Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
Comments are turned off for this media
Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.
Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James White director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.
If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 -973 -4602 or toll-free across the United States. It's 1 -877 -753 -3341. And now with today's topic here is James White.
And good afternoon. Welcome to the dividing line a debate on the dividing line today between myself and Tim Staples staff apologist for Catholic answers we are going to be discussing 1st Corinthians chapter 3 verses 10 through 15 and The claim that this text clearly presents the doctrine of purgatory.
Here's how it's going to be laid out. We're gonna jump right into it so that we can have some time at the end of the program for your phone calls as well. 15 minutes each opening statements. We're going to be exegeting the text.
Then each was one of us will have an 8-minute response. We'll have 5 minutes to cross-examine each other. 8-minute closers and that should give us enough time to take about 19 to 20 minutes worth of phone calls at the end of the program.
Please make your question very short very succinct. It is not a time for you to preach to add to The presentations made by anyone it is a question a question has one of those little squiggly things the end called a question mark.
So, please make sure that you get to your question very very quickly and we will attempt to answer it as succinctly as possible. We will not open the phone lines For those questions until 5 o 'clock Mountain Standard Time.
Which would be 4 o 'clock in the Pacific and whatever it is, wherever else you are. You can figure it out from there. So with that I would like to welcome to the air Tim Staples and thank you for joining us Tim.
It's great to be with you James. All right. So since we have a lot to get to and not a whole lot of time to do it in here. We'll go ahead and if you'd like to begin sir.
Sure, I'd like to begin by thanking you for sending me over a couple links to audio files from from your radio broadcast. That really helped me prepare for this dialogue. The first was a critique of an answer I gave on Catholic answers live to one of our callers who had a question about purgatory in first Corinthians 3 and that actually served as the impetus for this dialogue and.
The other was a section from a debate on purgatory you had as you know with father Peter Stravinsky. I'm going to be using these as sort of a foundation for my opening remarks the first Corinthians 3 10 to 15 as you said now.
Suppose I could begin By saying from a Catholic and biblical perspective. This is really not difficult to see in a nutshell. St. Paul is here giving us a vivid picture of the judgment. Which is obviously after death and he tells us that at the judgment and I know we'll get some play on this.
There will be some who are already perfectly purified so that they will not experience the pains of purgatory. But they will receive their reward immediately. And there are those who will not have been perfectly sanctified.
So they will undergo a purging of all imperfections so that they can enter into the glory of heaven. St. Paul says it like this. I'll just read verses 13 through 15 work will become manifest for the day referring to the judgment.
We'll disclose it because it will be revealed with fire and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work which any man is built on the foundation survived He will receive a reward.
If any man's work is burned up he will suffer loss though he himself will be saved but only as Through fire now as James knows and I said many times on Catholic case or more proper obviously not hell because folks are being saved.
It's not heaven because there's imperfection being taken away. And we know Revelation 21 27 says nothing unclean shall enter heaven. Habakkuk 113 thou art of pure eyes than to behold evil and can't not look on wrong.
Now in a nutshell. This is what I want to do here is back up and take the text apart a bit and I'll start Listening very carefully to your critiques of what I said really pretty much everything I've said so far and more.
And examining first Corinthians 3 again I found that I agreed with you that sickly continuing a discussion that goes back especially diverse Apostolic endeavors. Now you notice that st Paul uses the metaphor of he and Apollo God in verse 9 Did field in which they worked.
He then switches metaphors made midstream often does matter parts of verse 9 Apollos to now focusing on himself as as he says a wise master builder who laid the foundation the Melian and He then mentions an indefinite another all those who would then build on that foundation.
But then again in good Pauline fashion. He changes gears a bit again and at the end of verse 10 He says let each man in the foundation. So now st. Paul is moving to a more universal statement. He's no longer limiting himself to speaking just about himself Apollos or even just ministers, but he's making a general statement let each man observe how he builds on the foundation and.
This leads him to verse 11 where he says for no other foundation. Can anyone lay actually no one so we could say here? No one is able to lay any other foundation again, though. He's stressing a more universal application.
But at any rate other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid Jesus Christ. St Paul tells us what I assume we all of us as Christians agree that Jesus Christ is the foundation of all our Apostolic endeavors indeed.
He is the foundation of our lives. Now st. Paul doesn't specifically say foundation of our lives. But I don't think it's a stretch to say that Christ is being presented here as our foundation. But at any rate st. Paul then says definite a teeth or even just ministers.
He says if anyone Builds on the foundation with gold silver precious stones wood a stubble each man's work again. The judgment will disclose it because it will be revealed with the Greek word for of what so what kind of what is he?
Talking about what kind of. What he's talking about is each has done now. This is going to be important in a moment. In fact, mr. White I noticed on your broadcast you sent to me. I counted three times.
Where you claim that basically all that's happening here is the judgment reveals whether ministers of the gospel. As as you said on on your broadcast whether they have proper motivations or improper motivations this judgment simply discovers again to quote you again the Motivations of why people would argue the text doesn't say this.
You say this in other words. It doesn't say the fire test. What sort of motivation people have each man is done to what you claim even more clear in a moment now I suppose in defense of what you you said we could say improper motivation could be a subset of what st Paul is talking about here if we want to stretch actually says is the fire which represents the judgment.
We'll test what sort of work each has done limit this to some arbitrary notion of proper motives because we let the text speak in Its proper context and we understand you on another point. Mr. White and something else.
You said during your critique of me and by the way where you claimed I massacred this text. And by the way, I was deeply hurt. When you said that I'm kidding, of course, I actually got a kick out of that one.
And and as you know James, I've said it often. I've always said I like James White. I like your passion and your diligence even if I don't agree with you, but at any rate You erroneously claimed that the Catholic Church's position is that this fire represents purgatory both here in verse 12 and in verse 15 and and that's not true and You ridiculed the notion by saying well who the who are these word without suffering loss?
How are they in purgatory? Well, the Catholic Church has never claimed the fire per se is purgatory. The church has never defined this as such. The fire here is actually the judgment as we'll see in a moment for purgatory.
Purgatory is not a place as in you send people over there to a chamber called purgatory. The Catholic Church teaches purgatory is as the Catechism the Catholic Church paragraph 1472 says it not in some external imposition of you know by God.
But proceeding from the nature of sin and the effects of sin on our souls in the context of the revelation of Christ at the judgment. So again, if you want to find a location for purgatory, it's those are being judged and imperfections are found on their souls.
These imperfections that st Paul speaks of are in perfect keeping with the biblical notion of for example sins that are not mortal mentioned in 1st John 5 or You know breaking of the least commandments that Jesus talks about in Matthew 5 19 that one can commit.
Yet remain in the kingdom of God. But just so you'll know that the church does not teach and your listeners will know. It doesn't teach as you've claimed over and over in your radio show that the fire is purgatory.
Let me quote a guy who knows a little bit about Catholicism Salvi in paragraph 47. He says quote in Savior the encounter with him is the decisive act of judgment before his gaze all falsehood melts away.
This encounter with him as it burns us transforms and freezes. Allowing us to become truly ourselves. All that we build during our lives can prove to the sickness of our lives become evident to us. Their life salvation his gaze the touch of his heart heals us through an undeniably painful transformation.
Add our of his love sears through us like a flame. Enabling us to become totally ourselves and thus totally of God. On your broadcast that you sent to me that we Catholics read into this text the fact that the fire purifies.
In fact you claimed on that broadcast that. There's nothing in here about a purifying fire. In fact, let me quote you use of any because even an evangelical scripture scholar like dr W Harold Mayer in the expositors Bible on these very verses that we're talking about.
