What does the Bible say about indulgences?

[Hestha]

An indulgence is not permission to sin. An indulgence is not an excuse out of hell. It's just a reward for repenting past sins and alleviate the time spent in purgatory, correct?

So, what does the Bible say about indulgences? Although indulgences have been sold throughout history, the selling goes against church doctrine and is one of the things mentioned in the 95 Theses by Martin Luther.

 

[bling]

I do not find it in scripture, but it is a way to get money.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

An indulgence is not permission to sin. An indulgence is not an excuse out of hell. It's just a reward for repenting past sins and alleviate the time spent in purgatory, correct?

So, what does the Bible say about indulgences? Although indulgences have been sold throughout history, the selling goes against church doctrine and is one of the things mentioned in the 95 Theses by Martin Luther.

Hi Hestha,

The Bible doesn't address the topic of indulgences because the idea was deduced and derived by the Catholic Church later on in history.

But you are correct that "an indulgence is not permission to sin." And what you've said reflects the Catholic doctrine, that an 'indulgence' is:

The remission of the temporal punishment due for sins and hence, the satisfaction owed to God for one's sins...The Church grants such indulgences after the guilt of sin and its eternal punishment have been remitted by sacramental absolution or by perfect contrition...

(The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1987)

Being that Jesus and the Apostles did not teach this, as reflected in the New Testament, then it isn't an approach to forgiveness that Christians should encourage.

Why is this topic on your mind, Hestha?

[Blessings]

 

[Hestha]

Well, it appears that many of the members here are Protestants or non-Catholics. Many of them just have 'Christian' attached to their name, not affiliated with any school/branch/denomination of the religion. If some Christians believe that indulgences are not scripted in the Bible or taught by Jesus, but fabricated by the Roman Catholic Church, and the Roman Catholic Church still uses this in the Sacrament of Penance, then I can surely see why some Christians do not consider Catholic Christians as 'Christians', theologically speaking. Protestants would probably also not consider the Fundamentalist Church of Latter-Day Saints 'Christians' either, since Fundamentalist Mormons practice polygamy and incest. Therefore, it's hard to define who can be counted as 'Christian' and who can not.

From an outsider point-of-view, I'll just say whoever identifies himself a Christian is a Christian. I don't care about theology and whatnot; I just care about the representative heuristic. And there are bad Christians and good Christians. But all Christians are fallible, even the good ones.*

Good = Christians who think they are following Christ
Bad = Christians who are perceived by others to not be following Christ
Fallible = "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Roman 3:23

 

[Nails74]

...theologically speaking. Protestants would probably also not consider the Fundamentalist Church of Latter-Day Saints 'Christians' either, since Fundamentalist Mormons practice polygamy and incest. Therefore, it's hard to define who can be counted as 'Christian' and who can not.

Mormons are not Christians because they have a different Jesus and a different Gospel...

I am amazed that you are so quickly turning away from Him who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— not that there is another gospel, but there are some who are troubling you and want to change the good news about the Messiah. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel other than what we have preached to you, a curse be on him! [Galatians 1:6-8]

From an outsider point-of-view, I'll just say whoever identifies himself a Christian is a Christian. I don't care about theology and whatnot; I just care about the representative heuristic. And there are bad Christians and good Christians. But all Christians are fallible, even the good ones.

In this case, theology is the name of the game.

“Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravaging wolves. You’ll recognize them by their fruit. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes or figs from thistles? In the same way, every good tree produces good fruit, but a bad tree produces bad fruit. A good tree can’t produce bad fruit; neither can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that doesn’t produce good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So you’ll recognize them by their fruit. [Matthew 7:15-20]

Good = Christians who think they are following Christ

Sadly, there are many of these...reminds me of one of the scariest passages in the Bible...

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord!’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of My Father in heaven. On that day many will say to Me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in Your name, drive out demons in Your name, and do many miracles in Your name?’ Then I will announce to them, ‘I never knew you! Depart from Me, you lawbreakers!’ [Matthew 7:21-23]

 

[Hestha]

I am amazed that you are so quickly turning away from Him who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— not that there is another gospel, but there are some who are troubling you and want to change the good news about the Messiah. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel other than what we have preached to you, a curse be on him! [Galatians 1:6-8]

Actually, Mormons do take the Bible as the source for the Gospel, but they have a different interpretation of the Bible and some Christian terms. In addition to the Bible, they also believe in The Book of Mormon, Doctrines & Covenants, and The Pearl of Great Price.

“Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravaging wolves. You’ll recognize them by their fruit. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes or figs from thistles? In the same way, every good tree produces good fruit, but a bad tree produces bad fruit. A good tree can’t produce bad fruit; neither can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that doesn’t produce good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So you’ll recognize them by their fruit. [Matthew 7:15-20]

This part looks familiar. It talks about a wolf in sheep's clothing - a popular idiom.

So, you are taking a passage from the Bible to attack Mormonism, because you think that Mormons are "ravaging wolves" in sheep's clothing, pretending to do good when really they don't know a thing about Christianity. Ouch, that's harsh.

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord!’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of My Father in heaven. On that day many will say to Me, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in Your name, drive out demons in Your name, and do many miracles in Your name?’ Then I will announce to them, ‘I never knew you! Depart from Me, you lawbreakers!’ [Matthew 7:21-23]

So, now you are taking a passage from the Bible to defend your point that Mormons are lawbreakers before God. I don't know about the quote; the passage may be referring to religious zealots who hijack Christianity for their personal gain. It doesn't really say anything about Mormons, but really say something about your attitude towards them.

 

[GrayAngel]

An indulgence is not permission to sin. An indulgence is not an excuse out of hell. It's just a reward for repenting past sins and alleviate the time spent in purgatory, correct?

So, what does the Bible say about indulgences? Although indulgences have been sold throughout history, the selling goes against church doctrine and is one of the things mentioned in the 95 Theses by Martin Luther.

Neither indulgences or purgatory are in the Bible. Even the Catholic church has abandoned their sale of indulgences, although they still promote their works-based salvation with the doctrine of purgatory. Purgatory suggests that Jesus' sacrifice was not sufficient enough to cover all of our sins, and that our remaining sins could be paid on our own through temporary purgatory.

There are only three places in the afterlife: Hell, Paradise, and Heaven. Paradise is empty now that Jesus' death has permitted their ascension into Heaven. That leaves Heaven and Hell.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Well, it appears that many of the members here are Protestants or non-Catholics.

Yes, many members of Christianity in the United States are Protestant, although I’m not sure we should lump all Christian groups together who affiliate themselves as Protestant. Many of them have significant differences in interpretation, and some groups, such as Mormons, are so different that they deviate significantly on a wide range of topics, and not just a handful of doctrines. If instead we take each Christian group in the U.S. as a separate entity, or denomination, we will find that Roman Catholics make up the largest denomination in the Unites States (at 23%), even though they are outnumbered by Protestants as a whole [at about 51% together] (The Pew Form, 2010).

References​

The Pew Forum. (2010). U.S. religious landscape survey. Retrieved from Statistics on Religion in America Report -- Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

Many of them just have 'Christian' attached to their name, not affiliated with any school/branch/denomination of the religion.

Yes, many Christians in the U.S. feel frustrated and/or confused by organized institutions that claim to represent the Christian faith, so it isn’t uncommon for Americans who consider themselves as Christian to still not attend church, or go regularly.

If some Christians believe that indulgences are not scripted in the Bible or taught by Jesus, but fabricated by the Roman Catholic Church, and the Roman Catholic Church still uses this in the Sacrament of Penance, then I can surely see why some Christians do not consider Catholic Christians as 'Christians', theologically speaking.

From my understanding of Scripture, I don’t think it is fair to cite Roman Catholics as ‘un-Christian,’ rather I would say that those in the RC denomination adhere to some superfluous dogmas that distort the interpretation and application of New Testament faith—but RC’s still have, at the least, the same core doctrines (and meanings) that Protestants do, which is something that Mormon’s do not.

Protestants would probably also not consider the Fundamentalist Church of Latter-Day Saints 'Christians' either, since Fundamentalist Mormons practice polygamy and incest.

Mormons also have a core of theology that drastically differs from that of Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants. Mormons may use many of the same terms, but they mean something vastly different.

Therefore, it's hard to define who can be counted as 'Christian' and who can not.

Yes, I would agree that defining who is a Christian is difficult, but it is not impossible, and we have the words of the founder(s) of the Christian faith which has already defined it for us.

From an outsider point-of-view, I'll just say whoever identifies himself a Christian is a Christian.

Well, I can understand wanting to simplify something that is difficult to ascertain, but if we decide to identify a person as a Christian because that person simply claims to be so, then we would be doing an act that Christians during the earliest Christian centuries did not do; in fact, not even Jesus endorsed that as an option. The Scripture is pretty clear that to be a Christian a person must, at minimum, 1) Believe in Christ, 2) Repent of sin, and 3) Do good to others. Persons who don’t carry through with these 3 things really have no business claiming to belong to the ‘Kingdom of God’; rather, they would be ‘illegal immigrants’ of a spiritual kind. Just as in most nations of the world today, to belong to that nation (or kingdom) is not for an individual to decide, but rather for the authorities who oversee that nation, and its legal framework or constitution, to make the decision as to who qualifies as a citizen.

