Purgatory for Protestants?

You’re contradicting yourself in this very post. Do you realize Martin Luther did not write the KJV or speak a lick of English? That even the KJV had all the books — except in America?

The 66-book canon began as a distinctly American phenomenon and only spread as American missionaries travelled the globe.

Please stop with the false history. Please. It does no help to Christian unity.

4 Likes

There is no false history and no contradictions on my part. Kindly do the research yourself.

Again, I do not wish to continue this here. If you have something more to say about it, you may do so via PM.

The reason people don’t believe it is because it is historically false. Luther’s translation was published in 1534. In that version, all 73 books of the typical western Bible were included, plus an additional book: The Prayer of Manasseh, which is a wonderful book, by the way. This was almost 80 years before the KJV.
None of this is in dispute.

The fact that American English language bibles - KJV, RSV, ESV, NIV and others were published with only 66 books is not in dispute, but it wasn’t luther who did it.

5 Likes

When false information is brought to a public discussion, expect it to be publicly refuted.

Both Roman Catholics and “Protestants” have noted your information to be mistaken. Do not take this as a personal attack; your assertions have been refuted with plain fact. In other threads, even photographic evidence and timelines have been presented to dispel the misinformation.

1 Like

When did the books start to be taken out on a consistent basis? Is it really an American thing?

Friend, when researching history, I’d encourage you to consult multiple sources. The truth is often clouded by individuals’ preconceptions.

I do not speak ill of Fr. Pacwa, for I’m sure he has done incredible work to expand the Kingdom and bring the Gospel to many. But Fr. Pacwa may not be the most reliable source for learning about the real, historical Luther. For instance, he has also claimed Luther killed a man in a duel — an absurd claim that is built on a strange interpretation of one sentence in a second-hand source, and is only slightly more believable than the idea that Luther’s mother tried to abort him after conceiving him in a bathhouse tryst with the devil himself. (Yes, that was a real claim made by some Roman Catholics at the time - look up Johann Cochlaeus for more entertainment.)

2 Likes

Others here can give deeper insight but generally, yes, it was an ‘American thing.’ Well, American churches and British publishers.

Long story short, the Crown controlled printing and shipping of the Bible to the colonies. The more Reformed (not Lutheran) churches in America were often anti-Catholic to the point that they’d consider Lutherans and Anglo-Catholics to be no different from Roman Catholics. They were Puritans, to keep things simple. They were already predisposed to jettison the “Catholic” practices of Lutherans, Anglo-Catholics and Roman Catholics, so publishers took advantage of that fact to ship lighter (cheaper) bibles to America.

Meanwhile, other Anglicans, Lutherans and Roman Catholics in America kept using their 73- and 74-book canons. For Lutherans, that didn’t really change until WWI, when American Lutherans stopped worshipping in German to prove their “Americanness” (for a long time, they were only a half-step ‘above’ the Irish in society). They adopted English translations quickly, and suffered some Reformed influence in the process. It’s been a rough 100 years or so, but lay American Lutherans are slowly recovering their other books - they were never “lost” in Europe, as European Lutheran posters here can attest.

It should be noted that American Lutheran clergy have always studied the Deuterocanonical books, they’ve always been part of American Lutheran liturgies, and they’ve always been considered useful, but less authoritative than other books. This can explain the Lutheran view of Scripture for those interested. It is similar to pre-Tridentine Catholicism.

3 Likes

A slightly different take on the Anglican story. All English translations, from the early-post Henrician period on, put the Apocrypha (as it they were termed: I think Jerome might have used the same term) in a separate section, the contents varied. The Authorized Version did the same, until the early 1800s, when agitation from Scottish reformed types in the CoE caused the major British Bible publication society to eliminate them as unneeded and divisive. By the time (ironically) that the Oxford movement/Tractarians were getting started, the Authorized Versions no longer carried them.

Anyone is free to doubt this, since it’s mainly vague memory.

3 Likes

Thank you for clarifying the timeline. Definitely your area of expertise. Please forgive my quick attempt at a 30,000-ft. view. (Apologies to any Scots-Presbys who I lumped in with Puritans! :sweat_smile:)

I do think the conversation here is more whether they were included at all, not whether they were in a specific order or section.

If order/appendix is the complaint against the KJV, etc. then some Roman Catholics might be surprised to learn that even their Church’s approved English transalations vary to this day.

Were the unauthorized versions the first to cut out the Apocrypha entirely? Was their clandestine publishing the motive for the smaller, lighter book?

“Protestants” cannot be lumped into one group like this. In fact, the vast majority of Protestants don’t believe some of the things you accuse.

In fact, I never met any Protestant that did not believe in Purgatory, they just believe that it happens differently. All Christians believe that nothing unclean can enter heaven, and that God cleanses us from sin so that we can be fit for His dwelling.

Scripture is very clear that, during the second coming,

1 Corinthians 15:52 “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.”

So, if we are not changed before that time, then we will be changed at the resurrection.