Let me quote it here. I'm sure is used figure purifying agent. And by the way, he references Matthew 3 11 and Mark 9 49 as two examples of our Lord using fire as a Purifying effect in simple here for God's judgment as he tests the quality of the Christians work.
You know any B makes a good point there. But I also want to point out what you'll find from another Protestant work and a good one called Kittles theological dictionary of the New Testament volume 6 page 9 44.
Here these Protestant scholars teach what I would argue it is impossible for any Christian to ignore About this text if he's serious about studying it and that is that st Paul is here referring to to quote Kittles.
Let me quote referring to the idea of an eschatological refining fire and. They reference here Malachi chapter 3. If we examine Malachi chapter 3 verses 1 3 we discover this is a text that especially verses 1 and 2.
That's either quoted or alluded to six times in the New Testament as fulfilled in John the Baptist and Christ and notice what it says prophetically of our Lord. It says John the Baptist behold I send my messenger to prepare the way before me and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple.
The messenger of the covenant in whom you delight behold He is coming says the Lord of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming and who can stand when he appears for he is like a refiners by it as a refiner and purifier of silver and he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them.
Protestant scholars Leave some of them have to acknowledge what it seemed to me in listening to miss Into your radio broadcast that you said to me. You're not willing to admit and that is that st Paul here uses language that indicates he's harkening back to Malachi and as such It becomes even more obvious st. Paul is talking about Christ the judge fire.
He will also Be described in verse 16 their bodies the fire of judgment can also denote destruction as dr Mayor pointed out of the judgment and purgatory verse. You are God's temple and God's Spirit dwells in you if anyone destroys God's pronoun is using the destruction of this person rather than pure for reference from these Imperfections on their way to heaven and I think I'm about out of time.
But folks this is a textbook definition of purgatory. I.
Actually had about 36 seconds left. You wanted to add anything else? No, I think that'll do it. Okay. I'm being good. Okay. All right, thank you very much mr. Staples. Let me go ahead and and read the entirety of the text at the beginning of my time here according to the grace of God Which is given to me like a wise master builder.
I laid a foundation another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it. For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold silver precious stones wood hay and straw.
Each man's work will become evident for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire and the fire itself Will test the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built on it remains He'll receive a reward.
If any man's work is burned up He will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved yet. So as through fire now the context of the preceding nine verses is really quite simple. Paul is discussing the problems that exist in the Corinthian congregation.
He has used harsh words with them in the preceding verses referring to them as men of flesh and infants in Christ. He refers to the strife and jealousy that exists among them. He zeroes in on their part on their partisanship the fact that they are saying I am of this Christian leader or that Christian leader.
He reminds them that leaders are but servants of the Lord and that it was the Lord that even gave those servants the opportunity to Preach the gospel to them. He writes in verse 6. I planted Apollos watered.
But God has caused the growth. God used Paul and Apollos as means. But the growth was caused by God not by the Christian leaders themselves at this point. Then Paul begins to speak of the role Christian leaders have in the work of the church.
Note his words in verse 8. Now he who plants and he waters are one but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor. For we are God's fellow workers your God's field. God's building. Verse 8 provides the first reference to reward misthoughts.
And it is clearly in the context of the Christian leaders who labor in the work of ministry. It will be significant to note that the phrase received reward in verse 8 is identical in terminology the same phrase in verse 14.
Since in this context, we know that the planting and watering mention goes back to Paul and Apollos the topic remains consistent. Throughout this passage Paul then speaks of himself and Apollo says God's fellow workers that his workers owned by God not equal with him.
He uses two terms field and building but picks up only on the second God's building. A fellow worker of God Works in God's building and that building is the church. This then brings us to the main passage verses 10 through 15.
Give us an illustration of how weighty is to minister in the church and how God will someday. Manifest the motivations of the hearts of all those who engage in that work. Then in verses 16 through 17 Paul adds a further warning speaking of God's certain judgment upon those who do not build but instead tear down or destroy.
There is an obvious movement between 10 through 15 and 16 through 17 for in 10 through 15 the metaphor remains the construction of a building upon a foundation. In 16 through 17 this switches to the metaphor of the temple of God already constructed.
Further in 10 through 15 the certain ones are those who are indeed building upon the foundation. Even if they have less than perfect motivations or understanding the certain one in verses 16 through 17 is not building anything at all.
But is instead tearing down and ruining what has already been built. This distinction is important as well as we shall see and so we enter into the text itself according the grace of God Which is given to me like a wise master builder.
I laid a foundation and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it for no man can lay a foundation of the one which is laid Which is Jesus Christ. Paul continues the context insisting that by God's grace He has laid a foundation knowing that others would build upon that same foundation.
This foundation Of course refers to the work of ministry and building up the church that he has engaged him. But there is an element of personal responsibility this part of ministry in Christ Church a man must be careful.
How he builds upon the foundation which Paul reminds us is holy. The only foundation of the church is Jesus Christ himself. The minister is to recognize that ministry in the church is a holy task and He must look well a literal rendering of the Greek upon how he goes about this work.
This leads to further expansion upon this thought in the following section verses 12 and 13. Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold silver precious stones wood hay and straw each man's work will become evident for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire and the fire itself will Test the quality of each man's work.
The first thing to see in verse 12 is that we are still talking about the same group Christian Workers those under discussion build upon the foundation. We will see that in verses 16 through 17 Paul refers to a different group those who do not build but instead tear down.
So we have one group who build upon the one foundation, but with different quality materials. And obviously the terms gold silver precious stones wood hay and straw are all figures of speech. They're all metaphors.
Christian leaders are not known for having an abundance of gold silver precious stones. Let alone is the building being done here a literal activity either. These are terms referring as Paul himself puts it to the quality of each man's work.
Some labor selflessly and in obscurity with motivations pure and honorable while others have mixed motivations tinge to a lesser or greater degree by Selfishness and vain glory during this lifetime. We cannot necessarily know which Christian leaders even within the bounds of Orthodox teaching and practice are Doing what they do with motivations that are pleasing to God.
But Paul is reminding us that such will not always be the case. God will reward those who have labored diligently for his glory. In that day when all the secrets of men's hearts will be revealed. Paul says that each man's work will become evident for the day will show the nature of the Christians ministers work will be made plain and Clear.
The lack of clarity that exists during this lifetime will no longer cloud our vision at the judgment. What a tremendously sobering thought for those who labor and building upon the foundation of Jesus Christ God who searches the hearts will reveal our true motivations.
On that day a Declaration they loci will be made about the nature of the works of all those who worked in the church. But please note This is everyone all Saints all workers in the church will experience this judgment from the greatest Saints to the least in the work.
There is no room here for any idea of anyone bypassing this judgment. But it remains the same judgment the judgment by fire of the works. The revelation of whether one's ministerial works are precious and lasting or surface level and temporary will be accomplished by fire.
Obviously fire differentiates at the most basic level between gold and wood. Silver and straw precious stones and stubble the precious elements withstand the fires presence Whereas the others are consumed in their entirety.
Given that it has already been established that gold and silver etc are figures for the quality of men's works. So it follows inexorably that fire refers to a testing that makes its verdict as clear as the destruction of wood.
Hay and stubble by the raging flames of a fire. The works that were not done to God's glory are destroyed and those works having the proper character passed through unharmed. But please note the verb use the fire is apocalyptic.
I this is a term of revelation. It does not mean to purify it does not mean to cleanse. It does not mean to purge. The object of the actions in this verse is always the works. The day will manifest the character of the works.
