Some time ago I promised an article on the subject of conditional versus unconditional forgiveness. I’ve had many false starts and have been largely unsatisfied with anything I’ve written on the subject. So I decided to simplify and to provide only an outline of my thoughts on the subject. I am, perhaps, a little less than perfectly confident in my beliefs on this subject which is why I do not wish to be too dogmatic. Instead, take this article this as my understanding of why forgiveness is to be conditional, not unconditional. I’ll just trace the progression of my position as I’ve looked to Scripture to seek to understand forgiveness. Much of my recent thought has been influenced by Chris Braun and his forthcoming volume Unpacking Forgiveness.
My first thoughts about this subject came at the time of the Columbine shootings. Shortly after those two boys terrorized the school and took their own lives doing so, I remember seeing a photograph of students standing outside the school holding signs that side “We forgive you.” I remember being surprised and incensed. Why would anyone wish to forgive people who caused such pain and destruction, who expressed no remorse and who sought no forgiveness. It seemed to me that it made a mockery of forgiveness to extend it to those who did not want it. The same thing happened when at the recent Virginia Tech shootings—people forgave the killer, but only after his death and without him expressing any regret or remorse. What is it that bothered me about this?
Let me build my case for conditional forgiveness step-by-step.
Forgive as God Forgives
According to the Bible, our forgiveness of one another is to follow God’s model of forgiveness. We see this in several New Testament passages.
- Matthew 6:12b “…forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.”
- Ephesians 4:32 “Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.”
- Colossians 3:13 “…bearing with one another and, if one has a complaint against another, forgiving each other; as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive.”
In each case you’ll notice the little word as. We are to forgive as God forgives or in the same manner as He forgives. Thus we must first understand how God forgives if we are to rightly forgives. That would be a long and deep study, though no doubt a good one. For our purposes, though, we’ll narrow in on just one area.
God’s forgiveness, according to Chris Brauns, is “a commitment by the one true God to pardon graciously those who repent and believe so that they are reconciled to him, although this commitment does not eliminate all consequences.” That seems to me to be a good working definition and one that encompasses what the Bible teaches on the subject. Key words are “commitment,” “pardon,” “graciously,” “repent,” “believe,” and reconciled.” I cannot touch on all of those today, so I will leave you to read Brauns’ book when it becomes available. It will be a blessing to you.
God’s Forgiveness Is Conditional
It is beyond any reasonable dispute that God’s forgiveness is conditional. God is not a universalist who chooses to forgive all men for their offense against Him. Nor does He offer forgiveness without expectation or condition. Rather, God forgives only those who turn to Him in repentance and who put their trust in Him. We affirm that God’s offer of forgiveness is universal, in that He extends it to all of humanity. But the reality of forgiveness is only for those who accept the conditions of faith and repentance. Proof for this assertion can be found throughout Scripture, but perhaps no more clearly than in 1 John.
- 1 John 1:8-9 “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
Forgiveness and the cleansing it brings is conditional on a confession of our sin (which is an inevitable act of those who have placed their faith in Him).
So we’ve seen that we are to model God’s forgiveness and have seen that God’s forgiveness is conditional. Would God hold us to a higher standard?
God Does not Hold Us to a Higher Standard
Nowhere in the Bible do I find that God holds us to a higher standard of forgiveness than He does. If God’s forgiveness is conditional, and if we are to model Him, our forgiveness will also be conditional. Of course we will also freely offer forgiveness and we will pursue and long for the ability to extend forgiveness. We will seek reconciliation. But we will not forgive those who are not repentant. This makes sense when we understand that, in its fullest sense, forgiveness requires repentance.
According to Brauns, human forgiveness is “a commitment by the offended to pardon graciously the repentant from moral liability and to be reconciled to that person, although not all consequences are necessarily eliminated.” Forgiveness is a commitment to restore broken or disrupted relationship. It is a letting go of the anger or hurt that has been caused and is a commitment to restoration. It is a commitment to no longer hold an offense and its moral liability against a person. This can only happen when one person repents and the other extends forgiveness. The ultimate aim of forgiveness is to restore relationship, but a relationship can only be restored when both parties are willing. There cannot be communion when one party is willing and the other is not. To state that there has been full forgiveness in such a case is to make a mockery of the biblical concept of forgiveness.
So there is my case. To summarize it simply: We are to model God’s forgiveness; God forgives conditionally; there we are to forgive conditionally.
Consequences May Remain
None of this is to say that forgiveness automatically revokes consequences. There may be times when forgiveness allow us to overlook certain consequences, such as when a wife whose husband has been unfaithful chooses to forgive, reconcile and remain with him even while she could justly divorce him (though, in such a case, there will certainly be other consequences, such as a lack of trust). But there are many other occasions when forgiveness will still require consequences. A man may be forgiven by a person he abused, but this does not mean he should escape the jail time that is a just consequence of his actions. We may forgive and still demand that a person face the consequences of his sin.
There will be times when reconciliation is extremely difficult and perhaps near impossible. A woman who was savagely raped may extend forgiveness to a repentant attacker, but it is unlikely that complete reconciliation will be possible. Such a crime is so horrific and it cuts so deep that these people may never be able to enjoy the kind of Christian fellowship they might otherwise enjoy. These cases, though rare and tragic, are a sad consequence of living in a sinful world. In heaven even these two will enjoy unbroken communion and full reconciliation may have to wait until that time. This is both a consequence of the offense and of life in a sinful world.
Conclusion
This may be entirely unsatisfying to you. I know questions will remain and I will attempt to address some of those as they arise. Already I anticipate one or two. Regardless, follow my argument and I think you will see it does hold merit and that it can be reasonably defended from the Bible. If you disagree with me, it may be helpful to follow the argument and to show the point where you feel it derailed.
Have at it!
Comments (69) »
1. Hayden
February 15, 2008
10:29 AM
Tim,
Great article. Here is a good article that I think sums up what you are talking about. http://theresurgence.com/steve_cornell_2007_forgiveness_is_one_thing
Keep up the good work brother.
2. Dan Phillips
February 15, 2008
10:41 AM
Agreed. But — though it is what Scripture specifically says — this stance is always upsetting to many. The “unconditional forgiveness” position is firmly-entrenched in traditionalism. Ask for specific Scripture, you get blank stares and broad free-associations.
Don’t have access to my blog from where I am, or I’d point to posts in which I make the same argument different. Search “Dixie Chicks” for one.
