Do souls in hell have any hope for the forgiveness of their sins? According to Catholic teachings, once a person died, there are 3 places where a soul can be placed: hell, purgatory and heaven. At the time of death, if a soul will be judged and damned to hell, is it possible to be in friendship or be reconciled with God again? What about the Final Judgement where there could be repentance and prayers for these souls in hell?

I thought of this when I was researching [this question](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/3121/when-did-knowledge-of-christs-sacrifice-become-necessary-for-salvation) . [Leviticus 4](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%204&version=NIV) goes into great detail about the sacrifice that must be made in order for a sin to be forgiven. However, we see here that God actually provided a way for these sins to be forgiven. Specifically, Leviticus 16 shows that this sacrifice and the [Day of Atonement](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2016&version=NIV) did provide forgiveness of sins: >[Leviticus 16:30 (NIV)](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2016:30&version=NIV)Emphasis added
>because on this day atonement will be made for you, to cleanse you. **Then, before the LORD, you will be clean from all your sins.** Now, Jews no longer provide sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins, however God has still provided a way for these sins to be forgiven. (See [Why don't Jews sacrifice animals anymore?](https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/8862/why-dont-jews-sacrifice-animals-anymore) for more information.) So, if God has previously given us a way to have forgiveness of our sins, why did he send Jesus to be our ultimate sacrifice? *Edit:*
I believe that there is some doctrinal basis for this. I'm not sure which specific doctrine would best be applied to this, but I am seeking a mainstream Protestant doctrine on the matter.

Yet 1 John 1:9 is widely taught as conditional forgiveness for the Christian when the passage of 1 John 1 is directed as an invitation to Gnostic Jews to become believers.

Considering the language of 1 John 1, this passage is clearly not addressed to believers, yet is widely mistaught in Christendom. 1 John 1:9 KJV >If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

In the Lord’s Prayer, we see these words: > and forgive us our debts, > as we also have forgiven our debtors. (Matthew 6:12, ESV) Among the views on how to understand Matthew 6:12 are: - **Conditional View**: Direct correlation. God's forgiveness is contingent upon our prior or simultaneous forgiveness of others. - **Consequential View**: Our forgiveness of others is a result or evidence of God's forgiveness working in our lives. Experiencing God's grace empowers us to extend grace to others. - **Relational View**: The two acts of forgiveness are parallel and interconnected, not strictly conditional. Emphasizes the relational aspect. God's forgiveness restores our relationship with him, and our forgiveness of others restores our relationships with them. I would like an overview of: - Which denominations lean toward each view - Which Prominent theologians endorse each If possible, include quotes from confessions or theologians that show that they hold that view. If there are other important and different ways to look at this verse, include them as well. Note: This is related to a previous question on Luther’s view: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/97180/how-do-lutheran-discern-law-and-gospel-in-the-lords-prayer **Example: John Calvin** As an example, here is a quote from John Calvin, suggesting the Consequential View: > *As we forgive our debtors…* This condition is added, that no one may > presume to approach God and ask forgiveness, who is not pure and free > from all resentment. **And yet the forgiveness, which we ask that God > would give us, does not depend on the forgiveness which we grant to > others:** but the design of Christ was, to exhort us, in this manner, to > forgive the offenses which have been committed against us, and at the > same time, to give, as it were, the impression of his seal, to ratify > the confidence in our own forgiveness. Nor is any thing inconsistent > with this in the phrase used by Luke, καὶ γὰρ, for we also Christ did > not intend to point out the cause, but only to remind us of the > feelings which we ought to cherish towards brethren, when we desire to > be reconciled to God. And certainly, if the Spirit of God reigns in > our hearts, every description of ill-will and revenge ought to be > banished. The Spirit is the witness of our adoption, (Romans 8:16 ,) > and therefore this is put down simply as a mark, to distinguish the > children of God from strangers. The name debtors is here given, not to > those who owe us money, or any other service, but to those who are > indebted to us on account of offenses which they have committed. - John Calvin (1509-1564) *Commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke - Volume 1* https://www.lords-prayer-words.com/commentary/john_calvin_matthew_6_12.html