The fire will reveal the nature of the works and So we see in verses 14 and 15 if any man's work which he is built on it remains He will receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up. He will suffer loss, but he himself be saved yet.
So as through fire The context continues unbroken note the repetition of the preceding concept of building on the foundation. If a man's work built upon the Foundation of Christ in the church remains in the presence of the judgment of God.
He receives a reward a misthoss. But in direct parallel if another workers labors are burned up. He will suffer loss. Now the opposite of the reception of reward is to suffer loss. The Greek term that Paul uses Zamiyahu Myers.
Zamiyahu is Translated by the vast majority of recognized translations as suffer loss and there is a reason for this. Despite the fact that you can render the term as punish its normative meaning. Especially the New Testament refers to experiencing the opposite of gain that is loss and often.
What is not gained is found in the immediate context. The words used for example in Philippians 3 8 Paul says more than that I count all things to be lost in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ My lord for whom I have suffered the loss of all things and count them but rubbish that I may gain Christ.
Obviously, this does not mean Paul has been punished but has suffered the loss of all things. The same is true in Jesus used the term in Matthew 16 26. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul or what will a man gain?
Give an exchange for his soul in first Corinthians 3 15. The term is used in a context that provides a direct correlation to the term the one whose work remains Receives a reward. So the one whose work is burned up does not hence They suffer loss.
If you want to see further information on this You can see the theological dictionary the New Testament volume 2 page 8 8 8. We are reminded however that despite the seriousness of the loss of reward for the Christian worker We are still talking about those who have found salvation the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.
Paul tells us that despite suffering loss. These are saved yet. So as through fire know that the text does not say that they are saved having been purified by fire they do so as one who has escaped from a fire in his house having lost all but saved his life as.
One commentary has expressed it quote the fire tests the work. Destroying what is of poor quality imperishable a wage will be paid only for good durable work. The man whose work will not endure the searching test of judgment will suffer a loss like one escaping from a burning house.
He will be saved but his work and his reward will be lost. This metaphor clearly teaches the responsibility of ministers the gospel who will be rewarded or punished for the manner in which they have fulfilled their ministry and quote.
I Know that the commentary I just read is the Roman Catholic Jerome Bible commentary. Which goes on to directly state that this text does not teach the doctrine purgatory. However, the doctrine can find quote support and quote in the text a far cry from the claim that this text clearly teaches purgatory.
So let's summarize first. The passage is about Christian workers not all the Christian faithful. Any wider application would only be secondary in nature. Secondly, the passage says nothing about the purification of individuals.
Works are tested in this passage. Rome teaches souls are purified from the temporal punishment of sins by suffering sada spasio and purgatory. But there is nothing about temporal punishments sada spasio or suffering of individuals for their sins.
Anywhere in this passage at all. All these are extraneous to the text itself. Further the insertion of the Roman concepts into the passage turns it on its head. Remember those with works of gold silver and precious stones that is Christian workers who had godly motivations appear in this passage.
Their works are subject to the same Testing as the others if this fire is at all relevant to purgatory and certainly historically that has been the understanding. Then are we to assume that even those with godly motives suffer?
Are there no Saints involved in building upon the foundation. Modern Roman Catholics have started to move away from the term fire. Though this was an arguably what attracted the attention of Rome the passage in the first place and Seek to focus more upon the suffering of all of a loss so that only the second group is seen as being relevant to purgatory.
Of course, this is made possible by the constant repetition of the assertion. Rome has never officially declared the meaning of this passage nor that there is fire in purgatory nor that purgatory is a place.
No that we experienced time in purgatory. Etc, etc, etc. The fact that one can go into history and determine with great clarity What was taught and believed only a few centuries ago does not seem to matter in this case.
Anyway, the text simply will not bear the weight that is placed upon it by Roman tradition. Paul knew nothing of purgatory. Instead this same author the Apostle Paul informs us of the real and only source of purification and cleansing for the Christian.
The same writer who wrote the words of first Corinthians chapter 3 also wrote these words to Titus in chapter 2 verse 14 Speaking of Jesus Christ It says who gave himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed and to purify for himself a people for his own possession Zealous for good deeds.
So who is it that does the purification? Is this something that we somehow Contribute to through our experience of sada spacio in purgatory. Or is it something that Jesus Christ does not simply for the alleged eternal sins?
But instead as it says in the text for every lawless deed. Even if one accepts the unbiblical distinction, and I believe we looked at first John 5 we would see that it's a unbiblical Distinction is made there even Roman Catholic exegetes recognize that John is talking there about apostasy.
Not some kind of class of eternal sins mortal sins versus venial sins. But even if one were to accept that the assertion of the Apostle Paul is that Christ gave himself to redeem us from every Lawless deed and to purify for himself a people of his own possession either his death can purify us and make us ready for our entrance into the very presence of the Father or He cannot the addition of anything to that.
Is I think one of the key issues in regards to the gospel as it is taught by the Bible and by the Roman Catholic Church, and so as we look at this text, these are the issues that we need to be focusing upon.
Even if we could find places as we can in the Bible where the term fire is used of purification is that how it's being used here or Do we not have certain verbs that are specifically used by the Apostle Paul that have certain meanings can mr Staples provide us with lexical sources that tell us that here in first Corinthians 3 remember any word is defined by its context any word has a semantic domain and Then when you use the word you place it in a particular context and that determines the meaning of the word.
Can we find lexical sources that say that the verbs found in this text actually refer to? Purification when mr. Staples gave his interpretation of this text in the Catholic answers published CDs God's perfect plan purgatory and indulgences explained in the fifth CD when he went through first Corinthians chapter 3 very closely.
Eight times he used purified. Purification or purging eight times the question will be is that found anywhere in first Corinthians chapter 3? That is really where the debate needs to focus. I believe today so I'm going to wrap up and it almost exact same time period that Tim did with about 30 seconds left to go there and Let folks know you're listening to a debate on the dividing line between James White and Tim Staples.
We're finished with the opening statements and now Tim will have eight minutes For a response and then I'll have eight minutes after that. So sir your time begins.
Okay a lot to choose from here, but I find it odd how You as well as other Protestants that I read separate so radically the works from the person and Granted in verses for if any man's work abides, which he's built He will receive reward.
If any man's work shall be burned. No doubt. There is an emphasis on the works. However It's not quite as mr White is making it sound because it's not only the works that go through the fire of the judgment.
But he himself there are no works floating around separately from someone. This betrays a very poor understanding of the human person. But most importantly it contradicts the scripture because the scripture says he himself shall be saved yet.
So as by fire, so he goes through the fire not just the works. I also noticed a critique of me before and now know where to be found. He says well again I say this is not difficult. But perhaps with this are wimpy modern Sentimental view of Jesus and popular Christian culture is a fluffy little guy who would never cause anyone pain.
We need to point out what Jesus himself says in Revelation 3 19 referencing back to Proverbs 3 12. In fact, I'll start at verse 11. My son do not despise the Lord's discipline or be wary of his reproof for the Lord reproves him whom he loves as a father the son in whom he delights in Revelation 3 18 Jesus himself says I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire.
There again, we have the image of Jesus as the the refiner and the refining fire in verse 19. Those whom I love I rebuke and I chase and he who overcomes verse 21 says I will grant him descent with me on my throne.
I think it's important that we understand that we see this theme of A purifying fire throughout sacred scripture. St. Paul is not speaking in a vacuum or writing in a vacuum here. For example, and we also see clear text of Scripture that talk about how we are made holy through the discipline of the Lord.
