An indulgence is is a removal of all or some of the punishment due to already forgiven sin because of the performance of a good deed or the saying of a prayer.
This is an issue Luther used against the Catholic Church in his 95 Theses. Specifically, because the Pope had granted a plenary indulgence to those who would donate money toward the building of the Vatican [St. Peter's]. Then as now, many didn't understand the teaching and believed Luther when he falsely accused of us "selling" the indulgence to gain access to heaven.
I disagree with Luther's view and condemnation of indulgences. He said that we could never do anything to remove the punishment we deserved. I believe God is loving and merciful to those who repent with a sincere heart.
Thanks for scanning my links.
This doesn't make sense. If the sin is "already forgiven," there can be no punishment to remove! That's the very definition of forgiveness. The idea of What you have done here is put a "spin" on it in order to defend this evil and corrupt practice. And you say nothing about the exchange of MONEY(!) for these indulgences. In Luther's day, they were sold for money!! Peter said, "and your money perish with you" to the man who would purchase his way to heaven.
Furthermore, if "good deeds" could gain forgiveness, then there would be no need for Jesus Christ to die on that cross. It was the ONLY WAY! If there was another way, do you think God would have sent His Son? His death was the ONLY WAY that God could wipe away sin. It is blasphemous to suggest even remotely that there is any other way.