I make the case that, to me, forgiving the unrepentant is not only un-Biblical, but it is also incomprehensible.
3. Colleen
February 15, 2008
10:56 AM
So, my initial reaction is to balk at the idea of conditional forgiveness; however, I don’t think I really disagree with anything you’ve posted here. I think my misconception of the idea (and maybe other people’s too) is that conditional forgiveness condones or leaves room for anger, bitterness and hardness of heart towards whoever has sinned against you. But, if I understand correctly, forgiveness is conditional, not in the sense that we set conditions (i.e. the person must earn our forgiveness), but in that the offender must repent and accept our forgiveness—which, by God’s grace, we should always be willing to extend. Does that sound right?
4. Michael
February 15, 2008
11:02 AM
I agree 100% that God’s forgiveness is conditional. HOWEVER, I believe the only condition is the atoning work of Christ on the cross. Holding that that atonement is limited by God’s election does not make Him a universalist, it makes him inifinitely just and infinitely gracious. For the recipient, then, it is seemingly unconditional until one considers the price exacted on the cross. Repentance, then, is not a precondition of forgiveness, but it may be a precondition of sanctification. The price paid for my forgiveness was paid by another. I could never merit it based on contrition or a promise to change. The price, however, was enormous.
I am very open to being wrong. These thoughts merely represent my current understanding of things. I do strive to keep the focus off of me and on the cross - even on the issue of forgiveness/mercy.
5. Ian Vaillancourt
February 15, 2008
11:04 AM
Thanks for this article, Tim. Providentially, I’m teaching on the Lord’s prayer this coming Sunday evening, Lord willing. I plan to read your article this afternoon just prior to writing that Bible study. This is an important topic, eh.
Ian.
6. Paul Helms
February 15, 2008
11:26 AM
This seems more like a theological construction than an expression of the heart of Scripture. One has to look no further than Jesus on the Cross, who said “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” — and this statement to embittered, angry murderers blinded by Satan from seeing the Lord of glory. That doesn’t sound too different from the Columbine killers.
To go a bit further, I agree with Michael’s point. God’s forgiveness is not conditional when it comes to our part. It is not our repentance that fulfills some condition for forgiveness, but rather it is our repentance that is part and parcel of God’s bringing us into Christ. If we begin to see repentance as the door to the sheepgate and not Christ the Shepherd who demands repentance, our understanding may be skewed. Repentance marks our moving from identity in Adam toward identity with Christ; we see this clearly in baptism where we identify with Jesus in His death and resurrection. So too, we believe that God is the one who justifies us, yet faith is the gift of God given to reveal that justification. We don’t believe that faith actually justifies from a human standpoint, as if we were cutting a deal with God for our adherence (if you don’t like the wording of how I am saying this, just look at James).
All of that being said, I am afraid that I have a hard time reading the article. We *do* model God’s character by the way we act, and especially so in our mercy and forgiveness. Should we not, then, seek to show forgiveness and mercy to the lost and those who are blinded to Satan? Should we only pray for our enemies if they ask for it first? Did God do such a thing with us, or didn’t He in fact extend an invitation to prodigals? If our forgiveness is conditional, then we may not be able to easily say with Paul: “The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost,” as well as the words of our Lord Jesus Himself, “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.” Not the religious, mind you. It is God’s extending hand of forgiveness that reaches before we are even looking up that should inform our own acts of forgiveness.
7. Chris Brauns
February 15, 2008
11:30 AM
Thanks, Tim, that’s a fair distillation of some of my thinking. And, it is such an important time to talk about this.
You probably know, there was another school shooting yesterday in the U.S.: this one was at a university near where I live. Christians will no doubt weigh in again on the subject & I think it is important that we speak carefully and biblically.
I have preached and taught enough on this subject to know one of the major objections to conditional forgiveness is, “Won’t that lead to bitterness.” Maybe I’ll post a response to over on my blog.
8. Ernesto
February 15, 2008
11:35 AM
OK Tim, very good Article, it’s sometimes hard to think of forgiveness this way, but its the Biblical way.
The only thing i’ve always thought on this matter is when we are asked to give the other cheek and do good to those go do us bad, and praying for our enemies, i guess my problem is always to square forgiveness with grace, the common grace given to us, for the sun shines over good and bad and it rains on the just and unjust.
9. Christina
February 15, 2008
11:35 AM
I agree. I do think if someone were to teach on this in more detail, it would be fruitful to talk about bitterness too. We are told to forgive as God has forgiven, but to rid ourselves of bitterness. I fear that many people cannot separate being unable to forgive and being bitter.
Ephesians 4:31-32 . Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.
10. Michael
February 15, 2008
11:39 AM
Just to jump in on another topic raised in the comments, the issue to me is not that conditional forgiveness might breed bitterness - what about despair? How can I ever be sure that my repentance is good enough? What about besetting sin? If God is waiting on my to do something before extending forgiveness, what if I die without having done it? These are the exact questions Luther, Calvin, et al were wrestling with under the sacrementology of the RCC.
If on the other hand, the price was fully paid on the cross, how can I NOT extend forgiveness? What wrong done to me could possibly approach the wrong of requiring the death of the only innocent man to ever live?
11. Larry
February 15, 2008
11:39 AM
Great thoughts Tim. One question I would have is what does continued unforgiveness of an unrepentant person look like? I think that may be the rub. Many people associate unforgiveness with harboring bitterness and anger towards a person, which I don’t think God would have us do. However, if we’re simply saying we will not be reconciled to the person in any meaningful way unless they are repentant, I would agree with you I think.
12. James Hakim
February 15, 2008
11:41 AM
Tim,
I think it would be helpful if you defined what you mean by forgiveness.
Is forgiveness the opposite of harboring bitterness, holding a grudge, or desiring personal revenge?
I believe that this is how most of the “unconditional” crowd defines forgiveness. And since those things against which they make their definition are sins, then of course their idea of forgiveness ought to occur, whether or not there is reconciliation.
Perhaps in your definition, you could touch upon how it is not sinful to desire just penalties or wait upon the vengeance of God. After all, this touches the heart of how God forgives us: by satisfying His just penalty and swallowing up His vengeance in Another.
I am not disagreeing with Tim, here. I am only suggesting that some defining of terms may help him connect with those who do.
Pastor James
13. Terry Rayburn
February 15, 2008
11:44 AM
The argument is not as simple as “is forgiveness conditional or unconditional?”
As in so many of these arguments, “definition” is critical.
