Forgive and Forget
apology accepted?
debt paid in full?
on my posting about remembering the woman somehow the concept of forgiveness has come up,
and the conversation is pretty interesting. i'm deleting some personal junk from the comments there and suggesting that any futher discussion on forgiveness be posted here...
"He suffered and endured great pain for us, but we thought his suffering was punishment from God. He was wounded and crushed because of our sins; by taking our punishment he made us completely well...the Lord gave him the punishment we deserved" Isaiah 53
Then there is Matthew 9 - "your sins are forgiven you..." And Jesus' haunting words from the cross - "Father forgive them, they know not what they do" Luke 23:34-35
And back to Matthew for one more word, before I head to church..."If you forgive others for the worngs they do to you, your Father in heaven will forgive you, but if you don't forgive others, you Father will not forgive your sins..."
I will attempt to show how savy I am at this computer blogging business by putting the last two comments from the Remember the Woman post here...and pose the question
Just how important is this whole Forgiveness question?
22 comments:
from Wanderer to the posting "Remember the Woman"
This makes no sense. Think of what might be out there that this forgiveness could be for? Could God forgive you for being responsible for the death of another man? If you were truly repentant? It seems to me that these teachings would tend to indicate that the answer is yes. However, here it would not just be for us to remember. The man is still dead. The fabric has still been changed irrevocably.
And what purpose could this forgiveness serve if it was offered? It leads to a theology of lessened responsibility. If I fail God, and I am sorry I did so, he will forgive me for it. It opens the door up to plan for multiple failures. It leads to planning to do things and seek forgiveness later.
No, I can't accept this concept of forgiveness. Everything we do has consequences. Far reaching ones that impact many around us. God isn't wandering around wiping the slate clean. He is merely taking into account that we are human when he weighs our actions and our repentance.
from Pastor Art, to the posting "Remember the Woman"
Part of the issue wanderer is the transcendence concept. Forgiveness received by us from Yahweh is not only temporal but most importantly eternal. The consequences of sin, which ever one (in Yahweh’s eyes there are no greater or lesser) will be experienced while upon the earth. However, the consequences of eternal justice is atoned for upon the cross changing our status and punishment which was rolled upon the shoulders of Jesus. Therefore He offers salvation/forgiveness to those who choose to turn away from sin and turn to Him.
Does the offence become a memory laps while in time most often not however the end of all things is not come, and as Paul says this life and its afflictions are nothing compared to the heavy glory of eternity.
Pastor Art
If I could accept your definition, Pastor Art, then I would say that forgiveness is still only capable of being granted from God. One man cannot forgive another. If I could accept it. I can't, but I thought I would start by pointing this out.
My religion doesn't espouse the concept of divine forgiveness, and unlike the rest of you, I am happy for it. I think the concept, even in the divine is foolish.
There are things I have done in my life that I truly regret. God could forgive me and erase these things from my heart, or take the pain that they cause. No such thing happens. True, some of the pain and the guilt has subsided with time, but they are still there and still raw.
Perhaps in the way the Christians seem to espouse, there might exist a way where I could offer this up to God and have it taken from me. I wouldn't if I could. What use does God have with these faults of mine? Isn't it better that they are there, raw to triggers in others so that I can use them to assist others with the memory of my experiences and their consequences?
I fear one of the major hurdles that is not likely to be cleared is the equating of a lack of forgiveness with a grudge or a judgement against. These are not equated equally. I have spent much quality time with people who have slighted me in the past. People whom I haven't forgiven for these slights. I remember, but I don't hold a grudge. Here is the difference. I take into account who they were, and who they are. In effect, I take into account the whole man, or woman. I believe this is also important.
No, from the moment you live, the tally begins, and there aren't any erasers. Whatever you do, you know, and God knows. What people seem to be unable to acknowledge is that even as we are capable of seeing that a person has changed and is really a good person, so is God. Why put this feel-good "forgiveness" concept out there to candy coat it further. Why imply that God would forget, or need to, in order for you to not be condemned?
