, "Intermediate State" is very much like a grouping of cl***ifications. Think of it like the Animalia Kingdom where underneath it there are several animals that are both reptile or mammal. They don't look alike, but they are still animals. Intermediate State is a cl***ification of several perceptions which among them are Soul Sleep, Heaven and Hell, Heaven/Purgatory and Hell, Sheol, etc.. Admiting to one of these perceptions automatically means you believe in some sort of intermediate state of the soul between existing bodies. I did not ask if you believe in purgatory nor soul sleep, excepting as those are examples of those perceptions of what the Catholic and Seven Day Adventist view as what is happening during this time of transition "BETWEEN--a.k.a. Intermediate" state when the soul leaves the body. You just provided the very scriptural proofs I use to support the "Intermediate-BETWEEN" the time of death and resurrection. By your admitting the soul is awaiting their bodily resurrection, the soul's time in existence is BETWEEN their bodily death until they will be resurrected. How many times do I have to spell this out to you? Intermediate is not endorsing any particular view regarding a place.

Once you see you are talking past me on this subject, I suggest you look at my points in the Original Post. There hasn't been anything of really substantial difference at this point. The fact you divert away from my points, which are only 4 with some subtopics within each, means you are approaching the subject without having to address these very points.

Dmarie
06-15-2012, 09:43 AM
Dmarie, You just admitted to there being an "Intermediate State." I have been telling you all along what the "Intermediate State" is. I made italics the word "this" in your bold and underline statement because you are still implying the Intermediate State is Purgatory, which is only one of several perceptions underneath this umbrella. In a way, "Intermediate State" is very much like a grouping of cl***ifications. Think of it like the Animalia Kingdom where underneath it there are several animals that are both reptile or mammal. They don't look alike, but they are still animals. Intermediate State is a cl***ification of several perceptions which among them are Soul Sleep, Heaven and Hell, Heaven/Purgatory and Hell, Sheol, etc.. Admiting to one of these perceptions automatically means you believe in some sort of intermediate state of the soul between existing bodies. I did not ask if you believe in purgatory nor soul sleep, excepting as those are examples of those perceptions of what the Catholic and Seven Day Adventist view as what is happening during this time of transition "BETWEEN--a.k.a. Intermediate" state when the soul leaves the body. You just provided the very scriptural proofs I use to support the "Intermediate-BETWEEN" the time of death and resurrection. By your admitting the soul is awaiting their bodily resurrection, the soul's time in existence is BETWEEN their bodily death until they will be resurrected. How many times do I have to spell this out to you? Intermediate is not endorsing any particular view regarding a place.

Once you see you are talking past me on this subject, I suggest you look at my points in the Original Post. There hasn't been anything of really substantial difference at this point. The fact you divert away from my points, which are only 4 with some subtopics within each, means you are approaching the subject without having to address these very points.

Hello & Blessings.

I did?
No, No, No.
I have never admitted to any "BETWEEN" states as you obviously think I have.
Remember, you are promoting and defending a "concept," a "perception."

What I have said is that the Scriptures speak of a soul either being "with" Christ, or being "seperated" from Christ. This is what happens when a concept like this is built upon, and it always begins with a deviation from Scripture. Something is read in between something, and then something else is read in between that, and eventually... it is turned into a teaching, a dogma. You know, when Scripture chooses to be silent on something, we should take the more earnest heed to listen.

"Do not interpretations belong to God? (Gen.40:18)
"Do not add to His words." (Prov.30:6)

It is very clear Columcille that you refrain and even refuse to equate, and define, the other part of this "State". You've even asked me not to equate this state as a place. Is it because it sounds very simular to the teaching of Purgatory- even though the Orthodox claim to refuse this term and its Catholic definition?
You hammer and explain away about the state of the soul prior to its resurrection, (even using the Animal Kingdom as an example), but then you refrain from adequately explaining- as you put it-"...the souls time in existence." A soul has to spend its time in existence some where, and what happens while this soul is in its existence there? Your Confession of Diostheus speaks of a soul when it is seperated from it body as departing "...immediately either to joy, or to sorrow and lamentation...." It speaks of a soul paying "satisfaction" in "Hades" and eventually being released once this "satisfacation" has been paid through "torments," "Indulgences" and "Prayers." Do you agree with this "Confession"?

You may be bumping your head against a wall right now, but again, you can't explain away on on part of this State without explaining it- fully.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-15-2012, 01:06 PM
It is very clear Columcille that you refrain and even refuse to equate, and define, the other part of this "State". You've even asked me not to equate this state as a place.

1 Is it because it sounds very simular to the teaching of Purgatory- even though the Orthodox claim to refuse this term and its Catholic definition?

You hammer and explain away about the state of the soul prior to its resurrection, (even using the Animal Kingdom as an example), but then you refrain from adequately explaining- as you put it-"...the souls time in existence." A soul has to spend its time in existence some where, and

2what happens while this soul is in its existence there?

Your Confession of Diostheus speaks of a soul when it is seperated from it body as departing "...immediately either to joy, or to sorrow and lamentation...." It speaks of a soul paying "satisfaction" in "Hades" and eventually being released once this "satisfacation" has been paid through "torments," "Indulgences" and "Prayers."

3Do you agree with this "Confession"?

1 I don't have to explain away the "intermediate state," I only say that there is one. I cannot really answer your question because it is a different cultural mindset. Since I have already presented my positions in the four points in the Original Post, I refer you back to it.

2 As I pointed out the Scripture for point #2, the light of God is perceived differently to both those justified by Christ and those who remain unjustified. God's presence to the unjust reveals their darkness of their hearts and due to their pride remain condemned eternally. To the Just of Christ, God's presence surrounds and permeates the very essense of the soul.

3 I not sure what to think about the "Confession of Diostheus." Upon research, it seems the confession is a refutation against some sort of Calvinist false confession of Cyril. Diostheus is, from what I gather, a patriarch of Jerusalem. Since the translation is in English and does not show the original language, and the confession is not a lengthy discourse, I simply feel this is not the best source. It does not come from an Ecumenical Council, it does not exegete the comments made. Wether or not "I agree" with it or not is a matter of speaking on my own ignorance regarding it. I tend to think you probably found this in an obscure place simply because it is easy to twist without relevant commentary by the Patriarches or other prominent Eastern Orthodox theologians. What I have read suggests that the light of God is like a fire. Eastern Orthodox do not see two types of fire, like a hell fire and a purgatory fire, but both are one fire because it is God's presence. Hence, I would disagree with your understanding of the "Confession of Diostheus" than I would directly against the confession itself. Again, you find me commentary by an Eastern Orthodox on the Confession, I can guarantee your "interpretation" of it is faulty. In fact, I give you Bishop Ware on the subject below. As you can see, there is room for various opinions in the Eastern Orthodox. I agree with the last statement regarding what is said to St. Antony.


http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/11/1/6.aspx
Orthodox are convinced that Christians here on earth have a duty to pray for the departed, and they are confident that the dead are helped by such prayers. But precisely in what way do our prayers help the dead? What exactly is the condition of souls in the period between death and the Resurrection of the Body at the Last Day? Here Orthodox teaching is not entirely clear, and has varied somewhat at different times. In the seventeenth century a number of Orthodox writers — most notably Peter of Moghila and Dositheus in his Confession — upheld the Roman Catholic doctrine of Purgatory, or something very close to it (According to the normal Roman teaching, souls in Purgatory undergo expiatory suffering, and so render ‘satisfaction’ or ‘atonement’ for their sins. It should be remarked, however, that even in the seventeenth century there were many Orthodox who rejected the Roman teaching on Purgatory. The statements on the departed in Moghila’s Orthodox Confession were carefully changed by Meletius Syrigos, while in later life Dositheus specifically retracted what he had written on the subject in his Confession). Today most if not all Orthodox theologians reject the idea of Purgatory, at any rate in this form. The majority would be inclined to say that the faithful departed do not suffer at all. Another school holds that perhaps they suffer, but, if so, their suffering is of a purificatory but not an expiatory character; for when a man dies in the grace of God, then God freely forgives him all his sins and demands no expiatory penalties: Christ, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, is our only atonement and satisfaction. Yet a third group would prefer to leave the whole question entirely open: let us avoid detailed formulation about the life after death, they say, and preserve instead a reverent and agnostic reticence. When Saint Antony of Egypt was once worrying about divine providence, a voice came to him, saying: ‘Antony, attend to yourself; for these are the judgments of God, and it is not for you to know them’ (Apophthegmata (P.G. 65), Antony, 2).

Now if we can go back to the points in question of the OP...