I don't care about theology and whatnot; I just care about the representative heuristic.

I can understand that as an “outsider” you may not want to make the effort to understand the institution of Christianity on its own terms, and you may perhaps instead want to simplify the issue by recognizing a heuristic, but this kind of self-asserted, relativizing isn’t really my or your call to make—it is the call of the authorities that oversee the kingdom.

And there are bad Christians and good Christians. But all Christians are fallible, even the good ones.*

Good = Christians who think they are following Christ
Bad = Christians who are perceived by others to not be following Christ
Fallible = "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Roman 3:23

Hestha, the way in which you categorize bad and good Christians is a somewhat gracious way of evaluating individual Christians, and I appreciate that. However, while it is true that there are Christians who have attained varying degrees of spiritual maturity, some good and some still struggling, Jesus Christ and his apostles have already made it clear that counterfeit Christians are to be also expected in the real world—there will be, and have already been, false Christs, false teachers, false prophets, etc., which is another reason why we can’t just take someone’s word for it that he or she IS a Christian.

So, in sum, all of this ties into the ‘indulgences’ issue we have already begun to discuss, and it does so in that there is a truth to the matter. The idea of ‘indulgences’ has to be tested against Scripture, as well as for logical coherence and truth.

Is ‘indulgences’ an idea in Christianity with which you have been affiliated with in the past? Or, is the ‘indulgences’ issue simply one that you find to be interesting?

[Blessings to you!]

 

[Sketcher]

Answer: absolutely nothing.

 

[Nails74]

Actually, Mormons do take the Bible as the source for the Gospel, but they have a different interpretation of the Bible and some Christian terms. In addition to the Bible, they also believe in The Book of Mormon, Doctrines & Covenants, and The Pearl of Great Price.

...but, in reference to the Bible passage, what is the Gospel that they preach? You certainly cannot compare the Mormon "gospel" with what you find in the Bible. Why do you think they have an additional book?

This part looks familiar. It talks about a wolf in sheep's clothing - a popular idiom.
So, you are taking a passage from the Bible to attack Mormonism, because you think that Mormons are "ravaging wolves" in sheep's clothing, pretending to do good when really they don't know a thing about Christianity. Ouch, that's harsh.

You need to read my responses in the context of your statements above. Though Jesus is talking about false teachers in that passage (and those bringing a different Gospel would certainly be false teachers), I was referring to your statement that:

I'll just say whoever identifies himself a Christian is a Christian. I don't care about theology and whatnot

By discussing Christianity and those who would call themselves Christians, you are most certainly talking about theology!

So, now you are taking a passage from the Bible to defend your point that Mormons are lawbreakers before God. I don't know about the quote; the passage may be referring to religious zealots who hijack Christianity for their personal gain. It doesn't really say anything about Mormons, but really say something about your attitude towards them.

Again, I'm not dealing specifically with Mormons here (because your statement wasn't) but anyone who would just slap a "christian" label on themselves arbitrarily. Read that Matt 7:21 passage. There will be many people shocked to find out that Christ "never knew them".

 

[Hestha]

The Scripture is pretty clear that to be a Christian a person must, at minimum, 1) Believe in Christ, 2) Repent of sin, and 3) Do good to others.

If being a Christian only has to do three aforementioned things, then that would make Christianity one easy religion to follow and not so easy to distinguish from a typical secular American. No headdress to wear. No special garment to try on for the rest of your life. No forbidden foods to eat because they are 'unclean'. As far as I know, Christians seem to savor any type of food they want and still call themselves 'Christians'. In addition, steps one and two, a belief in Christ and repentance of sin, are internal activities, whereas the last one, do good to others is an external activity. Take away the first two, and you wind up with an atheist who does good to others based on empathy and compassion.

Is ‘indulgences’ an idea in Christianity with which you have been affiliated with in the past? Or, is the ‘indulgences’ issue simply one that you find to be interesting?

Actually, I find it interesting, because I did learn about the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther, and 95 Theses before. Nowadays, Christians never seem to talk about this issue. I would expect that Protestants would explain why they are Protestants in the first place - agreement with Martin Luther and rebel against the Roman Catholic Church. Instead Protestants are more focused on the belief that salvation can be achieved through faith alone.