1. God’s forgiveness is indeed conditional, but not conditional on the repentance or confession of a person for each individual sin. We commit mass numbers of sins in our lives that we are not even aware of.
So although repentance in the general sense is a condition for forgiveness from God, the REAL condition is the Cross and our justification. Upon our justification, ALL our sins are forgiven.
2. It it exegetically incorrect to say that we are to forgive in the same way that God forgives. When Scripture says to forgive AS God has forgiven us, it is merely saying something like, “Since YOU have been forgiven, it’s only reasonable that you forgive others.” It’s not a reference to the LEVEL or QUALITY of forgiveness.
3. Regarding our forgiving others, there is a constant misunderstanding of the difference between “forgiveness” and “reconciliation”.
That’s why Braun’s definition of human forgiveness is fatally flawed (“a commitment by the offended to pardon graciously the repentant from moral liability and to be reconciled to that person, although not all consequences are necessarily eliminated” ).
4. A better biblical definition for human forgiveness would be as follows, as it gets to the heart of the forgiver, not the actions of the forgiven:
“The refusal to withhold Love from the offender, unconditionally.”
Sub-definition of “Love” in this context:
“That fruit of the Spirit which causes the desire for the ultimate best for the one loved.”
5. The implications of requiring repentance and reconciliation in order to forgive are truly ridiculous:
a. Tim wrote, “It is a letting go of the anger or hurt that has been caused”. The logical alternative if there is no repentance is to hang on to the anger and hurt. Absurd.
b. It makes absurd the Scriptural injunction to “Above all, keep fervent in your love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins.” How does love cover a multitude of sins if they all have to be repented of? Every church get-together would be a confrontation-fest Not to mention get-togethers with unbelievers, whom we also need to forgive, and who are unlikely to be very repentant.
c. It doesn’t allow for the forgiveness of those who have died.
d. It doesn’t allow for the forgiveness of those who are unable to repent (e.g., the drunk who killed your child, and is now in a coma, or vegetative state).
e. Perhaps most important, to continue to hold unforgiveness against someone because they haven’t repented is a sure road to bitterness, and then to a root of bitterness. Don’t you see this all the time?
6. Unconditional human forgiveness is not God holding us “to a higher standard” of forgivenss than His. On the contrary, it’s a considerably lower standard, since His forgiveness is judicial, perfect, complete, permanent, and based on the death of His Son.
Ours is a relinquishing of our fleshly desire to “play God”, and to love the offender with that Love, which is patient, kind, not jealous, does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, bears all things, believes all things, endures all things (1 Cor. 13, selections).
When we are unforgiving we repudiate that love.
7. I wouldn’t be so vehement on this subject, except that I think that lack of forgiveness is such a plague on the Church, and the thinking that it requires repentance is a MAJOR cause of why that is.
8. Sidenote: There is a “common grace” forgiveness similar to the above fruit of the Spirit, which God has graciously brought about in many unregenerate people. That’s why you may see unbelievers who are more “forgiving” than many Christians. Shameful.
9. Reconciliation is a whole different animal, which requires BOTH “forgiveness” (as defined above) AND “repentance”. Whole different animal.
Blessings,
Terry
14. Chris Brauns
February 15, 2008
11:47 AM
Larry, for the Christian, “un-forgiveness” looks like wrapping a package, offering it to the offender, and praying in an ongoing way that the present will be received.
When I was growing up, my church often sang the Gospel hymn, Softly and Tenderly. You probably know that one. Jesus stands inviting people to come to him and the character of his invitation is one of love and tenderness (Matthew 11:28-30).
So, Christians are to have a disposition of grace, to offer forgiveness to all. And, that should shape our feelings and entire outlook and attitude.
15. Terry Rayburn
February 15, 2008
11:50 AM
Uh-h-h…
Something glitched my outline. Should be numbered 1 through 9. They all switched to 1’s, 2’s and 3’s.
16. Jim Vellenga
February 15, 2008
11:51 AM
I agree with James Hakim’s comment. There is an issue here with how forgiveness is defined, and in many ways I think that is where the conclusion about unconditional forgiveness comes. I have not studied this area as much as I would like, and tend to not hold tightly to either view. Paul Helms’ comments were of value as well and worth considering. Overall, this was good food for thought, and have spurred me to consider this some more.
17. Bernard
February 15, 2008
11:52 AM
Tim. If I were an arminian I would agree with you that forgiveness is conditional. Because to an arminian God holds out salvation to people conditional on their response.
But there is no conditional forgiveness in a God’s sovereinty affirming position. God provides the forgiveness, and God provides the effectual grace for the sinner to repent and accept that forgiveness. Nothing is conditional on the sinner.
More than that God is in the business precisely of reaching out with forgiveness to those who are persistent in their unrepentence and rebellion against any standard of good. The apostle Paul makes this point “God demonstrated his own love for us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” Romans 5 7-8
18. Chris Brauns
February 15, 2008
11:52 AM
This link is also relevant. It’s a round table discussion on forgiveness with Justin Taylor and Lig Duncan.
http://www.reformation21.com/Upcoming_Issues/Forgiveness_Roundtable/354/
19. Dan Phillips
February 15, 2008
12:00 PM
Terry, that reminded me of the (not unconditionally recommended” man’s list of rules — you know the one, where every rule is #1?
(c;
20. John Maresco
February 15, 2008
12:04 PM
Tim, thanks for your post. It’s helpful for me to be challenged to think about these things.
You wrote, “Forgiveness is a commitment to restore broken or disrupted relationship. It is a letting go of the anger or hurt that has been caused and is a commitment to restoration.”
What do you mean by anger that has been caused? I have a hard time with a definition and application of forgiveness that seems to place emphasis on my brother “causing” me to sin (by his sin), and then me refusing to let go of that anger (sin) until he repents. I know the way I just stated this sounds like I put it in the most negative light possible, but to me, it’s hard for me to read your statement any other way.
I’d also like to hear a response to Paul’s comment about Jesus’ statement on the cross.
21. Chris Brauns
February 15, 2008
12:16 PM
John - - I posted an excerpt from my book that speaks to Jesus prayer on the Cross.