It sounds like you have been heavily influenced by some Calvanists. Most Protestants don’t embrace the TULIP.

This is not contradictory to believing one will go to heaven because one is saved by faith. In many Protestant theologies, there is a moment in time when a person is justified, at which time judgment occurs for them. They are transferred from the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of light, born again from above. There is a believe that, after this occurs, God judges that sinner by seeing him covered by the blood of Christ. Everyone will be raised to the judgment, but for the person whose life is hidden with Christ in God, their sins will be covered by the blood He shed on the cross. In that sense, the determination that they will go to heaven has already been made.

There are two problems with this statement. The first is that if there is Purgatory, then it exists for everyone, and persons who don’t believe do not change the fact that it exists. The second is that a person who dies with mortal sin on their soul has a “cooked goose” even if they do believe in purgatory. Purgatory is not some sort of “second chance” a person acquires after death.

You did, but your response lacks scholarship and authenticity. If you want to keep making the assertion that Luther “removed” books, then provide some credible evidence. “Every Protestant who doesn’t accept any Bible other than the KJV” is not scholarly or credible evidence. Christians who hold this view of Scripture tend to be narrow minded and uneducated. Is that how you wish to appear?

2 Likes

This seems like a reasonable request. So please help me to accommodate it by refraining from making strawman arguments! Provide some credible sources for your assertions, or refrain from making them! Unless and until that happens, you will continue to appear as though you have an affection for straw.

I am sure you believe what you are saying, but it is just a misguided opinion. It is inappropriate to accuse Luther of anything that is, or is not, contained in the KJV.

I guess that means you really can’t provide a credible source that Luther removed books from the KJV of the Bible?

Requesting that you provide a source for your assertions is not an attack, @lilypadrees. It is part of having a meaningful discussion in the realm of Apologetics. Everyone here is asked to do the same.

There are large segments of Protestants that do not believe the Calvanistic ideas you seem to be taught as a child.

Yes, I sojourned for a time among Southern Baptists who believed this way. They did not seem to know anything about the history of the Bible.

Good! Perhaps you can cite the source? What talk was it? Where is the recording located?

No, lilypadrees. No individual persons “feelings” give them any authority whatsoever to determine what books should be in the canon.

Do you know what a strawman argument is?

This would be a great start!

It seems that discovering our prejudices is an ongoing task.

No, AFAIK. The term Authorized Version is not to distinguish them from some unauthorized version (If there were any such, and maybe there were), the issue was really what was to be in the AV.

Removing them from the AV calmed and soothed nerves amongst Anglicans at the time, and made for cheaper printing costs.

On this subject I do not play an authority on the internet.

On other subjects I do. Distinguishing mark is usually the number of books I own on a topic.

5 Likes

Purgatory is unpleasant, yet the holy souls in Purgatory rejoice in their sufferings, for they know that those sufferings bring them closer to God, and that they are assured of attaining the Beatific Vision on or before Judgment Day.

2 Likes

[quote=“mcq72, post:19, topic:479853”]

That’s incorrect. We absolutely can know if a sin is mortal. Otherwise why warn against that sin, and avoid committing that sin if one has no clue that they have committed such a sin?

Examples of mortal sin. The consequence is the tip off. If one dies in them one is excluded from heaven, as in they go to hell

mortal sin

examples: of mortal sin

mortal sins and continued These are examples.

1 Like

I’m Catholic now, but I feel the need to correct some of the things I’m seeing in the thread. The faith tradition I grew up in loved the King James and that was what was used in sermons and such, but there was never any hint that it was the only valid version. No Protestant I know of believes we will have any kind of sinful nature in heaven. What they do deny is that people destined for heaven are denied Beatific Vision for even a moment after they die. Rather, the purgation occurs at the moment of death without pain of sense and without the ability for anyone on earth to shorten the time. Mine also believed in "once saved “always saved” but denied double predestination, limited atonement, and irresistible grace. They absolutely believe that they will be judged by God and their works will be rewarded or punished. The way “saved as if through fire” was exegeted was that some people would make it to heaven by the skin of their teeth and have no reward other than heaven itself because of their sins. They were also big believers in the Great Apostasy but that’s neither here nor there

2 Likes

An Anglican view of purgatory, like all such Anglican views, can vary. it is more likely to be thought of as a process/event, rather than a place, duration (if that is appropriate to such an event) is not speculated on much. And C. S. Lewis, definitely an Anglican, was ready to believe it was not pleasant.

One never knows, re: Anglicans.

3 Likes

What I know is that I am not going to get into a war of words with you.

No sin and no one is sinful in heaven.

If one goes straight to heaven then that’s true. The question is, how many get a straight shot

Even scripture talks about suffering in that process.

Purgatory isn’t complicated.

Since the next life has no clock, we can’t determine how long purgatory is for any particular individual. As Peter says one day to God is like a 1000 years and 1000 yrs is like a day. All we know is that the person who goes to purgatory and is purified there, died without even one unconfessed mortal sin on their soul. If mortal sin is still on their soul they go straight to hell.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.