First Peter 1 6 and 7 says in this you rejoice though now for a little while you may have to suffer various trials. So that the genuineness of your faith more precious than gold. Which though perishable is tested by fire may read down to praise and honor and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ revelation being Apocalypse a there or a Hebrews chapter of our being made holy.
Our earthly father's disciplined us for a short time and at their pleasure. But he disciplines us for our good in order that we may share his holiness very important. In order that we may share in his holiness for the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant.
But later it yields the peaceful or peaceable fruit of righteousness because soon a Justification to those who have been trained by it. Verse 12 strive for peace with all men and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.
The text of Scripture are many and and varied first Peter 3 12. But do not be surprised that the fiery ordeal which comes upon you to prove you as though something strange were happening. But rejoice in so far as you share Christ's sufferings that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed or st Paul himself in Romans 8 17 says we must quote suffer with him in Order that we may be glorified together with him.
I would argue that this those with these Imperfection, but thanks be to God. These in first Corinthians 3 will be saved as the text says because of the nature of these imperfections though. They keep them from final salvation and that's important.
This is obvious from verse 15, which says they will be saved yet. So as to fight from The beatific vision church means by temporal punishment. These punishments are not eternal. They're temporary. Now, what about the problem specifically with sin being?
Mentioned here by the church. James you claim that this text has nothing to do with sin. What is it that keeps us from full communion or as my Baptist friends will say fellowship with God? It's a sin.
Psalm 66 18 and a whole host of biblical texts. We could cite tell us sin separate us from God and not only sin. But any defects or impurity caused by sin such as bad habits attachment to sin. That's right.
There will be none of this in heaven. These keep us from God and this is precisely what we see in first Corinthians 3 the souls mentioned that suffer loss a Stubble and I would argue on their souls because you cannot separate as mr. White has done works from people.
These are imperfection that must be clean for whatever you want to say. They must be removed. Why according to the text in verse 15 if any man's work is burned he will suffer loss. Though he himself will be saved yet.
So as through fire. They are removed so that these individuals can receive final salvation. That's what the text says to be temporal that is separation from that final separation. Hence the punishment from the Lord the discipline of the Lord if you want to call it that is revealed to be temporal as well.
Now what about what? Mr. White mentioned about the reward of first Corinthians 3 14? What's the difference between the reward in verse 14 given to those who? We assume had nothing to burn up and the salvation received in verse 15 by those who do Mr. White has said this doesn't make sense.
How can there be you know verse how can there be reward in verse 14? If the fire mentioned in verse 13 is purgatory. How can this be purgatory? Mr. White has said in the tape that he sent me if you have gold in purgatory now, it's obvious Mr. White did not understand that the fire Represents in Catholic teaching the judgment of Christ and I quoted Pope Benedict the 16th.
That is an official magisterial teaching that those who have no imperfections that need to be burned will go immediately to heaven. That's what the text indicates. They're not in part is found in this objective going through the judgment not in some sacred Cubicle over there somewhere now as far as the reward in first Corinthians 3 14.
The answer is simple st. Paul tells us for example in Romans 2 Verses 6 and 7 that among other things the rewards for Christians who perform good works in Christ are not only salvation. And and eternal obvious that these souls who need no purification are are receiving to use st Paul's language fact we see st Paul using multiple metaphors for degrees of glory in heaven in the same letter in first Corinthians 15 41.
Another the moon another the stars is dead. That's we see varying the individuals.
Okay, Tim, that's that's that's eight minutes. You have to slow you down there for a second.
I only had one two more sentences, but all right, go ahead. Okay. All right. Thank you.
You're listening to a debate between James White and Tim Staples. Let me just remind you very very quickly before I go to my section. We will be opening the phones in approximately 20 minutes or so if Please don't be calling right now.
We already have a couple folks do that but in about 20 minutes from now You'll be able to call and get online and please once again make your questions on the topic first Corinthians chapter 3 specifically and as clear and succinct as possible questions about well all sorts of other issues will only Detract from the focus of the debate.
So with that my my response My desire is to stay in this particular text. I could quote all sorts of texts From other places and then I would have to to if they're going to be relevant Demonstrate that the topic of those texts is the same topic that Paul is addressing here and I would submit to you that mr Staples did not demonstrate that any of the texts that he quoted had anything to do with Paul's purpose and his words here instead he's grabbing words and assuming that these words have the same meaning wherever they're found and that is a very common error of Isagetical interpretation the text of Scripture you simply cannot assume that just because the kaya soon ace appears over here.
It's being used in the same sense as the text you're examining over there. And so for example, we we saw Revelation 3 in Hebrews 12, but these are talking about sufferings and purifications in this life.
They have nothing to do with the idea that before you enter into the presence of God There's going to have to be a post-mortem cleansing or purification of your soul before you can experience that you're having to undergo Satisfaction to be cleansed from the temporal punishments that cling to your soul that you did not Manage to deal with through the penances and sacraments of the church during life and so without making that connection I would simply submit that all of those Had nothing to do with this some of them were not even written by Paul or at least you could say well at least the Same author said this but one that was that really struck me was the assertion that Mr. Staples made that Romans 8 17 Is what is going on in 1st Corinthians 3 but Romans 8 17 is saying and if children then heirs heirs of God and joiners With Christ if so be that we suffer with him that we may also be glorified together with him.
This is this is talking about now. This isn't talking about some post-mortem experience of purification of the soul. And and so when we come back to the text We were told that the text says verse 15 refers to sins that have to be removed before receiving final salvation.
Where does it say that I even quoted the drone Bible commentary which? Gave the same interpretation that I did. Let's once again focus our attention here. We can find other passages in the Bible where fire has something to do with purification.
But we have not heard anything from mr. Staples where this text mentions purification. He said well, there are sins that have to be burned up here. Well, actually it's talking about Demonstrating what kind of work Christian leaders have done?
What kind of work? There is a revelation an Apocalypse that takes place at the judgment. People are going to know which Christian leaders did what they did for the right reasons and which Christian leaders were simply seeking to gain followers, that's what this text is talking about and We have yet to see how apocalypsis or the fire or the giving of a demonstration or showing what kind how any of this has anything to do with the removal of Temporal punishments of sins and the completion of a sanctification process that must take place before one enters into the very presence of God.
That's that would require a complete change of context. You'd have to have a complete Modification of the context in 1st Corinthians 3 10 through 15 from what's come before and what comes after. But as we said in our opening statement, there is no change of context.
The context is very clear. We do not have to insert a tremendous amount of material in here to do this kind of thing. Now we were we were also told well These the gold silver precious stones are different levels of rewards folks gold is already pure.
That's the whole point of saying that they built with gold there are going to be people who had absolutely pure motivations here only by the work of the Holy Spirit, but they did and yet they their works are tested just like everyone else's and So to to I really believe twist the text to say ah.
But it says that they go through the fire see they go through the fire themselves. Even the drone Bible commentary recognizes that this is a way of speaking that. It's simply saying they have suffered loss and to say that they do they are saved.
It says through fire is not some secondary statement that has nothing to do with the preceding statement. It is a statement that expands upon that and explains what it means the nature of their loss. The nature of their loss is they have lost everything that they thought they were building because they did not build it properly and They are saved as a person who has escaped from a burning house.
That's what it's talking about to turn that into the concept that well They themselves are being purified by this fire is again to engage in absolutely wishful Eisegesis where else does Paul teach this where else this requires again an external authority and it is my assertion That just as we just recently listened to mr. Staples Talk about how Luke chapter 1 has nuptial language so that Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit when you have an external Authority when you have an external Dogmatic authority specifically here in the dogmatic teachings the magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.