Dmarie
06-19-2012, 10:46 AM
1 I don't have to explain away the "intermediate state," I only say that there is one. I cannot really answer your question because it is a different cultural mindset. Since I have already presented my positions in the four points in the Original Post, I refer you back to it.

2 As I pointed out the Scripture for point #2, the light of God is perceived differently to both those justified by Christ and those who remain unjustified. God's presence to the unjust reveals their darkness of their hearts and due to their pride remain condemned eternally. To the Just of Christ, God's presence surrounds and permeates the very essense of the soul.

3 I not sure what to think about the "Confession of Diostheus." Upon research, it seems the confession is a refutation against some sort of Calvinist false confession of Cyril. Diostheus is, from what I gather, a patriarch of Jerusalem. Since the translation is in English and does not show the original language, and the confession is not a lengthy discourse, I simply feel this is not the best source. It does not come from an Ecumenical Council, it does not exegete the comments made. Wether or not "I agree" with it or not is a matter of speaking on my own ignorance regarding it. I tend to think you probably found this in an obscure place simply because it is easy to twist without relevant commentary by the Patriarches or other prominent Eastern Orthodox theologians. What I have read suggests that the light of God is like a fire. Eastern Orthodox do not see two types of fire, like a hell fire and a purgatory fire, but both are one fire because it is God's presence. Hence, I would disagree with your understanding of the "Confession of Diostheus" than I would directly against the confession itself. Again, you find me commentary by an Eastern Orthodox on the Confession, I can guarantee your "interpretation" of it is faulty. In fact, I give you Bishop Ware on the subject below. As you can see, there is room for various opinions in the Eastern Orthodox. I agree with the last statement regarding what is said to St. Antony.


http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/11/1/6.aspx
Orthodox are convinced that Christians here on earth have a duty to pray for the departed, and they are confident that the dead are helped by such prayers. But precisely in what way do our prayers help the dead? What exactly is the condition of souls in the period between death and the Resurrection of the Body at the Last Day? Here Orthodox teaching is not entirely clear, and has varied somewhat at different times. In the seventeenth century a number of Orthodox writers — most notably Peter of Moghila and Dositheus in his Confession — upheld the Roman Catholic doctrine of Purgatory, or something very close to it (According to the normal Roman teaching, souls in Purgatory undergo expiatory suffering, and so render ‘satisfaction’ or ‘atonement’ for their sins. It should be remarked, however, that even in the seventeenth century there were many Orthodox who rejected the Roman teaching on Purgatory. The statements on the departed in Moghila’s Orthodox Confession were carefully changed by Meletius Syrigos, while in later life Dositheus specifically retracted what he had written on the subject in his Confession). Today most if not all Orthodox theologians reject the idea of Purgatory, at any rate in this form. The majority would be inclined to say that the faithful departed do not suffer at all. Another school holds that perhaps they suffer, but, if so, their suffering is of a purificatory but not an expiatory character; for when a man dies in the grace of God, then God freely forgives him all his sins and demands no expiatory penalties: Christ, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, is our only atonement and satisfaction. Yet a third group would prefer to leave the whole question entirely open: let us avoid detailed formulation about the life after death, they say, and preserve instead a reverent and agnostic reticence. When Saint Antony of Egypt was once worrying about divine providence, a voice came to him, saying: ‘Antony, attend to yourself; for these are the judgments of God, and it is not for you to know them’ (Apophthegmata (P.G. 65), Antony, 2).

Now if we can go back to the points in question of the OP...

Greetings & Blessings.

Please forgive my delay C.
I do value our discussions. However, I have taken note that you are finding it a little difficult in refraining from your condecending remarks.
My integrity is who I am. The shadey and "obscure websites" you refer to as getting my information from, well, they happen to be-
the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America website, the Orthodox Christian Information Center website, and the Creeds of Christendom website- just for your information, as well as for anyone else who may be following our discussions. Again, my responses are not based on "two-bit terminologies" nor are they taken from shadey "obscure websites" but they are given through serious study, prayer, gleaning, and of course on ultimately what the Scriptures have to say; and they are not given in a careless, quick-fire way so as to win a discussion. So please, let us respect one another even in our disagreements, or should I say- especially in our disagreements.

Also, a friendly reminder- you started this thread.
It is labeled Intermediate State/Purgatory, so if I tend to use these two words in an interchangeable way, it is because I see them as both being more commonly entwined in their discriptions, than not. Just as I view the Orthodox and Catholicism- there is more that commonly binds them to one another, than distinquishes them. I know this is obviously frustrating for you, but it is my view.

As for the Confession of Dositheus and he later "recanting" as you state, well, this "Confession Dosithei" is still still cited by your Orthodox as being a "major pronouncement" and "an important source of church teaching. It is also listed (still), among the "Chief list of Orthodox Statements (since 787)". "The Synod was made up of 68 Eastern Bishops, and ecclesiastics, including some from Russia".

"The Confession Dosithei presents, in 18 decrees or Aritcles, a positive statement of the Orthodox faith. It follows the order Cyrill's confession, which it is intended to refute. It is the most authoratative, complete doctrinal deliverance of the modern Greek Church on the contoverted articles. It was formallyy transmitted by the Eastern Partriarchs to the Russian Church in 1721, and through it to certain Bishops of the Church of England, as an ultimatum to be received without further question or conference by all who would be in Communion with the Orthodox Church."

This is very much in contrast to your casual, and glossed over response to it.

Article XVIII: The souls of the departed are either in torment, according to their conduct in life....

If the Church is citing this as among its most important and defining dogma, again, my question to you is...why didn't Jesus specifically teach about this? Why didn't any of the Apostles teach about this? Why doesn't Scripture-specifically anywhere- clearly teach about this?

Why does the Church dogmatically and firmly, dutifully require Indulgences and Prayers for the Dead if this is, as you say only an "agnostic reticence"?

Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie
06-19-2012, 10:53 AM
Blessings.

I've restated my position, (and yes, then some), but if you wish to "move on" to your original OP as you've stated your desire is, and since you did start this ...lead on Columcille!

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-19-2012, 01:46 PM
It is my experience Dmarie, speaking on my own experience, that I have not read the complete Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, D & C from page to page. Mormonism, of course, is not the topic of discussion. However, the fact you just happened to "pull up" the "Confession of Dositheus" with it being an outside reference not in my points, suggests you first got it from a third party source prior to directly getting it through the primary websites you mention. Now, perhaps you grew up Eastern Orthodox and just so happen to have read many Early Church Fathers, Councils, and such Confessions and other books of antiquity. However, if that was the case, you'd already have known that Dositheus changed his position later on and the correct Eastern Orthodox perspective. However, even as a Catholic I have not read the full amount of books out there.


As far as interchanging the terms based on my OP ***le, I should have marked "Intermediate State--Purgatory" rather than a slash mark to mean it as an "or" comment. As you see in Point 4 of my OP, I don't like to use the term because it has particular mental ideas that do not really convey the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox understanding. It is like getting a mental picture that Angels have wings, saints have halos, the devil has a pointed tail and pitchfork with horns, and the saints are sitting on a cloud playing harps 24/7. These images clearly have symbolic representation, but Heaven and Hell are nothing to really grasp completely by our mortal senses, since even the worst a person suffers here on earth cannot be expressed to the eternity of suffering awaiting those who are following after the Devil's schemes.

Columcille
06-19-2012, 07:09 PM
Blessings.

I've restated my position, (and yes, then some), but if you wish to "move on" to your original OP as you've stated your desire is, and since you did start this ...lead on Columcille!

Blessings...Dmarie

I haven't really seen any point of contention from you regarding any of my points listed in the OP. Point one was answered, point two was answered. From what I gather, I am not sure what points in #3 you have issue with. If you have no contention, then point four is a conclusion and your disagreement with me is really a matter of semantics rather than a real point of contention.

Columcille
06-21-2012, 04:26 PM
Dmarie, I might be taking a sabbatical of sort for awhile. I have to register for the GMAT and for cl***es at the university for this summer. May be awhile before I answer if you reply.

Dmarie
06-22-2012, 04:10 AM
It is my experience Dmarie, speaking on my own experience, that I have not read the complete Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, D & C from page to page. Mormonism, of course, is not the topic of discussion. However, the fact you just happened to "pull up" the "Confession of Dositheus" with it being an outside reference not in my points, suggests you first got it from a third party source prior to directly getting it through the primary websites you mention. Now, perhaps you grew up Eastern Orthodox and just so happen to have read many Early Church Fathers, Councils, and such Confessions and other books of antiquity. However, if that was the case, you'd already have known that Dositheus changed his position later on and the correct Eastern Orthodox perspective. However, even as a Catholic I have not read the full amount of books out there.


