This whole discussion seems to be a matter of semantics.
Paidion
Yes it is but sometimes semantics are important like in Mark 11.25 when Jesus says if we do not forgive then God will not forgive us. We can brush it off and think that Jesus really only meant repentant sinners or it’s not really literal or some other qualification but Jesus could have meant what the actual words convey.
To some extent it is semantical. I see reconciliation as mutual and including restoration of relationship. Everyone will be reconciled, and all will go through repentance to become reconciled.
I do not see forgiveness as being the same as restoration of relationship. Forgiveness is a gate opened which the forgiven one may or may not walk through, but when the gate is opened, the forgiveness is real and true on the part of the one who opens it. Just the fact that it is opened has an effect on those without(it draws/drags them to Christ crucified), but the full benefit of reconciliation is not afforded them until they walk through it.
“But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Rom 5:8 Forgiveness
21And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, 22yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach— 23**if indeed you continue **in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, Col 1 Reconciliation
Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, 19namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them(forgiveness), and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. 2 Cor 5
I see it as if we are declaring this universal forgiveness, and leading the forgiven(those who follow) through the gates into reconciliation
Thank you for making clear in the above statement, what you mean by “forgiveness.” If someone has done you harm and you don’t hold it against them, then you have forgiven them. Would that be something like, “You don’t demand restitution”?
I think your understanding of forgiveness is quite prevalent. And it applies to “forgiving a loan.” If someone has borrowed money from you and is unable to repay you, and you “forgive” the loan, you don’t require him to repay it.
Unfortunately, when you forgive in this sense, where there is no repentance, it sometimes sends the message to the offender that what he did was okay.
I think that is a narrow definition based on the example I gave- which is Christ on the cross, but I am not disputing that repentance is necessary for reconciliation and restoration. I am saying God’s forgiveness was wide and deep before the foundation of the world, manifest in the Logos, who is the Lamb slain, and already given before creation. Forgiveness clearly “does not count trespasses against” the transgressor, setting such a one free, once they avail themselves of it- not by “paying for it with repentance”, but by becoming aware of them selves before the greater love of a forgiving God, which causes a change within, a change in which repentance is only one element, along with faith and revelation.
It is ok that forgiveness is given before repentance. This is what disarms the principalities and powers, destroying the elementary principles of the world, and draws men to Christ crucified. Nothing by any means can “let anyone off” because the only way out is the revelation of the love of God in Jesus Christ(imo that is the fire of His presence, overwhelming perfect love).
“For God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him might not perish”
The forgiveness was implicit in the sending and the sacrifice. The deliverance comes when one believes, which, imo, includes repentance.
It is the wisdom that none of the rulers of this world did not understand, or else they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
I dont see how anyone can minimize the intrinsic value in the words “Father forgive them for they do not know what they are doing”, breathed out in the midst the greatest act in all of time and consciouness- as a manifestation of the heart of God, “For He is the radiance of the Father’s glory and the exact representaion of His nature”. Forgiveness given to the perpetrators in the midst of the act, before repentance, which will eventually come to all with the revelation of Christ crucified, so that all will be reconciled and restored.
If someone desires to emulate that forgiveness, and not “count transgressions” against someone, it does not mean they do not speak the truth in love to that person, or are just releasing them from a loan. It is love, if it is true and not just religiosity, and it will have power in that persons life- even if it is not presently received. The forgiveness itself IS the power that brings repentance, which is why(imo) Paul says, “I am determined to kno nothing among you but Christ and Him crucified” and also why Jesus said, “If I am lifted up from the earth I will draw all men unto me”.
When God’s agape love is made real to a person, it just seems to dissolve so many pre-existent ideas about retributive justice, fear, and self-righteousness. It can lay us low even more than a threat of punishment; not in fear, but with the un-raveling of a lifetime’s defenses and sins and false hope.Those things fall away, leaving us exposed.
Seeing ourselves as we are, and yet as unconditionally loved by the God who is Agape - even if we’d never heard the term ‘repent’, we do it anyway. With gladness
If it is a narrow definition of forgiveness, please provide a broader one. I read your last post above, and I still have been unable find from your words a clear definition of forgiveness as you understand it.
Dave, I agree with your post above. But how does it relate to the meaning of true forgiveness? Are you saying that unconditional love is tantamount to forgiveness?
Don - good question, but no, I wasn’t trying to say that.
I was centered more on the idea of ‘repentance’ before God, that has been presented as either a ‘work’ to earn God’s forgiveness, or as unnecessary.
I think the “either-or” is a false dilemma. I could be wrong, but ‘in His light we see light’ - the actual experience of, not the theology of, God’s love for us in our particularity lights up the evil places, the dark corners, and the ‘turning away’ just happens as the things hidden there are exposed; the disgust for them as they are shown for what they are, and the realization that our coddling of those things has cost us much of our true life, is enough for us to let them go.
