New Voice Media | Associated Baptist Press
     
 
Friday, March 12, 2010
Home arrow News arrow Forgive Us: Is forgiveness always appropriate for Christians?
 
Forgive Us: Is forgiveness always appropriate for Christians? Print E-mail
By Vicki Brown   
Monday, February 01, 2010

(ABP) -- Sermons on forgiveness often emphasize the Lord’s Prayer -- “and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.” But should Christians always forgive, regardless of circumstances? Is granting forgiveness always appropriate?

“Yes -- but...” is the response from four Christians who deal with the concept forgiveness in different contexts.

“Do we really want God to forgive us the way we forgive?”

Strive for justice

For Tarris Rosell, professor of pastoral theology, ethics and ministry praxis at Central Baptist Theological Seminary in suburban Kansas City, Kan., justice is crucial to the ability to forgive another.

Rosell relates the story of an international student who had lost his family and several friends to genocide in his home country.

“Basically he said, ‘I cannot be a Christian because I cannot love or forgive the people who killed my family,’” Rosell noted. “That spoke to me about how easy it is to talk about love and forgiveness.”

Talk may be easy, but following through is much more difficult, he acknowledged. In contrast to some theologians, Rosell believes God instilled a natural desire to forgive.

“I think humans are amazingly forgiving, even though I know that goes against the theology of basic depravity. I think the natural tendency is to be forgiving,” he said.

Forgiveness comes more easily when the offender is up-front and transparent. Citing former President Bill Clinton’s involvement with Washington intern Monica Lewinsky, “I think we are amazingly prone to forgive, but what we cannot tolerate, I think, is cover-up,” he said.

If Clinton and other politicians caught in immoral situations had been up front with the public, “at that point I think Americans naturally would have fallen over themselves to forgive.”

“I think this is the case in our professional and personal lives.... Somehow ‘I’m sorry’ matters,” he added. “What we cannot tolerate is cover-up and blaming.”

Rosell teaches ethics to and counsels with clergy-in-training and doctors-in-training. He believes openness by the perpetrator can facilitate the victim’s desire to forgive. Studies show doctors and hospitals that admit mistakes or wrongdoing are less likely to be sued than are those that do not, he said.

But, he added, true forgiveness must be rooted in justice. He follows Marie Fortune’s philosophy that forgiveness and justice must go hand-in-hand, often even when justice is not possible.

A United Church of Christ minister, Fortune is considered an expert in clergy abuse and is founder of the Faith Trust Institute, a Seattle-based organization focused on violence against women and children. She teaches there can be no forgiveness without justice.

Accountability and idolatry

Justice requires accountability, Rosell insisted. Ministers and their congregations sometimes act as though the only requirement for forgiveness is to change the victim’s attitude and to simply say: “We forgive you.”

“Sometimes what’s counted as forgiveness is the unwillingness to hold a brother accountable.... That is a sin,” he said.

Part of the problem in churches also stems from “pastor idolatry,” he added. “We make a god of the pastor, and when he sins, we often can’t recognize it because of our idolatry.”

Often clergy abusers aren’t held accountable because some church members will pressure the rest to “forgive” him or her. Lack of accountability opens opportunities for further abuse, he said.

Rosell encourages his ministerial students to view forgiveness as a process, rather than a platitude. “We ought not to press for forgiveness. Forgiveness is discovered, not forced,” he said.

Accountability is the primary issue for Speed Lea, as well. An expert in conflict management, particularly in churches, he is a consultant for the Alban Institute.

“It’s always important to maintain boundaries, and there needs to be consequences for missteps,” he said.

Consequences must be determined fairly, he stressed, rather than used as retribution. “Keep them within limits and avoid the vengeful kinds of responses our primitive brains might want to use to react.”

And victims must avoid becoming victims a second time by loosening or discarding consequences because they fear the perpetrator will see them as being unforgiving -- particularly if both claim to be Christians.

He tells the story of a church business manager who stole money from the offering plates and from a checking account during his 10 years of service. The congregation decided not to press formal charges but insisted the manager reimburse the church. And they insisted he find a job that did not involve dealing with money.

“Not all the congregation was happy, but the solution gave the opportunity for the individual to start a new life,” Leas said.