This becomes the overriding concern in the exegesis of the text of the Bible is No longer what Paul would have understood his words to mean or what his original readers would have understood his words to mean.
Now it becomes well Rome has said this Rome has used this text and even though I would assert And I would just simply suggest to anyone Go pick up a book by FX soup called purgatory published by tan. Read that and tell me that Roman Catholics have not for a long period of time Believed things about purgatory with papal approval.
That are no longer believed. We just for example. We just were just told that a single document from Benedict the 16th Provides us with evidently an infallible interpretation of this text where this fire becomes a judgment of Christ.
Well, are there not all sorts of other papal pronouncements that we could look to? That would give us completely different understandings of this how many people have thought that the promise of wearing the scapular.
That Mary would descend into purgatory and release you on the Saturday after your death Had to do with time and now we're told that what they just misunderstood. But how many people lived and died on the basis of those things?
You see the addition of external authorities does not clarify the text. It only muddles the text and so my questions remain. You can't go to other texts and say well fire means purification over here.
So that means that here that means it has to mean it here. No. You have to establish that you have to true exegesis means that you go into the text and you demonstrate that in this context. Yeah as it as it rolls along.
That that is what is being taught and that is not what is being taught that wasn't established. In the presentation that was that was just made and so once again Focus your attention upon this does revealing the kind of works mean the same thing as making the final preparation for entrance in the presence of God by the removal of the temporal punishments of sins from the soul as Sadas Pacio is meant to be in purgatory.
That is the question of the debate today. All right with that we move on to the next section. Let me again. Let the listeners know where we are here. We have so far had the first two 15 minute opening statements eight minute rebuttals now each will have five minutes for cross-examination.
Tim will get to ask me questions for five minutes and then I'll ask him questions for five minutes. Then we'll have eight minutes statements at the end I will try to be as succinct and concise there to maybe open up a little more time for callers if we can and Then we will start taking phone calls.
So that means in approximately Ten minutes. We will open up the phone lines for your calls at eight seven seven seven five three three three four one. That's eight seven seven Seven five three three three four one.
So five minutes Tim. Go ahead first.
Said that you have developed your understanding Her ability to defend the divinity of Christ by demonstrating Christ being referred to as Yahweh and You've done that by listening to the other side and and so forth.
Is that correct? You've developed your understanding to where you're a more effective presenter of the divinity of Christ.
I think what you're referring to very quickly was my statement that in listening to Greg Stafford's attacks upon the identification of Jesus Yahweh that greatly increased the Solid nature of the arguments that I presented presented in the forgotten Trinity.
Is that that's what you're referring to? Yes. Yes.
Yes, so you've gotten better in your presentation print in the church over 2 ,000 years and thousands of minds. And some of the greatest minds that have ever been on the planet. Would you agree that it would be reasonable to say that there can be development of doctrine?
With over 2 ,000 years. Never an essential change but a development and understanding since you've had it in your own life.
Are we talking about the general concept of the Newman's that development hypothesis. Are we talking about. The definition of the doctrine of purgatory and then its development since say the Council of Constance.
What I'm saying, isn't it reasonable that the church that has occurred in the nature of purgatory? But our understanding and our and the manner in which we explicate it can develop. Are you saying that that's unreasonable?
Well, I would say that the change that has taken place is not a development. It is a mutation. There is a difference between a change in mutation. One is is a better way of expressing a truth. The other is a is having one said X and now saying not X or not X but Y is.
Yeah, can you prove that? Well, if you're if you're asked asking about changes in the teaching of the doctrine purgatory? Yeah, yeah, I think that it's. It is beyond question that. Until yes beyond question but until recent times when a person stood before the relics in the castle church in Wittenberg in 1510 and was told that they would receive an indulgence of a certain number of months for saying a certain number of our fathers while standing in front of a feather that was supposed to be from Gabriel's wing that person believed that that was a temporal concept and The church used the money he paid to go see it to build st Peter's and so I would say that on a historical level it can be easily Demonstrated that for hundreds of years the concept of indulgences and time and purgatory was one of the primary motivating factors in all sorts of Religious devotion shall we say.
Even even if I'm not sure this has to do with purgatory.
But but Tim one of our biggest one of our biggest questions always of you guys is how come you get to determine? What is and is not teaching when I quote a Pope? Well, you know, that's not. That wasn't a conciliar document that wasn't there that other thing.
But then someone else can quote a Pope and all of a sudden that's an incredible thing.
I'm sorry quoted a Pope you haven't quoted. I am of course.
I am of course referring to many previous encounters that I've had with yourself and other folks the Catholic answers but.
You're you're not giving me any reaching because in fact, mr. White there hasn't been an essential change in teaching. We're talking about Changes in emphasis in the way that we present the truth of purgatory, but let me ask you another question.
Can you tell me where? Improper motivations are found in first Corinthians 3. You said this is what's being judged here.
Yeah, I presented this my opening statement again. Paul is saying let each man look well to how he builds upon the foundation. For a judgment is going to be made showing what kind of works he did. That what kind ha poi on tells us that we're talking here about an examination of what kinds of works now.
We're obviously not thinking here that we're talking about people who were destroying the church. They were actually building upon the foundation. That's why I made the distinction between verses 16 and 17.
But what else can ha poi on mean. And the revelation of what it means. What kinds of works they did then what? Motivations they had whether they were seeking to glorify Christ. Whether they did so for the right reasons as Paul and Apollos are doing or Not so good reasons as we see throughout first Corinthians where we have all sorts of people that are causing problems.
That's okay a great example of Isaac Jesus, okay.
Well, you're saying that time is up. Let me ask you that excuse me your time Tim. Tim your time is up. It's my turn. Okay, that was five minutes. So I get to ask five minutes and we will. We have I have someone else watching me to make sure and anyone can listen to this tape.
We're being very very careful on the time. Okay, you said in your You said in your presentation On purgatory quote all scholars agree at this text is dealing with the judgment of mankind after death and quote Is it not true that many scholars restrict this text the judgment of the works of Christian leaders not to the general judgment of all Mankind.
I said again you said in your presentation all Scholars agree that this text is dealing with the judgment of mankind after death. Is it not true that many scholars restrict this text the judgment of the works of Christian leaders?
Not to the judge general judgment of all mankind.
Yes. Yeah, there are scholars that would limit that, yes.
Okay. In your interpretation of this text on the 5th CD of your Purgatory set, you used the term purify or purification or purging eight times. Could you please give us which Greek terms in 1 Corinthians chapter 3 should be translated here as purifying and what lexical sources give this as the meaning?
No, I didn't give you lexical sources. What I did is gave you an example from, for example, Kittel's Greek Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, which you also quoted, where you have scholars, and these are Protestant scholars who acknowledge that refers back to Malachi chapter 3, verses 1 through 3, where Jesus is clearly revealed to be, in a prophetic sense, the one who will purify at the judgment the people of God.
Okay, so which... You have an antecedent in the Old Testament that's being referred back to, and I quoted a Protestant scholar to show that.
Which verb, however, in 1 Corinthians chapter 3 means to purify?
That wasn't my argument, James. There is no verb that means to purify. There doesn't have to be.
Okay, in the New Testament, what is the verb for purification? I don't know. Tell me. Katharidzo. Is it used in 1 Corinthians chapter 3?
I already answered that. Not to my knowledge, it's not.
