The Evangelical Universalist Forum

TRUE FORGIVENESS

But more than that, I am confused as to why Paidion wants to make a huge distinction? If I didn’t know better, I would think it had to do with his desire NOT to forgive.

I’ve seen Paidion argue like this on another forum about the same topic and i think he has strong beliefs about a couple of things. He believes that Christ’s death delivers us from sin and God’s enabling grace helps us continue to be righteous. But the kicker is that Paidion thinks unconditional forgiveness either contradicts or undercuts this vision of salvation. Just my opinion from observation though.

What is, at bottom, the one basic bone of contention here? Can it be put simply by someone, please?
Thanks

What is, at bottom, the one basic bone of contention here? Can it be put simply by someone, please?
Thanks

Does forgiveness require repentance from the offender or can it be unconditional?

Thanks Steve.
For a rather innocuous question, there seem to be earth-shaking consequences hanging on the answer.
If you could kinda simply lay out what is at stake here?
Thanks

Thanks Steve.
For a rather innocuous question, there seem to be earth-shaking consequences hanging on the answer.
If you could kinda simply lay out what is at stake here?
Thanks

I think it’s about God’s character and whether his love and grace is unconditional or conditional. If it’s conditional then it’s limited and what are the ramifications but if it’s unconditional then what is it worth if it’s for free and doesn’t require a change of behavior?
I’m sure others can add to this.

The bottom line—the basic bone, Dave, is that “forgiving” an unrepentant person sends him the message that what he did was acceptable, and that he is free to repeat his offense as often as he wishes—whether he is a murderer, a rapist and/or a torture or little girls, etc.

The position I hold that repentance (a change of mind and heart) is required in order to grant true forgiveness of wrongdoing was inspired by Denis Prager’s article in the Reader’s Digest. I think it was the March issue in 1998. His article was entitled “When Forgiveness Is a Sin.”

After an extensive search I think I may have found that article or one that is very similar. Please check out the following site:

lukeford.net/Dennis/indexp29.html

Here’s another article about that article (or perhaps it’s about a similar article) by Prager, that you might find well worth pondering:

str.org/articles/the-sin-of-forgiveness#.WS81rdy1vAU

I’d add that this is really more a case of true repentance (something Jesus DID speak to Lk 3:8 et al), BUT that’s a different kettle of fish.

IF God’s forgiveness is NOT unilaterally inclusive and embracing of humanity in toto, BUT rather… dependent fully upon an individual’s actions to be true THEN none can have peace of heart/mind as to the grace of God because each repetitious repentance for each repetitious infraction draws into question the efficacy of God’s forgiveness thus cheapening forgiveness and making IT reliant on human behaviouralism for IT to be true and efficacious — THAT is the cart before the horse.

IF one takes note of this OT principle it can be seen that Israel’s position was one of being redeemed, i.e., having been FORGIVEN her transgressions/trespasses/blunders… as a result she was called to RETURN or turn again to Yahweh. Thus repentance was possible BECAUSE OF the pre-existing condition set and established by God… their actions (behaviour reflecting repentance) being ENABLED by divine grace.

Isa 44:22 I have blotted out, like a thick cloud, your transgressions, and like a cloud, your sins. Return to Me, for I have redeemed you.”

Yes Paul said it’s the goodness of God that leads men to repentance.Rom 2.4

I agree with those articles that it is quite wrong of me to forgive someone who has wronged a third party. Who am I to offer forgiveness when it is not I who has been wronged? But I don’t think the articles dealt sufficiently with the power/consequence of forgiveness for the one who is doing the forgiving.
Much has been said about the recipient of the forgiveness but what about the donor? If I have been wronged and I do not forgive, then I carry an albatross around my own neck. But if I can forgive, then I find freedom. Isn’t this a spiritual truth we learn as Children of our heavenly Father and doesn’t it point towards unconditional forgiveness?

Indeed!!

Pilgrim, how do you understand “unconditional forgiveness” of a wrongdoer? Do you mean letting go of ill feelings for such a one? If you do, then I am all for doing that, and I agree that refusing to do so and holding onto anger or a grudge toward such a person is only harming yourself, and that you need to be free from the “albatross” you are are carrying.