As far as interchanging the terms based on my OP ***le, I should have marked "Intermediate State--Purgatory" rather than a slash mark to mean it as an "or" comment. As you see in Point 4 of my OP, I don't like to use the term because it has particular mental ideas that do not really convey the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox understanding. It is like getting a mental picture that Angels have wings, saints have halos, the devil has a pointed tail and pitchfork with horns, and the saints are sitting on a cloud playing harps 24/7. These images clearly have symbolic representation, but Heaven and Hell are nothing to really grasp completely by our mortal senses, since even the worst a person suffers here on earth cannot be expressed to the eternity of suffering awaiting those who are following after the Devil's schemes.


Greetings & Blessings.

Columcille, you are not being very nice, nor respectful....and a whole paragraph at that. I will refer you to read Jill's latest post.

In regards to the Intermediate State, so far you have not presented any specific Scriptural support or basis for this teaching. You have listed and provided "points" in an effort to try and prove a "concept", an "agnostic reticence." I have addressed and answered all of your points in my posts, and by your own words...
"I don't have to explain away the Intermediate State, I only state that there is one."

Your above statement is clear, and I think that you've explained this as fully as is possible...which is not.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-22-2012, 07:26 AM
Greetings & Blessings.

Columcille, you are not being very nice, nor respectful....and a whole paragraph at that. I will refer you to read Jill's latest post.

In regards to the Intermediate State, so far you have not presented any specific Scriptural support or basis for this teaching. You have listed and provided "points" in an effort to try and prove a "concept", an "agnostic reticence." I have addressed and answered all of your points in my posts, and by your own words...
"I don't have to explain away the Intermediate State, I only state that there is one."

Your above statement is clear, and I think that you've explained this as fully as is possible...which is not.

Blessings...Dmarie

It is not meant to be clear. Paradoxes never have such clarity. How, in worldly wisdom is the "meek to inherit the earth" when all worldly wisdom see the actions of agressors dominate and "own" the earth? The paradox is simply not making the same references which are misunderstood by outsiders. This is a very Eastern mindset, to embrace paradoxes and not having to feel the need to break them down into specific catagories. You have in your statement stated that my above comment is clear, but what you seek is a very Westernized expression.

As far as my rudeness is concerned, I feel that my point is relevant. There are literally thousands of writings by patriarches (John Chrysostom, Bartholomew I), popes (PJPII...), saints (Francis of ***isi), doctors of the Church (Bonaventura, Aquinas), Early Church Fathers (like Tertullian, Origen) and Councils (both regional and ecumenical... Florence, Lyons, Nicea, Constantinople). I rarely expect that people have read the documents in its historical perspective... like when some say the term "Theotokos" applying to Mary means to them that she is "The fourth person of the Trinity" rather than seeing how the terms was used against the Arian heresy. It is easy to "misrepresent" singular quotes when there is no relevant context. I used my example of Mormonism's literature as a means of an example that I have not read all their material and I don't expect every Mormon to have encountered all their materials. I generally in discussion try to make my comments relevant to the points being brought up. I don't usually introduce a quote unless the person has already introduced it or is within the Original Post either by being referenced as a bibliographical source or there are clear allusions within the structure of what is said. Typically, if the OP is talking about a specific quote, I pick my "fights" based on my own knowledge of the quote being referenced; if I am fairly ign.orant and I am already engaged in dialogue, I tend to glance a quick overview like I did with your introduction of the Confession which led to a very quick commentary by Bishop Ware regarding it; if I am fairly ig.norant and not in dialogue yet, I tend to choose not to participate and thereby aggravate my ignorance. As Dr. Martin has stated the proverb often, "better a fool remain silent than to speak and remove all doubt."

Columcille
06-24-2012, 07:27 AM
I wanted to say one more thing, but on a good note. Now that you read Bishop Ware's comment on the Confession, did you learn something from it regarding that specific p***age you quoted?

It is important in that perhaps you will now not use the Confession in a very similiar argument knowing that in this one p***age is not as reliable as a source. If you got it from a third source, perhaps they did not examine Diotheus' change of comments laster on. This mistake might be a common thread between those against Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, picking a quote that sounds "different" or "awkward" to Protestant sentimentalities and quoting it out of context or without regard to its historical significance. I just don't want you to fall into the same trap again. Perhaps the next time you introduce a quote, you can tie it into one of my points more succinctly (meaning for example that it is actually supporting my paraphrase accurately rather than ... "what if" or "what about" questions. This would mean that you actually understood my point by a relevant p***age. Perhaps what I will do is give you some quotes from some cl***ic texts to support my points, texts that are easily accessible online, so that you can better see the commentary or sermon or "encyclical" letter or council note with its appropriate canon law. However, due to my prepatory study for the GMAT, it may take some time before I give you something. July 9th is my start date for two summer cl***es. If I can schedule a GMAT test prior to that date, then I will certainly have more time inbetween the completion of the test and the beginning cl*** date to devote giving you some resources from the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox perspective.


From a distant source to its primary source

Ok. So this is just quick reference materials. Now granted, there are some Catholic references in the bibliographies between 14-40. So it is important to distinguish the Eastern Orthodox/Catholic perception, as it seems most Catholics will consider Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory seperate "places" rather than "states of perception of the very same divine light of God." You will notice that there are several embedded quotes within the bibliographical information, some will be quotes that are commentary on some p***ages of scripture that provide biblical precedence. However, it may be difficult to get to these works to see the Scripture texts referenced, so it takes patience and a need for a certain amount of refraint from making ***umptions about the text until you are able to read it as it is embedded in the work. For instance, footnote 20 gives a homily 27 of St. Isaac. I haven't found an online text of St. Isaac's works, so I would have do one of two things in regards to the quote provided. First, I would take that the source is being used to support the thesis and since "wikipedia" is not interested at debunking Eastern Orthodoxy but to provide information about them, I would take the statement at face value. Secondly, in regards to is scriptural references used by St. Isaac, since "wikipedia" does not always consistently provide a scriptural text, don't automatically ***ume there is no scripture until you read St. Isaac's homily. Since it is a "homily," which is in essense a written sermon, it is the custom in the practice of the Divine Liturgy and M***, to have a "homily" follow the Scripture texts used in the lectionary. So for certain, St. Isaac is quoting from scripture to base his homily. To ***ume there is no scripture used, is to not be knowable about what a homily is. Since I referenced a footnote of St. Isaac, it is due to using this website:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Christian_theology#Concept_of_Hel l



Got to "Concept of Hell" sub***le:

Some Orthodox theologians see another example of distinction between East and West in the teaching of Hell as a created place.[14][15][16][17] For the Orthodox, Heaven is not a place in the sky, it is being with God.[18] Salvation in the East, is not salvation from the wrath of God,[19] as St Isaac teaches that the Love of God is the Tree of Life.[20] According to Eastern Christianity people are not sent down to Hell by an angry God.[21] Hell as professed in the East is neither the absence of God nor the separation of the soul from the presence of God, but rather the opposite--Heaven and Hell are the divine presence experienced either pleasantly or unpleasantly, depending upon one's spiritual condition.[22][23][24] Finally the theological concept of hell or eternal ****ation also via theoria is expressed different in the West,[citation needed] than in the East.[25]





"A Monster from Hell". A 19th-century Russian hand-drawn lubok.
The Orthodox Church holds that both Heaven and Hell are a condition of relationship with God that is either theosis or perdition, both of which are often spoken of as the effect of being in the presence of God. The Orthodox Church teaches that eternal ****ation in the lake of fire and heaven occur within the same realm, which is being with God; God is Heaven, God is the Kingdom of God and Heaven.[26] For one who hates God (as existence, as Life for example called Misotheism) such a place as in the presence of God, will be eternal suffering.[27][28]

The Orthodox Church teaches that Heaven and Hell are in the same realm, and that Hell is not separation from God symbolically or physically,[29][30]

Hell as taught in Orthodoxy is a place chosen.[31] The Western understanding of Hell (called inferno or infernus) can be understood from the works of Augustine as being a place possibly located under the earth.[32] Saint Gregory of Nyssa, himself a believer in apocatastasis and universal reconciliation, argued that Hades (the place "which serves as a receptacle for souls after death" not the place of Hell per se) is a subterranean locale.[33]

The West too teaches that God does not cut off anyone off from himself, and that the non-physical separation from God of those in Hell is only a self-exclusion on their own part.[34][35]

As the Church both Eastern and Western teaches, there is no place where God is not, and God's love is for all human beings, including sinners. Hell is described as self-exclusion from communion with that universal love,[36] as cutting oneself off from love,[37] or but as an enemy of God.[38] Only of a human heart that excludes God can it be said that, in a sense, God is not there, and so Eastern Orthodox Bishop Kallistos Ware wrote that Hell is "the place where God is not" (emphasis in the original).[39] In his review of the Bishop's book Hieromonk Patapios criticized this expression as unorthodox.[40]

tealblue
06-26-2012, 05:12 AM
Greetings & Blessings.