Okay, you said in your presentation, quote, Catholics and Protestants also agree that some of the works mentioned here in 1 Corinthians 3 are being burned up and some are being purified, end quote. Wouldn't you agree that...
Where do Protestants agree? And if you want to just talk about German liberal Protestants, I guess that's okay, but where do Protestants agree with such a reading of the text, and where does the text ever use such language?
How does showing what kind of work something is equate to being purified from temporal punishments of sin?
My time ran out. When it talks about kinds of works, you limit... And again, I'll grant you that. That could be a subset of what we're talking about. But kind of works includes sins. And when you further the language being used here, not a verb for purifying, but the metaphor of fire, which is used for purification in the New Testament, as well as in the Old Testament as Protestant scholars.
I only quoted two of them from Kittel's Greek Theological Dictionary and Dr. Mayer in the Expositor's Bible Commentary.
Yes, but Dr. Mayer actually says, so there's a fitting symbol here for God's judgment, but he does not say anything about purification in the quotation that you provided, at least as you quoted it in that.
So did I miss something?
Yes, you missed that. Dr. Mayer said that fire is used in two senses in Scripture. One as purifying, and the other as consuming. And he's specifically referencing 1 Corinthians chapter 3. And I agree with him.
You may not agree with him, but this is a Protestant scholar who acknowledges that fire is in fact used. And when you consider that you have these kinds of works that are being burned up, these people are going through fire, not just the works, but them, it is entirely reasonable.
Are the people in this text ever the direct object of the action of fire? They go through fire. But it says, yet so as through fire. Even the Drone Biblical Commentary recognizes what that means. So is that the only text that you believe, that fire is the direct object of a purifying of them?
That's the one text that you would use?
Yes. In fact, I would back up here that burn up, and those who do, they all go through the fire of judgment. The fire is symbolic of judgment. However, it's those who, if I could finish...
But you're going to have eight minutes, so you're next up anyway. So no reason to hold off the callers. Folks are already calling at 877 -753 -3341, 877 -753 -3341, very quickly to keep everyone knowing where we're going.
Right now, Mr. Staples will have eight minutes to conclude his thoughts. I will have eight minutes to conclude mine. I will try to be as concise as I can. And then we will start taking your phone calls, 877 -753 -3341.
Tim, you have eight minutes.
This thing goes by. I appreciate you having me on, and I think this time has been fruitful. But I guess if I could toss out a few final thoughts. First, I think everyone listening to me needs to realize something.
You've been listening to a man in James White, who I respect greatly as a man, and as one who is very fervent in his beliefs, and I want to be clear on that. But you're also listening to a man who can keep a straight face and say that St. James taught justification by faith alone, even though St. James says you see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone, which is a fascinating way to approach Scripture, to say the least.
But when it comes to we poor Catholics exegeting 1 Corinthians 3, we can't say this refers to the judgment of Christ as a fulfillment of, or at least a reference back to Malachi 3, 1 -3. Sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver.
Even though Protestant scholars, as I mentioned, as well as Catholics, do see an obvious reference here back to Malachi. But we can't say there's any purification going on here in spite of this. Even though the text refers to certain kinds of works, as I mentioned, some of which need to be burned up and some which don't, to Mr. White, have nothing to do with the souls of these individuals.
So it's that these works are so radically attached to these individuals that not only the works, but these individuals themselves must go through the fire of judgment, or as Mr. White said. Why? Because we're talking about a metaphor of judgment.
It's not real fire. Their souls are not being lit on fire. And even though there are certain kinds of works represented here that are clearly keeping these individuals from final salvation, they're keeping these folks from heaven until they are removed through fire.
And even though we know, as Psalm 66, 18, and a host of scriptures reveal, that it is sin and the effects of sin that keep us from full fellowship with God, we can't say sin is involved here. Folks, the bottom line is that is bogus.
Sin and the effects of sin are being described quite effectively here for those who have eyes to see. Now then, I also have to say that I do see, because Mr. White understands the Catholic position on this text, when he claims that, you know, how can this be purgatory since you have gold there?
How can gold be in purgatory? It was obvious he didn't understand that the judgment of Christ in Catholic magisterial teaching, as I have quoted, and those who have no imperfections that need to be burned up go to heaven immediately.
They're not in purgatory. Again, purgatory is found in the subjective experience of the individuals going through the judgment, not in some sacred in 3 .14 that the individuals receive that have nothing to burn up.
It can't be salvation because they're all... Well, the answer is simple. St. Paul tells us, in Christ, sin, and eternal life, it's obvious that these souls who need no purification are receiving, to use St. Paul's language, a great...see St. Paul using multiple metaphors for degrees of glory in heaven in the same letter of 1 Corinthians 15, 41.
Remember, there's one glory of the sun, another of the moon, another of the stars, differs from star in glory. So it is with the resurrection of the dead. How much more clear can it be that folks will receive different levels of reward?
I did not say that the gold, silver individuals who have their...suffer loss. What loss do they suffer? They suffer the loss of the degree of glory they would have had if they did not have these imperfections.
We also have to say that they suffer greatly because they would have a much more profound sense than we do of the nature of these imperfections or sins that are keeping them back from experiencing heaven, or the beatific vision.
That's the very root of their suffering, as our Holy Father has pointed out. And they are purified, yes, purified. These imperfections are removed, and though the verb purify isn't used there, that's what is happening.
These imperfections are being removed by the refiner's fire, and they are finally... ...is that I believe Mr. White has failed to show... ...anyway, what matters here is... ...of the Catholic Church. It obviously did not understand the Catholic position on this, and other...into the dialogue, and for that I am most grateful to you, James.
Scripture says, Rebuke a wise man and he will love thee. Consider yourself rebuked. But I only do so out of great charity toward you and all of your listeners. And for those of you listening, check out our website at CatholicAnswersAtCatholic .com.
You can email me there as well. But I would finally exhort all of us not to... ...Godless and silly myths. And quite frankly, you're going to get a lot of silly myths with Mr. White, with all due respect.
...self and godliness, for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come. This saying is sure and worthy of full acceptance, for to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hopes set on the living God.
And I will leave you, at least in this section, with one of my favorite verses of the Old Testament, Sirach 428, which says, Fight for the truth unto the death and God will fight for you. Please, folks, don't fight for the opinions of James White or John Calvin or any other fallible man giving nothing but fallible opinions.
Fight for truth. Truth, we have the fullness of it in the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Jesus Christ in A .D. 33 and presently presided over by Benedict XVI, where we have proclaimed one Lord, one faith, and one baptism for 2 ,000 years.
And I hope to hear from some of you soon, not only on the phone lines right now, but also via email. God bless you.
All right, thank you very much. My eight-minute closing statement, I believe. Do we have one line left open or are we full up right now? I'm sorry? We're full. Okay, all right. So we'll get to this as quickly as we can.
All right, first I would like to point out that the citation of W. Harold Mayer, he specifically says, as Tim himself cites it, is used figuratively in two ways, as a purifying agent in Matthew 311 and Mark 949, and as that which consumes.
So it is a fitting symbol here for God's judgment. Notice the purifying agent, which, of course, is Mr. Staples' whole position, is the position that Dr. Mayer doesn't give for 1 Corinthians 3, as he cites it.
I would encourage folks to get past the rhetoric that we just heard, the silly myths, Mr. White doesn't understand the Catholic position, when Tim is giving a position that he knows. There are many Catholic scholars who would agree with me today against him on this matter.
He probably would disagree, for example, with Richard McBrien when he said, quote, there is for all practical purposes no biblical basis for the doctrine of purgatory. That is not to say there is no basis at all for the doctrine, but only that there is no clear biblical basis for it.
