Read the first and second posts in the series, then come back here and read this post!

Here, my fellow traveler expresses his interpretation of the passage in Matthew 12 in which Jesus states that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven in this age or the age to come (which to me implies that it’s possible that something can be forgiven in the age to come.)

You are correct. The Bible speaks of two ages or two worlds. This present age or world is this present time period, possibly beginning with creation of the earth. This present age or world and thus this world will end. See for example Matthew 28:20.

Matthew 28:20
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
KJV

Other versions use the word “age” for world. Since this age will end there must be a new age for which we can determine the beginning. This present age will end when the present creation is gone and there is a new creation indicating a new age.

Revelation 21:1
1 Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away.
NKJV

2 Peter 3:13
13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
NKJV

In the new age only righteousness will dwell indicating that our heavenly home will be there. There can be no sin in the new age. Since there can be no sin there is no forgiveness. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven because there will be none in the new age of eternity future which will have no end.

Regarding lost people: Revelation 19:11-15 describes the Great White Throne judgment where all the lost of this present age are thrown into the lake of fire. This judgment will occur as this present age is ending so no lost person will be found in the new age. It is only in this present age that people are given the choice to accept or reject the revelation of God given them by the Holy Spirit. In heaven will be saved people forever more.

My response:

So in your interpretation, you are saying that there is no forgiveness of anything in the age to come because the age to come is heaven so there’s no need for forgiveness since there’s no sin there?

While I see where you’re coming from, it just strikes me as odd that Jesus said that there will be no forgiveness of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, either in this age or the next. To me for Jesus to mention that something CAN’T be forgiven in the next age implies that there is a flipside – that something CAN be forgiven in the next age – and I think it’s clear that we agree that in neither heaven nor hell is any forgiveness present/necessary.

In any event, I appreciate the input you’ve given and especially the civil way in which you have shared your interpretations.

My impression is that we’ll be putting this passage in Matthew to bed because we have each expressed our views and clearly there’s not further purpose to discussing it. Of course we should be able to continue on the subject of where one suffers loss as through fire yet is saved from I Corinthians.

As I said to my coworker who got this whole thing started, and I would throw out to any of my fellow amateur apologists reading this, my point here is not to change anyone’s mind (though if the Holy Spirit decides to work in that way I am pleased to be His tool) but simply to inform. Too many folks out there disagree with a distorted version of the Catholic teaching on this or that subject, and I would much rather have someone be informed of what the authentic Catholic teaching is and disagree with that!

BTW, your ideas in the combox will be helpful too!

You need to read the first post in the series before you read this one.

Here is the next response from the other party in the discussion:

There are several Bible references to our going to heaven when we die. Here is one. Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5:8 that he was willing to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.

2 Corinthians 5:8
8 We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.

Paul was looking forward to going to be present with the Lord in heaven when he died. Our blessed, living hope is to soon be present with our Lord and Savior and to see him face to face. Because of his great sacrificial love for us we will praise him for all eternity in our heavenly home. See also Philippians 1:23, John 14:6, John 17:24 and 1 John 3:2.

In the 1 Corinthians 3 passage the inspired writer is addressing saved people who are believers in the finished work of Christ. The subject is the works we do for Christ in this present life and not our sins. You may wish to begin reading at verse 5. I print 1 Corinthians 3:10-15.

1 Cor 3:10-15
10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it. 11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, 13 each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is. 14 If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.
NKJV

There is coming a time of judgment of our works where they will be tested by a fire judgment to determine of what sort they are. Some works will endure this judgment and be rewarded while other works will be lost. But the believing person is still saved even though his works are lost in the fire judgment and will not be rewarded.

It is important to understand that the saved person is not being judged for sin. All our sins; past, present and future were all washed clean by the blood of Christ and our eternal life is secure in Christ. This passage should not be confused with the forgiveness of our sins.

The Matthew 12 passage deals with what is called “the unpardonable sin”. Much has been written on this topic. Every person is born a sinner and thus unfit to enter heaven. Romans 1:18-21 indicates that God has given a revelation of himself to every person so that those who reject his saving grace are without excuse as they go the way of eternal destruction. Those who reject his saving grace must reject Bible truth concerning our great salvation. It is the work of the Holy Spirit to give universal revelation of God to mankind. To reject that revelation is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit leading to the conclusion that only Christ rejecting people commit the unpardonable sin.

You will note that in Matthew 12 Jesus is addressing the Pharisees who have already rejected Jesus and the revelation of God by the Holy Spirit. In this passage they accuse the Son of God of being a worker of Satan. Jesus call them a brood of snakes and indicates that their words are evil. Verse 37 indicates they are condemn by their evil words. The Lord’s loving forgiving grace was rejected by these Pharisees.