22. Darryl
February 15, 2008
12:29 PM
Good post, and I would agree, although it is important to define what we mean by forgiveness. I think it’s also important to emphasize that when repentance doesn’t take place, we are still called to:
* resist thoughts of revenge (Romans 12:19)
* not seek to do them mischief (1 Thessalonians 5:15)
* wish well to them (Luke 6:28)
* grieve at their calamities (Proverbs 24:17)
* pray for them (Matthew 5:44)
* seek reconciliation with them (Romans 12:18)
(from Thomas Watson’s A Body of Divinity)
23. Dave
February 15, 2008
12:33 PM
Responding to Paul’s comment about Jesus’ statement on the cross: “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” — to embittered, angry murderers blinded by Satan from seeing the Lord of glory….
My thinking is that even though Jesus uttered the words “forgive them” does not mean that they were necessarily forgiven. Wouldn’t those whom Jesus was addressing still have to be repentant and seek out forgiveness for themselves (as stated in 1 John 1:9)?
Jesus very likely had the mindset and attitude of forgiveness when He uttered those words, and would be ready to forgive in an instant should forgiveness be sought out, but does that mean each murderer present at the crucifixion was actually forgiven? Or was it just in principle as far as Jesus was concerned? I often ponder this for myself.
I’ve had this debate with many people before and am still convinced that even though I am “forgiven” by someone, I still need to first be personally sorrowful and repentant and seek out and ask for forgiveness before it can be truly granted.
If we are to forgive as God forgives, and God forgives based upon conditions (repentance, confession, etc.), does that mean that our forgiveness towards others should have initial and foundational criteria/conditions which come prior to our granting forgiveness to others?
Maybe we are splitting category hairs here or not properly distinguishing between the actual deed of forgiveness versus a forgiving attitude should one come and ask for forgivness… Just my 2-cents.
24. Andrew
February 15, 2008
12:34 PM
The pre-requisite for God forgiving a man, is that the man repent. Of course, God, in his kindness, leads that man to repent (Romans 2:4). So, ultimately, the condition for forgiveness is the kindness or grace of God.
25. David Bromberg
February 15, 2008
12:49 PM
I agree with Terry. I think there may be a bit of a difference in definition. I think it’s important to understand the difference between forgiveness and reconciliation. I think it can look somewhat different from the way God forgives as well. I think for us the key part of forgiveness is something that happens on the part of the forgiver- he/she lets go of their “right” to bring up the offense again, to hold it over the other person, to be bitter, etc. It’s something the person wronged has to come to on their own, and it’s something offered to the other person, that whether or not they accept it, you forgive them, and you refuse to let the offense stop you from loving them. Reconciliation however, is dependent on the actions of the other person. Full reconciliation cannot happen without real repentence on the part of the offender, and without that offer of forgiveness on the part of the person wha was wronged.
26. Justin Keller
February 15, 2008
12:50 PM
I remember counseling someone several years ago who had been very badly hurt by someone she loved (I do have permission to share this). Her view of forgiveness was conditional — without repentance, real biblical forgiveness was impossible. And as a result, she had much pain, sorrow, and anger that she simply did not know what to do with. But without repentance, she could not forgive.
I think this sort of situation gets at the discomfort with this notion of “conditional forgiveness.” If the other person won’t repent, what do I do? Stay hurt? Stay mad? “Give it over to God”? Just stop being upset?
Things become even more jumbled if we consider the possibility that two people could disagree over whether a wrong was even done. The person who is hurt won’t forgive until there has been repentance; the person who did the alleged wrong feels stuck because he doesn’t believe he has anything to repent of.
I see at least five problems with “conditional repentance” as it has been presented here:
1. The procrustean use of the little English word “as”. Neither in English nor in Greek does the language proscribe a strict point-for-point match between our forgiveness and God’s forgiveness. Indeed there can be no such match — I cannot nor should not attempt to duplicate the work of Christ in satisfying the wrath of God. That fact in and of itself should give advocates of “conditional repentance” reason to pause. What the passages cited above seem to indicate is that we are to forgive to the extent that God has forgiven — that is, we are not to say we forgive then hold a grudge, or say we forgive and then bring it back up later, or say we forgive some things but not others.
2. As has already been noted, from the perspective of God’s decree our forgiveness is not conditional. God not only willed that we repent, He then gave us the repentance. All is from God, none is from me.
3. As has already been noted, the use of 1 John 1:9 is not helpful. God does not require of us our repentance from each and every sin that we commit. If He did, I would spend all my time in continuous confession, since all I do is tainted by the stain of sin. Ironically, that would put me in roughly the same spot as Martin Luther was *before* his conversion when he did not understand the gospel. This is not to say that confession and repentance are unimportant or unnecessary. The confession of known sin is vital in experiencing the mercy and presence of God. But what 1 Jn 1:9 requires of us is the confession that we are sinners, which a study of the context reveals (especially v. 8).
4. The language of forgiveness in the passages cited (Matt 6:12 aphimi; Eph 4:32 and Col 3:13 xarizomai) has more to do with letting go of something or of extending pardon or of giving a favor to someone. That need not require the other party asking me to forgive them. We’ve retained that sense of unilateralism in English usage. If someone owes me money and I forgive the debt, there is no requirement there for the debtor to ask beforehand.
5. The “conditional forgiveness” view, in the end, conflates the ideas of forgiveness and reconciliation. That’s true in Tim’s post, and it’s true in the comments so far from those who agree. And this is where the parallels between God and human beings break down. When God forgives, it is because His wrath was satisfied at the cross and He has granted sinners repentance from sin and faith in Christ. By definition, when God forgives (no longer holds our sin against us) there is reconciliation (the relationship between God and sinners is restored). But when I forgive (no longer hold a wrong against another), there is no guarantee of reconciliation. I cannot do what God does — I cannot grant repentance to another. So I cannot force reconciliation. But I can forgive — I can decide not to hold the wrong against the other person.
And I can forgive because of the cross and the Last Day. Justice will be done either at the cross or at the judgment seat of Christ. I don’t have to hold on to what another person has done. God will take care of it.
So I would describe this position as unconditional forgiveness and conditional reconciliation. It seems to me to reflect the Scriptures better, to show how we are like God and unlike Him better, and to be more livable.
27. mike rucker
February 15, 2008
1:24 PM
hogwash.