The author of Leadership and Conflict has identified five levels of conflict that can plague relationships. Forgiveness becomes more difficult as disagreement moves from problem solving to unmanageable conflict.

Sometimes finding forgiveness must be done through a third party. “It’s very hard when people are in the midst of the pain ... to get to the possibility of repairing a breach,” he said. “Sometime the forgiveness is in the observers who can help until those involved can get beyond the pain.”

An act of obedience

Christians must forgive in obedience to God, said Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.

“It goes back to the Lord’s Prayer -- forgive us as we forgive others,” he said.

Jesus added that believers would be forgiven in the same way in which they forgive others, Land stressed.

“Do we really want God to forgive us the way we forgive?” he asked.

Land emphasized that lack of forgiveness “will hinder growth and your spiritual relationship.” Believers should hold those who hurt them accountable, and in cases such as abuse, should remove themselves from the situation. But in every case, Christians must forgive.

“When we realize what Christ has done for us, how can we not forgive?”

And when believers find forgiveness difficult, they should “give it to the Lord,” he added. “Give it to Jesus, and then the power of the person to hurt you is gone.”

Releasing the burden to God

Roberta Damon, retired marriage and family counselor at First Baptist Church in Richmond, Va., and author of two books, believes forgiveness comes much more easily when the perpetrator repents and asks for forgiveness because the wounded individual can choose to forgive or not.

“But there are times when the perpetrator isn’t going to come to you ... and there will be no reconciliation,” she said. That’s when the one wronged must release the pain and the burden to God.

“I don’t believe God’s forgiveness hinges on our ability to forgive,” she noted, pointing out that the Lord’s Prayer is sometimes misused to prove that it does.

When no accountability exists -- either through the perpetrator’s seeking forgiveness or through the criminal-justice system if a crime has been committed -- the victim still must decide how he or she will react.

“The question is: What am I going to do with my own heart? The situation must be released into God’s hands,” she said. As a part-time counselor for First Baptist Church and for the SBC's International Mission Board, the former missionary to Brazil asks counselees to visualize Jesus walking the road to Calvary.

“You see him stumble with the crosspiece and fall to one knee. Now visualize yourself placing your burden on that crosspiece,” she tells them.

“Our first reaction is that we feel sorry for him, and we don’t want to add to his burden,” Damon said. “But we know that we must release our burden and our heart into God’s hands.

“Add your burden, and watch him get up."

-30-

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it   is associate editor of the Missouri Baptist Word & Way.

Read more New Voice stories:
• Christians struggle with radical forgiveness
• Opinion: Forgiveness is an unmistakable mark of character

 





Reddit!Del.icio.us!Google!Live!Facebook!Slashdot!Technorati!StumbleUpon!Spurl!Newsvine!Blinklist!Furl!Fark!Yahoo!Ma.gnolia!Free social bookmarking plugins and extensions for Joomla! websites!
Comments (25)Add Comment
...
written by pjerwin, February 02, 2010
Roberta Damon said: “I don’t believe God’s forgiveness hinges on our ability to forgive.” Hmm, how does that comport not just with Jesus' teaching as recorded in Matthew 6:14-15, but also with His teaching through the parable of the unforgiving servant as recorded in Matthew 18:23-35? Jesus explicitly says that the Father's forgiveness IS tied to our forgiveness -- forgiveness from the heart.
Forgive the unrepentant?
written by mcskinny, February 02, 2010

Can we humans truly forgive those who are unrepentant and continue to do hurtful things to us? Oh, I know we can say we forgive someone, but do we really forgive them as they continue to hurt us? We can choose to forgive those who ask for forgiveness or are no longer an irritant in our lives. We can turn forgiveness over to God and ask Him to forgive them. Does even God forgive the unrepentant repeating offender?
repentance is a necessary condition for forgiving
written by Xenophon, February 02, 2010
This article takes a much more measured and balanced approach to forgiveness. There must be justice and accountability on the wrong-doer's part along with the appropriate response of forgiveness from the victim, which will still not be easy in many cases. I do not know how people ever came to believe that we are to forgive aggressors without their showing remorse.
...
written by pjerwin, February 04, 2010
You have a misunderstanding of what forgiveness is. Forgiveness is a recognition of fault, but excusing or pardoning it, not acting as if it never happened, but absolving the offender from repayment or retribution, and renouncing anger and resentment because of it. Forgiveness is not a denial of the truth, but an exercise of grace in the full recognition of that truth. Forgiving is something I do whether you deserve, receive, or reciprocate it. Even in psychotherapy, forgiveness on my part is not necessarily tied to any response in the part of the offender.

