WHY Universal Reconciliation is wrong ?

then you didn't understand the Catholic faith when you were Catholic. Purgatiory is about sanctification. Not about salvation. I will venture forth in that 80% of Catholics don't really know their faith.

 

Maybe Catholics don't, but that is no reason for the RCC to propagate a doctrine which negates the sufficiency of the blood of Christ and makes his atonement all in vain. Why should he even die for our sins, if we have to pay the penalty ourselves in purgatory? The doctrine is blasphemous and is akin to spitting in the face of God.

 

I don't believe in your Calvinism. I don't believe the Bible teaches it.
What you teach:
Negates the Great Commission.
Negates the need for evangelism.
Puts the local church in the position where all the members have to do is sit back and let God save the elect and condemn the wicked. Man doesn't have to do a thing.

You believe all unsaved are the enemies of God. All enemies of God are the objects of the hatred of God. All those who are the object of the hatred of God are forever condemned by God. Why even evangelize?
God is just a big bad hate-filled boogey-man that has no love for the unsaved. You have a terrible message for the unsaved. I don't know how you could ever witness to a lost person with your view of God. How do you do it?

What do you say?
God is your enemy. God hates you. You can't be saved. End of story.

 

Sanctification is in a different class than attoning for sin. Two different topics. Purgatory is about sanctification not atonment for sin.

 

Your authority for doctrine has become the RCC.
My authority for doctrine is always the Bible.
From the Bible's perspective purgatory is blasphemous. Christ died and paid the penalty for our sins in full. The RCC does not believe this (from a Biblical perspective). If they did, they would not have to be "purged" further or be cleansed from their sins. Where did Christ go wrong? Was not his blood sufficient enough to cleanse us from ALL of our sins?
No further sanctification is needed. He washed away ALL of our sins: past, present and future. He said on the cross: "it is finished." Why not believe him?

 

You are absolutely, and entirely wrong. My authority for what the RCC believes is the RCC church. My authority for what the Bible teaches is the Holy Spirit.

Now that you have this new and wonderful understanding we can speak sensibly. According to the Roman Catholic Church you are correct when you say

And it disagrees with you when you say this

and when you say this

Even as protestants we hold that Christ calls us to sanctification. Paul says "I have not yet attained" but then he also says " I forget what is behind and strive towards the goal". So scriptures are indeed in discourse about sanctification. Whether or not Purgatory is required is another matter. However, before you can speak about Purgatory you have to 1) get the belief right so you can intelligently speak about it and 2) get you terms clarified so you can speak intelligently about it.

 

I understood very clearly what the Catholic priests and nuns taught their victims.


Purgatory is about sanctification SO THAT the person needing it can make it to heaven and be saved, rather then go to hell.

It is all about SALVATION.

And it is also a complete lie.

 

I'm sorry if that's how it was presented to you but it is wrong. Purgatory is only for people going to heaven. It's not a second chance. But it is a sanctification process. I've come to learn even priest and "religious" get it wrong. As in the case of your teachers.

and

 

That is what I said. If your authority is the RCC your theology is wrong. The RCC's theology is not Biblical; in many places it is not only unbiblical it is anti-Biblical and anti-Christ, as it is here.

Cute saying. Nothing against God's word is of the Holy Spirit.
The RCC falls into this category when they claimed they were speaking of the Holy Spirit. This is what Paul said:

1 Corinthians 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
--When you imply that the sufficiency of Christ is not enough you call Jesus accursed, and that is not of the Holy Spirit.

You misunderstand sanctification.
When I trusted Christ as Savior he sanctified me. He gave me positional sanctification. I was sanctified once and for all. I was set apart, made holy, called a saint of God, made a believer in Christ, given an inheritance, sealed by the Holy Spirit, made a child of God, born again into his family, justified by faith, and given many more promises than those. I was sanctified. My sins were forgiven: past, present and future. I was cleansed from all my sins: once and for all. They will never be held against me again. I will never lose my salvation. It is evident that you don't understand sanctification. I am already sanctified positionally.

However God calls every believer to a life of holiness. Though I was made holy, set apart from sin and called to be a saint, I still must live a life in this world that is holy. That is a growing process. There still must be growth in the believers life. That day to day process (which never affects one's salvation) is called sanctification also. It is a process; not his position in Christ. I am sanctified positionally in Christ. But there is a process of sanctification as well. The word is used in two separate ways.