Columcille, you are not being very nice, nor respectful....and a whole paragraph at that. I will refer you to read Jill's latest post.

In regards to the Intermediate State, so far you have not presented any specific Scriptural support or basis for this teaching. You have listed and provided "points" in an effort to try and prove a "concept", an "agnostic reticence." I have addressed and answered all of your points in my posts, and by your own words...
"I don't have to explain away the Intermediate State, I only state that there is one."

Your above statement is clear, and I think that you've explained this as fully as is possible...which is not.

Blessings...Dmarie

I first apologize for highjacking this thread. I have been in the process for the past few months relocating overseas and have not had the time.

I realize there are a few referances that seem to point to the idea of absence from the body and present with the lord. Well who says that purgatory wouldn't still be in the presence of jesus. As far as I know any non presence of god in general would be hell. Becasue thats what hell is.

Here are two facts I would like to share with you.
1. There will be no suffering in Heaven.
2. Nothing inpure will enter into heaven.

1Cor 3

14If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage. 15But if someone’s work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved,* but only as through fire.

Here are a couple of facts about this p***age.

1. The person descibed here is not on earth because its talking about judgement.

2. The person is not in heaven because its describing suffering loss and still being saved. And we know there will be no suffering in heaven.

So if this verse is desribing some sort of state thats not on earth or in heaven where(what state) are they?

Dmarie
06-26-2012, 10:48 PM
It is not meant to be clear. Paradoxes never have such clarity. How, in worldly wisdom is the "meek to inherit the earth" when all worldly wisdom see the actions of agressors dominate and "own" the earth? The paradox is simply not making the same references which are misunderstood by outsiders. This is a very Eastern mindset, to embrace paradoxes and not having to feel the need to break them down into specific catagories. You have in your statement stated that my above comment is clear, but what you seek is a very Westernized expression.

As far as my rudeness is concerned, I feel that my point is relevant. There are literally thousands of writings by patriarches (John Chrysostom, Bartholomew I), popes (PJPII...), saints (Francis of ***isi), doctors of the Church (Bonaventura, Aquinas), Early Church Fathers (like Tertullian, Origen) and Councils (both regional and ecumenical... Florence, Lyons, Nicea, Constantinople). I rarely expect that people have read the documents in its historical perspective... like when some say the term "Theotokos" applying to Mary means to them that she is "The fourth person of the Trinity" rather than seeing how the terms was used against the Arian heresy. It is easy to "misrepresent" singular quotes when there is no relevant context. I used my example of Mormonism's literature as a means of an example that I have not read all their material and I don't expect every Mormon to have encountered all their materials. I generally in discussion try to make my comments relevant to the points being brought up. I don't usually introduce a quote unless the person has already introduced it or is within the Original Post either by being referenced as a bibliographical source or there are clear allusions within the structure of what is said. Typically, if the OP is talking about a specific quote, I pick my "fights" based on my own knowledge of the quote being referenced; if I am fairly ign.orant and I am already engaged in dialogue, I tend to glance a quick overview like I did with your introduction of the Confession which led to a very quick commentary by Bishop Ware regarding it; if I am fairly ig.norant and not in dialogue yet, I tend to choose not to participate and thereby aggravate my ignorance. As Dr. Martin has stated the proverb often, "better a fool remain silent than to speak and remove all doubt."


Greetings & Blessings.

"Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ." (Col. 2:8)

The Intermediate State you speak so eloquently of C. is simply as you say it is--a "paradox," a "concept," an "agnostic reticence," a "mind-set," and whatever else you have referred to it as. It is a doctrine of men and not of God.

Again, and again you provide no Scriptural support for this teaching, but you continually appeal to the writings and teachings of men. One of your primary references, Bishop K. Ware, makes this statement in his Prayers for the departed..."Here orthodox teaching is not entirely clear, and has varied somewhat at different times." So, what may have been accepted at one time may be dejected or re-interpreted at another time.

God has revealed and given to us all things pertaining to our salvation and godly living---with no pit-stops; and He "...has in these last days spoken to us through His Son." (Heb. 1,2)

We would be wise to listen to Scripture when it speaks loudly and clearly to us-warning us- "...not to be carried about with various and strange doctrines." We would also be wise to listen when Scripture chooses to be silent.


"...but those things which are revealed belong to us." (Deut.29:29)

The Intermediate State/Purgatory are works and doctrines of men and not of God.
Again, Jesus never taught about these 2 states/places. Please, can you site anywhere in Scripture where Jesus teaches specifically on any of these two? Is it not Jesus to Whom we look to and to Whom we draw from? Is it not Jesus to Whom the Scriptures point to and specifically say that it is He, who "...has in these last days spoken to us...."?

***"Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?"*** (Gal.3:3)

*Romans 8:38,39

Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie
06-26-2012, 11:07 PM
Greetings.

Columcille, as for your steadfastness in your condecending remarks towards me, (which you say you base on your "experiences"), well...God knows, and you don't.
You don't know anymore about me-- what I've studied, how I study, where I study, anymore than you know what I had for breakfast this morning.

Of course you may think what you want, but please consider my friend, or should I say reconsider, what you say and accuse another of...

God knows.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-26-2012, 11:09 PM
Dmarie, you just condemned every theologian, even the most historically conservative because of their conceptualization. Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and any theologian you even have heard as having impact with intelligent discourse. Even Paul on Areopagus used pagan quotes and led some to Christ. You don't condemn Paul for quoting Pagan materials do you?

The problem seems to me that this is not your vocation, although I hope you practice more and more.

Dmarie
06-26-2012, 11:15 PM
I first apologize for highjacking this thread. I have been in the process for the past few months relocating overseas and have not had the time.

I realize there are a few referances that seem to point to the idea of absence from the body and present with the lord. Well who says that purgatory wouldn't still be in the presence of jesus. As far as I know any non presence of god in general would be hell. Becasue thats what hell is.

Here are two facts I would like to share with you.
1. There will be no suffering in Heaven.
2. Nothing inpure will enter into heaven.

1Cor 3

14If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage. 15But if someone’s work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved,* but only as through fire.

Here are a couple of facts about this p***age.

1. The person descibed here is not on earth because its talking about judgement.

2. The person is not in heaven because its describing suffering loss and still being saved. And we know there will be no suffering in heaven.

So if this verse is desribing some sort of state thats not on earth or in heaven where(what state) are they?


Hi tb, and welcome back.

I will refer you to reading my previous posts, (if you have not done so already). The p***age you are referring to is specifically speaking of our "works" being burned up, or not. It is not speaking of our bodies.

Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie
06-26-2012, 11:30 PM
Dmarie, you just condemned every theologian, even the most historically conservative because of their conceptualization. Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and any theologian you even have heard as having impact with intelligent discourse. Even Paul on Areopagus used pagan quotes and led some to Christ. You don't condemn Paul for quoting Pagan materials do you?

The problem seems to me that this is not your vocation, although I hope you practice more and more.


Blessings.

There you go again. Now you're jumping around and adding words.
No,..I was specifically addressing YOU Columcille.
Is being respectful this difficult? Again, please let us be respectful of one another. If you do not wish to do so, and you continue to address me in this fashion, well maybe, this is your way out, and I truly wish you well.

I will continue to pray for you.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
06-27-2012, 04:08 AM
I can always use prayers, I never turn them down, no matter the intention.

But really though, scripture nowhere states certain conceptualizations of many Protestants theologians. TULIP (Reformed council following Calvin), OSAS (Baptists), Consubstantiation (Luther), via media (Anglicans-Thomas Cranmer), Pascal's Wager (Blaise Pascal-pensees), Immanuel Kant (Lutheran philosopher), ... It is pretty striking, to say the least, to condemn what you really have not understood. There has been no relevant objections to my OP points, your constantly shifting away from it because you come already with preconceived notions that each time do not reflect my points. You talk more about my bad tone than you address directly my points, except in generalities or in "what about (certain texts)" that diverts me to do the research you should have done on your own. If it is only my tone that you take issue with, then forgive me; if it is something within my points, please show me specifically which point you disagree with in the order as it is presented in my Original Post.

tealblue
06-27-2012, 04:12 AM
Hi tb, and welcome back.