(sorry, tim - at least i refrained from using my favorite word.)
this is the most character-impugning, misguided, narrow-minded notion of God i’ve read - outside of the pyros website, of course. and, luckily, i read past the first two or three preached-to-choir comments to see others who agree - and who, i’ll grudgingly admit, may have said it a little less critically than me.
the prodigal’s father didn’t hear a word of his son’s rehearsed, make-me-a-hired-hand speech. nevertheless, i grant you, it was good for the son to see the error of his ways. asking on our part - and thinking God’s forgiveness is conditional upon it - need not be related in the slightest. God’s forgiveness should not be abused, nor taken for granted. but to say it’s conditional misses the whole thrust of scripture. the conditional aspect of God’s forgiveness is EXACTLY what the catholic church wanted to establish and then retain - how else could it position itself as the arbiter between men and God?
do any of you have kids? do you really mean to tell me that you don’t forgive them in your heart until they come before you and ask?
we read in the OT that “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” which is precisely why Jesus came to correct that fear-based notion of the God he told us to call abba/Father, and about whom He wanted us to know that His perfect love casts out any fear on our part.
the people who want conditions on forgiveness are no different than those who claim to be elected and preach election. they want everyone to know who’s ‘in’ and who’s ‘out.’
please - let’s stop letting man’s theology define God. it needs to be the other way around.
mike rucker
-
28. Jason
February 15, 2008
1:52 PM
“we read in the OT that “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” which is precisely why Jesus came to correct that fear-based notion of the God he told us to call abba/Father, and about whom He wanted us to know that His perfect love casts out any fear on our part.”
Mike, do you mean that the OT is wrong?
29. Don Johnston
February 15, 2008
1:54 PM
I agree with Tim’s article and Chris Brauns’ premise about forgiveness being conditional. “Unconditional Forgiveness” has been a common phrase and thought for so long, that it seems almost heretical to some to think otherwise.
I think the problem is our tencency to equate love and forgiveness. I’m personally OK with using the term “unconditional love” (God loves everyone no matter what), but I am not OK with the term “unconditional forgiveness” (God forgives everyone no matter what). This may seem to be an oversimplification, but I think it speaks to the root of the issue. Love can be one-sided, thus it can be unconditional. True forgiveness cannot be one-sided, it requires a mutual transaction between 2 or more persons, thus it cannot be conditional.
We live in a feel-good, warm and fuzzy culture, where many are content to coexist with a “Why can’t we all just get along?” approach, rather than to follow our Creator-God who demands that we quit pretending and get down to the root issues, such as is indicated in Proverbs 28:13- “He who covers his sins will not prosper, but whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy” (kindness and potential for forgiveness, reconciliation and restoration).
God is our Father and Jesus is our model. We are to walk as He walked, love as He loved, speak as He spoke, and forgive as He forgave. Clearly, God’s forgiveness IS conditional (Lev. 5:1-5,Ps. 32:5, Prov. 28:13, Hos. 5:15,
I John 1:9), and He commands us to forgive as He forgave (Mt. 18:15-18, Luke 17:3-4, Eph. 4:32, Col. 3:12-13).
May we seek to love everyone unconditionally (as God does), and forgive those who meet the Biblical conditions of forgiveness (as God does). God doesn’t let the disobedient, arrogant and unrepentent “off the hook” and neither should we. God always stands “ready to forgive” those who acknowledge their transgressions (Ps. 86:5), and so should we. “Let God be true, but every man (who disagrees with God or contradicts Him) a liar”, Rom. 3:4.
Don Johnston
30. Paul Helms
February 15, 2008
2:14 PM
*Just to add on to what I said earlier in summation of everything else that has been well-said already:*
The distinction needs to be made (and for those of us who use different terms, conceding to semantics may be necessary)
— forgiveness does not mean reconciliation. —
This explains Jesus’ words on the cross (and sorry, Chris, I haven’t had time to read your thoughts about the Cross prayer yet). Jesus asked that they be forgiven, and this was certainly an act of intercession; we shouldn’t assume that these were empty words of consolation. This does not mean that the men were reconciled to God, which would have required that they turn from their wicked hearts to the very man they were crucifying. It probably meant to Jesus that this horrific act be overlooked by God, lest they be destroyed then and there.
So too, with us. We have to be willing to forgive at all costs, even to our own hurt or death (ever read a good martyr story?) — but we do not have to give into the delusion that this means that we are reconciled. In some cases this may mean that we must still seek reconciliation; in other situations this may mean that we never see reconciliation because it is dependent upon an unrepentant person. In many ways, forgiveness precedes reconciliation because forgiveness overlooks the wrong in order to make things right. As Christ says, “If you do not forgive your brother from your heart, neither will your father in heaven forgive you.”
The mercy of God transforms our hearts through humility — it is surely a prideful and bitter heart that harbors unforgiveness.
31. Jim Vellenga
February 15, 2008
2:46 PM
Don Johnston, I am not even sure I am comfortable with unconditional love when speaking of God, at least not as the vast majority of people I have encountered understand it, ie unconditional acceptance. Again there is always the problem of how people understand a term and one of the most misunderstood terms in Canada and the US is love.
32. Don Johnston
February 15, 2008
3:34 PM
Jim Vellenga: I understand what you are saying. It would doubtlessly be possible to parse the meaning of unconditional love. But you are right, love and acceptance are two very different things. Generally, the Scriptures seem to indicate that God’s love for sinners is “unconditional”, in that He loves every single man, woman and child in the world, regardless of their ethnic background, religion or personal behavior. His unconditional love is, however, limited by each person’s responsibility to respond to God’s love (Christ’s died for our sins) by placing their faith in the Lord Jesus BEFORE they die in their sins. Therefore, initially, God loves all of us without condition, but we dare not presume upon His love. “My Spirit will not always strive with man”, God said.
Certainly there is no such thing as unconditional acceptance. “How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation”? We are “accepted IN the BELOVED” (when we place our faith in God’s beloved, and only-begotten Son), for “IN HIM we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace.” Eph. 1:6-7.
I’m no mathematician, but perhaps we could say that….God’s unconditional love + our unconditional repentance & faith = God’s unconditional acceptance.
33. Roger
February 15, 2008
3:54 PM
I’ll just say this as a non-theologian …
I’ve experienced hurt from people who didn’t know or didn’t care - it would be absurd for me to wait for repentance before forgiving them (or “letting go” or whatever term you wish to attach to it.)
Ultimately human forgiveness is non-redemptive, regardless of whether repentance exists or not. When we forgive we are not forgiving as God does, we are relinquishing our hurts and our grievances into God’s hands for him to mete out justice or divine forgiveness as he sees fit.
That being said, human forgiveness does require repentance from the grieving party in order for reconciliation to take place. Human relationship issues rarely involve a clearly defined offender and offended - generally both parties fill both roles to some degree and need both to forgive and to repent.