And forgiveness does not entail being stupid. I forgave the man who murdered my sister, even though he was unrepentant, but I would never trust him in any way with any thing for any reason. And forgiving him didn't mean justice didn't need to be met.
reply to PJ
written by Xenophon, February 04, 2010
Again, forgiveness is no longer holding the wrong-doer responsible for his actions as if the person had never committed the wrong. That is the way God forgives us. If one desires justice, which is a type of systematic revenge, then one has not truly forgiven the person who committed the wrong.
...
written by pjerwin, February 04, 2010
You are wrong, Xeno. By definition -- look it up -- to forgive is "1. To excuse for a fault or an offense; pardon. 2. To renounce anger or resentment against. 3. To absolve from payment." It is not to foolishly trust. And by definition, punishment is "imposed penalty (a disadvantage or painful consequence resulting from an action or a condition) for wrongdoing;" to chastise is "to correct by punishment or reproof."

The concept of grace is what you need to grasp: "A favor rendered by one who need not do so."
...
written by Xenophon, February 04, 2010
Concerning forgiveness, try these verses:

Isaiah 1:18: "Come now and let us reason together, says the LORD, though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall be as wool."

Psalm 103:11-12: "For as the heavens are high above the earth, so great is His mercy toward those who fear Him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us." (Psalm 103:11-12)

Hebrews 8:12 For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”

The Lord's Prayer teaches us to forgive as God forgives.

Now on to the difference between 'punishment' and 'chastisement.'

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the roots of 'punishment' are "poine "blood-money, fine, penalty, punishment," from PIE *kwoina, from base *kwei- "to pay, atone, compensate" cf. Gk. time "price, worth, honor, esteem, respect," Skt. cinoti "observes, notes," Avestan kaena "punishment, vengeance," O.C.S. cena "honor, price," Lith. kaina "value, price."

For chastise the roots are free of revenge but do involve the infliction of pain, hence the overlap with 'punishment.' Here are the roots for chastise: "From Latin castigatus pp. of castigare "to purify, chastise," from castus "pure" (see caste) agere "to do." Sense of "make someone pure by correcting or reproving him."

A nice non-biblical example this dictionary provides is "He alone may chastise who loves." [Rabindranath Tagore, "The Crescent Moon," 1913]

Both terms do refer to the infliction of pain, so that is why 'punishment' is showing up in some definitions of 'chastise.' But the purposes of each are subtly different. As you can see from the roots,
'punishment' involves revenge while 'chastise' involves correction in order to purify (notice the relationship between 'chastise' and 'chastity'--they share the same root). The passage in Hebrews 12 that discusses chastisement clearly refers to God inflicting pain on believers in order to correct and purify them, not to reign down his wrath on them.
...
written by pjerwin, February 04, 2010
But, of course, we want a biblical understanding here. So really we’re not dealing with the English words, but the Greek and Hebrew behind the translation/interpretation. But let’s go ahead and deal with the English a little.

As far as the notion that punishment always necessarily involves revenge, that simply isn’t true. Punishment isn’t always retributive (retaliatory or revengeful); some punishment is remedial (educative, corrective) or rehabilitative (therapeutic). Note that dictionaries list the following synonyms as carrying shades of meaning: punish, correct, chastise, discipline, castigate, penalize. All of these verbs mean to subject a person to a penalty (such as loss, pain, or confinement) for an offense, sin, or fault. Punish is the least specific (i.e. the most general) and is a sort of umbrella term. To correct is to punish so that an offender will mend his or her ways. Chastise implies punishment (such as corporal punishment or a verbal rebuke) as a means of effecting improvement in behavior. Discipline stresses punishment inflicted by an authority in order to control an offender or to eliminate or reform unacceptable conduct. Castigate means to censure or criticize severely, often in public. Penalize usually implies a monetary penalty or the forfeiture of a privilege or gain because rules or regulations have been broken.