As to true forgiveness between persons - it takes more grace than I can conjure up on my own, to forget some wrongs until, that is, I really see what I have done, in my heart or outwardly, that I have need of forgiveness for. We not only live in a broken world, we have to see ourselves as part of the brokenness, indeed as one of the ‘breakers’; the other guy is in the same boat.
$.02
Amen 
Jesus forgave before repentance. I don’t feel like I need to define that anymore than I have already. He did it, so it was “true forgiveness”. He did not hold their trespass against them even as they were in the midst of trepass.
This does not mean they wil not have to face their iniquity and experience repentance(a broken and contrite heart), it simply demonstrates that from the forgivers point of view, the repentance of the trespasser is not always a prerequisite condition to their having been forgiven.
The words “always” and “never” are often given to express a concept that may be true in some instances, even sometimes a majority of instances, but is not necessarily absolute across all instances.
In other words, you are defining “forgiveness of offenders” as “not holding offenders’ trespasses against them.” Doubtless that definition is ubiquitous, but that doesn’t make it correct. Jesus’ words still stand, “IF your brother sins against you, rebuke him, and IF he repents, forgive him.” Those words still imply that forgiveness is conditional upon repentance. If not, why did he insert the phrase “if he repents”? If forgiveness is NOT conditional upon repentance as you believe, then Jesus would have said, “If your brother sins against you, rebuke him, and then forgive him.”
“IF your brother sins against you, rebuke him, and IF he repents, forgive him.” Those words still imply that forgiveness is conditional upon repentance. If not, why did he insert the phrase “if he repents”
Because the primary focus in this statement is not forgiveness but is repentance and the benefits of repentance. Forgiveness is actually the secondary focus in this statement as it is pointed out by Jesus to be a benefit of repentance as is also restoration of relationship which Jesus pointed out in other statements.
Forgiveness and fellowship are benefits of repentance and you are reading into this something different then what Jesus is saying IMHO.
Once again we differ on what this is to mean. Some how you want to link :Affliction and anguish for every person who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honour and well-being for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek, for God shows no partiality
With the Idea that: And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. The good work is His doing. I am perplexed 
The good work is not ENTIRELY His doing. We must coöperate with Him, or the good work in us will not be accomplished.
Working together with him, then, we appeal to you not to receive the grace of God in vain. (2 Corinthians 6:1 ESV)
I am not defining forgiveness in any terms so limited as that. That is indeed one element of forgiveness tho. Also, I am not trying to limit the definition or set it in stone. My whole point has been that the statement “True forgiveness must be accompanied by repentance” is a limiting statement that does not take into account all the different elements and perspectives of forgiveness.
True forgiveness can be given before repentance occurs.
Jesus words still stand, “Father forgive them they dont know what they are doing”. So making your one verse a law for defining all aspects of forgiveness, instead of seeing it as a one verse addressing one element of forgiveness, is the wrong approach, imo.
“IF your brother sins against you, rebuke him, and IF he repents, forgive him.”
One can read this as, “if your brother repent you should forgive him”
it seems you are reading
“do not forgive your brother until he repents”
But the nexr sentence reveals the intent of the whole context…
Even if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times returns to say, ‘I repent,’ you must forgive him.”…
Which, as several posts have addressed, is the goal of the teaching.
Forgiveness is the focus and repentance is the point at which I must forgive a brother who transgresses against me.
It in no way reads to limit giving forgiveness ONLY TO THE REPENTANT. It simply requires that one MUST OFFER FORGIVENESS TO THE REPENTANT.
The distinction is worth making because to elevate one verse above others concerning the same topic and limit them by it is hermenutically incorrect.
4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.
Certainly God forgave us before we repented. The awareness of that mercy is the source of repentance. “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them” - surely includes forgiveness before the fact.
But I’m not limiting forgiveness to this mode. It is simply one element of forgiveness- albeit a major one because ot reflects the attitude of God, who truly forgave us when we were yet sinners. Sometimes forgiveness cannot be of benefit and achieve reconciliation without repentance on the part of the transgressor. That is another element of the whole context of biblical conversation concerning forgiveness, which is a broad conversation.
You say you are not limiting the concept of forgiveness to “not holding offenders’ trespasses against them.” I have asked you several times to tell us what you DO mean by “forgiveness” and you don’t seem to be able to respond to this question. You simply seem to avoid an answer by saying that forgiveness involves “a number of different elements.” If you do not KNOW what true forgiveness is, then how can you be so certain that forgiveness can be granted without repentance. Just WHAT IS IT that is granted without repentance?
I see forgiveness as a response to repentance leading to a restoration of relationship.
As for the examples you provide which purportedly indicate forgiveness without repentance, I have already explained how each one of them DOES involve repentance.
So what happens when we do not cooperate with him?
Then the good work that He began in us will not be brought to completion.