34. Alice
February 15, 2008
4:02 PM
My answer to the question “is forgiveness conditional or unconditional?” is “yes”.
The clearest explanation I have seen of forgiveness comes from the book Forgiveness: the Power and the Puzzles by Wendell E Miller. Below is a summary of his main points.
Forgiveness by God:
1) When we put our faith in Jesus, God declares us righteous. This forgiveness sets us free from the penalty for the sins we have committed up to that point in time. This is initial forgiveness of God as judge.
2) When we put our faith in Jesus, God frees us from the separation that was between us and Him. We are no longer enemies but we are his children. This is the initial forgiveness of God as Father.
3) Once we have been justified before God, He sets us free from the penalty of sins committed after justification. This is unconditional and depends only on the faithfulness of our Advocate, Jesus Christ. (1 Jn 2.1-2) This is the repetitive forgiveness of God as Judge.
4) When we confess our sins to God, He forgives by restoring the relationship broken by sins committed after justification. This depends upon the confession of our sins. (1 Jn 1.9) This is the repetitive forgiveness of God as Father.
Our forgiveness of others
1) Vertical forgiveness: God commands each believer to pray and give Him without condition the penalty of each personal offense (committed by a believer or unbeliever) each time he is offended by someone even if that person never repents (Mark 11:25). This forgiveness is a commitment to refuse all bitterness in action, word, or thought and to love the offender with agape love, in other words, to do what is best for the other person.
2) Horizontal forgiveness: In response to the repentance of the offender (unless present performance, such as refusal to make restitution, denies the reality of his repentance), God commands the offended person to forgive. That is, he is to release the offender from the alienation caused by his offense (Luke 17:3). This allows the work of reconciliation and the rebuilding of the relationship to begin.
35. mike rucker
February 15, 2008
4:25 PM
jason asked me,
mike, do you mean that the OT is wrong?
no, i don’t think it’s “wrong” - i just think the way a lot of people look at it is. i believe it’s a spot-on record of man’s understanding of, and relationship with, God at the time it was written. what some would call God’s “progressive revelation” i have come to see as man’s “progressive understanding”. God’s clear movement from an intensely imminent deity (e.g., coming down to walk among men at the Tower of Babel, etc.) to an entirely transcedent figure reflects mankind’s similarly changed views about God being in the wind or a disease or a storm.
Jesus’ whole message about the law was basically, “You’re reading it wrong.” and i believe it’s the same message he’d give today - especially to american evangelicals. unfortunately, he’s not here, so i have to be the messenger who gets crucified - hopefully only in a figurative sense - this time around… :)
mike rucker /
-
36. Jim
February 15, 2008
5:33 PM
Forgiveness is REALLY hard to do. If its hard to forgive, then it is hard to love another because LOVE forgives. Love hopes all things (1 Corinth 13). Love refuses to take human failure as final. With Christ in me, my human failures are never final. Love never keeps a record of wrongs. Love forgives and love is unable to think about them anymore. Forget the past and move on. Focus on the future as I focus on Christ at the same time. Romans 4:8 (also Psalms 32:2) “Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him”. In 1 Corinthians 13:5 says “Love does not act unbecomingly”; which means a Christian should demonstrate godly love and have real Christian credibility.
If we forgive those who sin against us, our heavenly Father will forgive us. But if we refuse to forgive others, our Father will not forgive our sins. Hate what is wrong. Stand on the side of the good. Love each other with genuine affection, and take delight in honoring each other. Live in Harmony with each other.
Christians are to act like Jesus, toward sinners and brethren in compassion, toward saints in warm affection, toward others in love. We are to be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, just as God through Jesus Christ has forgiven us.
What would Jesus do?
Matthew 5:26-28 (King James Version)
26Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.
27Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
In John 8 (King James Version), Jesus dealt with the the scribes and Pharisees of a woman committed adultery. Jesus wrote on the ground.
9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
I am going to repeat this in my Theology Blog, thank you for provoking my thoughts today.
Jim
37. David
February 15, 2008
6:12 PM
… this is the most character-impugning, misguided, narrow-minded notion of God i’ve read - outside of the pyros website, of course. and, luckily, i read past the first two or three preached-to-choir comments …
Mike, this is the kind of comment that earns you the “troll” label. Do away with the insulting rhetoric, or be deleted.
Everyone else, please don’t feed the trolls.
38. Truth Unites... and Divides
February 15, 2008
7:37 PM
I listened to Dennis Rainey today on his FamilyLife radio program. Paraphrasing, he defined forgiveness as “Forsaking the right to punish the other person for the wrong that they have done to you.”
Using Rainey’s definition, I would lean towards “unconditional” forgiveness. I do not want to harbor in my heart (no matter how much I want to cling and nurse my grudge for being unfairly wronged by a mocking unrepentant no-gooder) a bitter weed that will grow over time and choke out the good, abundant life that Christ desires for me.
Also, I really like the poster above who clearly stated that
Forgiveness Does NOT EQUAL Reconciliation
I conflated these two concepts. Thank you for disentangling those two.
Hypothetical example, suppose my child was brutally assaulted, then murdered. Could I forgive the perpetrator, if s/he was unrepentant?
Even if the perp was repentant, it’d still be hard! I don’t ever want to find out if my heart is soft enough to forgive. (Honestly, I think my heart and my thoughts would incline towards retaliatory vengeance). All I know is that I will be deeply affected for a very long time and it will take me a long time to surrender and yield my pain and hurt and suffering over to God.
Great Post, great discussion.
39. connie
February 15, 2008
7:57 PM
Unforgiveness is a very serious matter in the eyes of the Lord. I would rather risk forgiving too much than risk disobedience to the command to forgive. So I think I will continue to forgive unconditionally. I’m certainly mentally healthier for it-and I’m quite happy to leave the ultimate forgiveness question to God-vengeance is His, not mine.