Surely, just as you are aware you are human, so is God. Your stories say he became man, so you know that he even knows what this means. Why must this silly forgiveness thing be brought into it?
Wanderer, I would accept the logic of your comments if it weren't for the cross. there in lies the defining truth. perhaps some of our other friends could help explain it, because i think it is very important. I'm asking RD to comment, forgiveness is a very personal issue for him these days.
For me, I cannot separate "forgiveness" from "grace". The definition is use mose often for grace is "unmerited favor." With that as the definition and backdrop, I now can go on to accept (if not understand) Divine forgiveness.
~Kevin
I am copying this comment here from "Here we go, Rose" because it goes along well with this discussion. It was made by "Inheritor of Heaven"
Forgiveness can not/should not be taken for granted. If we do not forgive, we will not be forgiven says Jesus. Forgiveness in one sense is more for us than for the other person who has sinned against us. When we choose not to forgive them we are placing ourselves in judgement over the other. The bitter roots of that unforgiveness will bring bad fruit in our lives. When we forgive them whether they acknowledge they have done anything or not, whether they have heard or accepted our forgiveness or not, doesn't matter in a sense because we get rid of the bitter roots and return to Christ to bear his good fruit. We may through forgiveness also be restored to fellowship with that person if they come to repentance. We can possibly be more able to talk with them rationally about what they did to hurt us if we have forgiven them as well. Our feelings may or may not change but in the supernatural realm something has in fact changed. Much of the difficulty we have seen in peoples lives in both prayer counseling and deliverance ministries seems to stem from their judgements and unforgiveness. Much of the success we see as far as restoration and healing goes comes through their repentance and forgiveness.
"When we choose not to forgive them we are placing ourselves in judgement over the other."
Here I have to wholeheartedly disagree. On this hinges one of my most important points. It is the act of forgiveness that places us in judgement. We cannot forgive unless we first label the other party as guilty. Judgement must come first, and this act of judgement is one of the things that I stand against. I will still try to hold an open mind on the Divine Forgiveness question. It is not one of my beliefs, but I think there is a decent conversation going on with that one, but I can't hold to the human forgiveness.
Pastor Art - If the forgiveness doesn't bring erasure by God, if all is the same until judgement day, than the concept of forgiveness dissolves. It is not forgiveness that allows you to pass the test in the end, but sensible and wise judgement on the part of God. "Due to extenuating circumstances, your sentence is commuted with time served. Welcome home."
It is a singular judgement in which you are found worthy or not. It is not a forgiven transgression.
On Forgiveness. Pardon me, but this may take a while, and I might be better off posting this on my blog than here, but since Maryellen asked me to comment, I will and see how this goes.
First of all, Forgiveness is one of the biggest theological points in Christian theology, as Pastor Art has explained in his own profound, though sometimes hard to grasp way (maybe I should write a story about it?), but in all of the back and forth on this I have seen, and with all of the Scripture's that I have seen thrown around, there are two that are noticeable missing. First of all is the story of the paralytic man brought to Jesus in Mark chapter 2. The story is famous mostly because of the healing,and because of the lengths that this man's friends went through to get him to Jesus, but many people miss the main point of this miracle. When the paralytic was brought to Jesus, He didn't see a man on a mat who needed to walk, He saw a man lost in sin who needed forgiveness. Seemingly ignoring the man's physical infirmity, Jesus looks at him and says, "Son, your sins are forgiven you." In doing so, Jesus clearly demonstrates that He didn't come to earth to free of us of physical, emotional, financial, or any other earthly problem, although He does handle those for us too. He came to free us from our sins and to forgive us. I believe that had that man left Jesus still paralyzed, he still would have received a gift far greater than he could have expected. Jesus heals the man to prove a point. The pharisees started complaining, as they often did, and Jesus asks them, "Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat, and walk?'" Then, to prove to the pharisees that He had the authority to forgive sins, He healed the man. When the people exclaimed that they had never seen anything like it, what were they talking about? Jesus had been out healing people for a long time, which is why the man was brought to Him in the first place. My opinion is that they were commenting on both His confrontation with the teachers of the law, and on His forgiveness of the man's sins. Yes, even to these religious people forgiveness was a strange and foriegn concept. That some teacher can simply declare a man forgiven and he is... They were right to say that only God can truly forgive our sins (that is, to erase [to use my good friend's term]) and Jesus was showing the people that since He had the power to forgive, then He was indeed God. Wow, there's a whole other post there. But my point on this scripture is that the teachings of Jesus and forgiveness go hand in hand. He made sure that it was so, so that we could follow His example in forgiving our brothers.
