It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In 1546 C.E., at the Council of Trent, that the Roman Catholic Church definitely confirmed its acceptance of these additions into its catalog of Bible books, and this action was deemed necessary because, even within the church, opinion was still divided over these writings. John Wycliffe, the Roman Catholic priest and scholar who, with the subsequent help of Nicholas of Hereford, in the 14th century made the first translation of the Bible into English, did include the Apocrypha in his work, but in the preface to this translation declared such writings to be “without authority of belief.” Dominican Cardinal Cajetan, foremost Catholic theologian of his time (1469-1534 C.E.) and called by Clement VII the “lamp of the Church,” also differentiated between the books of the true Hebrew canon and the Apocryphal works, appealing to the writings of Jerome as an authority.
It is to be noted as well that the Council of Trent did not accept all the writings previously approved by the earlier Council of Carthage but dropped three of these: the Prayer of Manasses and 1 and 2 Esdras (not the 1 and 2 Esdras that, in the Catholic Douay Bible, correspond with Ezra and Nehemiah). Thus, these three writings that had appeared for over 1,100 years in the approved Latin Vulgate were now excluded.
Well yes I do reject Maccabees as do most Christians today.
originally posted by: adjensen
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
Get it clear. Purgatory is a state, it is not a place. I've never said anything else.
And Jesus and the Apostles used the Septuagint, which included Maccabees.
Jesus and the Apostles: studied, memorized, used, quoted, and read most often from the Bible of their day, the Septuagint. Since Matthew wrote primarily to convince the Jews that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed their promised Messiah, it follows as a matter of course that his Gospel is saturated with the Hebrew Scriptures. Yet, when Jesus quotes the Old Testament in Matthew, He uses the Hebrew text only 10% of the time, but the Greek LXX translation—90% of the time! (Source)
The Protestant Bibles, post Luther, removed the books of the Septuagint, because they are contrary to Protestant beliefs, but it is 100% obvious that Jesus and the Apostles used the Septuagint, not the Protestant version of the Old Testament.
originally posted by: adjensen
a reply to: Blue_Jay33
I've already shown it, in 2 Maccabees.
Are you a Jehovah's Witness, that rejects 2 Maccabees?
(in Roman Catholic doctrine) a place or state of suffering inhabited by the souls of sinners who are expiating their sins before going to heaven.
originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
This is the current definition of purgatory
(in Roman Catholic doctrine) a place or state of suffering inhabited by the souls of sinners who are expiating their sins before going to heaven.
originally posted by: Murgatroid
Purgatory and 'non-existence' are both equally heretical.
I believe it was condemned as heresy in 553 A.D.
In summary, annihilationism is not biblical. For this reason, it was condemned by the Second Council of Constantinople (AD 553) and the Fifth Lateran Council (1513). theresurgence.com...
originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
Purgatory
Seems a bit convoluted to me ???
2. It is not a second chance: The soul is already saved. Purgatory is a place to pay off debts for sins that were forgiven but for which sufficient penance had not been done on earth.
3. It is not an actual place: Blessed John Paul II said in an Aug.4, 1999 general audience that purgatory was a state of being: “The term does not indicate a place, but a condition of existence.” Pope Benedict XVI said in a Jan. 12, 2011 general audience, “This is purgatory, an interior fire.
To be fair, only #3 comes from the Pope. #2 is a long held belief of Catholics that was never officially endorsed. They don't seem to be able to let it go though, even after their Pope says to.
originally posted by: Not Authorized
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
It means Papal authority is broken. God is not the author of confusion. Since this conflicts, we can state that the real God, left that house long ago. What you see is a lot of people rolling around the floor until the lights go out.
Infallible leaves no room for error. That is after all, what you are force fed in that belief system.
As the saying goes, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
originally posted by: Not Authorized
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
The definition of infallible means by extension absolute truth. You have pointed out an error. How can there be truth, in a house of lies? Hard to say you are infallible, if you can't get your story straight.
One needs only to look at history for that.
The Emperor wears no clothes. Pull one string and watch it unravel. You found one of many loose ends to choose from.
originally posted by: DarknStormy
Why would Christians believe in something that is not taught in the Bible? This seems like a moot argument what ever way you choose to look at it.
originally posted by: igor_ats
originally posted by: DarknStormy
Why would Christians believe in something that is not taught in the Bible? This seems like a moot argument what ever way you choose to look at it.
I think they believe in purgatory because it fills highly questionable gaps in the logic of their belief system - ensoulment and "what happens to good ppl who aren't Christians/baptized", and other such questions etc.
Without purgatory ppl like Ghandi go straight to hell etc.
This concept is like a place for people not bad enough for hell, but not yet good enough for heaven, this is convenient for many reasons. The Bible, however, does not speak of anything like purgatory at all. Much like other things like abortion too however.