Re: Purgatory?

x-no-archive:yes
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 15:14:12 -0500, Joseph Geloso
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
x-no-archive:yes
>On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 05:12:11 -0800, John W
><john_weatherly47<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>x-no-archive:yes
>>On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:35:34 -0500, Joseph Geloso
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>BTW, why are you in here? 
>
>This is a cross-posted thread, and I am posting only from the Catholic
>newsgroup. I am here because this is a discussion about Purgatory, one
>of the Doctrines of the Catholic Church. You said you can disprove the
>Doctrine with two passages from Scripture. I am waiting to see that.
>
>>We have a dozen more Catholic "missionary"
>>wannabees in here already.
>
>There is only one me!
>
>>And if you haven't learned by now, Baptists do NOT make good
>>Catholics.
>
>More accurately, Batists *are* not good Catholics. One of them who
>converted would make just as good a Catholic as anybody, and then that
>one would make an excellent missionary to the Baptists, having known
>what it is like to be a Baptist from the inside.

You have dishonestly sidestepped my point, then reshuffled my words to
say something not true and counter to the point i was making. 

My point WAS that Baptists know the Bible to well to be fooled by your
cult.

>
>>We read our bibles, and I've heard since my childhood, "Bible readers
>>don't make good Catholics (we know too much), and Catholics aren't
>>Bible readers."
>
>Well it is obvious that you have been inculcated with anti-Catholic
>prejudice since your youth.

Not at all  I have studied what the Roman Catholics believe in light
of scripture, and since we believe in the Bible's final authority, a
teaching right from the Bible, when you deviate, which you do almost
every pate, we reject your apostasies and heresies.

The Bibles was literally believed by its authors. So why would we need
to redefine everything in Roman terms when the original meaning is
intact and makes perfect sense.  My pastors have been the scholars of
Christianity.

All translators, all with multiple Ph Ds, Th Ds, etc.

 So at least I know what I'm dealing with
>here. 

You may know Catholicism; you do not know 1st Century, classical New
Testament Christianity. I know both well enough to separate the wheat
(Bible) from the chaff, the Roman heresies and apostasies.

You are under (at least) two distinct misimpressions, and if you
>allow me, I can help you to clear them up. 

By all means.  I LOVE to learn from a more knowledgable person.

>"Bible readers don't make good Catholics (we know too much)" is a
>crock.

YOUR problem is a false sense of superiority

 Bible readers make the very best Catholics.

If you read it, why don't you obey it?

 Bible reading alone
>won't necessarily make you a Catholic, because the Bible, contrary to
>what some like to think, is not a self-interpreting Book.

On the contrary. I have, as a missionary and Bible student in
seminary, left a Bible with some 50 people who expressed interest. I
have gone back to the 50 and 45 of them had found the gospel and
prayed to receive Christ, with no help from anyone but the Holy
Spirit. I bet YOU a Roman Catholic have never heard of THAT
phenomenon.  In seminary, it was a test, a "field experiment."

Once I learned this technique, I was bring 2 - 3 or more people
forward at church to give their lives to Christ 3 Sundays a month.

Can YOU claim that?

. The Bible,
>in fact, can be used to support many different and contradictroy
>notions of the truth. 

True. However, 95 % of all non-Roman Catholics can sit down together,
regardless of affiliation, and we'll agree on 95 % of our doctrines
and Theology.  The oddball? The one that doesn't fit?   The Roman!

The Bible, contrary to your mis-training, is QUITE capable of speaking
for itself, because it comes with the Holy Spirit attached. And He is
the best teacher of all; even better than your priest!

God designed it that way, in order to "confuse
>the proud in their inmost thoughts."  

Meaning YOU, who thinks you have a lock, not only on Truth, but on the
Bible, which you reject 9/10s of.


And the Bible itself, finally,
>contains a warning about just that. You've read it, in the Second
>Epistle of Peter. right? It's right there at the end of the Epistle.

True. But if one takes the words LITERALLY right off the page, there
is no "private interpretation." AGAIN, if one reads mindfully, and
merely asks the Holy Spirit to teach us, who can improve upon the Holy
Spirit's teaching?

(you're in WAY over your head!  I've had my stomach filled with
counter-RCC evangelism/training)  50 years worth. At any rate, I don't
need to know the RCC inside and out. All I need is to know my Bible
inside and out.  I do.