40. Jim
February 15, 2008
8:21 PM
I this quote:
The degree to which I am able and willing to forgive others is a clear indication of the extent to which I have personally experienced God my Father’s forgiveness for me. The corollary to this is that anyone who is not willing to forgive another has certainly not known God’s loving forgiveness. Philipp Keller
Of course this quote from one of my favorite theologians:
Whenever I see myself before God and realize something of what my blessed Lord has done for me at Calvary, I am ready to forgive anybody anything. I cannot withhold it. I do not even want to withhold it. Martin Lloyd-Jones
This quote always make sense and I agree:
Always forgive your enemies, nothing annoys them so much. Oscar Wilde
I will always forgive even though the “reconciliation” will be there or not. Forgiveness is the first step. There have been people looking for any scriptures that says we CAN unforgive people. We are to forgive even when a person is unwilling to repent. Relationship restoration requires repentance to God FIRST and come to the offending person for the restoration. Forgiveness have already completed, now the both parties are to focus on restoration. It takes same two people to restore a relationship of two people. Not one. Just as God forgave us. But in order to restore our relationship with God from eternal death, we are to repent and acknowledge God and Jesus so that we can have eternal life. God has already forgave us and now He is waiting for those to REPENT so that the relationship can be RESTORED (reconciled). If one is unwilling to repent is the same person who refused to acknowledge and decided to be bitter against a person. God wil always forgives but He will still send a person to hell if that person does not acknowledge the conviction of the Holy Spirit and repent and accept God’s love and unlimited forgivenesses.
That I understood clearly.
41. D.L. Kane
February 15, 2008
9:39 PM
Interesting conversation. The first thing that came to mind as I read the article was Psalm 50:21 “Thou thoughtest that I was altogether such and one as thyself.” God says ‑ You thought I was like you. With God, he forgives both temporally as well as eternally.
There is a temporal forgiveness (holding off wrath and punishment) and an eternal forgiveness (redemption and reconciliation). Confusing the two is the problem here. God forgives unregenerate sinners all the time—not with the forgiveness that reconciles and redeems, but with a temporal forgiveness; our he would punish them on the spot for their sins. There is a temporary (temporal) forgiveness that God displays giving change after chance before punishment is finally delivered. The forgiveness that is eternal is something all together different and I beleive most have confused the two.
We only possess the ability of one type of forgiveness and that is temporal. The kind of forgiveness we are called to is a forgiveness that removes our desire to judge, seek revenge, and condem their souls. For example. If you place you life savings in your brothers hands for save keeping and he gambles it all away, we are called to forgive him. However, we are not called to entrust him with anymore money.
42. D.L. Kane
February 15, 2008
9:59 PM
To clarify the two types of forgiveness that God displays: When we ask the Lord (as regenerate sinners) for forgiveness for sins or disobedience, we are not asking for redemptive “eternal” forgiveness (we have already received that and it is unconditional) but temporal forgiveness which he may or may not grant depending on His wisdom—that forgiveness, on His part, is conditional on many things.
We only have the ability to grant the latter and we are most definilty called to it, unconditionally.
43. D.L. Kane
February 15, 2008
10:57 PM
Sorry Tim - Things just keep coming to me. You said, “I remember seeing a photograph of students standing outside the school holding signs that side “We forgive you.” I remember being surprised and incensed. Why would anyone wish to forgive people who caused such pain and destruction, who expressed no remorse and who sought no forgiveness. It seemed to me that it made a mockery of forgiveness to extend it to those who did not want it. The same thing happened when at the recent Virginia Tech shootings—people forgave the killer, but only after his death and without him expressing any regret or remorse. What is it that bothered me about this?
The signs did not read, “We forgive you and GOD forgives you”. We forgive the act because we believe God is sovereign and the “eternal” consequences of the shooters and the eternal destination of the souls of the victims are in God’s sovereign hands. “You meant it for evil, but God meant it for good.” Hard to swallow, I know, but biblical.
44. Andy Wood
February 16, 2008
6:31 AM
I think at issue here is that fact that our use of “forgiveness” is somewhat akin to our use of “love” in English. Forgiveness is part of a cluster of other decisions and feelings, some of which involve the offenders, others of which involve only the offended, and ALL of which involve our ongoing communion with the Lord.
To receive an offending individual or group’s sincere (or even insincere) expression of remorse opens the door for a release of judgment or accountability we may hold out toward them because of their actions. I “forgive” in the sense that I “cut the cord” that binds them to my anger (let’s assume righteous for the sake of argument) and sense of justice. But what of the FEELINGS of hurt, anger, sadness, or offense I have tomorrow, after my offender has already made his/her apologies? I encourage those I teach and counsel that forgiveness is not something you do once when it comes to emotions. Every time the feelings return, we have the choice between harboring bitterness (a justifiable concern from the comments previously made) and choosing again to release those feelings of judgment and justice and anger.
But what of those who have died without repentance toward me? What of those quite alive, but completely unremorseful? How do I express unconditional LOVE toward them (should we argue over whether love is to be unconditional) while not showing them some measure of - here’s that word again - forgiveness? And what DO we make of what appear to be expressions of unilateral forgiveness - Jesus on the cross and Stephen while being stoned? Moreover, is there a difference between a believer’s “forgiveness” (boy, we need more words here Greek, anyone?) of a nonbeliever vs. the forgiveness mentioned on Ephesians, 2 Corinthians, etc. What are we to make of Paul’s clear command in 1 Corinthians about “judging” an unrepentant brother? Can the church discipline a fellow believer and still forgive him/her? Or is the discipline an actual withdrawal of forgiveness? And if that’s true, aren’t we then denying Ephesians 4?
There are answers, once we understand the definition and use of the terms. This much I know:
Forgiveness isn’t something I do once.
Forgiveness doesn’t mean approval.
Forgiveness (I believe) doesn’t always mean restoration.
Asking God sincerely to forgive someone is an equally sincere desire to forgive, if not an outright colloquialism for forgiveness.
We can enlarge our understanding and agreement when we’re able to somehow enlarge our vocabulary in relation to this cluster.
One more thought… in looking for examples to flesh out the command aspect of all this, I wonder if Joseph waited until his brothers were face-down before deciding that the purposes of God were good, despite the evil actions of his family (Genesis 50:20).
45. Jim
February 16, 2008
11:05 AM
In terms for us to forgive and like a respond that Joseph did to his brothers who sold him into slavery, “As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good.”
Moving on to the New Testament, in John 9:2-3, Jesus and His disciples encountered a blind man. “His disciples asked Him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’ ‘Neither this man nor his parents sinned,’ said Jesus, ‘but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life.”
Forgiveness while enduring afflictions will always be a tough issue for many of us. God has given us the grace to sanctify us. The sources of “thorns” can be weaknesses, insults, distresses, persecutions and difficulties (which also includes sickness). James says count it all joy when you fall into various trials cause trials have a perfecting work. Peter says after you’ve suffered a while the Lord will make you perfect. God uses suffering to reveal our spiritual condition. In the midst of the sufferings, what kind of Christian do you see yourself?