And while the English word “punish” may have ποινη (poiné), ποινη is not found in the Greek NT. Instead, punish is used to translate a variety of Greek words and is often interchangeable with chastise (e.g. Luke 23:16, 22; KJV: chastise; NASBu, NIV, etc.: punish). The same is true for the Hebrew. While יסר (ysr) and םוסר (musr) are the main words translated/interpreted with the word group above, there are others, and punish and chastise are often used interchangeably, often depending upon the version. However, note that chasten and punish are used to translate parallel thoughts in Hebrew (e.g. Jeremiah 30:11 “For I am with you,” declares the Lord, “to save you; for I will destroy completely all the nations where I have scattered you, only I will not destroy you completely. But I will chasten you justly, and will by no means leave you unpunished.”

Further, in regard to your notion that “chastisement clearly refers to God inflicting pain on believers in order to correct and purify them, not to rain down his wrath on them,” Note the following passages:

“O Lord, do not rebuke me in Your anger, nor chasten me in Your wrath.” (Psalm 6:1)

“O Lord, rebuke me not in Your wrath, and chasten me not in Your burning anger.” (Psalm 38:1)

In answer to your question, “Does God require repentance before he forgives?” In short, no. “In Christ, God was reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them ...be reconciled to God.” (2 Corinthians 5:19, 20) God has already extended forgiveness; repentance is required for us to receive it, for it to be effectual for us.
reply, once again
written by Xenophon, February 05, 2010
As I noted above, there is an overlap between 'punish' and 'chastise' in that both involve the infliction of pain. So, in each case you cite, there is an infliction of pain, and hence, a reference to punishment. But 'punish' in a strict sense refers to retribution and the etymology I referred you to above makes this focus clear. Notice that in your post above you quoted the dictionary as defining 'chastise' as "to correct by punishment or reproof" (emphasis on "correct").

So, how do we account for references to God's wrath raining down on the believer from the verses you cite? One possibility is that these verses are from the Old Testament before Jesus' atoning death and so God's wrath was more of a present threat given the time period the Psalmist lived in. I am not sure since I am not familiar with subtleties of meanings in Hebrew, but I do know that God punished Jesus in a retributive sense for our sins once and for all, and so we are never under God's wrath in the sense of our paying for our sin debt that we owe to God. Of course, we can fall into God's displeasure if we continuously and deliberately disobey him, and he can and will inflict pain on us, as I have said all along. But the pain God inflicts on us is to lead us away from sin motivated by his love for us, not to avenge himself on us. He did that with Jesus on the Cross.

Finally, for us to access God's grace, we must repent of our sins. Here are a few verses along with others that I have cited previously to show that repentance is a prerequisite for forgiveness (The quotes from the Gospels are all Jesus' words):

Matthew 4:17 From that time on Jesus began to preach, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near."

Luke 13:3 "I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish."

Luke 15:7-10 "I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent. 8 "Or suppose a woman has ten silver coins and loses one. Does she not light a lamp, sweep the house and search carefully until she finds it? 9 And when she finds it, she calls her friends and neighbors together and says, 'Rejoice with me; I have found my lost coin.' 10 In the same way, I tell you, there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."

Acts 2:38 Peter replied, "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.

Acts 20:21 I have declared to both Jews and Greeks that they must turn to God in repentance and have faith in our Lord Jesus.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

I can go on and on, if you like. I notice that you have not given a single bit of support for the claim that repentance is not necessary for us forgiving other people. We are not forgiven by God until we repent and that is very clear in these passages and many others.