Our forgiveness, while modeled after God's, is very different. No matter how much we forgive, we cannot effect a person's eternal destiny. If I forgive your sin, but you don't repent and receive God's grace, then my forgiveness did little for you. On the other hand, and for this every Christian should be eternally grateful, if God forgives our sins, which He does for anyone who truly repents, it doesn't matter if not another living soul does so. Our forgiveness, as far as God is concerened, has nothing to do with whether those we have trespassed against forgive.
The second point (and I am trying to keep this as brief as possible, which those of you who have read me know is very difficult for me)is about what Wanderer refers to as "erasure".
Does God erase? How? How can He wipe our slate clean when we still face consequences for our actions? To use Wanderer's example, how can we be forgiven of murder when the man or woman we killed is still dead. Wouldn't erasure of that action bring the man back to life, and if it doesn't, then isn't forgiveness a pointless concept?
I admit that I am no theologan. I cannot understand how God can say that He remember's our sins no more. Does it mean that He actually forgets what we did? If that is the case, then wouldn't He be surprised when He goes to look for the man we killed and doesn't find him? I often pray for people I have sinned against, even though I have given those sins to God and have been forgiven of those sins. While I know that God "remembers them no more" I know He doesn't say "Who? I don't know what you're talking about!" when I say these prayers. This, like many Judeo Christian concepts, is confusing, almost contradictory to our finite minds (which to me is proof that Man didn't make this religion up. If Christianity was the invention of a human mind, or even of a thousand human minds, it would make more sense. A simple thing like the eternal existance of God or His Triune nature boffles the mind, as it should. I'm a writer, and I know that I couldn't create a concept that I couldn't understand. But, back to my point, and I am making one.)
2 Corinthians 5:17 "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!" This means that once we turn our lives over to Jesus, and become "in Christ" we are completely new creatures in God's eyes. The old has gone, or as some versions put it, it has passed away. It is dead, buried, gone, no more. What the old man did remains, and the consequences may remain as well, but in God's eyes, the man who did those things is dead. He looks at the forgiven man and sees something completely new. Take the example of the murderer. God knows about the murder, cares for the victim and the victim's family and friends, and the murderer himself may (if there is any human justice) have to face the consequences of his sin for a long time to come, perhaps the rest of his life. But, once that killer repents and comes to God, he is made new. I don't believe that God wipes his slate clean, I believe that God gives him a completely new slate. He isn't the old person just cleaned and set loose, he is new creation, a new man. This is why it is said that we are born again. This is why Paul so often talks about the old man trying to come back and our need to "Put on the new man."
I could go on and on, and will probable do so depending on if anyone has read enough of this to want to comment. But suffice it to say, I have been forgiven of my sins, and I have been made a new man. Thank GOD!
Arthur B Roberts
Arthur - I must point out first off that your defense of your religion on the basis that parts of it don't make sense lacks a little in the logic department. Not saying you are wrong about your religion, but I wouldn't offer that quote to atheists, or anyone you are trying to convert.
(And I am also a writer, and I have often written things that later made no sense to me.)
I see the implied power of this forgiveness thing, but I still maintain it is a straw man argument, and that forgiveness either divine or human would in fact be detrimental to the forgiven as well as others.
Pastor Art - I appreciate your effort, but you still aren't demonstrating for me the value, or even the lack of destructive component in this forgiveness thing. I imagine in brief and time delayed dialogue it would take some time for both of us to become clear enough to convince or find there was no convincing.
