Does your religion....

[rayelias]

The term "Purgatory" - no. But my posts above have indicated where there is some Biblical basis (depending on your interpretation of certain passages) for the concept of Purgatory.

Additionally, while "Limbo" does not exist as a term in the Bible, the way it was previously taught to be a place of "not good, not bad, just simple existence after death" kind of thing is actually rather similar to the early Jewish concept of Sheol - which is mentioned in Scripture.

Isn't Sheol roughly translated to mean "grave"? Eg, when you die, you are in your grave until the resurrection? I guess that's sort of "limbo-esque". Or, am I misunderstanding it?

I also thought (again, could be wrong on this one, too) that the part of the Apostles' Creed where it says "He (Jesus) descended into Hell; on the third day he rose again" was intended to mean Jesus was in his grave for 3 days and then rose from the dead. However, my Catholic school taught that he went into Hell (the fiery devil-dwelling place). I don't know what the "official" Catholic teaching is.

Which brings another question... is "Hell" a Biblical concept? My post-Catholic learning has taught me that the mentions of "Hell" in the modern Bibles are translated from Sheol (grave) and Gehenna (a place where they burned trash). That there's no real mention of an eternal place like "Hell" and at the final judgment, the dead are risen from Sheol and judged - the bad are incinerated and no longer exist (unlike the Catholic teaching of an eternal Hell punishment). The modern idea of "Hell" pretty much comes from Dante's Inferno, not the Bible.

I find it very fascinating (and rather confusing at times) to see how Christian religion has been changed/modified/warped over the last 2000 years, even within each denomination. What's even more intriguing to me is how different modern Christianity is from the Judaism that Christ Himself followed. You would think that those that follow Christ would follow what He followed. I must say, it makes it rather difficult to find the right path.

 

[esdras]

Isn't Sheol roughly translated to mean "grave"? Eg, when you die, you are in your grave until the resurrection? I guess that's sort of "limbo-esque". Or, am I misunderstanding it?

Yes, grave is a good "rough" translation, but there is more. EARLY Judaism didn't accept the concept of divine reward or punishment after death - that only came about in later Judaism and when Christianity emerged from Judaism. So, Sheol was the permanent afterlife, with no reward or punishment - not good, not bad. That's its similarity to Limbo. Only later Judaism, with the beginnings of belief in a possible resurrection, thought that Sheol would be the "temporary" grave. It's difficult to make a definitive statement about concepts that often change over the course of centuries, yet retain the same term/word.

I also thought (again, could be wrong on this one, too) that the part of the Apostles' Creed where it says "He (Jesus) descended into Hell; on the third day he rose again" was intended to mean Jesus was in his grave for 3 days and then rose from the dead. However, my Catholic school taught that he went into Hell (the fiery devil-dwelling place). I don't know what the "official" Catholic teaching is.

There is no way to determine this with certainty. The phrase in the Creed is taken from 1 Peter 3:19 where it tells of Jesus preaching to the souls in Prison. The debate is what "Prison" means - and arguments have supported both a "Sheol" or "Hell" view. I had to write a 25 page paper on this topic, and the only thing I could come up with is that each view of Christ's death (Sheol, harrowing of Hell, forsakenness in Hell) is plausible, and none can be proven definitively. Sorry, I can't give you a better answer than that - and some would disagree with my decision, arguing that one of the options is correct.

Which brings another question... is "Hell" a Biblical concept? My post-Catholic learning has taught me that the mentions of "Hell" in the modern Bibles are translated from Sheol (grave) and Gehenna (a place where they burned trash). That there's no real mention of an eternal place like "Hell" and at the final judgment, the dead are risen from Sheol and judged - the bad are incinerated and no longer exist (unlike the Catholic teaching of an eternal Hell punishment). The modern idea of "Hell" pretty much comes from Dante's Inferno, not the Bible.

The "Lake of Fire" is one of the origins, and Gehenna was used as a comparison to indicate an afterlife place which would not be so nice. An "incineration" of the bad means the destruction of their soul - which opens up the touchy subject of whether souls are "immortal" or "eternal" - and even if they are could/would God utterly destroy a soul - or would God permit a soul to experience eternal torment in "Hell" - or... etc.

Once again, we are treading on ground where we really can't know the answer with certainty. Some current theories (going along even with Christ's descent to "Hell" or to the "Dead") is that "Hell" is eternal separation from God - which would be a personal Hell requiring no further external torment. It also fits with Christ's descent as one of separation from God - "My God, my God... why have You forsaken Me?". Christian writings regarding Christ as fully God and fully man stated that He had to be fully human in all things but sin, because "that which He has not assumed, He has not saved". Some argue that Christ had to experience being forsaken by God to save us from that potential fate. And only an individual who is able to experience that, yet still retain the spark of divinity within (as Christ is still fully God), could be freed from eternal forsakenness.