I've been trying to find a verse I read not too long ago for quite some time about sinning and knowing it's wrong, but sinning anyway because you know God will forgive you. I believe it also mentioned how people who do this are even lower than people who sin, then repent and attempt to stop doing it. I know that verse-identification has had a lot of discussion on the meta as to whether it should be allowed, and it seems most people would only allow it under very strict circumstances. That said, I do agree with this opinion, but I also believe that this question meets those circumstances, so I will take the risk. I have been trying to find this verse for quite some time, and I can't find it. I've searched Google, I've looked it up on quite a few websites, I've even asked other people if they had seen the verse. It's almost like it didn't exist, but I'm 100% certain that I saw it, but I can't find it. Point is, I've searched all over the place to no avail, and I feel that this is the last place I can possibly turn. If anyone has seen this verse I would very much appreciate it, but if you haven't seen this particular verse, I would rather you not answer with a verse that has a similar subject, but is different. Thanks. --- **Update:** I just asked a particular person who I hadn't asked before and they said they knew the verse I was talking about, but wasn't sure where it was. They hunted around for a while looking for it and found a few similar verses, but not the correct one. To make things easier, I will name a few verses it isn't, but it would be nigh impossible to track down every similar verse I've seen that isn't the one. *I'll also include passages that have been put in answers that aren't it.* **Many of the verses I have seen that aren't it are as follows:** - Romans 6:15 - Luke 13:3 - 1 John 5:18 - Hebrews 10:26-31 - 2 Peter 2:20-21 There are other verses I have seen, but these verses were the closest ones I found.

One of my latest questions concerned the issue of animal sacrifices in the Old Testament times. (https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/103127/why-were-animal-sacrifices-required-for-those-in-the-old-testament-period-but-n) . There are verses in the Bible that suggest that animal sacrifice led to forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 9:22; Numbers 15:25 (ESV): and Leviticus 4:20). One of the responses to my question (above) asserted that it is impossible to have salvation through animal sacrifice. Since childhood, we have been taught that salvation is through Jesus. The discussion on my earlier question made me ask myself whether salvation and forgiveness of sins are the same thing. If a person had their sins forgiven (for instance under the Old Testament covenant), is that different from salvation?

Genesis 4:3-4; Leviticus 3:2; Leviticus 16:5; Ezekiel 44:1;Numbers 6:10-11; and Exodus 29:10-14 are some of the many places in the Bible that speak of God requiring animal sacrifices or sacrifices being made to God for expiation of sins or for thanks. If God's plan all along was that Jesus would come as a perfect sacrifice to atone for the sins of all of humanity; why were animal sacrifices required of the people of those "Old Testament" times, but not of our time; yet Jesus was destined to die for the sins of both ("groups")? My question is not restricted to the purpose of animal sacrifice as asked in this post: (https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/842/what-was-the-purpose-to-animal-sacrifices) ; but I ask why we no longer have to offer them when they were required of earlier generations despite the fact Jesus would die for their sins as well as our sins.

When the disciples asked Jesus to teach them how to pray, He gave them this model commonly known as the Lord's Prayer. > Pray then like this: “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, **and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.** And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Mathew 6:9-13 ESV In it, we are to ask God to forgive our debts "as we also have forgiven our debtors". The parallel passage in Luke is similar, but specifically mentions forgiveness of sins: > And he said to them, “When you pray, say: “Father, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come. Give us each day our daily bread, **and forgive us our sins, for we ourselves forgive everyone who is indebted to us.** And lead us not into temptation.” Luke 11:2-4 ESV I was discussing this with a couple friends last night, and one of them mentioned that we do not really want God to forgive us in the same manner that we forgive others, as that would be a much weaker, incomplete forgiveness. In fact, we would much rather pray, **"Father forgive us completely--wholly unlike how I am even able to forgive others."** I understand that we are encouraged to forgive others as completely as we can, but I also know my weakness in doing this. So, again, why are we taught to ask God only to forgive us in the manner that we forgive others? It seems we would want a much greater level of forgiveness--the kind of forgiveness that only God can give.