I suspect as we continue here that we might find a similar result to MaryEllen's and my debate about light and dark. We seem to hold a number of similar opinions, but different terminology that we are hanging on to too tightly.
"It is the act of forgiveness that places us in judgement. We cannot forgive unless we first label the other party as guilty. Judgement must come first, and this act of judgement is one of the things that I stand against."
Are you saying, Wanderer, that someone cannot sin against another person then? If someone can sin against, or cause harm to, or degrade, devalue, etc. another human being, then how does the person wronged deal with what has happened to them?
Inheritor - Do you propose they rack themselves up with more guilt out of some moral driving to "forgive" someone of something heinous that has been done to them?
One does not need to forgive to move on. Trust me, I have laid out my feelings on the issue, and forgiveness isn't one of my tenets. Your implication that I couldn't move on if I was a victim at some point and couldn't forgive would mean I have been unsuccessful in moving on.
You seem to miss my main point. It is not my place to judge. I don't hold a grudge. Holding a grudge against someone else is like poisoning your own coffee every morning and waiting for them to die. My lack of a grudge does not equate forgiveness. I remember and take to heart what they have done that was wrong, as well as subsequently what they may have done to make amends or change themselves. I evaluate the person, not the issue. This does not require forgiveness. This leads to caution with the other person to begin with, and dealing with them as another human being.
You see, if I forgive you for wronging me, then it is wrong of me to bring it up in my own mind in the next scenario that might relate. If I simply treat you as another human being, and remember what you did, and play on the side of caution with you, I allow you to prove yourself without opening myself or those close up to me to being a victim.
You evaluate a person on who they are, not on one moment in their life. Forgiveness is unnecessary, and potentially dangerous to the person who espouses the belief. This is another one of those issues that I have referenced as the dangerous teachings of the Christian church. The teachings of forgiveness are an attempt to dumb the whole concept of dealing with your fellow man down to the most common denominator. The problem is that it succeeds in getting the basic message across while simultaneously being fundamentally wrong.
Wanderer,
I didn't mean to imply that I only believed in Christianity because parts of it don't make sense. (BTW, I have studied nearly every religion, including yours to some extent, and find that Christianity in fact makes the most sense.) I merely stated that I believed that Christianity was of divine origin because so much of it was beyond our comprehension.
Now, I have to go to my blog and to yours and reply to all of those mean things that you said that you said about me! ;0)
God Bless,
ABR
Wanderer, you said "It is not my place to judge. I don't hold a grudge. Holding a grudge against someone else is like poisoning your own coffee every morning and waiting for them to die." In this you are perfectly right. I think that is what forgiveness is. Forgiveness is not pretending you have not been hurt. Forgiveness is seperate from trust and reconcilliation. Forgiveness of someone does not preclude accountability especially in the case of unlawful acts. Restoration of full fellowship can only occur after change (repentance occurs). I don't think "forgive and forget" is biblical. We will remember what happened to us, likely for a very long time depending upon what happened and trust will then take a long time to be restored. It is the judging aspect that forgiveness relates to which leads back to your statement related above.
"Forgiveness is not pretending you have not been hurt. Forgiveness is seperate from trust and reconcilliation. Forgiveness of someone does not preclude accountability especially in the case of unlawful acts. Restoration of full fellowship can only occur after change (repentance occurs). I don't think "forgive and forget" is biblical."
Then forgiveness is in fact unsubstantial. It is merely a dumbing down of the cerebral activities involved in being human to another human being, and sharing the blessing of divinity's touch with them. It seems you point to "forgiveness" as supplanting all of what I have explained. In this case I think the flaw isn't in the theory, but the fact that the interpretation can be so awry. In this case I can agree with the philosophy, while still being opposed to the terminology.
So essentially it appears you just don't want to use the word forgiveness to be used for "not holding a grudge"?
or "the debt has been paid"?
"So essentially it appears you just don't want to use the word forgiveness to be used for 'not holding a grudge'?
or 'the debt has been paid'?"