He would simply dismiss those folks. You have to do some homework for yourself, but I hope you look past the rhetoric and the rah-rah going on there. The only thing we were missing to recreate the 1996 debate we had was the Roman Catholic in the audience that yelled out, purgatory, Eucharist!
And then everybody starts clapping as if somehow yelling out the word Eucharist is an argument in a debate. That doesn't actually help us at all. We just heard that, well, you know, you got to be careful.
Mr. White there thinks that James believed in justification by faith. I've never seen Mr. Staples respond to the 24 pages of exegesis I've provided of James chapter 2 in The God Who Justifies. And I honestly don't believe that he would be capable of interacting with it, though I would challenge him to do so.
I'd be glad to debate him on that subject. But remember, I did mention, and you can go back to the archives, it was just last week that Mr. Staples answered a question in Catholic Answers Live where he defended as a biblical concept the idea that Mary is the spouse of the Holy Spirit.
Now, there is nothing farther from history, tradition, and scripture than that concept, nothing whatsoever. No one in the early church had any concept of anything like that, and yet Mr. Staples has presented that soberly as being something you can actually trace through episkiads of the Book of Judges, even though episkiads never appears in the Book of Judges in the Greek Septuagint.
But be that as it may, I would encourage you to look past that rhetoric and realize that Mr. Staples has failed to show us any purification in this text. He's gone to all sorts of other texts, but he has not been able to demonstrate that any of those texts can be drawn back to 1 Corinthians chapter 3 that overthrows the immediate context.
Mr. Staples has failed to provide any contextually based connection between any of those other texts he has cited, most of which had to do with suffering in this life, especially Romans 8, 17, which in the very next verse says it's talking about suffering in this life.
Mr. Staples has failed to show us where the actions of fire in this text are purifying. He's asserted it, but he hasn't been able to show us where the actual words mean that. He's assumed it based upon his external authorities.
Mr. Staples has failed to show us that Paul has moved his discussion to the cleansing of sins before entrance into God's presence. He has not been able to show us sins or anything like that in this particular text.
Now, some of you Roman Catholics were sort of wondering, wow, this guy doesn't understand anything about what Roman Catholics believe when he talks about purgatory? And what is that based upon? Well, that's based upon saying, well, you know, this particular word means the encounter with Christ in judgment.
I would like to ask, and maybe one of the callers will ask too, has that been infallibly defined by the church as the infallible meaning of this text? And if it hasn't, then how can I be faulted for not, quote, unquote, understanding that or for going with so many statements, such as those of Ludwig Ott, the cleansing fire, purgatorium is a place and state of temporal penal purification, fundamentals of Catholic dogma.
Who's right, Tim Staples or Ludwig Ott? How about Nicholas Patrick Wiseman, Cardinal Archbishop Westminster? We see that the fathers of the church have called it a purging fire, a place of expiation or purgation.
The idea is precisely the name, almost the same. There's so many of these things. Read F. X. Shoup's book, Purgatory. Lagasse's book, The Birth of Purgatory. Read these things for yourself, and you will be able to see that it is not a matter of misrepresenting the Roman Catholic perspective.
There has been change. If you want to call change development, well, I guess that's how you get from the first 500 years of the Christian church knowing nothing about the concept of the bodily assumption of Mary to dogma.
I call that not development. I call that perversion and mutation. They are not the same things. The fact of the matter is the context is clear, and the meaning of the words are clear. What is going on in 1 Corinthians chapter 3 is a demonstration of the people who built upon that foundation and why they did.
Those with gold, silver, and precious stones, their works are tested in the exact same way as the works of anyone else. And every Roman Catholic who has ever turned to 1 Corinthians chapter 3, and I hear them call Catholic answers all the time, and they see the word fire, they immediately connect it with Purgatory.
I guess they don't understand it just as badly as I didn't understand it, or maybe they've been taught differently. I'll leave that up to you to determine. But the fact of the matter is that this text is not talking about how sins are purged.
There's nothing about temporal punishments. There's nothing about penances. These are extra biblical concepts that have no place in Paul's presentation in this text. And so I simply ask those in the listening audience, take the time to go to the text yourself and ask yourself the question, did Paul and those to whom he was writing have a context to be able to understand this text as it's been presented?
Not only by Tim Staples, but look at how other Roman Catholics present it. Did they have the context to understand it? If they did not, then you cannot embrace this interpretation as being exegesis. You have to recognize that for what it is, it is eisegesis.
Well, I still have two minutes left there, but I'm going to go ahead and wrap up because I want to allow the callers to participate. As soon as you hear someone hang up, that will be the time to call, and we will process calls as quickly as we possibly can.
If you're getting a busy signal, just hang up and try again. But like I said, the best time would be when someone hangs up. Hopefully, Tim, you'll be able to hear the callers very clearly. If you cannot, please let us know.
We'll try to make an adjustment. And let's begin with Roger. Hi, Roger. Hi, James. How are you?
Good. Speak up a little bit. Go ahead with your question. My question is, do you think that—.
Okay, Roger, thank you for that phone call. And my answer would be no. There's nothing about a millennium here or anything about outer darkness whatsoever. Did you want to comment on that at all? No.
I would have to agree with you on that. I would just emphasize that verse 15 clearly says, but he himself shall be saved. So they're clearly not being cast into outer darkness. Yeah, outer darkness.
So the Left Behind series isn't one of your favorite series to read? No. Okay. All right. Just checking. Just trying to find some common ground there. We've got it there, I think. All right.
Let's talk with Greg. Hi, Greg. Hello. For Mr. Staples, inasmuch as the Bible says that our sins were dealt with on the cross, in the body of Christ, cleansed by the blood of Christ, that this was done perfectly and forever, and that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sins, how, then, is there any sin left to be dealt with?
And secondly, how is it that the blood of Christ was sufficient to cleanse a believer from the mortal sins that he committed before he came to Christ, yet somehow these venial sins are still left over?
Okay. Thank you, Greg. That's a great question. I think the key is you have to understand the difference between the objective sacrifice of Christ, which puts the sins of the whole world, as 1 John 2, is what we're talking about as the Council of Trent declared, November 25, 1551, when it talks about, and by the way, this is quoted in the Catechism, paragraph 1460, under the heading of satisfaction, that when we talk about making satisfaction, suffering for our sins and such, we become like Jesus who made satisfaction for our sins, and from whom is all our sufficiency.
We also have a most sure pledge that if we suffer with him, we shall also be glorified with him, as Romans 8 .17 says, for this satisfaction which we offer in payment for our sins is not so much ours that it is not also done through Christ Jesus, for we can do nothing of ourselves as of ourselves.
With his cooperation, we can do everything in him who strengthens us. So we have nothing to boast, all our boasting is in Christ, says the Catechism of Trent. So this is not about adding to what Christ did, but it's about applying what Christ did in our lives subjectively.
Okay, well my comment would be, as I note in Titus 2, verse 14, he redeemed us from every lawless deed. There is no distinction made in that which Christ redeemed us from, and the Book of Hebrews makes a very strong argument that it is by one sacrifice he has perfected forever, not made perfection available that we then through sacraments apply it to ourselves, but he has perfected forever those that are being sanctified.
That is why I am the blessed man of Romans chapter 4, verse 6, when Justice David also speaks the blessing of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works. Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have all been forgiven, whose sins have been covered.
Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account. There is a fundamental difference. This goes to the difference between Roman Catholicism and what I believe in regards to the biblical gospel, and it would be a very, very good subject for a future debate.