Notice the word "goal". He is speaking of reward, not sanctification or salvation, something that can never be lost. There was awaiting for him reward in heaven because of his service in life.

No they don't speak of this blasphemous doctrine at all. You haven't given one scripture in support of it yet.

I know what Purgatory is. I used to stand in fear of it every day. How many hundreds of years would I spend in its flames before I would gain entrance into heaven. Would anyone pray for me? What about indulgences? How could my time there be shortened. Perhaps if I prayed the rosary more often, and so I did. That was as a child.

Purgatory comes from the word "purged." Christ has already purged us from all our sins. It is blasphemous to think that the RCC can come up with a doctrine that can do more than Christ said he already did. Are they greater than Christ?

 

I think you're entirely missing my point. I will state it again more clearly so that you understand what it is I am saying.

My authority for what Roman Catholic Church believes is based on the RCC
My authority for what Mormons believe is the Mormon church
My authority for what Islam beliefs is the Muslims themsleves
My authority for what Atheist belief are Atheist
My authority for what Agnostics believe are Agnostics
My authority for the bible is the Holy Spirit.

As far as sanctification I know scriptures calls us to a sanctified life.

 

This was your answer to my statement:
"Christ died and paid the penalty for our sins in full."
Now look at Scripture:

Hebrews 10:4-12 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

The blood of bulls and goat could never take away sins.
But, by one sacrifice, Christ took away our sins forever.
Nothing could be any clearer than the teaching given in this passage.
But the RCC makes a mockery of this teaching and substitutes a blasphemous doctrine instead, teaching that one must pay for their own sins.

 

Again your argument is a non sequitur. You're preaching your point of view. I'm showing that you assertion of what someone else believes is wrong. Not that your belief is wrong but what you believe someone else believes is. So, in a sense you seem to just be preaching rather than participating in debate.

 

My authority is the Bible. They say they don't believe in idolatry; the Bible says they do.

My authority is the Bible.

They say that Christians believe in three Gods. The Bible doesn't teach any such thing.

My authority is the Bible.
"The fool hath said in his heart: There is no God."

My authority is the Bible.

No it isn't, not if you are teaching that which is not true.

That is only applicable to believers and has nothing to do with salvation.
At salvation God gave us positional sanctification. It is once and for all.
There is also progressive sanctification which you referred to. But I also have positional sanctification and thus my sins are forgiven, once and for all.

 

My authority is the Bible not the RCC.
The teaching of the RCC is blasphemous. Every doctrine must be looked at through the eyes of the Bible. Otherwise it is useless.

 

You're being sanctimonious. I guess you autority for Physics is the bible? Because E=mc(squared) is mentioned in the bible. Or that the speed of light being 299 792 458 meters per second is mentioned in the bible? Your argument is ludicrious. I said my authority for what the Catholics Say they believe is the catholics themselves. You have to turn it and say I believe in the bible. Ok very nice. But if your only authority is the bible your sorely lacking in mathmatics, science, etc.... Do you still believe the earth is flat? or that the wind is kept by gates or that we live in a geocentric universe?

The problem is you misrepresent what other people believe and then preach the bible to a question not even asked.

That is Sanctamonious.

 

I agree but first get what is being taught first before pulling out scripture. If I say the sky is blue and you start answering why the ocean is red then we aren't talking about the same thing.

 

If God too the same action toward them that He took toward me, they would have the same reaction I did. When God speaks to the heart of a sinner dead in sins, they live.

 

I disagree. Some men are very rebelious.

 

Thinking Stuff...

For some strange reason you are trying to use little linguistic mumbo jumbo games on us with your responses.

Why? are you a Catholic?

DHK and I are ex-Catholics. We cant be fooled. We were properly taught by the priests and nuns who taught us the wicked false teachings and idolatries of the Church of Rome.

We are now born again and know the truth.

 

Sola Scriptura (the way we believe it) means that the Bible is our final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine.
1. Note that it is our final authority. I have often quoted from other authoritative sources. But the Bible is the final authority.
2. Note that it is the final authority in matters of faith and doctrine. That excludes Math and Physics.
Your points are moot.

If the Bible is not the final authority many of your arguments would run like this.
I should believe that Christ is only a prophet and that Mohammed is greater than Christ because the Koran, the authority of Islam says it is. That is their authority and thus the authority you would use. Correct?
This would be your belief if we don't look at everything through the eyes of the Bible.