Forgiving the unrepentant
written by tenor1, February 05, 2010
Far be it from me to presume I can insert intelligent dialogue into these learned discussions going in several threads; however, here are some simple thoughs:
Does God offer unilateral, unconditional forgiveness?
2 Chron. 7:14 says "IF MY PEOPLE which are called by my name.......then I will forgive their sins and heal their land." Does God promise forgiveness? God promises judgement and justice.
Jesus said "Forgive them, they know not......" knowing that the circumstances of this occasion was within God's plan that he should be crucified. Grace is offered AFTER repentance, not before.
...
written by pjerwin, February 05, 2010
"For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly... while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us... while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son..." (Romans 5:6-10) That's unilateral. Forgeveness has been extended by God to all people, but it has not been received by all people.
...
written by pjerwin, February 05, 2010
Grace is extended before repentance. When we respond in faith, demonstrated by repentance, God's grace becomes effectual for us.
actual forgiveness
written by Xenophon, February 05, 2010
While I would agree that the opportunity for forgiveness is extended before humans repent, so that God is ready to forgive, there is no actual forgiveness until an individual repents from their sins. See the biblical passages that I cited above on this, and there plenty more.
...
written by pjerwin, February 05, 2010
X Your contention is that there can be no forgiveness, thus no reconciliation, prior to repentance, right? Then explain this: "while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son."
potential vs. actual
written by Xenophon, February 05, 2010
PJ, Jesus graciously paid our sin debt on the Cross by receiving God's wrath that was rightfully directed to us. Based on Jesus' atoning death, we have the potential to be reconciled to God. This potential is only actualized if we repent and accept Jesus as Savior. God has set conditions in place for us to be reconciled to God, but we must repent and submit ourselves to God before we come actually back into right relationship with God as forgiven children of God. Again, see the references that I listed on the need for repentance before we are forgiven by God.

By the way, I like the bold X, you have for my name.
...
written by pjerwin, February 06, 2010
Well, I thought it only fitting, since you're a bold person -- at least on this forum. :-D
...
written by pjerwin, February 06, 2010
Let me explain it this way. Repentance isn't a change of life, as though sinners can/must reform our way of living before we trust the Savior, it's a change of mind/attitude toward God. The mind set on sin is hostile toward God, it doesn't subject itself to God and is unable even to do so. But while we were still hostile toward God -- that is, unrepentant -- God reconciled us to Himself through the death of His Son. It's logically inconsistent and intellectually dishonest to say that we must cease being hostile toward God before we can be reconciled when the Scriptures say that while we still hostile to Him He reconciled us.
...
written by pjerwin, February 06, 2010
And consider the following. Through the revelation of Jesus Christ to John, we are given a glimpse of The Great and Terrible Day of the Lord. Here's what the Scriptures say about the way things will ultimately unfold with regard to judgment:

Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire." (Revelation 20:11-15)
It appears that everyone will be resurrected, the great and small, the righteous and unrighteous, even if we be in Hades/Sheol (whatever that is), and we will all be judged -- every one of us -- according to our deeds as they are written down in the books, with God's ultimate verdict based on whether or not our names are found written in the other book, the book of life.

How does this comport with your view of God's forgiveness and punishment?
lastest reply to PJ
written by Xenophon, February 06, 2010
Thanks for your replies, PJ. First, I completely agree with what you say about repentance. It is a change of heart and mind. Out of that change of heart comes a change of behavior. We do not have to change our behavior up front for God to forgive us. I agree.

Moving on the rest of your first post just above, God as I was saying above, God laid the groundwork for us to be saved by sending Jesus to atone for our sins on the Cross. Jesus received the punishment that we deserve on the Cross, so nothing else is necessary for our salvation. We do not have to pay anything more to God or to anyone else to receive salvation. But all of this is ineffectual for the specific individual until he sees his need for a Savior in his own personal life and opens his heart to Jesus and repents, in the sense that we seem to agree on, and accepts Christ as his own Savior. This process that I just described, which can take place in seconds, is necessary though for the individual to actually be forgiven and restored to relationship with God. In the moment of accepting Jesus as Savior, we must cease our hostility to God--to be very direct in addressing the point you raised above. To put it another way, our faith precedes regeneration, so that I am rejecting the Augustinian/Calvinist take on the exact process of regeneration. I am not sure if the Augustinian/Calvinist view is informing your thinking on this issue or not, but I thought I would bring it in to amplify what I am claiming.

