Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Purgatory Debate with Dan Marcum

Yesterday, Dan Marcum (Roman Catholic) and I did a short debate on purgatory. An mp3 of the debate is available. There a number of points within this debate that I would like to comment on, but I thought it would be better to go ahead and post the debate now. My main comment on the debate is that the constructive and conclusion speeches were just too short.

9 comments:

Ryan said...

The distinction between the RC and Reformed position regarding [temporal] punishment was helpful. Would you mind expanding on the distinction between punishment and loss suffered (1 Corinthians 3:15)?

Dan seemed to be implying a really strange ontology when he insisted that one's works being burned would entail oneself being burned.

Laughed out loud at the random honking cars. Thanks for the work you put into these debates.

natamllc said...

Quite a young man Mr. Marcum! I commend him for his zeal.

I suppose, because God is the same yesterday, today and forever, (and His crucifixion was foreknown before the foundation of the world, meaning there is implicit in that knowledge Adam and Eve were destined to come into the devil's rebellion against God), these words from History apply to Mr. Marcum also:

Rom 10:1 Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved.
Rom 10:2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.
Rom 10:3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness.
Rom 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.


Mr. Marcum is certainly reading into all of those passages he cites as verses representing purgatory basis a "knowledge" that is not in the Bible.

I do agree that we did learn a lot about the Roman Catholic Church's teaching of purgatory.

And that's scary in light of what John wrote, here:

2Jn 1:8 Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward.
2Jn 1:9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son.

Stevo said...

Great debate! Although the time seemed a little constraining the exchanges were great :)

I just wanted to point out some circularity in Marcum's argumentation.

Turretin, when you noted that all the Scripture Marcum had appealed to as a basis for Purgatory only spoke of the Last Day, he said (inter alia) that it doesn't matter because they still show Purgatory exists, even if they don't show it exists now.

When Marcum utters the phrase "they still show Purgatory exists" the word "Purgatory" refers to the RCC's dogma of Purgatory, which says that Purgatory exists now.

So, the texts he appealed to don't show that 'Purgatory' [as he understands it] exists, otherwise they'd show or entail that it exists *now*. Yet, this is precisely what he's trying to show. So he begged the question.

Drake Shelton said...

Here are the answers you could have given to Jay Dyer a while ago:

‘Free Choice in Maximus the Confessor’ by Joseph P Farrell Reviewed by Drake Shelton

http://olivianus.thekingsparlor.com/concerning-orthodoxy/-free-choice-in-maximus-the-confessor-by-joseph-p-farrell-reviewed-by-drake-shelton

Turretinfan said...

Drake:

Any reason you think that this is on-topic for this post?

-TurretinFan

Drake Shelton said...

No, feel free to delete it. I just thought you didn't have a clue what you were talking about when you spoke with Jay and I thought I could help you not look so unfit to teach theology to people.

Turretinfan said...

I already blogged your response to Dyer in January.

http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2011/01/alternative-responses-to-jay-dyer.html

-TurretinFan

ChaferDTS said...

I saw severnal blunders from the Roman Catholic perspective on this issue.

1 ) The Roman Catholic in the debate equates prayers for the dead with a belief in purgatory. Yet Eastern Orthodox holds to belief in prayers for the dead without a belief in purgatory.

2) His misuse of 1 Cor. 3:15. The context is of Judgement seat of Christ and not the intermediate state which the doctrine of purgatory is about.

3 ) He was unfamilair with the Reformed view of justification and sanctification. This resulted in him failing to see how all Christians enter heaven without the necessity of " purgatory " .

4 ) I personally would have loved to have heard the Roman Catholic explain Heb 1:3 which states with respect to the elect that Jesus Christ " purged our sins " and 1 Jn 1:7 which states that Jesus " cleanses us from all sins. " . It was those two verses which helped freed me from my former belief in Purgatory over 19 years ago.

5 ) The concept of purgatory in Roman Catholicism is connected with it's ideas of indulgences. A discussion of that together would clearly reveal that the doctrine of " purgatory " seriously demeans and atttacks the work of Jesus Christ on the cross for our sins.

6 ) The Roman Catholic is unable to see that man can not atone for his own sin in purgatory in order to enter heaven. Since Jesus already atoned for all the sins of the elect in order for them to enter heaven.

Turretinfan said...

"Would you mind expanding on the distinction between punishment and loss suffered (1 Corinthians 3:15)?"

The loss of the building that was on the foundation. While the loss of a building can be a punishment, it need not be.

"Dan seemed to be implying a really strange ontology when he insisted that one's works being burned would entail oneself being burned."

Agreed.