@Soul
No, I’m not falling for it, you’re here to recruit, not reason. And I’m not buying what you’re selling. My exegesis stands because it’s rooted in the actual syntax and morphology of the inspired text. You’ve shown no grasp of either. If you can’t handle the grammar, don’t challenge the meaning.
J.
Errors everywhere @Soul, not good.
J.
You want me to verify my sources? Absolutely, my Bible, not heresies!
Good enough for you @Soul?
You are way out of your depth here, no offense.
J.
Indeed, I’ve angled the floodlight on several of those errors thus far, and they lie with the author of one of the articles against Maria Valtorta that you cited. Then, I asked if you wanted to take over verifying those sources, and you answered:
No one in Scripture is the source of the articles you cited. Is it good enough for you to be someone who refuses to be properly knowledgeable about the subject in question, and verify the sources of the articles you cite against it? Apparently so.
So you are claiming the links I provided are lying @Soul, that’s it?
J.
Did you not see the several errors that I pointed out in one of those articles you cited, and showed that they lie with the author of that article, not Maria Valtorta? Did I not ask if you want to take over verifying the content of those articles, rather than watch me continue to do your work for you? Based on the answer you gave, apparently not.
Valtorta defenders raise valid challenges to some criticisms, especially on ancient tools or geography.
But, the core issues remain unresolved: doctrinal oddities, fictionalized dialogue, and lack of ecclesial endorsement.
Fact: the Church has officially rejected her writings as not divinely inspired. That remains the final word.
And that’s my final word to you @Soul.
J.
Your post is lacking. Which defenders? What criticisms? Which tools? What about geography? What doctrinal oddities? What fictionalized dialogue? What kind of ecclesial endorsement?
If you did your homework, you’d know the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith put out a statement giving their opinion that Maria Valtorta’s writings “cannot be considered to have a supernatural origin”. An opinion that lacked an explanation and the DDF has been wrong in their opinions before. If you want to be an objective investigator, then read the Response to the Vatican’s 2025 Press Release on Maria Valtorta, as well as the proofs in A Summa and Encyclopedia to Maria Valtorta’s Extraordinary Work in support of her writings having a supernatural origin.
Let’s dokimazo this with Scriptures, you go first @Soul
J.
I have referenced Scripture and more, and tried to explain my position in my own words, but you misinterpreted what I said, and then argued against what I “said” based on your misinterpretation of Scripture. It’s a mess. That is why, for the sake of clarity and due to the character limit, I referred you to Jesus directly:
In His dictation on October 17th, 1943, He explains what Purgatory is and what it consists of. (The Notebooks: 1943)
In His dictation on October 21, 1943, He gives the reasons for the following system of expiation in Purgatory: suffering only because of love and expiating with love. (The Notebooks: 1943)
If you want to try and properly understand my position on Purgatory and test my arguments, then read the words of my source (Who references Scripture), regardless of whether you believe that source to be Jesus or not.
You can cite your source on purgatory, what’s the problem with that? Just quote a paragraph and I will respond.
J.
The number of words exceeds the character limit, and a moderator informed me that I’m disallowed from copying and pasting material in multiple subsequent posts. That is why it would be easier if you just visited the links I cited and read from the source directly.