One issue that affects these discussions is that God is both in and out of time. We humans are stuck in time. We can speculate how God sees things from an eternal perspective, but because we are so time-bound in the very essence of our consciousness that we cannot escape except imperfectly through our imagination, we can easily confuse these perspectives. That confusion that we all suffer from might be at play in this controversy.

As for the Last Judgement, there seem to be two Final Judgements or, at lesat, two standards of judgement for humans depending on their status based on whether or not Jesus' atonement applies to them. The passage you quote above from Revelation 20:11-15 is describing the Great White Throne Judgement that is directed toward non-Christians. Whether or not there is another judgement in "time," I am not sure. Another judgement, whether at another time or the standards are different for the Christian and the non-Christian since our sins are covered by Jesus' blood (I John 2:2), is termed the "Judgement Seat of Christ," as you may know. This judgement for Christians is focused on rewards through eternity for how well we served and obeyed God while on earth after we were saved. We will not be judged for our sins with an eye toward retributive punishment as the non-Christians face. Consider such passages as 1 Corinthians 3:12-15 where Paul tell us that our works will be judged by God without believers facing the possibility of incurring God's wrath for our sins. I think it is likely that God will have us reconcile with other Christians whom we have wronged on earth if those differences had not be settled in this life. But even in those cases, there is more of a threat of loss of reward and the realization that we let our Savior down as well as other people. After we have accepted Jesus as our Savior, we owe God nothing more in terms of atoning for our sins. As the song says, "Jesus paid it all."
...
written by pjerwin, February 08, 2010
X You wrote: "The passage you quote above from Revelation 20:11-15 is describing the Great White Throne Judgement that is directed toward non-Christians." That may be what some theological systems teach, but is that what the passage actually says? No, it describes all people being gathered at the throne and "if anyone's name was not found written in the Book of Life, he was thrown into the lake of fire," which implies that at least some of their names were found in the Book of Life, hence it cannot be a judgment of only non-Christians.

"Consider such passages as 1 Corinthians 3:12-15 where Paul tell us that our works will be judged by God without believers facing the possibility of incurring God's wrath for our sins." That's a pretty big leap from this passage, as are your further speculations that follow -- no biblical support for it. The passage you cite says that some will be saved "but as through fire," so there's more to it than you allwo. What I'm trying to get you to realize is that all wrath -- even all of God's wrath -- is final. Believers may be chasitised in wrath, but that wrath is different from the fullness of God's wrath described in Scripture in connection with the final judgment.

But we've gone pretty far afield, haven't we? Greater minds than ours -- certainly than mine -- have debated these issue for centuries and each had a case to make. The real issue is about us and forgiveness. If you can show me that it is biblical for believers to maintain any bitterness, anger, resentment, antagonism, acrimony, antipathy, animosity, acerbity, acridity, asperity, enmity, hostility, or any hard feelings, then I will agree with you. If you can show me that God would have me nurse a grudge until someone repents, then I'll concur. But if the answer is, "no," we must forgive when wronged, even if the offender has no intention of admitting their wrong or accepting our forgiveness. Take the matter of the lawsuits among the brethren at Corinth; as Paul teaches, we should prefer to be wronged and defrauded than to bear grudges before a watching world.
God's wrath is not directed toward Christians & Christians in court
written by Xenophon, February 09, 2010
As I have said over and over with biblical support, we born-again Christians are freed from God's wrath. Losing rewards due to not being properly motivated in this world as we serve God or downright wrongdoing is not the same as being the object of God's wrath. I regret that you cannot see that crucial difference. I know that I am not under God's wrath because Jesus absorbed that punishment for me on the Cross. I also know that I will not face the same final judgement that unbelievers will face. I stand by my comments above on the Last Judgement(s).

I have given lots of biblical references that support the view that God requires repentance prior to forgiveness. You have not supplied any clear-cut passages to support your view. As I said previously said in a post on the other article accompanying this one, I do not believe that the only alternative to forgiveness is being consumed in bitterness. Anger is a legitimate emotion that God has given us to protect ourselves and our loved ones from evil. God the Father and Jesus clearly exhibited anger upon seeing wrongdoing on occasion. Jesus did not always exhibit anger but in some cases. In those cases where he was more patient with people, the wrongdoers were either oblivious to what they were doing or had a repentant heart. When the sinners were hardened and unrepentant, Jesus (or God the Father) were more likely to evidence anger.

