You can listen to Ask The Pastor every weekday at 9:00am MST on 97.1FM Hope Radio KCMI! You can also listen and subscribe to Ask The Pastor in your favorite podcast feed. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, Amazon Music and most other podcast services.
This edition of Ask the Pastor features Pastors Gary Hashley, Tim Hebbert and Brad Kilthau.
Tim Hebbert
So we're here to discuss another question, and this one comes from a listener. "Purgatory, where did this teaching come from? And is there any validity to it?" So guys, I thought I'd give you a little bit of a historic background to that, and then I'm gonna pass the baton to Gary. But as I understand purgatory, it's a temporary place between heaven and earth where those who have died go to be cleansed, or some unconfessed sins are dealt with so that when they enter heaven, they come completely clean. In the dictionary, it says the word purgatory cannot be found anywhere in scripture. The term itself, which literally means, "to purge or to cleanse," did not come into existence until, somewhere between 1175 and 1225 A.D. So let's talk a little bit about the history of it. Yeah, guys, it was interesting to research a little bit, because I didn't know that much about it. It was birthed, actually in ancient pagan religions, as well as Judaism. We can go back even to the time of the ancient Greeks when they were under the teachings of people like Plato, Heracles, and other philosophers. And they taught the ancient Greeks about a place that they were referred to as a Celestial Hades, somewhere between the earth and the moon. And you went there for a season to work out whatever you had not worked out in your earthly life. I think what I read was, Plato even thought that maybe, that was the answer of what the Milky Way was, that he could see. Ancient Judaism, also for a season, believed in prayers for the dead. In a book called 2 Maccabees 12:41-46, they say this, "So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous judge that reveals the things that are hidden. And they turned to supplication, praying that the sin that had been committed might be holy blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen their own eyes what had happened as a result of the sin of those who had fallen. He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of 2,000 drachmas of silver and sent it to Jerusalem, to provide for a sin offering. In doing this, he acted very well and honorably taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would've been foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was holy in pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead so that they might be delivered from their sins." So you're out there and you're saying, "Well, I've never heard of that book before." Well, it's not in our canon, it's in the biblical canon of the Catholic church. And guys, one of the things I've always struggled with, with some of the books that are added are, they're not recognized in the Old Testament as part of the Jewish canon. Primarily one of the very first reasons is, is because it's written in Greek. It's not written in Hebrew, but I also think as I look at that, they're written in that time between the end of our Old Testament canon and before the gospels begin. And they're written in that time, where for all intents and purposes, God goes silent for those years. So it's very difficult to say, you have divine inspired scripture unless the divine one is inspiring scripture. So we were talking before we went on the air, actually 1 Maccabees is a very good historic document about the Maccabees revolt. But what happens, I think in second and third Maccabees then, is they try to create a theology around that, which I would disagree with obviously. So the foundation of purgatory now is part of the Catholic faith. Their early church fathers didn't always believe it to be something of a physical place until around 1200 A.D. And a medievalist named Jacques Le Goff defines the birth of purgatory, the conception of purgatory, as a physical place. Now this is a place where you go, if you've left this earth, you've died, but you still have some unatoned sins. You go to this place of penance and cleansing. So if you have a loved one there, you can pay penance for them, financial penance for them. In a lot of ways, it's very similar to what we find in the Mormon faith, where they go and they stand as an intermediary or are baptized in place of their relative that may have not died within the bounds of what they would consider, what they need to be in that faith. So, Gary, I'm gonna pass the baton to you. Is there any validity to this teaching and why would it be needed?
Gary Hashley
Validity? That's a that's a good question. Again, the term purgatory really comes from a word that has to do with purification. And I've heard it explained this way, that it's possible that through Jesus your sins have been forgiven, but you haven't been purified yet. So when you die, you have to go someplace to be purified so then you can go to heaven. And so what they will say in their teaching is that there are three main thoughts to purgatory. The first is that, everybody in purgatory is going to heaven. The question in their minds when they believe in purgatory isn't, you're still up in the air as to whether you go to heaven or hell. They say, "You know, if you're in purgatory, that means you're gonna get to heaven eventually." They say, "It means purifying the soul, that your soul wasn't pure. So you need to go and have the fires of purgatory purify your soul." And the third part of their thinking is that, then those who are here and still alive need to pray for the dead and that it helps when we pray for the dead. Some of the reasoning seems a little circular, because they say, actually one of their proponents said, "If someone died and went immediately to heaven, why would we pray for them?" So he's saying, because we're taught to pray for them, must be they don't all just die and go immediately to heaven. They don't say, "Since someone dies and goes immediately to heaven, we don't need to pray for them," they go around the other way in the circle. And so, you know, why would it be needed?