Now – the first 3 paragraphs I didn’t address because they are rather peripheral in comparison to the other stuff. Myself, I don’t see how the passage he cites indicates that one must be EITHER present in the flesh OR present with Christ. It doesn’t say that there’s not a place “in between.” On to my response.

First, to the idea of suffering as through fire yet being saved:

You said,

There is coming a time of judgment of our works where they will be tested by a fire judgment to determine of what sort they are. Some works will endure this judgment and be rewarded while other works will be lost. But the believing person is still saved even though his works are lost in the fire judgment and will not be rewarded.

I find this really interesting. You state, if I may paraphrase, that our works go with our souls when we die, to a place/time/state of being in which our works are judged – tested through fire.

Would you agree that when we refer to works, we are either referring to good works or sins? That’s all works are – sins or not sins, right?

Therefore, I understand you to say that our sins and our “not sins,” our good works, will be tested through a fire judgement. And some of our works – our good works, will survive this judgement and they will be rewarded. And our works that are not good works, our sins, will be burned up and separated from us. Naturally, they won’t be rewarded.

Based upon my understanding of what you are saying, you have succinctly described the Catholic teaching of Purgatory. The bad stuff is burned up and doesn’t survive and the good stuff does. I’m beginning to believe that you and the Catholic Church have no disagreement with each other on this subject.

Again, let me thank you for the reasoned and civil discussion we have been having.

And now to my response about the idea that there is a sin which won’t be forgiven in this age or in the age to come:

Okay, I do agree with the explanation of the context of the Matthew 12 passage. But what I am asking for is an explanation of
“it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.” (KJV)
or
“will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.” (NIV)
or
“it shall not be forgiven him, either in ^{( AJ)}this age or in the age to come.” (NASB)

Now we’re talking about 2 ages here. I take the meaning of “this age” to refer to the current human state of existence on Earth (and the coinciding era of time in which humans have existed on Earth.) Therefore, the question is, what is the age or world to come in this verse? Does it make sense for the age/world to come in this verse to be either heaven or hell?

Now, logically, if Jesus tells us that a sin will not be forgiven, not in this age or world, or the age or world to come, then that means some other sin can be forgiven both in this age/world and the age/world to come.

So let’s take heaven first: can something be forgiven in heaven? No, there is no sin in heaven; so people who have received the gift of heaven no longer have sin on their souls…no forgiveness necessary.

How about hell? Is there any forgiveness in hell? No, there is no exit from hell, therefore the souls in hell cannot receive forgiveness, and even if they did it would give them no benefit.

So, therefore, where/what is the age/world to come where one can receive forgiveness?

More in my next post!

This is a fun one. My first real solid opportunity for apologetics, and I am up against a Ph.D. It all started yesterday when a coworker pulled me aside and said that at his breakfast prayer meeting, someone made some offhanded remarks about how the Catholic Church created Purgatory to make money (I know you’ve never heard that one before.) I forwarded him the Catholic Answers article on Purgatory. Little did I know this would be the jumping-off point for a spirited discussion of the subject. My whole point in providing the info to my coworker was to say, it’s fine to disagree, just make sure you’re disagreeing with the authentic teaching and not the bastardization that is perpetuated by those who are anti Catholic (and no, I didn’t use those exact words to express that to him). He forwarded the article on to the rest of the group, which prompted this response (indicated by the block quote):

Here is Biblical truth for you all to consider:
xxxx

1 Peter 3:18b-19
the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.

Question: Who were the spirits in prison that Jesus preached to? Look at Luke 16:19-29.

Luke 16:19-31
19 “There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day. 20 But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate, 21 desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 Then he cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. 26 And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.’ 27 Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ 29 Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31 But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’ “NKJV

The rich man and Lazarus both when to the ‘heart of the Earth’. Notice that there were two regions. One, where the rich man went was a place of flames of torment called Hades. The other where Lazarus was carried by the angels was a place of comfort called ‘Abraham’s bosom’ or in other places ‘paradise’. The ‘spirits in prison’ were formerly disobedient but they were saved like the eight souls in the ark at the preaching of Noah. Look at 2 Peter 2:4-5.

2 Peter 2:4-5
4 For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; NKJV

The fallen angels were cast in the hell, in chains and in darkness. This is not the Hades where the rich man went because he had light to see into paradise and there is no mention of his chains. These fallen angels will some day be cast into the lake of fire prepared for the devil. See Matthew 25:41 and Revelation 20:10. Like the rich man, all ungodly lost people will go to Hades to await the judgment at the Great White Throne of Revelation 20:11-15.

Following his crucifixion Jesus went in the spirit to the ‘heart of the earth’ where he preached to the souls in paradise. Compare 1 Peter 3:19 with Matthew 12:40.