What "appears" is that rather than looking what I am saying, you would rather harp on the fact that I pointed out that if you were saying what I was saying, then we were having a breakdown of communication rather than a disagreement of ideals.
I spend a long time talking about precisely where I stand and you dance a circle around one word. I am attempting an intelligent discourse here, not some sophomoric junior high school debate that involves someone else putting words in my mouth to make themselves feel better.
Hint: The phrase "So essentially what you are saying" is a debate tactic used to put words that were not said on the table and blame them on the other person, usually intended to make them look foolish in the eyes of the audience. Don't tell me what I am "essentially saying." Discuss what I said. I know the topic, I was there when I wrote it.
I guess what I am saying is that what you said earlier "You seem to miss my main point. It is not my place to judge. I don't hold a grudge. Holding a grudge against someone else is like poisoning your own coffee every morning and waiting for them to die. My lack of a grudge does not equate forgiveness. I remember and take to heart what they have done that was wrong, as well as subsequently what they may have done to make amends or change themselves. I evaluate the person, not the issue. This does not require forgiveness. This leads to caution with the other person to begin with, and dealing with them as another human being." is exceedingly close to what forgiveness means. One place it is different from forgiveness is that it does not include God in the process. I do think we are having much more a breakdown in communication than a breakdown of ideals. Perhaps the breakdown of ideals is occurring due to how you view God in the process versus how I do.
I have never been in debate (and am not good at it anyway) so my use of a Junior High debate tactic is probably to be expected :)
I perhaps should have said "What I hear you saying" rather than putting it more as words in your own mouth. Sorry.
It does not leave God out of the process if it is as God would have us behave. Moreover, you cannot remove God from any life process since God created everything and is infused and in direct participation with everything. The only aspect in which it removes God, and rightly so in my opinion, is in stepping back and taking responsibility for ourselves and our fellow man, rather than chalking it up to being God's work and washing our hands of it.
"I have never been in debate (and am not good at it anyway) so my use of a Junior High debate tactic is probably to be expected :)" I apologize for assuming that the phrasing of your argument was intentional. Honestly the first part of that sentence has me a little jealous. I on the opposite end, have been in far too many.
Wanderer: You said, "I apologize for assuming that the phrasing of your argument was intentional."
If I said "I forgive you." Would you take it understanding the smiling wink with which it is said?
Inheritor - I think I would have to as, to my chagrin, is illustrated here.
Wanderer: I was just learning tonight two things, one of which is that email (and I would say posting comments on blogs) is a poor substitute for face to face communication, and the second is to not make assumptions about what another person means when they say something. I take you to be a deep thinker. Your writings I often have to dwell upon and read many times over to percolate. I think that often I don't exactly catch all of what you are saying. So sometimes I may read it with a certain intonation in my head that you did not intend when you wrote it (so in essence I "hear" you incorrectly).
I often think of myself as one who tries to simplify complicated concepts (probably because I have to try to teach math to teenagers) and I think I too often oversimplify and in doing so I stray from precise meanings of technical words perhaps. In any case, I do have some fun trying to explain my views to you and understand your point of view in the process. I am fairly certain due to convictions we each have, there are certain areas we will heartily disagree and others where I think perhaps we are more in agreement than either of us may realize. It is late here and I breezed through your post but will read it again tomorrow. Have a good night/day/afternoon depending upon when or if you read this. (I think i am sounding like Jim Carrey in The Truman Show now)
"I was just learning tonight two things, one of which is that email (and I would say posting comments on blogs) is a poor substitute for face to face communication, and the second is to not make assumptions about what another person means when they say something."
"In any case, I do have some fun trying to explain my views to you and understand your point of view in the process."
"I am fairly certain due to convictions we each have, there are certain areas we will heartily disagree and others where I think perhaps we are more in agreement than either of us may realize."
Agreed, likewise, and agreed. :)
I would be interested on your thoughts on the post, particularly since it touches directly on (and was in fact instigated by) our conversation.
Post a Comment