1. Alyssa says:

    Interesting take on the meaning of Biblical forgiveness. I’m wondering how you reconcile, though, the idea of “loving your enemies” with the condoning of holding onto anger, bitterness, and the hope for God’s vengeance (rather than the hope that the wrongdoer too would find the forgiveness you have in Christ)?

    • I’m wondering how you reconcile, though, the idea of “loving your enemies” with the condoning of holding onto anger, bitterness, and the hope for God’s vengeance

      I wouldn’t. Not one bit. The article should reflect that.

      God’s command “beloved, never avenge yourselves” in Rom. 12 is a command to let go of anger and bitterness and thoughts of vengeance. The “leave it to the wrath of God” is not about a feeling of, “Oh, that person will get what’s coming to him,” but is instead exactly what you said: “the hope that the wrongdoer too would find the forgiveness you have in Christ.” Yet it is also a faith-based confidence that God alone, and not ourselves or even the human justice system, will avenge all evils.

      (Not directly spoken above is the fact that God can also avenge evil by “redirecting” it to Jesus Christ, Who suffered once for all on behalf of sinners on the Cross.)

      I’m simply saying that Scripture never refers to this letting-go of anger/bitterness/vengeance as “forgiveness.” Calling it that can at least lead to confusion. And as Brauns says, it can minimize the importance of a victim seeking to reconcile with an offender (or seeking to reconcile if you are the offender!). After all, if you can simply avoid the person for the rest of your life and say, “Well, I forgive him, but I don’t want to have anything to do with him,” doesn’t that rather give away the fact that the bitterness is still ongoing and we’re simply in denial about it? (That’s a moral argument; the central argument remains what Scripture spells out.)

      Finally, this came up in another discussion: that does not mean that, for example, in a horrific case of evil such as rape, the victim would forgive her attacker if her repents and then have a fully restored relationship with him. If he were truly repentant, he would understand that this is almost 100 percent impossible in this world (and he would also show his repentance by staying out of her life and serving jail time or worse). But both of them would have hope of reconciliation in eternity.

  2. I don’t know…  I can’t help but think of a couple Scripture passages, right off the top of my head…

    Jesus on the cross, asking God to forgive them “for they know not what they do”.  They haven’t repented or asked for reconciliation, but Jesus still forgave them and asked God to do the same.

    Also, the Lord’s prayer says “forgive us our debts AS WE forgive our debtors”…implying that we should forgive others’ sins against us the same way God forgives ours.

    Thoughts?

    Gah, Avatar spoilers.  I knew I shouldn’t have clicked on this link but I hate missing anything from SpecFaith. 😀

    • (Response belated because: cold.)

      DeYoung has a quick answer to the “Father, forgive them” bit at the above link.

      People have asked, “Well, what about ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do’? It seems like Jesus is offering unconditional forgiveness those who have conspired to crucify him.” But notice, Jesus is offering a prayer, much like Stephen does in Acts 7. Jesus doesn’t pronounce absolution on the sins of the people (be it the disciples, the Jews, or the Romans). He is simply asking God the Father to be merciful to his enemies. There can be no doubt that the men and women in this crowd needed to repent in order to be forgiven and saved (Acts 2:37-38).

      This is something I think we can do: we can plead that God would show mercy that would include the offenders’ repentance and His forgiveness, not that He would grant total absolution (which would indeed mean that every chief priest and Roman soldier that day would be in Heaven today). If He can do it, so can we.

      Also, the Lord’s prayer says “forgive us our debts AS WE forgive our debtors”…implying that we should forgive others’ sins against us the same way God forgives ours.

      Meaning that we had best determine how God forgives sins so we can understand the template. Above I wrote this:

      [… E]ven as Jesus warns us that we must forgive others — in an immediate and broader ministry context that presumes the offenders have repented, even multiple times5 — He bases this on God’s forgiveness, and states that God does not forgive all people:

      For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

      Matthew 6:14-15

      And I’m e-cycling/editing this next from another discussion.

      Here’s the text in a bit more context:

      “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.

      For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.”

      — Matthew 6:11-15

      “Forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors” makes the comparison clear: we forgive others in the same way God forgives us. Does God forgive those who have not repented and who persist in sin? Other Scriptures make this clear, but we have one example right here: If we don’t forgive others, He won’t forgive us. It’s pretty clear then that God does not forgive the unrepentant. Why then would we suggest that for us we should forgive the unrepentant?

      DeYoung wisely concludes his piece with this:

      On an emotional level, the idea of conditional forgiveness doesn’t sound right. It sounds like we can be bitter toward those who hurt us. It sounds like we should hold on to our pain. It sounds like we shouldn’t release our offenses to God unless our offender comes to us and repents. These would be the wrong inferences to draw from the biblical teaching on forgiveness. We should always love our enemies. We should always fight against bitterness. We should cast all our cares on the Lord. We should learn to trust God’s providence. We should be eager to forgive those who hurt us and be reconciled to them. We might call all this an attitude of forgiveness or a willingness to forgive. But if our forgiveness mirrors God’s forgiveness, it is something that can be granted–and must be granted–only when there is repentance. It is a relational transaction that establishes a commitment to release our debtor from all he or she owes us. When someone sins against us and we are never given the opportunity to hear “I’m sorry,” we do not have the opportunity to grant forgiveness, but we will foreswear personal vendettas and bitterness by leaving room for God’s wrath (on the cross or in hell) and by trusting ourselves to the one who judges justly.