>
>"Catholics aren't Bible readers" is equally a crock. I am a Catholic
>and a Bible reader, so that disproves that right there. 

Ok. You win one point.  So why aren't you living the Bible? If you
were, you could not be Roman Catholic.

Pray tell me, here is "purgatory" mentioned in the Bible?
Where is Mary worship?
Where is "beatification?
Where are "indulgences?
Where is idol worship said to be acceptable?
Where are "graven images" in church acceptable?
Where is Mary, the Mother of God?
Where is the Eternal Virgin Mary  mentioned?
Where is the Virgin Mary's Mother mentioned?  (Immaculate Conception)
Where is confession to a priest?
Where is "excommunication" mentioned?
Where is the pope mentioned?
Where does God tell the church to murder all those who refuse to
become Christians ?   (the Inquisitions, the Crusades)
Where does the Bible order the Roman Church to become the richest
organization on the planet?  "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures
on earth"
Jesus said, "If you will follow me, go, sell all that you have, give
to the poor, and come after me." Why do you hoard BILIONS of dollars
in the Roman coffers, contrary to Christ's commands?
I find no mention of canonizing saints. Please give me the Bible
reference for that.
The Bible in fact says that all born again Christians are "saints", so
when are you going to start worshipping me? I'm a saint.
The Bible says NOTHING about "apostolic succession". The one time the
apostles tried to "replace an apostle", they elected Matthias. God
said, "no", and He chose Paul instead. the apostles got the message
loud and clear, and no more apostles were appointed.
The Roman cult claims to be 1st. Yet there are no 1st C Roman cult
churches. What we DO have are the churches Paul built. And I know
they're there because I've been to one. 1st C AD church with a 1st C
AD cornerstone.

Shall I continue?


In fact, the
>study of the Holy Scriptures is encouraged by the Church.

LOL!!!  But ONLY with a priest supervising, as Cathy has already told
us.

  Pope Leo
>XIII wrote an encyclical about it, entitled "Providentissimus Deus."
>You can read it here:
>http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus_en.html
>You may find it enlightening. At the very least, it may clear up some
>misconceptions you have had about Catholic Biblical Scholarship.

WHAT Catholic Biblical Scholarship?  Your scholarship is so poor you
put the Gnostic A in the Bible!

>
>There is even a plenary indulgence attached to reading the Sacred
>Scriptures for one-half hour. Since we're on the subject of Purgatory,
>the subject of indulgences comes right into play. 

There is no purgatory.

The ordinary
>conditions for receiving a plenary indulgence are, the state of
>Sanctifying Grace, the work prescribed, prayer for the intentiions of
>the Holy Father,

What Holy Father? You mean God, right?

John Paul farts and pisses and sneezes and burps just like I do.
There's nothing holy about the guy!

And he qualifies as an anti-Christ. He's in fact, a leading candidate.

 the Sacrament of Confession, 

There are no sacraments. The word does not appear in scripture.  The
only thing that transmits grace is the blood of Christ . "Sacraments"
merely mean that Christ's blood is ineffectual (heresy) and you need
something else to get you to purgatory. Heresy!

And why did you choose to steal Joseph's wife, and thus his marital
rights? The nativity story is CLEAR that after His birth, Mary and
Joseph began normal marital relations (sexual intercourse).

Your demand that she remain virgin is only your invention to turn her
into a goddess.

and the worthy reception
>of Holy Communion. The effect of the plenary indulgence is the entire
>remission of all temporal punishment due for sin.

Heresy.  The blood is sufficient.

 That means, yes,
>that a plenary indulgence gets you out of Purgatory entirely.

There is no purgatory.; Paul, the thief, and Lazarus proved that.

Purgatory was invented to separate you from your cash. Period.

 And one
>of the works so indulgenced is the devout reading, for at least
>one-half hour, of the Sacred Scriptures.

So, when are you going to teach me something and clear up my
misunderstandings?

I'm waiting........

Good luck.

And now that I've waded through your doctrines from the pits of hell,
you must answer each of my list of questions.

BTW, why can I not find ANY of your teachings in the Bible? I thought
you said you were a Christian!   ????????



John W