On another thread recently Angus Johnson wrote:

Angus Johnson - 24 July 2008 10:07 AM

We can and should forgive sins committed against each other including forgiving non-believers when they do us harm (Mark 11:25). I believe this is for our good and is necessary even if the wrongdoer does not seek forgiveness. Not forgiving risks us becoming enslaved to hate and anger, so we must leave judgement of others to God who knows the hearts of all.

It is clear that the Bible teaches us to love our enemies, and to be forgiving towards others.  But does Mark 11:25 tell us to forgive those who do not seek forgiveness?  God himself only forgives those who repent.  Are we able to be more forgiving than God?  And in any case, isn’t forgiveness by its very nature something that is only given in response to repentance?

Bob Cameron - 24 July 2008 11:35 AM

It is clear that the Bible teaches us to love our enemies, and to be forgiving towards others.  But does Mark 11:25 tell us to forgive those who do not seek forgiveness?  God himself only forgives those who repent.  Are we able to be more forgiving than God?  And in any case, isn’t forgiveness by its very nature something that is only given in response to repentance?

I think that it does tell us to forgive others, regardless of whether or not they ask for it. It says that “if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him” with no conditions attached.
In any case, surely forgiveness of others is actually good for us. By that, I mean that if we carry grudges and remember past hurts, it is actually bad for our physical, mental and spiritual health. The act of consciously forgiving those who have harmed us enables us to recover and move on with our lives

Hi again Bob.

I’ve just done a very quick Google search on “forgiveness and theology” - isn’t the Internet a wonderful tool! - and found a couple of very thoughtful and helpful articles from bloggers/authors I haven’t heard of or read before:

Faith & Theology: Forgiveness

Forgiveness and Healing in Brethren History and Theology

Also, as I mentioned in the original thread, I think George Ellis presents a fascinating insight into the possibility of “laws of ethics” just as we accept “laws of physics”.

Edit: And also I can recommend Lewis Smedes’ excellent book ”The Art of Forgiving”.

Jean Marlow - 24 July 2008 11:48 AM

Bob Cameron - 24 July 2008 11:35 AM

It is clear that the Bible teaches us to love our enemies, and to be forgiving towards others.  But does Mark 11:25 tell us to forgive those who do not seek forgiveness?  God himself only forgives those who repent.  Are we able to be more forgiving than God?  And in any case, isn’t forgiveness by its very nature something that is only given in response to repentance?

I think that it does tell us to forgive others, regardless of whether or not they ask for it. It says that “if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him” with no conditions attached.

The way I’ve reconciled these two is to recognise an “intermediate state” of “being ready to forgive”.  God is ready to forgive the unrepentant, but the forgiveness “transaction” won’t be complete until they ask for and receive his forgiveness.  Similarly, I should be ready to forgive those who wrong me (and thus I should leave behind thoughts of retribution etc and practically love them) but my relationship with them can’t be restored to how it was until they elect to receive the forgiveness.

God sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous…

Hi Tom
That’s how I understand the Bible’s teaching on forgiveness also, even down to the idea of forgiveness as a “transaction”.  I’ll be interested to hear (hopefully) what some more of our many erudite posters have to say.
Bob

I don’t know what ‘erudite’ means, but you’re going to hear from me anyhow;-)

As far as I understand it forgiveness is all about repairing relationships.  God offers forgivness to any who will accept it in order to repair our relationship with Him.  God presents the offer of forgivness before any act of repentance and waits for a response.  However if the gift of forgivness is rejected the relationship is not repaired and the offender is left unforgiven.  That is to say, the debt is not cancelled and still needs to be paid.

I think forgivness is the same for people towards one another.  As Christians we are commanded to offer forgiveness to those that have sined against us.  If we are unwilling to do so, Jesus tells us in the Lord’s prayer that; God will also be unwilling to forgive us our sin.

This does not mean that if a person rejects our forgiveness, or is unable to accept it because you no longer have contact with the person, that you can continue to hold a debt against them.  Because the act of offering forgivness is the first step to wishing well for another person.  The hatred is destroyed in the very offer it self.  For example Stephen (in Acts) asked God to forgive the people that were stoning him without expecting any acceptance of the offer.  He wished them well.  As God also wishes everyone well.

The difference between us and God though is that God is also the Judge.  If you reject the Judge’s offer of forgivness then the debt must be paid back by the offender.  The debt being the wages owed for sin, that is ‘death’ Romans 6:23.

Craig Thacker - 25 July 2008 10:05 AM

I don’t know what ‘erudite’ means.....

I think it means one who is prone to commit many errurs .. oops I mean errors.

( Please forgive me - I couldn’t help myself. ) Actually I am really appreciating the comments that have been made on this thread. Thanks guys.