I will refer you to reading my previous posts, (if you have not done so already). The p***age you are referring to is specifically speaking of our "works" being burned up, or not. It is not speaking of our bodies.

Blessings...Dmarie

Yes I do agree that its talking about our works being burned up. The verse though is specifically talking about "that day" which is judgement day. If its talking about our works being burned up and will be suffer loss says that says to me during this suffering must be in some state that is not on earth living and not in heaven. Where or when do you say this suffering for our works happen?

Dmarie
07-01-2012, 01:17 PM
Yes I do agree that its talking about our works being burned up. The verse though is specifically talking about "that day" which is judgement day. If its talking about our works being burned up and will be suffer loss says that says to me during this suffering must be in some state that is not on earth living and not in heaven. Where or when do you say this suffering for our works happen?


Greetings & Blessings.

"For we must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad." (2Cor.5:10)

When this Scripture speaks of "suffering loss" it is speaking specifically of those things (rewards) that we will not "receive." Again, it is not speaking of a physical suffering pertaining to our bodies to be suffered somewhere in some chamber apart from Christ. If we are Christ's, we are Christ's, and we are with Him where He is. I point again to the Scripture "We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord." (2Cor.5:8)
What did Christ say as He was dying to the thief on the cross? "***uredly, I say to you,today you will be with me in paradise." (Luke 23:43)
If we are Christ's, our spirits/souls will be with Christ awaiting the time when our physical bodies will put on "incorruption" to be reunited with our spiritual bodies. (*2Cor. 15:51-55, 2Cor.15:42,44, Rom.8:11)

"Where" we appear when this judgement happens, the Scriptures speak of "...the judgement seat of Christ...." that is, where Christ is.
"For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us."

So whether we "receive" those things (rewards), or we do not receive ("suffer loss"), we are with Christ. who will "...appear in the presence of God for us." where we will either gain or "suffer loss" of our "rewards". This is not speaking of the loss of our salvation, nor again, is it speaking of our having to suffer loss and having to be further purified somewhere in some chamber apart from Christ to be later reunited with Him.

Also tb, thank you for appealing to Scripture.

Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie
07-01-2012, 01:30 PM
I can always use prayers, I never turn them down, no matter the intention.

But really though, scripture nowhere states certain conceptualizations of many Protestants theologians. TULIP (Reformed council following Calvin), OSAS (Baptists), Consubstantiation (Luther), via media (Anglicans-Thomas Cranmer), Pascal's Wager (Blaise Pascal-pensees), Immanuel Kant (Lutheran philosopher), ... It is pretty striking, to say the least, to condemn what you really have not understood. There has been no relevant objections to my OP points, your constantly shifting away from it because you come already with preconceived notions that each time do not reflect my points. You talk more about my bad tone than you address directly my points, except in generalities or in "what about (certain texts)" that diverts me to do the research you should have done on your own. If it is only my tone that you take issue with, then forgive me; if it is something within my points, please show me specifically which point you disagree with in the order as it is presented in my Original Post.

Greetings.

Please, please , please...
Appeal to, and show me the Scriptures.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
07-01-2012, 02:52 PM
Greetings.

Please, please , please...
Appeal to, and show me the Scriptures.

Blessings...Dmarie

See points 1 and 2 as far as Scripture used in my post #21.

3) A) Sin has two consequences and B) good works only have one consequence.

Romans 6.23, for the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

This verse applies to the spiritual state as it is contrasted to the gift of God.



I'll edit later as I list other scriptures as they apply to my points. I have GMAT study and wife is calling me now.

3Ai--Sin seperates us spiritually from God by virtue of God's holiness.
3Aii--Sin's temporal consequences are felt by others and builds bad character traits.
3Bi--The temporal (positive) consequences of good works is that it builds character and connects us one to another.
3Bii--Good works is not salvaic. Only Christ's sacrifice at Calvary repairs the spiritual relationship to unify us back to God.

Dmarie
07-03-2012, 10:43 AM
I first apologize for highjacking this thread. I have been in the process for the past few months relocating overseas and have not had the time.

I realize there are a few referances that seem to point to the idea of absence from the body and present with the lord. Well who says that purgatory wouldn't still be in the presence of jesus. As far as I know any non presence of god in general would be hell. Becasue thats what hell is.

Here are two facts I would like to share with you.
1. There will be no suffering in Heaven.
2. Nothing inpure will enter into heaven.

1Cor 3

14If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage. 15But if someone’s work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved,* but only as through fire.

Here are a couple of facts about this p***age.

1. The person descibed here is not on earth because its talking about judgement.

2. The person is not in heaven because its describing suffering loss and still being saved. And we know there will be no suffering in heaven.

So if this verse is desribing some sort of state thats not on earth or in heaven where(what state) are they?


Greetings tb.

When we are "saved" we are immediately "sealed" with God's Holy Spirit:

"In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritence...." (Ephesians 1:13,14)

God imputes the righteousness of Christ on us because "having believed" in the perfect and sufficient sacrifice of His Son, God now, when He looks upon us, sees us through the pure and perfect sacrifice of His Son, who is now our righteousness--"sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise who is the guarantee of our inheritence...."
We are now saved unto good works to do for His glory and kingdom, and these works will be judged by their motives either to be "burned up" or not. These works will either produce good fruit yielding for us "treasure" in heaven which we are told to "build up" or we will loose these treasures (rewards) only to be "saved as through fire." Or, another way of saying this is that our possible rewards will be burnt up, but we will be "saved by the skin of our teeth", but we will "suffer loss" of our rewards.

Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie
07-03-2012, 02:14 PM
See points 1 and 2 as far as Scripture used in my post #21.

3) A) Sin has two consequences and B) good works only have one consequence.

Romans 6.23, for the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

This verse applies to the spiritual state as it is contrasted to the gift of God.



I'll edit later as I list other scriptures as they apply to my points. I have GMAT study and wife is calling me now.

3Ai--Sin seperates us spiritually from God by virtue of God's holiness.
3Aii--Sin's temporal consequences are felt by others and builds bad character traits.
3Bi--The temporal (positive) consequences of good works is that it builds character and connects us one to another.
3Bii--Good works is not salvaic. Only Christ's sacrifice at Calvary repairs the spiritual relationship to unify us back to God.


Greetings & Blessings.

C., I have already addressed these.
Yes, God is light and He has revealed this light to us in and through His Son.

There are those who either refuse or accept this light, which is Christ.
Those who refuse, will receive "the wages of sin which is death." Those who accept, will receive "the gift of God...," which "is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."
So we either accept this light and live to Christ..."For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord...." (Eph.5:8)...or, we reject this light and reap "the wages of sin which is death."
You focus on the first part "the wages of sin is death" which does initially apply to us all, however, if we come to the light and accept this light (Christ), we are no longer under this condemnation. We are Christ's. The second part of this verse applies to believers-those in Christ...it speaks of a "gift", and a promise to us..."but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Rom.6:23)

Again, if we are Christ's, we live and die to Him. When we die, we immediately go to be with Him...where He is. "...whether we wake (we are alive to) or sleep, (we die to) we should live together with Him." (IThes.5:10) "We are confident, yes well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord." (2Cor.5:8)

So, being Christ's we are "sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise who is the guarantee of our inheritence...." (Eph.1:13,14)

***Now, why would God subject one who is His, and is indwelt and sealed with His Holy Spirit to "suffer" apart from Him "somewhere" and in some "state"? Are we not one with Christ? Is Christ divided?***

"For if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lords." (Rom.14:8)

"For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord's." (Rom.14:7,8)

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
07-03-2012, 03:32 PM
Sorry, I had meant to add more verses to show point #3. I was thinking there were some O.T. p***ages that would be useful, and demonstrated by one p***age in the Gospel where the sins of the father were placed on the son, while at the same time the father's own sins are not the responsibility of the sons. The Gospel p***age that I was thinking about was one where there was a question prior to a healing, where the apostles initially thought the person's condition was the result of the parents sins. In some respects, there is a higher risk of inherited deceases and disorders from such sins as fornication (I am here thinking in modern times how babies are born with AIDS due to the parent's infidelity), drug abuse, and even incest. While these are physical attributes that are imparted through genetics, the sins of the father also generate certain impressional behaviors on the children. Hence, some people are more likely to be abusers if they were once abused, or an alcoholic if their parents were alcoholics. These verses would have shown the more temporal aspects of sin's impact on our lives.