So as far as I understand it, it is the case that if one prays, asks for forgiveness and repents and baptizes then according to most denominations and the Bible God forgives the sin one has committed. However what I can't quite wrap my head around is how to forgive oneself. Forgiving oneself in this context means (please use your own definition if mine isn't accurate enough): - Accepting that one has committed sin - Not beating oneself up/self criticism anymore because of the sin - No feelings of resentment or vengeance towards oneself - No destructive feeling of regret (still regretting but not the kind impeding with daily life or mental health) - No destructive guilt or shame (similar to regret: A little guilt/shame is not the problem, but to much of it risks mental health) While it might be easier to forgive single mistakes, it's a lot more difficult to handle character weaknesses or repeating sin. Is there any additional information about that? Summarized Question: - What does the Bible/the denominations say about **self forgiveness**? - How can one forgive oneself? - What steps can one do to forgive oneself? - Is the process to self-forgiveness fundamentally different for specific sins? - How can one forgive character weaknesses or repeating sin?

According to Acts 3:19-21: > 19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, 20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, 21 whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago.  I see repentance as requirement for Gods forgiveness, meaning the complete stop to any sin or sinful behaviors. Now this is easier said then done for addictions. Addictions have this characteristics: - Compulsiveness: An overwhelming urge to engage in the behavior or use the substance, often uncontrollable. - Tolerance: Increasing amounts of the substance or intensity of the behavior are required to achieve the same effect. - Withdrawal: Physical and psychological symptoms that occur when the addictive behavior or substance use is reduced or stopped. - Negative Impact: Continued engagement despite knowing it causes significant problems in personal, social, occupational, or health areas. - Loss of Control: Difficulty in limiting or stopping the addictive behavior or substance use. - Preoccupation: Persistent thoughts and focus on the substance or behavior, often at the expense of other activities and responsibilities. In Summary: Stopping an addiction is not easy and extremely difficult. So while it is easy to regret addictions and make genuine efforts to stop one, there isn't a method with guaranteed success. Addictive behaviors are often done consciously, meaning the case for active sin can be made. Assuming an addictions that is inherently sinful e.g. a sex-addiction(outside of marriage) or an addiction impeding with obedience like Gaming-addiction(no time to do what God says) or a self-destructive addiction like fentanyl: - Is the Assumption that repentance is required for forgiveness correct? - Is an addiction "forgivable"? Note that due to the nature of repeatableness, it means that shortly after the process of repenting and receiving forgiveness, a person sins again (Relapse). This potentially could undermine the effect Gods forgiveness could have. - Is mastering the addiction a requirement for salvation? (Lets exclude the edge-case of repenting and dying before the next chance to indulge in the addictive behavior arises) - Are there differences between denominations on this topic of forgiveness of addictions? What is their reasoning for one denomination being more or less strict on addictions?