Or do you mean that by “unconditional forgiveness” that you don’t require anything of the unrepentant offender (that is one who has not changed his mind about his offense, and has no intention of changing his ways). You just let him go on hurting people as if it didn’t matter. You are telling him in effect that what he did was okay, and you have no problem with it. That is exactly what the writers of the articles oppose—as do I.

Perhaps neither of these is what you mean by “unconditional forgiveness” of an offender. If not, please explain what you do mean.

I suppose I mean letting go of ill feelings and any feeling of ‘judgement’ towards the wrongdoer. I put the word ‘judgement’ in quotes because by it I mean any feeling that ‘I am a better person than he is’, but at the same time, I do feel it would be incorrect to remove all consequences in all cases.

If my ideas appear muddled it is probably because I am.

This is the fallacy you use to justify your whole rationale; but it is weak and assumes too much. One does NOT need to condone such aberrant behaviour for one to truly forgive… sure, one can be left feeling exacerbated by the offendant’s continual negative behaviour, but to give a supposed wink and nod as your assertion suggests goes too far. The reality is… forgiveness DOES NOT negate nor set aside potential consequences of continual abhorrent behaviour.

Although what follows are OT texts and as such carry little weight or place with you Don there are some biblical examples saying in kind what I’ve just said above. With regards to Israel and forgiveness and the outworking of remedial justice under the Old Covenant, we find the following…

So it was there were times of punishment involving the outworking of temporal consequences for temporal actions i.e., their actions had real time consequences in this life where Israel’s temporal pain was the fruit of their trespasses; thus their judgment.

As can be seen by these verses above… the TRUE nature, goal and resolve of divine justice and FORGIVENESS is restorative, and NOT carte blanche wrath. God’s “justice” was met fully in Christ at Calvary, met fully in LOVE imputing forgiveness to all once and for all…
from this we can learn and do in kind.

I am puzzled, Davo, how you can forgive a person and still execute wrath on him (or punish him) for his wrongdoing. What is MEANT by forgiveness in such a case? When you forgive while providing “remedial justice” what do you actually DO in your forgiving? How does the recipient KNOW that he has been forgiven by you while being chastised by you concerning his wrongdoing?

As for the 2nd and 3rd verses you quoted, they clearly say that God will show a little correcting now so that He might have mercy and compassion on them later. That makes sense from my point of view. After they have been corrected, they will have had a change of mind about their actions (repentance) so that God can then be merciful to them. Just as an earthly father sometimes administers correction to a child who misbehaves, but is then kind to him after he changes his ways.

  • Lam 3:31-32 For the Lord will not cast off forever. Though He causes grief, YET He will show compassion according to the multitude of His mercies.
    Isa 54:8 With a little wrath I hid My face from you for a moment; but with everlasting kindness I will have mercy on you,” says the LORD, your Redeemer.*

As to the first verse you quoted, it seems that translating the Hebrew as “God-Who-Forgives” is taking liberty. I have not studied Hebrew, but my Online Bible gives the meaning of the Hebrew as “god-like-one.” The Greek Septuagint uses the word “ευιλατος”. Ι have never encountered that word before. But consulting a translation, it may mean, “You have become favourably disposed to them, though you took judgment on all their wrongdoing.” This is much the same as the thought in the first two verses. After God judged them for their wrongdoing and they repented, He became favourably disposed to them.

Davo, I wish you would desist from saying such things to me as “Although what follows are OT texts and as such carry little weight or place with you Don.” It is untrue that OT texts in general carry little weight for me. Many of them are wonderful! It is only when Moses and some of the prophets depict God’s character in a way that is contrary to the way His character is depicted by Jesus and Paul, that I reject the former depiction and accept the latter. I am a Christian, so in case of conflict, I choose to believe what my Lord Jesus taught about God’s character.

“Repentance” is having a change of heart and mind concerning one’s ongoing wrongdoing. To give a literal example, if one is heading east in his car and suddenly realizes that he is going in the wrong direction, he changes his mind about going east and turns around and heads west.