      • This just seems like splitting hairs to me.  These quotes insist we should let go of our desire for vengeance, show love, release our offenses, let go of bitterness, etc. – but no, no, that’s not *forgiveness*!

        What is the difference between total forgiveness and just showing grace/love/release to our enemies, then?  *Can* we do all that without actually forgiving?  If we’ve done all that what are we still holding on to?  What’s left after we’ve put aside bitterness and vengeance?   (Aside from wise self-protection, which – most would argue – is sometimes necessary even when the offender has repented.)

        I may be wrong, but it seems to me that this hair-splitting is a technical way for believers to excuse “keeping a record of wrongs”.

        And it seems to rest on one’s theology too – did God really forgive us because we said “I’m sorry” to Him first, or did we say “I’m sorry” because He extended His grace to us first? Hmmm?  🙂

        • After all, let’s not forget that “While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:8.)  He performed the ultimate act of love and forgiveness BEFORE seeing us repent of our sins. 🙂

      • A belated response thanks to 1) head cold, 2) workplace conference.

        This just seems like splitting hairs to me.  These quotes insist we should let go of our desire for vengeance, show love, release our offenses, let go of bitterness, etc. – but no, no, that’s not *forgiveness*!

        My central question is this: how does the Bible define “forgiveness” proper?

        If I’m at least close to that definition, then all of the “well, what about X and Y and Z” questions are important but also don’t overthrow the definition.

        My secondary point is this: this definition of “forgiveness” fits with the “music” of fiction. If in this story Katara had “forgiven” her enemy’s sins and then seen him break down in tears, overwhelmed by resultant repentance, would we find that realistic? How often are real-life human enemies brought to repentance by their victims’ forgiveness — as opposed to being broken by the guilt of their sin, which their victims indeed reinforce by refusing to avenge themselves?

        What is the difference between total forgiveness and just showing grace/love/release to our enemies, then?  *Can* we do all that without actually forgiving?

        Again, is that what Scripture shows in the texts I’ve cited, such as Rom. 12?

        If we’ve done all that what are we still holding on to?  What’s left after we’ve put aside bitterness and vengeance?   (Aside from wise self-protection, which – most would argue – is sometimes necessary even when the offender has repented.)

        Which brings up another good point. In the Facebook discussion someone challenged whether Christian repentance/forgiveness really leads to a restored relationship, every time. My answer is still Yes, every single time* — but with this important asterisk: *We may not see it until we’re resurrected for eternity.

        I may be wrong, but it seems to me that this hair-splitting is a technical way for believers to excuse “keeping a record of wrongs”.

        I’m not sure what to say to this. It is true that either definition of forgiveness can be used to justify sin. But is the real question, “Can it be used to justify sin?” The real question is, “Is this a Biblical view? Can it be read naturally in the text?”

        And it seems to rest on one’s theology too – did God really forgive us because we said “I’m sorry” to Him first, or did we say “I’m sorry” because He extended His grace to us first? Hmmm?  🙂

        Christians of different persuasions can answer differently. I might answer the latter, but I’m not convinced that God’s saving grace is the same as His forgiveness. Even if it were, is that enough to establish that — contradicting Jesus’s own clearer words about repentance/forgiveness for His people — we are meant to imitate God in that way? Yet we know that only God has the power to overwhelm people’s resistance to His grace and regenerate their dead hearts, and we also know that there is at least one kind of forgiveness that God alone can do (Mark 2: 1-12). Suffice it to say, it’s not enough to say, “That’s how God does it,” if we are not likewise commanded to imitate Him. Otherwise we could say — and alas, some have said — that because God stores up wrath against ungodly sinners, so we should demonstrate the same “wrath” in our daily lives. Yet God warns that He can do this perfectly, and we can never do it (Rom. 12).

        • I’m a little confused by your reasoning, brother.  Are you saying, then, that either way we should extend mercy, forsake vengeance, etc. – but it’s not genuine forgiveness unless they have repented and there’s full reconciliation? – that forgiveness is a two-way street, so to speak?

          It seems to me that either way, whether we agree that Christians should forgive the unrepentant or not, we both believe we should treat our enemies the same way – love them, show patience and mercy to them, pray for them, etc.  I just don’t understand how that’s not acting in forgiveness – on “our side” of the situation, anyway.

          And Katara’s attitude of “I’ll never forgive him” is bitter, an attitude that God commands us to let go of, also – in Ephesians 4:31, for example:  “Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice.”

          Bitterness is about our hearts, so whether it is a reconciled brother in Christ or an unrepentant enemy, bitterness is never something we should hold on to. 🙂

          I don’t see that a continuation of this discussion is useful, since it seems to me that it’s coming down to a matter of semantics, and we are admonished in the New Testament not to quarrel over words, because it does no one any good (2 Timothy 2:14).  🙂

          God bless!  I always appreciate your blog posts here, by the way.  🙂

What do you think?