This is NOT an easy topic.

I find it very fascinating (and rather confusing at times) to see how Christian religion has been changed/modified/warped over the last 2000 years, even within each denomination. What's even more intriguing to me is how different modern Christianity is from the Judaism that Christ Himself followed. You would think that those that follow Christ would follow what He followed. I must say, it makes it rather difficult to find the right path.

There is always some change in religions over centuries. As I mentioned earlier, Jewish concepts of the afterlife changed even before Christianity came about. For example, the books of Maccabbees (pre-Christian Jewish writings) speak of Jews praying for God's mercy upon the dead - a practice that really did not take place in early Judaism when only a Sheol type afterlife was considered

Additionally, there are "Jews for Jesus" or "Messianic" Judaism - where Jews have converted, so to speak, to Christianity. However, they believe that they, much like the Jews who initially followed Christ, are still obligated abide by Jewish laws and customs.

Remember, in the Scriptures we have detailed in Acts the dispute between Peter and Paul in Jerusalem about Jewish and Gentile Christians - this really was the beginning of the debate about whether new non-Jewish Christians needed to become Jews to become Christians. Effectively, the answer was no.

In some ways, we can see three Christianities in modern times. We have Messianic Judaism, which would seem to be very similar to the first Jews who became Christians. We also have a very "Pauline" Christianity - as Paul predominantly preached to the Gentiles and argued that they only needed the new Covenant offered by Christ - no need to be Jewish whatsoever. The third could be called "Petrine" Christianity. Peter initially thought that you should be Jewish and Christian, but in the debate at Jerusalem, and his vision about what a person could and could not eat under Jewish law - and what this meant for non-Jewish converts... Peter came to see that you could be Jewish and follow Jewish law and be a Christian, or you could be Gentile, follow no Jewish law and be a Christian. Or, theoretically, you could follow some Jewish laws or customs, and provided you followed Christ and His teachings - be a Christian. In that sense, Catholicism - in the line of Peter, is Christian, and still retains some Jewish ritualistic elements - but still isn't fully Jewish in law and custom.

Sorry if that seemed convoluted - and I could go into far more detail - but I'd be typing all day.

Anyway, I hope this helped in terms of some of the issues you raised - which were very good points - but without some advanced study in theology, generally not known by everyday Christians

 

[Disney Doll]

Catholic here.

Limbo was discussed more when I was a kid...mid-60's and early-70's...not so much now.

Purgatory is still around but it's not like we hear about it on a weekly basis at church.

 

[rayelias]

Sorry if that seemed convoluted - and I could go into far more detail - but I'd be typing all day.

Anyway, I hope this helped in terms of some of the issues you raised - which were very good points - but without some advanced study in theology, generally not known by everyday Christians

Thank you VERY much for your detailed explanations. You're obviously very educated - are you a theologian?

From my simple, uneducated, sinner's standpoint, it's a little scary that one can be a lifelong scholar of Christian theology and not come any closer to the "truth". At times it seems the more you know, the more you don't know.

All I can do is hope to be the best Christian I can, and when it's time for MY judgement, hope that God's in a good mood that day and takes into consideration my *desire* to be a good Christian, even if I'm off base.

 

[Barbossa]

I'm Catholic but never hear anyone mention purgatory or limbo during mass. I forgot what the Catholic Church's position on this is, actually.

 

[Barbossa]

All I can do is hope to be the best Christian I can, and when it's time for MY judgement, hope that God's in a good mood that day and takes into consideration my *desire* to be a good Christian, even if I'm off base.

Personally, I think God takes this into consideration even when he's in a bad mood.

 

[jimmiej]

I find it very fascinating (and rather confusing at times) to see how Christian religion has been changed/modified/warped over the last 2000 years, even within each denomination. What's even more intriguing to me is how different modern Christianity is from the Judaism that Christ Himself followed. You would think that those that follow Christ would follow what He followed. I must say, it makes it rather difficult to find the right path.

That's just it. Christ did not come to continue the same old ways. He came as a fullfillment of the Law (old way). He brought a new covenant. We are now under grace, not law. God gave us the law to point out our sin.

Romans 10:4
Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

Matthew 26:28
This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

Luke 22:20
In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.

Hebrew 9 goes into great detail in this matter.

From my simple, uneducated, sinner's standpoint, it's a little scary that one can be a lifelong scholar of Christian theology and not come any closer to the "truth". At times it seems the more you know, the more you don't know.

All I can do is hope to be the best Christian I can, and when it's time for MY judgement, hope that God's in a good mood that day and takes into consideration my *desire* to be a good Christian, even if I'm off base.