You have a question in your last post, "***Now, why would God subject one who is His, and is indwelt and sealed with His Holy Spirit to "suffer" apart from Him "somewhere" and in some "state"? Are we not one with Christ? Is Christ divided?***

I don't really understand your question to me, because you presume my position is that "they" are apart from God. I have never suggested there is any seperation apart from God. I am actually unsure as to the nature of the supposed "suffering." Is it really suffering or is it merely a removal and loss of some bad character traits that are in the soul? To me, it could be called suffering of a sort, but I think the implied connotations you have regarding what some may consider "suffering" is not sufficient in the actual purpose of purging. Does a vine cry when it is pruned? If you lived and loved long hair all our life, does a hair cut cons***ute suffering? To tell you the truth, I don't rightly know the extact extent of this "suffering" or even if it should be called that. Personally, I don't think there is suffering; it is more like how one feels in the middle of a bath removing the dirt of the soul. I am not sure there is much for us to really disagree about. There has been nothing in your comments that I have disagreed with, excepting where you try to imply something I believe that I don't.

Dmarie
07-03-2012, 03:35 PM
Greetings.

C., again you are trying to tie "points" of Truth to prove and support a "concept" aka, Intermediate State. You have not. For that matter, anyone could use these same points in a deceptive and twisting way to start, prove and support just about any concept or teaching they want.
God specifically warns us not to add nor take away from His Words. (Rev.22:18,19)

What a fearful thing.

Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie
07-03-2012, 03:50 PM
Sorry, I had meant to add more verses to show point #3. I was thinking there were some O.T. p***ages that would be useful, and demonstrated by one p***age in the Gospel where the sins of the father were placed on the son, while at the same time the father's own sins are not the responsibility of the sons. The Gospel p***age that I was thinking about was one where there was a question prior to a healing, where the apostles initially thought the person's condition was the result of the parents sins. In some respects, there is a higher risk of inherited deceases and disorders from such sins as fornication (I am here thinking in modern times how babies are born with AIDS due to the parent's infidelity), drug abuse, and even incest. While these are physical attributes that are imparted through genetics, the sins of the father also generate certain impressional behaviors on the children. Hence, some people are more likely to be abusers if they were once abused, or an alcoholic if their parents were alcoholics. These verses would have shown the more temporal aspects of sin's impact on our lives.

You have a question in your last post, "***Now, why would God subject one who is His, and is indwelt and sealed with His Holy Spirit to "suffer" apart from Him "somewhere" and in some "state"? Are we not one with Christ? Is Christ divided?***

I don't really understand your question to me, because you presume my position is that "they" are apart from God. I have never suggested there is any seperation apart from God. I am actually unsure as to the nature of the supposed "suffering." Is it really suffering or is it merely a removal and loss of some bad character traits that are in the soul? To me, it could be called suffering of a sort, but I think the implied connotations you have regarding what some may consider "suffering" is not sufficient in the actual purpose of purging. Does a vine cry when it is pruned? If you lived and loved long hair all our life, does a hair cut cons***ute suffering? To tell you the truth, I don't rightly know the extact extent of this "suffering" or even if it should be called that. Personally, I don't think there is suffering; it is more like how one feels in the middle of a bath removing the dirt of the soul. I am not sure there is much for us to really disagree about. There has been nothing in your comments that I have disagreed with, excepting where you try to imply something I believe that I don't.

Hi Columcille & Blessings.

You say you believe in the concept of the Intermediate State. I refer back to a previous statement of yours where you speak of the soul with it remaining "impurities" needing further purging..."must be purged by the fire of God's light." Does this not speak of a purification process which is painful?

Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie
07-03-2012, 03:56 PM
Hi Columcille & Blessings.

You say you believe in the concept of the Intermediate State. I refer back to a previous statement of yours where you speak of the soul with it remaining "impurities" needing further purging..."must be purged by the fire of God's light." Does this not speak of a purification process which is painful?

Blessings...Dmarie

I meant to say a further purification process.... This is what you strongly implied by your previous statement when you refer to remaining impurities.

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
07-03-2012, 06:35 PM
To me the question of purification must be within the whole being of a person. If you believe that the person's make-up is made of flesh, soul, and spirit, then death purifies the flesh and the spirit is regenerated within this life. However, the soul is a most interesting conception. At what point and conditions is the soul purified?

There are some who believe it is only flesh and soul, believing the soul and spirit are interchangeable terms. For me, the ****ogy of the temple of God having three seperate places with its outer court, inner court, and holy of holies seems to me to reflect the one temple with the union of three courts. I believe the spirit of a mankind resides in the soul; where God resides within the spirit of that man's soul so that the sacrifice of Christ purifies the man to enter into God's kingdom upon death. However, while we are regenerated, even Paul states in Romans that he does what he hates to do. Many of us still sin even after regeneration, but the whole dynamic has changed upon regeneration; no longer are we blaming our sinful behavior on others, like Adam to Eve or Eve to the Serpent: no longer are we saying our sinful behavior is due to a disorder... No. We admit our sinfulness before God, we know as David says that "A sacrifice to God is a broken spirit. A broken and humbled heart God will not despise" (Psalm 50.19 SAAS; Psalm 51.19).

The question therefore is the soul and the flesh of the same substance? So that the purging of the soul happens at death? Or is it something else? All I know is that God is holy, and if our whole being is be present before him, it also must be made holy by God at some point. What seems exceptional to me is that the resurrection of our bodies is God pouring himself from the holy of holies outward; first he regenerates our spirits while in our mortal state, then upon death he purifies the soul by his presence, then upon the day of resurrection our bodies join with our souls and our innermost spirit. Instead of us approaching the holy of holies like the approaching in the O.T., God is coming out to us. What an amazing mystery.


As far as your question regarding suffering, I do not rightly know the nature of the suffering, if it is suffering at all. I think the ****ogy of purification suggests a type of suffering in many people's minds; but as an Eastern Catholic, it is not within my tradition to describe how that process is felt. The nature of the purification is something none of will know until after death of the body.

tealblue
07-06-2012, 04:01 AM
Greetings & Blessings.

"For we must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad." (2Cor.5:10)

When this Scripture speaks of "suffering loss" it is speaking specifically of those things (rewards) that we will not "receive." Again, it is not speaking of a physical suffering pertaining to our bodies to be suffered somewhere in some chamber apart from Christ. If we are Christ's, we are Christ's, and we are with Him where He is. I point again to the Scripture "We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord." (2Cor.5:8)
What did Christ say as He was dying to the thief on the cross? "***uredly, I say to you,today you will be with me in paradise." (Luke 23:43)
If we are Christ's, our spirits/souls will be with Christ awaiting the time when our physical bodies will put on "incorruption" to be reunited with our spiritual bodies. (*2Cor. 15:51-55, 2Cor.15:42,44, Rom.8:11)

There is much debate where jesus went for 3 days until his resurection. So when he speaks of "today" does he really mean today as in a real calender day or was he just trying to convey the fact that the thief will be going to heaven.

"Where" we appear when this judgement happens, the Scriptures speak of "...the judgement seat of Christ...." that is, where Christ is.
"For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us."

So whether we "receive" those things (rewards), or we do not receive ("suffer loss"), we are with Christ. who will "...appear in the presence of God for us." where we will either gain or "suffer loss" of our "rewards". This is not speaking of the loss of our salvation, nor again, is it speaking of our having to suffer loss and having to be further purified somewhere in some chamber apart from Christ to be later reunited with Him.



Also tb, thank you for appealing to Scripture.

Blessings...Dmarie

Rev 21

27 Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

2 cor 15

53For that which is corruptible must clothe itself with incorruptibility, and that which is mortal must clothe itself with immortality

So, If nothing impure shall enter into heaven unlean according to rev 21 and that what is corruptable must me made incorruptable according to 2 cor then obviously being made incorruptable must be happening before one enters the gates of heaven. Yes this probably still happens in the presence of the lord but must be according to scripture be outside the gates of heaven.

In reallity if this wasn't specifically a Roman Catholic doctrine having an intermediate state where a soul is purified before walking thu the pearly gates this would not be that hot of a topic. It would just be something of debate.

Columcille
07-07-2012, 08:43 PM
Ok, I should be able to focus some attention to the topic for a short time. I think I p***ed my GMAT today, but will see the total combined score in twenty days. School starts Monday with two cl***es, one undergraduate and one graduate courses. So depending on the intensity of the cl***work and reading, I might not be able to put in a greater amount of effort as I would normally like to devote.