It’s in interesting idea, wether learned people are more or less prone to error than anyone else. Erudite doesn’t mean prone to error. From the latin “rudis” meaning raw, or untaught, exrudis (now erudite) means “no longer untaught”

Beth Parker - 25 July 2008 11:16 AM

It’s in interesting idea, wether learned people are more or less prone to error than anyone else. Erudite doesn’t mean prone to error. From the latin “rudis” meaning raw, or untaught, exrudis (now erudite) means “no longer untaught”

Hi Beth,

Thanks for your response - however my comment was meant as a joke. ( But thanks for taking me seriously - not many do. ) The dictionary indeed states that erudite means “characterized by great knowledge; learned or scholarly” and that synonyms for the word include “educated, knowledgeable; wise, sapient”.

Wikopedia adds :

The word erudition came into Middle English from Latin. A scholar is erudite (Latin eruditus) when instruction and reading followed by digestion and contemplation have effaced all rudeness ("e- (ex-) + rudis"), that is to say smoothed away all raw, untrained incivility. Common usage has blurred the distinction from “learned”.

Well, now that we have our “word for the day”, let’s see who can use it the most in conversations today.

Cheers, Kevin

Kevin Goddard - 25 July 2008 11:45 AM

Well, now that we have our “word for the day”

“I yearn the company of the erudite
who ponder the meaning of wrong ‘n’ right,
the laws of God, and why we’re here,
not where to find the cheapest beer.”

Angus Johnson - 25 July 2008 11:58 AM

“I yearn the company of the erudite
who ponder the meaning of wrong ‘n’ right,
the laws of God, and why we’re here,
not where to find the cheapest beer.”

Source?

Bob Cameron - 25 July 2008 12:30 PM

Source?

C’est moi. July 2008

Angus Johnson - 25 July 2008 12:59 PM

Bob Cameron - 25 July 2008 12:30 PM

Source?

C’est moi. July 2008

Impressed!

Moving right back …

Peter Rodgers spoke on forgiveness at CMS Summer School 2003 in the evening Bible Studies. IIRC, it was part of a series that he called ‘Victims of Grace”. Worth tracking down, I think.

Unfortunately, I can’t find a link within CMS’s site where those talks can be ordered.

Cheers,
Andrew

I have a couple of questions.

If you are the offended party, do you wait for the offender to approach you for forgiveness or do you seek them, out explain yourself and take it from there?

If you you have been hurt/offended by someone and they are completely ignorant of their offense, what do you do? Is there more than one option to deal with such a situation or what?

Hi Fellow Posters

Took a few days vacation from the fora in order to get some (other) work done!  I had a very interesting conversation recently with someone against whom a horrendous thing was done.  In this case the perpetrators were punished but that hasn’t helped the offended person come even close to either loving or forgiving those people.  Such a person reads Jesus’ words in Matthew 6:12, 14-15:

12 Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
14 For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

and is understandably concerned about their own relationship with God.

Here’s what I said to this person (in very brief form):
1 Jesus does command us to love our enemies.  If you are finding it impossible to do so, ask him and keep asking him to help you to do so; pray for your enemies.
[Cf Matt 5:44 & Luke 6:27].
2 We are also called to be like our heavenly Father.  He stands willing to forgive anyone who repents of their wrongdoing, and he calls us to do the same.  This is part of what it means to love our enemies.
3 God does NOT forgive those who do not repent, nor can we.  The very nature of forgiveness is that it is an act of reconciliation between two parties.  It can only take place when BOTH parties ‘come to the table’.
4 Nevertheless, God can bring us to a place where we can let the offense against us go (in terms of what it is doing to us--causing bitterness, hatred, and so forth).  It is only when he does that work that we will be able to offer forgiveness if that person (or persons) does seek it in true repentance.

A couple of further comments.  Forgiveness in the Bible carries with it the idea of remission, i.e., the cancelling of a debt.  In that sense I guess it is logically possible to speak of forgiving someone their sin against us even if they haven’t repented, of cancelling the ‘debt’ they owe us.  I say “logically possible” because I don’t think the Bible says anywhere that God does so, and I don’t think we are called to do so either.

In any case I don’t think remission is the total picture of forgiveness in Biblical terms.  It can’t be separated from the concept of reconciliation.  It is in this regard that only a repentant sinner is forgiven, for without repentance there can never be reconciliation.  This is why I am in agreement with Tom’s earlier remarks and with those of Craig also, that we stand “ready to forgive” and “offer forgiveness” to those who have sinned against us, but that we can only forgive when the offender repents and seeks our forgiveness.

Angela also asked a couple of very practical questions:

If you are the offended party, do you wait for the offender to approach you for forgiveness or do you seek them out, explain yourself and take it from there?

If you have been hurt/offended by someone and they are completely ignorant of their offense, what do you do? Is there more than one option to deal with such a situation or what?

I don’t think we can be prescriptive on the first matter.  It may or may not be our responsibility to seek a person out so that we can let them know that we are willing to forgive them.  But our primary responsibility is in being willing to forgive if the opportunity arises.

In the case of the second question, again I don’t think we can prescribe.  But one thing worth considering is, is my hurt a result of their wrongdoing, or is it an unintended consequence for which they are not responsible.  If the latter is the case, there is no need for forgiveness, although I may have to overcome my hurt in order to keep loving them.

Well that’s it for now folks - possibly my longest post to date!

Regards to all,

Bob