As for Paul's admonition to suffer wrong rather than sue a fellow believer in Roman courts, in the same passage that you cite, he urges churches to set up what amounts to ecclesiastical courts or arbitration panels to resolve differences among Christians, not just let the meanest people walk over everyone else. The differences believers have should be resolved among believers, not just let things slide. Paul also seems to be addressing relatively minor disputes (see verse 2).

"If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6But instead, one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers!

The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers." 1 Corinthians 6: 1-8



...
written by pjerwin, February 10, 2010
X You and I agree when you say, “I also know that I will not face the same final judgement [sic] that unbelievers will face,” but “wrath” is not as monolithic as you seem to think. Various Hebrew and Greek words have been translated into English as wrath, but they describe various degrees of feeling, from sadness to overflowing fury, agitation to passionate anger, anguish or grief to impulsive anger -- even when speaking of God. And that doesn’t cover the full range. God’s wrath isn’t just His final-judgment-anger.

Certainly, believers are freed from God’s final judgment wrath; we never have to worry about that. But we do need to be aware that we may provoke Him to anger and receive His chastisement -- and as I showed with biblical evidence above, God may chastise with some degree of wrath -- a different quality of wrath than will be poured out on the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord.

You wrote: “You have not supplied any clear-cut passages to support your view.” But I have, you simply dismiss them.

You wrote: “Anger is a legitimate emotion that God has given us...” I agree, though the reason you believe He gave it may be a bit narrow. However, consider the following Scripture passages and their ramifications in this discussion:

•“...the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God.” (James 1:20)
•“...put them all aside: anger, wrath, malice, slander...” (Colossians 3:8)
•“Be angry and sin not; do not let the sun go down on your anger.” (Ephesians 4:26)
•“Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you.” (Ephesians 4:31)
•“I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court...” (Matthew 5:22)

You may say what you wish about forgiveness, but we are not free to maintain anger. You say that I have not supplied any clear-cut passages to support my view, but you refuse to accept the fact that we are to take the first step. While we were yet helpless, sinners, and enemies of God, we were reconciled to Him, not through our repentance, but through the death of His Son. You see, what you’re missing is that God’s forgiveness opened the way for us to repent. We didn’t love Him first, we were His enemies, but He loved us.

Listen, I do not begrudge you your opinion on this matter. You may continue to be unforgiving of anyone who doesn’t deserve it because he or she hasn’t repented to your satisfaction. As for me, I will continue to dispense grace, forgiving whether or not the offender deserves it -- that’s what unmerited favor is.
need for repentance seems to be biblical
written by Xenophon, February 11, 2010
PJ, I think that I have supplied verse after verse to support the view that God requires repentance as a necessary condition for his forgiveness, and as a condition for human forgiveness, even if we might make the first move graciously in some cases to show that we are open to forgiving. Here is a review of some of these verses that we do not have to read between the lines to understand:

God demands repentance to be forgiven:

Luke 13:3 & 5

Acts 3:19

Hebrews 8:12

I John 1:9

For humans to forgive other humans, repentance is necessary:

Luke 17:3

Matthew 18:15-17

You have cited only two passages that, with some interpolation, could be seen as implying that forgiveness in unilateral both on humans and on God's part. One passage that you cite in this way is Luke 23:34 where Jesus cried out to his Heavenly Father to "Forgive them for they know not what they do." First, Jesus did not himself forgive them, which he could have. He did not explicitly say that they were forgiven by God at that point. It was not clear exactly which sin he was asking the Father to forgive them of, murdering the incarnation of God or murdering an innocent man or both. This plea did not rule out the need for repentance on the Romans or Jews' part later.

These objections I am raising to your broader application of Jesus' cry of forgiveness are not simply my being "dismissive" or refusing to acknowledge a passage that I find inconvenient for my view. Rather, it is not clearly supportive of your view and your take on this passage clearly contradicts the passages that I cite above as well as many others that I could cite. My previous attempts to deal with this passage applied as you and others who cite it to support unilateral forgiveness are good faith attempts on my part to reconcile this passage with numerous others that clearly teach that repentance is necessary for forgiveness by God. You still must attempt to deal with the passages that I cite and implicitly refer to in order for the unilateral view of forgiveness to be reasonably considered as biblical. That has not happened so far.