While we may not understand all the details, one thing is abundantly clear in the Bible. Faith in Jesus is the only way to salvation/God. Being a "good" person is not enough. We are sanctified (made righteous in the eyes of God) by the blood of Christ.

Romans 3:20-22
20Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.

Romans 10:8-10

8But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart," that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: 9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.

 

[Barbossa]

I highly doubt that Bible quotations provide the answers that rayelias was looking for. Indeed, it's the different (and sometimes selective) interpretations of the Bible (of which there are many versions) that is the cause of many such conflicts in the first place.

 

[esdras]

Thank you VERY much for your detailed explanations. You're obviously very educated - are you a theologian?

You're welcome - but I'm not quite a theologian. Technically, you need to hold a PhD in Theology/Religious Studies to be one. I do, however, have an undergraduate degree in Catholic Studies at the "Specialization" level (3 more full year courses above the requirements for a Major) and once I (hopefully) complete my thesis, I will have a Master of Arts in Theology. I don't plan on going for the PhD, as I have come to the realization that research (required for any academic career at the doctoral level) is not my passion. I'm planning on getting a B.Ed. and teaching Religious Studies at the high school level - I like teaching, not research, so this should be a better fit for me.

From my simple, uneducated, sinner's standpoint, it's a little scary that one can be a lifelong scholar of Christian theology and not come any closer to the "truth". At times it seems the more you know, the more you don't know.

BINGO! There are some things that are just completely beyond human comprehension - due to limitations of language an experience. As I alluded to in previous posts - trying to fully grasp atemporal existence is extremely difficult - if not impossible - since we are beings constrained by linear time and therefore unable to consider atemporality with any tangible frame of reference or experience.

While our experiences are based upon "one thing leading to another" - for God, (arguably an atemporal being), everything just IS. Even Scripture (written by humans with divine inspiration) speaks of God "changing His mind" or responding to our requests and prayers. Even this really isn't quite right if God is thought to be atemporal. How can a being who isn't within, or acting within the contraints of linear time be subject to "cause and effect"?

Some therefore argue that God is not atemporal - although I personally disagree with that view. Essentially, I accept what some believe when they consider "Time" to be the 4th dimension. If that is the case, then "Time" is a tangible element of the universe. If a person of religious faith believes that God (in whatever manner) is ultimately the creator of the whole universe (pure creationism vs. God creating the "Big Bang" doesn't matter in this regard), then God is also the creator of "Time" itself. Some interpret the Genesis phrase of God separating the light from the dark, the "first day" as the creation of time - and note that this is one of the very first of God's creations. So, if God created time itself, it is therefore the contention that it makes no sense to view an apparently omnipotent creative entity becoming subject to - or constrained by - their own creation. The only acceptable alternative would be that God has chosen to become subject to linear temporal existence - but this view cannot be determined with any certainty.

All I can do is hope to be the best Christian I can, and when it's time for MY judgement, hope that God's in a good mood that day and takes into consideration my *desire* to be a good Christian, even if I'm off base.

Here's my own personal opinion, which is similar to C.S. Lewis. There is no one in hell who didn't want to be there - or, the gates of hell are locked from the inside.

I think there will be some form of interaction between ourselves and God, and we will be confronted with our failures and shortcomings. This is where the Biblical comments of a "hardened heart" come into play.

In our mortal existence, we are frequently confronted by our failures and shortcomings - and frequently, our response is to make excuses - or blame someone else - or justify it in some way as being okay for us, even though we would condemn the same action in another. This is ego - pure and simple. Instead of taking responsibility, and simply saying, "I was wrong, and I'm sorry" - we try to make ourselves blameless. Sometimes there ARE good reasons, and sometimes we do fully admit our mistakes - but not always.

There are, sadly, some people who are exceedingly bad at accepting personal responsibility for ANYTHING. Nothing is ever their fault, and they definitely DON'T need anyone's help or forgiveness, since there is nothing (in their mind) that needs forgiveness. That, in my opinion, is a hardened heart.

So, when a person comes face to face with God, their choice is the same as I have outlined above. Do you look at God, fully realizing all the mistakes in your life, and simply say, "I was wrong, and I'm sorry" - or do you try to justify yourself before God? Some think that the second response would not be possible by anyone confronted by God's divinity - but I have to wonder if some people are - by their own free will - capable of that much arrogance. It might be possible. It would be at that moment that a person denies responsibility for their actions and rejects God's unconditional forgiveness. In that sense, by their OWN actions, they have chosen to be alienated from God - what some argue to be damnation, or hell.

If, on the other hand, we believe that God is willing to forgive us unconditionally, the response of "I was wrong, and I'm sorry" is all that is required of us. This is why I mentioned the theologians who argue that this "judgment" (what Catholics term Purgatory) will be both intensely painful and incredibly joyful simultanously. I cannot fathom the despair I will likely feel by taking full responsibility for ALL of my failures - and I can only dream about how beautiful it will be to have someone (God) look at me in that moment of utter despondency and say, "It's okay, I forgive you".