A recent question, [How do believers in hell respond to the argument "What finite crime deserves an infinite punishment?"?](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/101213/how-do-believers-in-hell-respond-to-the-argument-what-finite-crime-deserves-an) leads to a more fundamental question: **How do penance or punishment, as opposed to repentance or destruction, make the universe a better place?**. We know that God has a purpose for everything he does: > **Exodus 9:18** But indeed for this purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth. > > **Job 42:2** “I know that You can do everything, And that no purpose of Yours can be withheld from You. > > **Ecclesiastes 3:1** To everything there is a season, A time for every purpose under heaven: > > **Ecclesiastes 3:17** I said in my heart, “God shall judge the righteous and the wicked, For there is a time there for every purpose and for every work.” > > **Isaiah 14:24** The LORD of hosts has sworn, saying, “Surely, as I have thought, so it shall come to pass, And as I have purposed, so it shall stand: > > **Isaiah 14:27** For the LORD of hosts has purposed, And who will annul it? His hand is stretched out, And who will turn it back?” > > **John 12:27** “Now My soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save Me from this hour'? But for this purpose I came to this hour. > > **Romans 8:28** And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. > > **Galatians 3:19** What purpose then does the law serve? … > > **Ephesians 1:11** In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, > > **Revelation 17:17** “For God has put it into their hearts to fulfill His purpose, … We know that God is a god of love and forgiveness: > **Zephaniah 3:17** The LORD your God in your midst, The Mighty One, will save; He will rejoice over you with gladness, He will quiet you with His love, He will rejoice over you with singing.” > > **John 3:16** “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. > > **Acts 5:31** “Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. > > **Romans 5:8** But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. > > **Ephesians 2:4** But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, > > **Colossians 2:13** And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, > > **1 John 4:8** He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. > > **1 John 4:10** In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. The simple view presented in the Bible is that eventually all mankind will either: - Repent, accept God's way of life, and receive eternal life (the vast majority). - Reject God and be permanently destroyed (a small number of incorrigible). > **1 Timothy 2:3–4** For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. > > **Revelation 20:15** And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire. But many denominations believe that: - After repentance, one still needs to do penance (and Catholics believe in additional purgatory after death). - If one does not accept God, one will have an eternal life of perpetually experiencing punishment, with no hope of its ever ending. The words "penalty" and "retribution" do not appear in the Bible (KJV). In the New Testament, "vengeance" appears only once, and "justice" not at all. But "love" appears over 500 times in the Bible. And "forgive" appears more than 50 times in each of the Old and New Testaments. Given that God's message is one of love and forgiveness, not of vengeance and punishment, what do those that believe in punishment say is **God's purpose** in choosing to make people suffer after death (i.e. what good will result from it)? ### Note: **I'm not asking why God punishes sinners. I'm not asking why God permanently destroys incorrigible unrepentant sinners. I'm asking why, rather than extermination, some denominations teach that God will perpetually torture these sinners; what purpose do these denominations think this will serve?**

Catholics and some Protestants believe that priests/pastors can forgive sin, usually citing John 20:23 as justification. For example, one variant of the Anglican liturgy has the Pastor make the following pronouncement: > By the authority of Christ given to the Church I absolve you from your sins Another, similar form: > By [Christ's] authority committed to me, I absolve you from all your sins Other Protestants believe that John 20:23 only applied to the original Apostles and would apparently object to the above. (I should note that my understanding is that Protestants, and perhaps even Roman Catholics, do agree that pastors/priests aren't *themselves* able to absolve sin, but merely serve as "intermediaries" of Christ to do so. Indeed, the specifics of the above clearly call this out.) Now, this discussion is *usually* entangled with the Roman Catholic belief in the Apostolic Succession. However, as I understand it, all Protestants reject the Succession. On what grounds, therefore, do (some) Protestants accept John 20:23 as applying to all called and ordained ministers? (In other words, what do those Protestants who side with Roman Catholics on the matter of the priestly/pastoral ability to deliver or withhold forgiveness respond to those who deny such ability?) Related reading: - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/91388 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/89608 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/13841 - [Does John 20:23 mean that Catholic priests can forgive sins?](https://carm.org/roman-catholicism/does-john-2023-mean-that-catholic-priests-can-forgive-sins/)

So I had a few debates with people who didn't like the catholic church. One of their reasons was, that priests would take on the role of God, by "forgiving" the sin. Now I am not a catholic myself and I didn't have the opportunity to experience confession. So hence my question: **What is a priest actually supposed to be doing when it comes to forgiveness during confession?** Since the catholic church is so big, I maybe have to add the question if there are different views on this, within the catholic church and if there are regions that are known to do it the wrong way repeatedly. With "confession", I imagine the ritual, where in church you go to that confession box and talk with the priest about your sin.