Repenting does not necessarily mean confession of sin. One can change his mind about his sin practice and stop doing it without saying a word. However, if we have offended someone and have truly changed our mind about our actions, then I think it would be a natural outcome of repentance to tell the person we offended that we had changed, maybe also tell him that we are truly sorry for what we did to him. Yet this “natural outcome” is not a necessary condition for repentance. If we had a change of heart and mind about what we were doing, and quit doing it, then we have repented whether we say a word to anyone or not.

Paidion, I am saddened at and feel insulted by you for giving reasoned, considered, and balanced answers on this thread. `It’s obvious that you know nothing about forgiveness, or the plan of God, or the meaning of the atonement, the scriptures in general, and you probably hate your mother; and that you are a devious, prevaricating, mendacious man of ill-will and need to be confronted on every word you speak.

From reading the thread, I think I’m in good company.

p.s. yes, I think the word for this is ‘satire’. :laughing:

I remember plenty of times as a kid having my ears clipped for doing some wrong and then enduring the consequences of my actions… I WAS forgiven BUT THAT didn’t always remove the chastening; love and forgiveness sometimes hurts.

Again Don… the cart before the horse. His mercy (forgiveness) facilitates repentance — see Rom 2:4. It’s not a case of ‘no repentance’ it’s a case of forgiveness is NOT DEPENDANT UPON repentance; it is often something learnt FROM the pre-existing forgiveness.

The God who is propitious i.e., is gracious or favourably inclined, aka “forgiving” — it’s more a stretch IMO to claim the translation “is taking liberty.”

It is amazing what your eyes seek to READ INTO a passage that says no such thing.

I’ve only been taking you at your own word where you in dismissing away dealing with OT passages that don’t meet your requirements you have yourself exclaimed… “I don’t care what is written in the Hebrew Scriptures.” — your words, not mine.

Jesus didn’t reject Moses nor the Prophets… quite the contrary Lk 21:22; 24:44-45.

How do you explain away Jesus’ words here… “but he who does not believe is condemned already” for “…the wrath of God abides on him.” Or, “But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear Him who, after He has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I say to you, fear Him!” — Jesus wasn’t being wishy-washy; do you likewise whitewash these from the text because they cut across your sensitivities?

Surely you are able to see that I said that only with respect to the false portrayal of the God’s character!

I’ve waited a long time for you to indicate what you understand by “forgiving.” But you never answer when I ask you directly. But now it comes out! You equate “forgiving” as being “gracious and favourably inclined.” If that is the meaning you assign to it, then I can well understand why you believe in forgiveness without repentance. I also believe one can be gracious and favourably inclined toward an unrepentant person. Indeed, I believe a Christian ought to be such.

However, “forgiveness” as I understand it includes not only a letting go of any ill will or retaliation toward the person, but also his release from any demands upon him and a restoration of relationship with him. This requires repentance on his part! Of course if he is truly repentant, he will want to make amends for his wrongdoing as far as that is possible.

It is disappointing you keep making this ridiculous claim. I have answered plainly and clearly a number of times now as is indicative when you cannot offer a reasoned and honest reply. You have done this by either… 1) ignoring or dismissing given texts. 2) blatantly changing the definition of various words within texts. 3) inserting repentance into texts where such is not mentioned. Playing fast and loose like this is not sound exegesis.

Again, you are hung by your own words… “but also his release from any demands upon him” — and what follows? — your demand for repentance. Humbug Don!

An honest reading of this thread shows I have made it clear, as in it can be read in this thread, where I AGREE repentance CAN BE a vital part in forgiveness. I just DO NOT hold your narrow view, and have argued accordingly with relevant texts, that said “true forgiveness” is NOT solely reliant on repentance.

But all that said… I think this poor old horse has been near flogged to death and fit for the knackery. :confused:

So you think it humbug that a restoration of relationship is a necessary element of forgiveness of sin?

I once knew another person who thought the same. Concerning one who sinned against him, he said, “Yes, I forgave him, but I’m not going to go out and have dinner with him!” No restoration of relationship.

If you should sin against God, Davo, I wonder how God’s forgiveness of you would play out if there were not restoration of relationship. Would God say, Yes, I forgive you Davo, but don’t bother praying to me. I won’t listen!" Would such “forgiveness” satisfy you, Davo?

And there can be no restoration of relationship without repentance on your part—a mind-change concerning your sin.