Sadly, it is likely due to the fact that none of us are capable of being unconditionally forgiving to each other (maybe sometimes, but not consistently), that we are unable to fathom how anyone could be that way - even God.

Anyway, I've rambled again. Essentially, I agree that all the little details are difficult, and many cannot be determined with any certainty. Even what I described above may not be accurate - but I think it fits within the general Christian belief of repent and be forgiven of your sins - and, while hard, try to do the same with each other while on earth. For the most part, that's Christ's teachings at the most basic level.

 

[jimmiej]

I highly doubt that Bible quotations provide the answers that rayelias was looking for. Indeed, it's the different (and sometimes selective) interpretations of the Bible (of which there are many versions) that is the cause of many such conflicts in the first place.

That's why I provided several different verses to answer each question. I encourage you (or anyone else) to show me where I am incorrect.

 

[Kath2003]

That's why I provided several different verses to answer each questions. I encourage you (or anyone else) to show me where I am incorrect.

Right there

 

[jimmiej]

esdras,

I posed this question a while back. Since you are fairly new (I don't remember you participating in that thread), I like to get your take on my original question.

If you were standing before God, & He were to ask you, "Why should I let you into my heaven?", what would you say?

 

[esdras]

My answer...

Lord, You shouldn't let me in. Even though I am sorry, I'm not worthy of Your forgiveness.

I can only hope, that by the sacrifice of Your Son, Jesus Christ, for my sins and the sins of others, You might find it in Your heart to forgive this sinner anyway.

 

[jimmiej]

My answer...

Lord, You shouldn't let me in. Even though I am sorry, I'm not worthy of Your forgiveness.

I can only hope, that by the sacrifice of Your Son, Jesus Christ, for my sins , and the sins of othersYou might find it in Your heart to forgive this sinner anyway.

Thank you! I agree completely!

*bolded mine

 

[esdras]

jimmiej:

Sorry, double post, and you might respond as I'm typing this - but hopefully you will see this too.

I think my response is based upon the parable of the Prodigal Son.

Although some Christians speak about an assurance of salvation - once you have accepted Christ as your Lord and Saviour, you know that heaven will be your destination. I won't debate that at the moment, as there is some disagreement on the doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved - and I'm not quite sure, despite studying it for a number of years, where my opinion falls on that subject. I don't think that the doctrine has been proven or disproven conclusively.

Regardless of any assurance of salvation - even if I did believe that I was saved beyond ANY doubt whatsoever - I need to be mindful about how I meet God. Do I walk up to God and the gates of heaven with my head held high and say, "Hi, I'm home!" - or, more like the Prodigal Son, do I come home, virtually upon my knees, hoping that my Father will take me in anyway.

Sure, the Parable indicates that the father is overjoyed at the return of the Son - but I think we need to be mindful of the son's demeanour - and approach our home in a repentant manner, with the understanding (like the Prodigal Son had) that there was no reason why the Father HAD to let him come home.

I hope that makes some sense.

 

[Ciao Mickey]

Does your religion speak about purgatory or limbo or anything like that?
I was raised Methodist and had never given it much thought til I converted to Catholicism and hear about it weekly now at mass.
Thoughts?-

Limbo and Purgatory have been banned for quite some time now.

What is a Methodist and how does it differ from a Catholic?

 

[beattyfamily]

Limbo and Purgatory have been banned for quite some time now.

What is a Methodist and how does it differ from a Catholic?

Purgatory has certainly NOT been banned in the Catholic church and it is still a very big part of the church, is still taught and is a part of our daily mass. It is why we have All Souls Day as well.

Catholics are always praying for those souls in Purgatory.

Limbo, however, is no longer a Catholic teaching.

 

[Ciao Mickey]

Purgatory has certainly NOT been banned in the Catholic church and it is still a very big part of the church, is still taught and is a part of our daily mass. It is why we have All Souls Day as well.

Catholics are always praying for those souls in Purgatory.

Limbo, however, is no longer a Catholic teaching.

It's been years since I attended Catechism.

I forget--who's stuck in Purgatory?

 

[Barbossa]

Purgatory has certainly NOT been banned in the Catholic church and it is still a very big part of the church, is still taught and is a part of our daily mass. It is why we have All Souls Day as well.

Where do they reference purgatory during mass?

 

[beattyfamily]

Where do they reference purgatory during mass?

They do not always reference the word but the concept. They have a prayer for all who have died that they may enter into Heaven. Prayers for the faithful departed. They don't need our prayers if they are already in Heaven.