> The first thing to note is that forgiveness of a sin is separate from punishment for the sin. Through sacramental confession we obtain forgiveness, but we aren't let off the hook as far as punishment goes. That's a quote from Catholic Online's article on indulgences . I've never heard forgiveness spoken about in this way. Even the site's tag wiki for forgiveness specifically includes release from punishment. I know this question is similar, but its answers don't cover a Catholic view. The only well-sourced answer explains a Lutheran stance. If God's forgiveness does not spare one from punishment, then what is it? Does this mean that the sacrament of confession alone does not spare you from punishment? Where does the Catholic Church get this distinction? Is there a biblical basis? Is it part of sacred tradition? Did a council decide it? --- On another note, I learned while researching for this question that anyone who has completed the three prerequisites for an indulgence may gain one by participating on Christianity.SE: > 20. Christian Doctrine. Partial indulgence to those who take part in teaching or learning Christian doctrine.

Doctrine and Covenants 42:18 appears to teach that anyone who kills cannot ever be forgiven. Does "killing" refer only to murder or to any killing, be it in self defense or as part of a way? > And now, behold, I speak unto the church. Thou shalt not kill; and he that kills shall not have forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come. D&C 42:18 Does the LDS Church hold to this position today? If so, how is God's forgiveness of David reconciled with that as well as the people mentioned in the book of Alma? > Nathan said to David, “You are the man... You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and have taken his wife to be your wife and have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites... David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan said to David, “**The LORD also has put away your sin**; you shall not die. 2 Samuel 12 (portions) ESV > > And I also thank my God, yea, my great God, that he hath granted unto us that we might repent of these things, and also that **he hath forgiven us of those our many sins and murders which we have committed**, and taken away the guilt from our hearts, through the merits of his Son. Alma 24:10

My aunt stole money from me. I was hurt, balled my eyes out; not because she stole but because I felt betrayed by someone I helped numerous times. I forgave her in my heart but someone told me that Im supposed to tell her that I forgive her. Note: She is a believer in christ and she lives in Nc while I’m currently in Md.

The passages of Luke 3:3 and Acts 2:38 have very similar language and according to Peter in Acts he is baptizing the same baptism as John, only in Jesus name. > Luke 3:3 says, "And he went into all the region around the Jordan, proclaiming a baptism of > repentance for the forgiveness of sins" > Acts 2:38 says, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" Both verses speak about repentance and baptism and both verses say they are "for the forgiveness or remittance of sin" So what does "for forgiveness of sins" mean. Now Acts 2:38 is often interpreted to mean that the act of baptism is necessary to wash away sin, however given the same language in both verses that means that Johns baptism also washes away sin. My question is, can this language be translated any other way that does not imply that baptism actually forgives sins or is when sins are forgiven.

For those who beleive in the doctrine of **O**nce **S**aved **A**lways **S**aved (OSAS). How does one reconcile our need to not only confess our sins, but to ask God for forgiveness for those sins? > Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us Some might say that in Mathew 6 the word should be translated as "debts" which are not necessarily "sins." Yet the parallel passage in Luke 11 uses the word "ἁμαρτία" which clearly speaks of sin. Question: If we have received forgiveness in full, and it is completed as many would suggest, why would the Lord have us petition (Pray) for our forgiveness when it has already, according to the OSAS doctrine, been freely given and can never be taken away? This question are for the Faith Practices that adhere to 'assurance of salvation' which includes most but not all the ecclesial bodies that broke and continue to break away from the Catholic Church.

Ezekiel 18:19-20 NKJV : > 19 “Yet you say, ‘Why should the son not bear the guilt of the > father?’ Because the son has done what is lawful and right, and has > kept all My statutes and observed them, he shall surely live. 20 The > soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the > father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of > the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked > shall be upon himself. Ezekiel 18:19 says the reason the son cannot bear the guilt of the father is because the son has done what is lawful and right. Since Jesus is sinless (1 Peter 2:22) how can he bear the guilt of anyone? Similarly how can our wickedness be upon Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:21), if as per verse 20, it must be upon ourselves?