God's perspective is not our own & anger is not sinful per se
written by Xenophon, February 11, 2010
The other passage that you employ to offer biblical support for your understanding of forgiveness is Romans 5:6-11. First, notice in this passage that Paul says that we are saved from God's wrath in verse 9. I think we might be making progress on this front as I read your last post. In any case, I agree that Christ died for the ungodly, which is all of us, while we were still sinners. That is clear from this passage and other passages in the Bible.

The key verses here for our present controvesy are verses 9 and 10:

"Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.

For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. "

Paul says in verse 9 that we are now justified by Jesus' blood and then in verse 10 that we were reconciled to God while we were still enemies of God. So, you conclude that repentance is not necessary for us to be reconciled to God based on this passage and the tense of verbs indicating that, in verse 10, we were already reconciled to God before we repented and believed. Is this your reasoning?

Again, your reading and application of this passage must be read in light of the numerous other passages in the Bible, including Paul's writings, that demand repentance and placing one's faith in Christ to redeem us. So, where does repentance come into play in your understanding of salvation?

I think that the only way that you can make any sense of this passage and other passages that I cite are along Calvinist lines where faith and repentance occur as a result of regeneration and are not a condition for regeneration. As I said previously, I think the Augustinian/Calvinist understanding of the process of personal salvation is confused due to placing God in time and taking us out of time. It is very difficult for us to grasp God's perspective, but I think we must realize that God is not bound by time but we are, and not to confuse the two temporal orders. The other problem here is that you seem to accept universal atonement while the Calvinist does not. So, you are stuck with the dilemmas that I posed to you about people in Hell being forgiven as the Calvinist with the doctrine of limited atonement escapes these conundrums since the Calvinist view denies that the non-elect were even potentially justified by Jesus' death on the Cross. I can understand their view even as I reject it, but I cannot help but see your take on these issues as incoherent. But perhaps I am still missing something in your argument.

I believe that this passage teaches that God laid the groundwork for our salvation before we even sought God. But we must accept God's offer of salvation by faith as we see our need for a Savior. In this process, we repent of our sins. Even though God provided the means of our salvation by sending Jesus to pay our sin debt for us, we must personally accept Jesus' payment for ourselves in our existential decision to take a leap of faith that takes place with each individual in a particular point in time. That temporal reality for humans does not negate God's eternal perspective on his redemptive plan or how he views each individual in the time and place in which he situated them. The decision in which we accept Jesus as Savior also involves repentance. Until we actually take this leap of faith, the payment does not apply to us as individuals and so we remain under God's wrath and unforgiven.

Finally, in all the passages you cite on anger, in context, they all seem to refer to an unbalanced, excessive anger that turns into bitterness. That is why Paul urges us to resolve situations that give rise to angry responses as soon as possible. But what I am arguing, following passages that I have cited throughout this discussion from the New Testament such as Luke 17:3, is that the best way typically to keep anger from moving into rage and bitterness is to resolve the situation that gave rise to the angry response in the person who felt wronged. Unless people openly discuss their differences and try to resolve them, then misunderstandings and resentments will simply be driven underground as the most inconsiderate and aggressive people treat others unjustly. I do not believe that most people can or should forgive until the situation has been dealt with. What passes for forgiveness today with this emphasis on unilateral forgiveness sweeping problems under the rug resulting in self-deception and displacement of anger onto innocent bystanders or depression as we take the anger deep into ourselves.
replacement verse
written by Xenophon, February 11, 2010
Instead of citing Hebrews 8:12 above in the context that I did, let me retract that verse and replace it with 2 Corinthians 7:10--"Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death."

Readers alone are responsible for the content of the comments they post here. The comments are subject to the site’s terms and conditions of use and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of the ABP News. Readers whose comments violate the terms of use may have their comments removed or all of their content blocked from viewing by other users without notification.
Write comment
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login | Register
busy
 
< Prev   Next >
Copyright © 2007-2010 Associated Baptist Press, All Rights Reserved.