Matthew 12:40
40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.NKJV

Recall also our Lord’s words to the repentant thief on the cross, “Today you shall be with me in paradise”. (Luke 23:43)

When the 3 days were ended and it came time for Jesus to leave the tomb, his spirit was united with his resurrection body. Recall Jesus’ conservation with Mary Magdalene whom he met immediately after he left the tomb. Jesus told her not to touch him because he was not yet ascended. See John 20:17

John 20:17
17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.’ ” NKJV

Jesus continued ascending to God the Father in heaven at that time. When Jesus ascended he emptied paradise, taking all the righteous Old Testament souls, including Lazarus, home to heaven. Look at Ephesians 4:8-10.

Ephesians 4:8-10
8 Therefore He says: “When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, and gave gifts to men.” 9(Now this, “He ascended”–what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)

NKJV

The ‘captivity captive’ refers to the spirits in prison that Jesus preached to while in the heart of the Earth.

Conclusion: THERE IS NO PLACE AND THERE NEVER WAS A PLACE LIKE WHAT IS CALLED PURGATORY. Remember that great gulf between Abraham’s bosom and Hades in Luke 16:16? Prior to the ascension of Christ at his resurrection saved souls were in ‘paradise’ or ‘Abraham’s bosom’. Lost souls were separated from them and tormented in Hades. Today all lost souls join them in Hades awaiting the final judgment and an eternity in the lake of fire with the devil and his angels. Today all saved souls are taken by the angels to heaven to forever be in the presence of the Lord.

Now I don’t see how the stuff he’s provided supports the statement that he makes in all caps in the final paragraph. Nonetheless, I responded:

I can certainly agree with the points xxxx makes. We don’t deny that Jesus did descend to the dead/bosom of Abraham/whatever you want to call it at which time he ministered to essentially the souls of people who had died in God’s good graces but not reached heaven yet (we have records indicating the Jews prayed for the souls of their dead for centuries – they must have thought there was some benefit to doing this) – it’s in the Apostles’ Creed, which was the first Christian profession of faith that was ever written out.

The thing for me is that these seem to all refer back to people who died prior to Christ’s resurrection; we do believe that the Old Testament saints were raised as a result of Christ’s ministering to them during the period between His death and resurrection. Dr. Rhoades says “Today all saved souls are taken by the angels to heaven” but I don’t see his scripture references even addressing what happens today, just how things were at the time of Christ’s death and resurrection.

I’d be interested in how Dr. Rhoades would explain the place where one suffers loss as through fire yet is saved (1 Cor. 3:15) and for that matter how one can receive forgiveness in the age to come (Matt. 12:32) if the only two choices are heaven and hell.

The next round will come in my next post.

Courtesy of the Times of London is an article about how several patients with Type 1 Diabetes have been able to stop taking insulin after receiving a treatment involving stem cells drawn from their own blood. Yes, that’s right, another disease being treated by non-embryonic stem cells.

Yet The Times can’t resist putting in a comment about ESCR and Bush’s opposition:

But research using the most versatile kind of stem cells — those acquired from human embryos — is currently opposed by powerful critics, including President Bush.

Never mind the fact that so far no diseases are being treated/cured as a result of ESCR, or that there are lots of leaders who oppose ESCR, not just Bush, or that Bush continues federal funding for ESCR on the existing lines of embryonic stem cells (though this is somehow called “banning ESCR.”)

Remember what John Edwards said before the 2004 Presidential Election: “If John Kerry was President, Christopher Reeve would stand up and walk.” Oh well.

Get the Story.

This is worth reading…

With a ten-gallon CHT to Jimmy Akin’s author SDG, we find out about a study conducted in Germany that the sympto-thermal method of natural family planning (as previously discussed in this blog) is equally as effective as the pill under perfect use.

Since this is a “scientific” publication writing about it (Scientific American,) of course it’ll be disparaging of anything that is more an art than a science. It starts with the headline.

Modified Rhythm Method Shown to Be as Effective as the Pill—But Who Has That Kind of Self-Control?

<picks up bullhorn, leans close to the ears of author Christopher Mims, squeezes the trigger, and gently screams> STOP CALLING IT THE RHYTHM METHOD!!! If you would do any homework at all you’d see that the old calendar rhythm method is 90% ignored by the current sympto-thermal method (hereinafter referred to as STM).

Of course we have to work in a disparaging remark in the first line of the story following the inaccurate headline:

birth control methods collectively known as periodic abstinence have been jokingly referred to as “Vatican roulette,”

From there, we have 3 paragraphs of accurate information, including this nugget of joy:

As effective as STM can be, experts say it is not right for everyone. Whereas the method is cheap (read: free) and appeals to women who want a natural birth control method, it requires a strong commitment on the part of both partners.