Gary Hashley
Well, if, and here's an if, if we had to earn our own way to heaven: if it was our good works, if it was our efforts, if it was our religious practices that that made it possible to go to heaven. Let's suppose, if we had to earn our own way to heaven and we died, almost there and God was looking down and saying, "Boy, you know, Gary, you got close. I'm just gonna send you to purgatory for a little while to make up for what you didn't accomplish in earning your own salvation. Then you can come to heaven." Well, we don't earn our way to heaven. The Bible says, "It's not of works lest any man should boast." So it's not an issue of, we almost got there. Another thought would be, well, if Jesus' death was a good start, but we had to finish on our own, and that's kind of how I sense what they teach. Is that Jesus died to forgive us our sins, but it really wasn't enough to purify us. And so we have to finish on our own, and purgatory is where we finish that up on our own. But neither of those makes biblical sense, because the Bible teaches us: Jesus died on the cross, Jesus paid it all. His sacrifice was complete, His sacrifice was completely accepted. We add nothing to our salvation. That's why Galatians was written. It's not believe in Jesus and be circumcised, it's belief in Jesus is what saves. So because they divide forgiveness and purification, the Bible does not. In fact, 2 Corinthians 5:8-9 says, "Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please Him." It doesn't lay out a third. It's not, at home, you know, part way, and then away. It's, we're either at home in the body or away. We're either here or we're in heaven as followers of Jesus, and there's no in between place. Now they would take like, 1 Corinthians 3, where it talks about our works being tried, you know, whether gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw. That it's like, God paints the picture, He piles up our works and what burns up, burns up, and what's left, we get rewarded for. And then he says, "And you're saved yet so as through fire." They take that fire, as you go, and you burn a while. Then you get to go to heaven as if we're in the fire, not our works are in the fire. So no, I see no validity to it. So Brad, take this to the close.
Brad Kilthau
Yeah, Gary, I agree with what you're saying there. And even some of that history that Tim was sharing earlier, we think about Roman Catholicism, and it teaches that believers incur debts that must be inevitably taken care of in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be open to that person. And again, I think as you're sharing Gary, is that's not scriptural. Again what the apostle Paul said, "To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord." There isn't a place in between that is taught in the word of God. And also when you think about, you know, the teaching and the believing in purgatory, I think first of all, the doctrine of purgatory undermines the sufficiency, obviously of Christ's atonement on the cross. I mean, scripture declares that Jesus was one sacrifice that He made perfect forever. Those who are being made holy, in Hebrews 10:14, it's also shared in Hebrews 1:3 And according to the Bible, we can rest assured that in Christ's body, on that cross, all the punishment that we deserve was placed into the body of Christ. And Jesus absolutely satisfied the justice of God the Father on our behalf. Romans 3 teaches us that, 1 Peter 3:18 teaches that. And then we also think, of course, we're coming closer and closer to Easter, and we always remember the work of Christ on the cross. And right before He died, Jesus said the words in John 19:30, He said, "It is finished." And what does that mean? It's obviously that the debt has been paid in full with the shed blood of Christ. There needs to be no other payment for our sins. And then I think, also the second part of this, of why disagree with purgatory, is because sometimes as you look at it, it undermines the seriousness of sin. By forwarding the notion that certain sins are not regarded as depriving the soul of divine grace. In other words, there are certain sins that will, you know, if we commit, but they won't keep us out of heaven. We have to understand that there are not sins that are not so bad that God just lets them slide. And they don't need to be atoned for by the blood of Christ. Every individual sin, even if we go steal a candy bar from the dollar general store, you know, that is stealing, that is a sin against God. And that is enough, there alone, to separate us from the presence of a very perfect and holy God. God the Father is not some old man that just lets things slide. He is perfect, He's righteous, He's holy. And so when we say that, that not so bad sin can be atoned for in a place called purgatory, that's saying that, "Well that not so bad sin doesn't need the blood of Jesus to cover it. This temporal punishment will take care of that." Well, that goes back again to what you were saying Gary. We're adding works to our faith again. Anytime you add works to faith, you have a false teaching. You have a belief that will not get you into heaven. It's only by faith alone, in Christ alone, that we are saved. There's never works, Ephesians 2:8-9 is so clear. And we have to understand that any transgression, any iniquity against our holy God is enough to separate us from our holy God, Psalm 51:4 tells us that. And so there's not a temporal debt that can be paid off on some of these sins and other sins don't need to be. Jesus taught very profoundly on that, if you just look at the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7. And then also we know that while the Catholic church promotes the teaching of purgatory, it wasn't officially defined by the, and I think Tim was talking about this, it was officially defined by the council of Florence in 1439. And it was also defended by the council of Trent in the late 16th century. Okay, so there were some council meetings, there were some coming together of high ranking hierarchy of the church in these, and there were some good things that were resolved. But we always have to remember, those councils are not scripture and what those councils wrote is not scripture. And when we look at the Bible, purgatory is not supported in a canon of scripture. In fact, I was even studying this a little bit earlier, even the new Catholic encyclopedia clearly acknowledges that the doctrine of purgatory is not explicitly stated in the Bible. Even those who are trying to promote it can say that it's not explicitly stated in the Bible. And so what you find as a teaching of purgatory, is really based upon traditions of the fathers of the Catholic church and not upon the forefathers of the Christian faith that we have of the apostles of the New Testament and the teaching of them. And then finally, I just got to say that most importantly, the father's testimony throughout all the word of God, as I've studied, it tells us that He has graciously provided salvation to those of us who come to Him by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. Romans 8 is so clear on that, Romans 11:6 is clear on that and of course, Ephesians 2:8-9, as I shared earlier. So, when we look at the teaching of purgatory and the validity of it, is it true? Well, when you come to the scriptures, you cannot find that support. You can find history, you can find tradition, but support from the scriptures is not found. Hebrews 10:4, just to finish up it says, "By one sacrifice, He," that is Jesus, "made perfect forever those who are being made holy." Jesus did it all. Jesus did it all in the cross of Calvary.