Can I respond to that? He asked you, and I didn't ask for a comeback on yours, so let's just do one response.
You took it a long way away from what he asked.
I think you did, but let's just go out with Jason here, okay? Jason, go ahead.
This is for Mr. Staples. Did the idolaters and second Maccabees that were being prayed for die in mortal sin? If so, can you please explain how this is possible in light of the Roman Catholic position, namely that if you die in mortal sin, you will not enter purgatory?
Thank you, Jason. Thank you, and that's a good question. And the answer is no, they did not die in mortal sin, which is obvious because the second Maccabees believed they did not because they believed they could still make what today Orthodox Jews call the mourners could do for their purification.
So they had amulets on their bodies and whatnot, which would be kind of akin to something like carrying a rabbit's foot. It's sinful to trust in anything other than God. It appears from the text that this was not mortal sin, but I would add this.
Even if it was mortal sin, we are not the judge of that. And if somebody dies, I don't make a judgment, oh, I think he died in mortal sin. No contradiction. If a family member or a loved one dies, we as a practice always pray for them, as did the Orthodox Jews.
I don't believe there's any reason to believe that the Jews held to a mortal and eternal distinction that is fundamental to this very question. It is very clear that they were idolaters, and that is why God struck them down.
God doesn't strike people down for carrying a rabbit's foot. It is very clear they were idolaters. I don't know what else could be a mortal sin but idolatry in the Old Testament. But I honestly think that that text is being torn way out of its context to be applied to this situation in any way, shape, or form.
Let's go to Michael.
Yes, sir, Michael. Yes, I think the two of you have missed a key.
Thank you very much, Michael. Would you like me to go first so you get the last shot on this one? Sure. I'll be real brief. I agree I did not miss that. I specifically made that as a part of my opening statement that we have the exact same terminology being used in verses 8 and 14.
And that I would agree that this is, at the final judgment, the day of verse 13. For the day will show it. I do believe Hamerah there is clearly the day of the Lord. It is the day of judgment. So I would agree with the caller's statement at that point.
I hoped that I had made that point, but evidently, given that he thought I'd missed it, I didn't make it clear enough, so I apologize. Your comments.
Yeah, I would say that the day of judgment, refer to this text, that each one of us will face at the moment that we die. And so you receive a reward long before the final judgment. In other words, as soon as you die, as we see in Luke 16, you know, when Jesus talks about the rich man and Lazarus, when they die, immediately they go one to paradise and the other.
So I think this text can apply to either the final judgment or the particular judgment.
All righty. Now we go to John. John, your question, please. Hey, James. This is John Salz. I'm a fellow apologist with Tim.
I've enjoyed the debate. In these verses, suffer loss. That hasn't come up. And I think, as you know, that's referred to punishment, zemiaho. In fact, I can cite a number of verses in the New Testament where zemiaho is used as eternal punishment.
You can go to Matthew 16, 26, Mark 8, 36, and Luke 9, 25. So if we have an individual here who has died,.
Okay, thank you very much. I actually did specifically address that. I'm not sure how my opening statement got lost. But I specifically addressed zemiaho and its forms and its uses in the New Testament.
I specifically made an argument that the range of zemiaho has to be translated based upon the context of which it is found, based upon its semantic domain. And I demonstrated that given that it's used in contrast to misthos, that that is why it's translated as suffer loss, not as punishment, and then gave further references to that.
So I'm sorry if that wasn't clear, but I did make that very statement in my opening statement. Tim, some response?
Sure. I appreciate the caller. And it does include punishment, and it is used elsewhere for punishment. And so, again, I think that adds more evidence to what we've been saying, and what I've been saying, and what the Church has been saying for 2 ,000 years, and that is that these works that are being burned up, it's not just the works out there floating around, individual, not only from the word, but also the context that we're talking about, purification, suffering, and such.
Okay. Frank, your question, please.
Hi. In a debate with Roberts and Jenners, this is Dr. White. You said that verse 17 does not, we've been 15 or also.
Okay. Frank, actually, what I pointed out, even in my opening statement today, did we broadcast my opening statement? It seems to have gotten lost. Maybe there is a problem with webcast or something. But as I pointed out, the contrast between 10 through 15 and 16 through 17 is found the fact that those in 16 and 17, or the individual, God will destroy him, it's individual judgment comes upon him, is that in 10 through 15 there is a building upon the foundation.
In verses 16 through 17, there is a destruction of the already built temple. And so that is the contrast. I don't recall the specifics in regards to, I think I pointed out in verse 16, you are the temple is to the Church, but him, and if a man destroyed the temple of God, God will destroy him, is about a person who is tearing down that temple, a person who is profaning the Church, and hence it's a reference to the holiness of the Church.
But I'm not sure what else I can comment on that because I'm not sure what he was referring to. Go ahead, Tim.
I don't disagree with anything that you say. One thing I would add is, know you not that you are the temple of God. But he does move from the singular to the plural here in verses 16 to 17. So he seems to be indicating here that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you.
If any man defile the temple, him shall God destroy. I think this refers to not just temporal punishment, but this would seem to indicate that the people are going to be destroyed. I think this is a reference to hell, whereas verses 14 and 15 would refer to purgatory.
Okay, let's try to sneak one more in here. Let's talk to Turretinfan.
Hello, Mr. Staple. Yes. This is a question based on the fact that you had related the spirit to judgment. The question is, who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifies.
Who is He that condemns?
Amen. I don't know what the question is, but I sure agree with the Scripture verse. Absolutely no one can, and in context there, I think, is that in Romans chapter 8 you're referring to?
Yes, that was Romans chapter 8.
Yeah, in context, of course, St. Paul is talking about people who were suffering persecution and such, is encouraging them to know that there is no power that can separate them. I love verses 35 through 39 there.
Neither death nor life nor angels nor principalities nor powers nor things present nor things that come, height nor depth nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus.
That's the security that we have as Christians. Of course, there's one thing he doesn't mention there. Maybe that's what you were angling at there, but I appreciate the call.
Okay. Well, I think what he was angling at was if the fire is the judgment of God and God is the one who justifies. Specifically, it says, who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies it.
I think what his point was, you have God not only bringing the charge but also being the one who justifies at the same time with the statement then, who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus. He who died, yes, rather who was raised.
Who's the right hand of God who also intercedes for us? And it is that intercession on our behalf that is the guarantee of the believer's salvation. It is not my continued faithfulness. It is the continued faithfulness of Jesus Christ in my behalf.
And that, again, would be something we could really get into as time would allow. But time does not allow as we have gone through our 90 minutes. Mr. Staples, thank you very much. I hope that as you go back and listen to this encounter that you'll be able to see that the time frames, the time allotments were exact.
And I believe everything was done in a way that is honoring to our commitments. And I would love to have an opportunity to do it again in the future.
All right, James. Well, I appreciate the time. And God bless you all and your listeners.
Okay, thank you, Tim. And don't forget, if you ever want to do this on Catholic Answers Live, you've got my phone number. All right. All right, thanks for calling. All right, thanks to you for listening.
We will be back, Lord willing, on Tuesday here on The Dividing Line. We'll see you then. God bless.
The Dividing Line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega Ministries. If you'd like to contact us, call us at 602 -973 -4602 or write us at P .O. Box 37106, Phoenix, Arizona, 85069. You can also find us on the World Wide Web at aomin .org, that's A-O-M-I-N dot O-R-G, where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books, tapes, debates, and tracks.
Join us again next Tuesday morning at 11 a .m. for The Dividing Line.