Imagine that! The idea that having a sexual relationship should in any way involve strong commitment on anyone’s part is blasphemous. To expect both partners to have a strong commitment to their method of family planning is simply expecting too much. Moving along, a totally unbiased OB/GYN who of course would never push any means of artificial contraception on anyone brings clarity to the conversation:

“Naive readers see these results, and they think [STM] is the greatest thing since laptop computers. The researchers on this paper went back and cherry-picked this data from an ongoing study from the past 20 years. They chose the users who were the best users for this method.”

Hmm. And I am sure that manufacturers of condoms, the pill, norplant, IUD, sponges, diaphragms, and so on, never give out their effectiveness stats based only upon those people who use their products according to the actual included instructions. News flash: all such products quote their effectiveness based on perfect use, just like proponents of NFP (note that there is no “NFP industry,” but that’s a whole other post.) To their credit, SA follows this up with another accurate statement:

“That means half the month you can’t have sex. That’s very difficult for young couples.” (It’s worth noting that STM actually requires only 7-10 days of abstinence, but related methods of birth control still practiced in the U.S. do require up to two weeks of abstinence every month.)

And here’s something that is not surprising

“Many of the authors of these studies have religious orientations,” he says, “and that clouds the motivations.” Some 74 percent of the women who participated in Frank-Herrmann’s study, which will be published in the journal Human Reproduction, listed their religion as Roman Catholic,

From an organization that teaches NFP,

She says that although religion was the early impetus, couples who practice STM are now seeking “natural” birth control. “Now it’s more and more from a natural motivation; to be closer to nature,” she says. “We often say it’s people who like camping, bicycling, outdoor exercise—people who want healthy food and healthy natural family planning.”

Our unbiased OB/GYN from above chimes in,

“I chafe at the term ‘natural family planning,’” he says. “For many couples this is highly unnatural. ‘Natural’ is methods that you don’t have to think about, that allow you to be spontaneous…. STM is very unpopular, hard to use, and has a poor success rate in average couples. Most people aren’t willing to put up with it.”

Never tried it with a latex barrier, but I have a feeling I’d notice it’s there. And somehow I just don’t see how you “don’t have to think about” putting on a barrier or making sure you take that pill at the same time every day. And I don’t see how loading your body up with artificial hormones could ever be considered more natural than not doing so. The article closes with one final flourish from our unbiased OB/GYN buddy:

“the best method for a couple to use is whatever they want. It’s counterproductive to try to steer people to one thing or another.”

To this, I simply ask him, do you teach your patients about all their options, including the STM of NFP? If not, sounds like you might be steering them to one thing or another…perhaps the one thing that lines your pockets the most.

H/T to The Curt Jester.

According to the AP, John Billings, a pioneer in the world of reproductive fertility, has passed away in Australia. Billings is known for the Billings Ovulation Method, which is a method of natural family planning that focuses on empirical observation of cervical mucus to determine when a woman is most fertile – thus it is pretty effective for both aiding those wanting to avoid pregnancy and those wanting to achieve pregnancy, both without drugs (or immoral procedures.)

The AP, of course, can’t help themselves. First, they give us this headline…

Founder of contraceptive method dies

Then a few paragraphs down they give us this…

Billings, a staunch Catholic and father of nine, always had the support of his church, which opposes contraceptive devises such as condoms and the pill that revolutionized birth control a decade later.

Obvious logical problem here – he had the support of his Church which opposes contraception yet he was the founder of a “contraceptive method.” AP = dumb as rock? I prefer to think it’s ignorance as opposed to an outright attempt to smear the man’s name posthumously. Of course, being the AP, they can’t resist also mentioning

Critics of the Billings method argue the church supported it because of its relatively high failure rate, which earned it the nickname “Vatican Roulette.”

Mukesh Haikerwal, president of the Australian Medical Association, said the method’s failure rate was three in 100, compared to one in 100 for condoms, one in 1,000 for the pill and one in 10,000 for implanted devices.

Planned Parenthood (and no, I won’t link to them) report the breakage rate of the condom is 2/100 – but that’s a perfect use rate. Billings’ method can’t theoretically have a “perfect use” because it’s more art than science. Then you get into the pill and the IUD, and yes, those are quite effective, but they have substantial peripheral health risks ranging from infertility to strokes to hemorrhaging. I do wonder where old Mukesh got his information on the failure rate of condoms.

One final note – I advocate and my wife and I use the Sympto-Thermal Method of NFP, which is a hybrid, using components of Billings’ and others’ methods to determine times of greater and lesser fertility. This method is taught beautifully by Couple to Couple League.

Get the Story!

Well, due to the length of our gospel reading today (I assume) there was no homily during Mass. Seems to me something of a missed opportunity, even in spite of the length of the reading. So, here’s Blessed JPII’s homily from Palm Sunday back in 2000.

Read it here!