Dmarie, in regards to the purification of the soul, the scripture verses I use are found in 2 Maccabbees 12.38-45, 1 Cor. 3.9-17. The reason I use 2 Maccabbees 12.38-45 is simply as a means to show that prayer for the dead is understood in the p***age to be effective. I know that you do not accept any of the so-called "Deutorocanonicals," so please understand that I am not presenting this scripture as authoritative for you to accept. Rather this scripture is used to support my own position. I am anticipating your response and so hope you understand that I am not here to "prove" to you, but to rather "defend" (demonstrate my own defense) my beliefs in certain aspects related to the intermediate state between death and resurrection. As such, if you were trying to disprove to me that the intermediate state of souls is not being purified and that prayers offered to the souls departed is ineffecient, you would especially have a hard time in the second due to not accepting 2 Maccabbees as part of Scripture.

Dmarie
07-14-2012, 09:41 AM
Greetings my friends.

I have not been well, but I am hoping to be back soon.
I still have much to say to the two of you...so, be ready for me! :p
Please keep me and my son in your prayers.

Many blessings...Dmarie

alanmolstad
07-14-2012, 10:25 AM
Purgatory is not a Bible-backed teaching.
The idea is from extra books that the church does not hold as being at the same level as the Bible.

The need for Purgatory is because we simply dont have all the answers to all the questions we might want to ask, and so over time a few people have invented answers that they needed...

Columcille
07-14-2012, 08:36 PM
Purgatory is not a Bible-backed teaching.
The idea is from extra books that the church does not hold as being at the same level as the Bible.

The need for Purgatory is because we simply dont have all the answers to all the questions we might want to ask, and so over time a few people have invented answers that they needed...

The main sticking points is a problem of at what point is the soul purified and how. It is obvious that regeneration within the spirit has taken place at conversion, it is also obvious that the cessation of fleshly temptations is ultimately purified by the death of the flesh. I think this purification comes on the day of the Lord that each person confronts just after death when the spirit goes back to God. I don't really believe it is a place, but a state of being within God's most holy presence. In fact, God is soo holy that nobody can see him and live. This last statement reflects the fears of the Jews to have Moses mediate for them; even Moses who did not see God in his full glory was radiating and had to cover his face due to its brilliance. Our spirits, as being in Christ, will embrace God's divine light with all its purity; but do you really think the soul's sinfulness stems from the fleshly cravings or do you think the soul's sinfulness stems from pride, dispair, and bitterness and distrust---in essence, the an***hesis of the three greatest things that St. Paul states in 1 Cor. 13 with hope, faith, and love.

Columcille
07-14-2012, 08:56 PM
Greetings my friends.

I have not been well, but I am hoping to be back soon.
I still have much to say to the two of you...so, be ready for me! :p
Please keep me and my son in your prayers.

Many blessings...Dmarie

I hope what you have to say will help me see where along my original post points may error. I have an idea in my mind that you will avoid the points as you currently do in favor of finding things within the Latin Rite to draw comparisons. There are comparisons to be made, but it is in a semantical viewpoint; the language used by the Latin Rite is not the same or in the same perception as the Eastern Catholics/Orthodox Churches. Until the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox perspective is addressed accurately, I do not see any form of argumentation to be worth consideration. The main point that has persuaded me is in terms of the purification of the whole Christian person--the spirit, the flesh, and the soul. The spirit resides in the soul, and the soul has cognition, and the flesh is controled by this union of spirit and soul by the grace of God. At what times and in what manner does each of these parts of humankind's make-up purified? My answers were already given, the spirit upon regeneration (as outlined by John 3) in conversion, the flesh at death--but most importantly at the bodily resurrection, and the soul immediately when in the presence of God upon death. If the soul was purified in this life, then there is no possibility for sin by the Christian. If the soul is purified by the death of the flesh, then the soul is itself flesh due to cognition only being tied to the body. However, I don't believe you would ***ume that as a correct position. How you would reconcile the purification of the soul, which is not of a corruptable nature (meaning it does not cease to exist after death--even those destined to hell are cognitive of their sufferings and therefore alive in a real sense though metaphorically speaking this is their second death; because death is considered by human ****ogy to be the most intense suffering in this life. How you reconcile soul's purification is what I would like to know.

alanmolstad
07-14-2012, 09:16 PM
Revelation 21:4

God changes things, changes us...helps us..fixes us.

We dont make ourselves better or more worthy of heaven...
God is at work in us....

He will wipe every tear from their eyes.
There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has p***ed away."

the limitations we suffer now because we are yet mortal are taken away.
We will know even as we are known,,,and we will be known for sure.

Dmarie
07-15-2012, 05:58 PM
Rev 21

27 Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

2 cor 15

53For that which is corruptible must clothe itself with incorruptibility, and that which is mortal must clothe itself with immortality

So, If nothing impure shall enter into heaven unlean according to rev 21 and that what is corruptable must me made incorruptable according to 2 cor then obviously being made incorruptable must be happening before one enters the gates of heaven. Yes this probably still happens in the presence of the lord but must be according to scripture be outside the gates of heaven.

In reallity if this wasn't specifically a Roman Catholic doctrine having an intermediate state where a soul is purified before walking thu the pearly gates this would not be that hot of a topic. It would just be something of debate.


Greetings.

"In reality...," whether this doctrine be RC or mormon or hindu or whatever, it would still be "...just as much something of debate."

Yes, I do agree with the clear teaching of Scripture when it says that only purity and perfection shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, which is why I also believe in the Bible's clear teaching of justification...when Christ imputes His righteousness to us when we become a child of God.
God gave us His Son to be that perfect sin offering for us..."He who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him." (2Cor.5:21) When a person comes to Christ through faith, the spirit of that individual which was dead in its tresp***es is immediately made alive by the Spirit of Christ, unto Christ. (Ephesians 1:13,14) "And you, being dead in your tresp***es and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all tresp***es having wiped out the requirements that was against us, and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross." (Col.2:13,14)

tb, do you believe that Christ's perfect sacrifice is perfectly sufficient to perfectly cleanse us from"all" of our sins, thus saving us...perfectly? From your previous statement, it seems that this belief is lacking. It seems that you believe that He saves us in stages, and does not save us completely.

This is your statement from a previous post:
"There is much debate where Jesus went for 3 days until His resurrection. So when He speaks of "today" does He really mean today as in a real calender day or was He just trying to convey the fact that the thief will be going to heaven."

How could you say this tb? Do you really think Jesus was only conveying this to a suffering and dying man desperately looking to Him for hope and redemption???
When Christ said to His diciples that He would be in the grave 3 days and 3 nights did He have to tell them and explain to them that this would be 3 literal calender days?

***"Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit, soul and body be preserved blameless until the comming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful, who also will do it."*** Please, do not missunderstand this with our sanctification. God's Spirit within us is teaching us to live a life holy to Him. Yes, while we are still in these bodies we continue to sin (and I am not minimizing this in the least), but we are covered, we are forgiven, and we are "...made the righteousness of God in Him." Again, when we come to Christ through faith, He makes us alive and seals us with His Holy Spirit...He saves us from the condemnation to come. "There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus." (Rom.8:1) So when we die, whatever sins we may have committed, whatever requirements against us, have been "paid for" by the blood of Christ, He "...having nailed it to the cross."..."He condemned sin in the flesh, ("HIS FLESH") and "He died to sin once for all...." (Rom.6:10).

So when we die, we die in Christ and to Christ...we are Christ's. Never to die apart from Him...in any way.
"But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him." (1Cor.17)


Blessings...Dmarie

Dmarie
07-15-2012, 07:10 PM
I hope what you have to say will help me see where along my original post points may error. I have an idea in my mind that you will avoid the points as you currently do in favor of finding things within the Latin Rite to draw comparisons. There are comparisons to be made, but it is in a semantical viewpoint; the language used by the Latin Rite is not the same or in the same perception as the Eastern Catholics/Orthodox Churches. Until the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox perspective is addressed accurately, I do not see any form of argumentation to be worth consideration. The main point that has persuaded me is in terms of the purification of the whole Christian person--the spirit, the flesh, and the soul. The spirit resides in the soul, and the soul has cognition, and the flesh is controled by this union of spirit and soul by the grace of God. At what times and in what manner does each of these parts of humankind's make-up purified? My answers were already given, the spirit upon regeneration (as outlined by John 3) in conversion, the flesh at death--but most importantly at the bodily resurrection, and the soul immediately when in the presence of God upon death. If the soul was purified in this life, then there is no possibility for sin by the Christian. If the soul is purified by the death of the flesh, then the soul is itself flesh due to cognition only being tied to the body. However, I don't believe you would ***ume that as a correct position. How you would reconcile the purification of the soul, which is not of a corruptable nature (meaning it does not cease to exist after death--even those destined to hell are cognitive of their sufferings and therefore alive in a real sense though metaphorically speaking this is their second death; because death is considered by human ****ogy to be the most intense suffering in this life. How you reconcile soul's purification is what I would like to know.


Greetings.

Avoid your points?
C., again and again, I have already addressed all of your points. Please, do not misunderstand me in regards to how I address your points. Yes, I come from a "Western" background and knowledge, and I am aware that some of the "semantics" that I use may reflect this, but to be clear, I am no longer joined to this, "perspective" or "viewpoint.", nor do I accept it. "For when one says, "I am of Paul," and another "I am of Apollos," are you not carnal?" Being that this is a Catholic forum, I may adjust my wordology, only for discussion and understanding, but never to compormise what I know to be the clear teaching of Scripture, and it is on the Scriptures that I base my responses on.

As for the "soul's" purification...1Thes.5:23,24

Do you think God is not able to sanctify totally and completely?
Why would He save one part, then another part, and another?
Is His sacrifice not able to save the whole?

Blessings...Dmarie

Columcille
07-15-2012, 10:03 PM
Imputing righteousness is something done on the spirit of the person, because if imputation happened on the soul, then we could not sin in this mortal life due to the purity of Christ transforming us. However, we know that while in this mortal life we still sin. Hence, imputing righteousness does not happen on the soul, but rather on the spirit of the person through conversion (regeneration).

Again Dmarie, you try to touch on it, but confuse the when and how the soul of a person is purifed. Seems you got the spirit of the person's point of righteousness imputed by God, but do not really address the soul.

Columcille
07-15-2012, 10:15 PM
Revelation 21:4

God changes things, changes us...helps us..fixes us.

We dont make ourselves better or more worthy of heaven...
God is at work in us....

He will wipe every tear from their eyes.
There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has p***ed away."

the limitations we suffer now because we are yet mortal are taken away.
We will know even as we are known,,,and we will be known for sure.

there is no doubt that God changes things and changes us. However, what we are talking about is how and when parts of a person is purified (the flesh, the spirit, and the soul). As an Eastern Catholic, I am well aware of my own sinfulness as Psalms 50(51) is a text that we commonly recite. To me, I have never read works of Christian mystics like Thomas Kempis' "Imitation of Christ" or St. John of the Cross' "Dark Night of the Soul" or "Ascent to Mt. Carmel" as having any hint of working our way to heaven on our own steam; much less in Eastern Orthodoxy with such writings as the "Way of the Pilgrim" by a Russian pauper, St. John Climacus' "Ladder of Divine Ascent," nor the writings of numerous saints collected in the "Philokalia."

tealblue
07-17-2012, 06:50 AM
Greetings.

"In reality...," whether this doctrine be RC or mormon or hindu or whatever, it would still be "...just as much something of debate."

Yes, I do agree with the clear teaching of Scripture when it says that only purity and perfection shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, which is why I also believe in the Bible's clear teaching of justification...when Christ imputes His righteousness to us when we become a child of God.
God gave us His Son to be that perfect sin offering for us..."He who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him." (2Cor.5:21) When a person comes to Christ through faith, the spirit of that individual which was dead in its tresp***es is immediately made alive by the Spirit of Christ, unto Christ. (Ephesians 1:13,14) "And you, being dead in your tresp***es and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all tresp***es having wiped out the requirements that was against us, and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross." (Col.2:13,14)

So basically you are saying that entering heaven in a pure is only in an imputed way?

tb, do you believe that Christ's perfect sacrifice is perfectly sufficient to perfectly cleanse us from"all" of our sins, thus saving us...perfectly? From your previous statement, it seems that this belief is lacking. It seems that you believe that He saves us in stages, and does not save us completely.

I believe he saves us thu infused righeousness not imputed. Basically salvation is the result of him making us righteous.

This is your statement from a previous post:
"There is much debate where Jesus went for 3 days until His resurrection. So when He speaks of "today" does He really mean today as in a real calender day or was He just trying to convey the fact that the thief will be going to heaven."

How could you say this tb? Do you really think Jesus was only conveying this to a suffering and dying man desperately looking to Him for hope and redemption???
When Christ said to His diciples that He would be in the grave 3 days and 3 nights did He have to tell them and explain to them that this would be 3 literal calender days?

He told the thief that he would be in paradise WITH him today. You want to use that as a proof text. He told his apostles that he would he would be in the grave for 3 days. You seem to be picking and choosing what is literal and which is not.

***"Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit, soul and body be preserved blameless until the comming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful, who also will do it."*** Please, do not missunderstand this with our sanctification. God's Spirit within us is teaching us to live a life holy to Him. Yes, while we are still in these bodies we continue to sin (and I am not minimizing this in the least), but we are covered, we are forgiven, and we are "...made the righteousness of God in Him." Again, when we come to Christ through faith, He makes us alive and seals us with His Holy Spirit...He saves us from the condemnation to come. "There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus." (Rom.8:1) So when we die, whatever sins we may have committed, whatever requirements against us, have been "paid for" by the blood of Christ, He "...having nailed it to the cross."..."He condemned sin in the flesh, ("HIS FLESH") and "He died to sin once for all...." (Rom.6:10).

For whatever reason having your sins paid for completely BUT still having any sort of spiritual purification leads you to think that some how dimishing Christs sacrafise is beyond me. You believe that we all don't recieve the same reward right? Well how come we all don't get the same reward? Going by your idea of salvation we are all judged righeous and should have the same reward. The bible is clear that our reward can be burned up.

So when we die, we die in Christ and to Christ...we are Christ's. Never to die apart from Him...in any way.
"But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him." (1Cor.17)


Blessings...Dmarie

In reallity I think that the main issue is the idea of imputed and infused righteousness. Because however you view this changes the whole nature of how we read scripture. I think the main objection for evangelicals is that with that idea of infused righeousness it seems unatainable in a complete perfect way. I think this comes from a calvanist way of thinking in my opinion. Jesus was asked how to attain eternal life by the young rich ruler. His response was obey the commandments. The ruler responded by asking which ones. Jesus says ALL OF THEM. Are you so posative that Jesus was only trying to convey the point to the ruler that obeying his commandments(With the help of God) was impossible.

alanmolstad
02-11-2014, 12:47 PM
to the question of 'When?' and 'Where?' is a person purified ? I have given it some thought....

I believe I have my answer, but as of right now I do not have all that many Bible verses to support or attack my views to know if Im right on the money or not?


I think the answer to the question "When and where?" is.....on the cross.

disciple
02-12-2014, 06:55 AM
to the question of 'When?' and 'Where?' is a person purified ? I have given it some thought....

I believe I have my answer, but as of right now I do not have all that many Bible verses to support or attack my views to know if Im right on the money or not?


I think the answer to the question "When and where?" is.....on the cross.


The idea of purgatory is not really found in the bible and the implication of purgatory is that the righteousness of Christ is not sufficient nor are we
justified by faith alone, we must do something to be cleansed of sin. Jesus did not say to the thief on the cross, today I will drop you off in purgatory.

alanmolstad
02-12-2014, 07:09 AM
Perhaps the truth is that the push to keep the teaching of purgatory around has nothing to do with the state of the dead but rather its about giving the living a feeling that it's up to "them' to get their loved ones out of purgatory.

In a way it gives the living something to do...

it provides them with a reason to go to church, as there are many hints dropped by church leadership and doctrine that prayers are effective when offered in the hope of helping people who are stuck in purgatory .


But from a strictly logical standpoint, purgatory is simply a bad idea that cant possibly be true or made to fit within christian doctrine.

disciple
02-12-2014, 07:27 AM
Perhaps the truth is that the push to keep the teaching of purgatory around has nothing to do with the state of the dead but rather its about giving the living a feeling that it's up to "them' to get their loved ones out of purgatory.

In a way it gives the living something to do...

it provides them with a reason to go to church, as there are many hints dropped by church leadership and doctrine that prayers are effective when offered in the hope of helping people who are stuck in purgatory .


But from a strictly logical standpoint, purgatory is simply a bad idea that cant possibly be true or made to fit within christian doctrine.

I agree. I believe the Catholic church realized long ago that creating doctrines and traditions that would keep the people dependent on the church would keep them coming. A very good secular tactic but a very shameful spiritual one.

alanmolstad
04-30-2017, 06:48 AM
Going over the posts on this topic...

The guy who supported the idea of purgatory was asked over and over to supply any text that backed his views?

he could not!



Over and over he ducks around the fact that he had not even one verse that taught there was a purgatory .
He was also unable to defend the concept ...


So on this score, the idea of purgatory "FAILED"