In this life it is inevitable and it is useful because it produces the evidence of your true spiritual condition, humility and intimacy with God and allows God to put Himself on display in His grace. One good example is Corrie ten Boom was schedule to die in Nazi Camp like the rest of family did, but came out of Nazi prison alive due to clerical error through God’s divine intervention. She realized her life was a gift from God, and she needed to share what she and her sister, Betsy had learned in Ravensbruck: “There is no pit so deep that God’s love is not deeper still” and “God will give us the love to be able to forgive our enemies.” God helped her to love and to forgive, even when she met some of the former guards from Ravensbruck. After the war, Corrie worked for forgiveness and reconciliation between former enemies. At one meeting soon after the war, one of the former SS guards at the camp came up to her and asked to shake her hand. To start with, she had a very big problem with this, but then found that she was able to forgive the guard. She later wrote about how important forgiveness was. In her rehabilitation work with victims of the Holocaust and other camp survivors, she found that only those who were able to forgive, could made a good recovery and begin to live again.
Two of my favorite quotes I love are from Corrie ten Boom:
“God raises the level of the impossible.”
“Trying to do the Lord’s work in your own strength is the most confusing, exhausting, and tedious of all work. But when you are filled with the Holy Spirit, then the ministry of Jesus just flows out of you.”
I say, God use GOOD and BAD for His own purpose. Romans 8:28-29 “And we know that God causes everything to work together for the good of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them.”
Ecclesiastes 7:14
When times are good, be happy; but when times are bad, consider: God has made the one as well as the other. Therefore, a man cannot discover anything about his future.
If we forgive those who sin against us, our heavenly Father will forgive us. But if we refuse to forgive others, our Father will not forgive our sins. We are to forgive seventy times seven. We must make allowance for each other’s faults and forgive the person who offends you. I have discovered through many denominations and movements, there is lack of forgiveness and lack of love. Satan have successfully sowed seeds of discords between believers so that there won’t be any spiritual and relationship restoration for unity. Relationship will be restored once that sinner comes to me and told me that he repented to God and he wants to restore the relationship. I don’t want to bear a grudge. If you sin against me, I have to forgive you in my heart even as God, for Christ’s sake, has forgiven me. So, I do that willingly. But I will never be able to have a right relationship with you until you come to me and seek the forgiveness that opens up the relationship. I always forgive and always give a person an amicable, companionable, comradely, cordial, hearty, neighborly, warm, warmhearted invitation without being cold, cool, frigid; bellicose, belligerent, contentious, quarrelsome. If I am not amicable and being cold, then I am not behaving like Christ who is ALWAYS amicable and inviting. I should be open for allowing the person so repent without getting on their knees. I want heart to heart repentance with Love.
Colossians 3:12-13
Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.
46. Thomas Twitchell
February 16, 2008
5:26 PM
Tim, could you answer this: return to me, for I have redeemed you. It seems to me that forgiveness is given before repentance. The word redeemed in the Hebrew here is ga’al and has the same essential meaning as kacah, calach, kaphar. It is to for give, either by removing the penalty, protection, or paying forth the debt for another.
I think there is a difference between, forgiving and forgiveness. We see this in the sending forth of the Gospel. It heralds forgiveness, but forgiveness is only granted to those who will receive. The point still being, that forgiveness is at the sovereign discretion of the giver. On the one hand we extend it, on the other it remains ours to bestow. So, there needs to be a distinguishing. First, there is no condition, because the free gift is not at the discretion of the receiver, but of the giver. Second the gift itself is not foreign to the action. That is, it is not that one is given in exchange for another. But, that one is given independently of the receiving satisfaction of exchange. You see, it did not matter whether or not the free gift of God was received by the Jews, Jesus still came to his own. Jesus is the forgiveness, the price paid forward, fore given, by the Father before the beginnings of the Earth. It is then not dependent upon the will of man, nor of the will of men, not of bloods but of God, that we are born-again. Instead, God in vital union in a new covenant arrangement makes us one with himself. And this is how we are foregiven. The full expectation of the Father though is exacting punishment, and no mere forgiveness of a debt without cost. On the behalf of whom it is bestowed, there is a union of suffering. So, forgiveness, requires participation in the penalty. The concept that one replaces the other, forgiveness for penalty, is simply not Scripture. Forgiveness costs, which is why we can require repentance in the administration of Matthew 18. There is a cost associated with biblical forgiveness which we call, interestingly, the ministry of reconciliation. The Gk word atallage was an accounting term, which meant to equalize the balances. It costs both parties then.
Unless we understand accountability, we will not understand forgiveness. Forgiveness is not a blank slate, but a yoking together.
47. Robert N. Landrum
February 16, 2008
7:20 PM
He loved us while we were yet sinners. “If he repents” seems to be just a given not a model. Stephen prayed a similiar prayer as Jesus at his crucifixion. And doesn’t this seem out of wack with “un”conditional election? It seems to me we ought to forgive all offenses. After all an unbeliever does not know what true repentance is yet we forgive them when they ask. God is discriminant in who he forgives. Offenses against him are infinate not finite as they are towards us. There is a difference. I haven’t read all of the comments these are Just a few thoughts. God bless.
48. Dan Miller
February 16, 2008
9:18 PM
I think the distinction you are looking for is not so much with forgiveness, but reconciliation. While it is true reconciliation is conditional, I believe the idea of conditional forgiveness misses the mark of Christ’s character. Besides some of the other verses cited I offer the following proof text:
“And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.” Mark 11:25
I believe this compliments the previous strand regarding Jesus’ forgiveness of those who had nailed him to the cross. While forgiveness is extended reconciliation is not, it is conditional.
49. Fernando Caballero
February 16, 2008
10:00 PM
There are several Greek words used for the idea of forgiveness, one of them is charizomai, which is related to the word grace and means “to forgive out of grace.”
”Enns, Paul P.: The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago, Ill. : Moody Press, 1997, c1989, S. 325
As I have experienced in my life, God’s grace cannot be conditional and therefore the forgiveness that leads me to salvation into eternal life cannot be conditional (hence unconditional), either. I understand that the forgiveness mentioned in 1 John is from the daily cleansing from sin that is necessary to maintain fellowship with God.. that changes like the seasons, and thereby by definition is conditional.
50. Jeri
February 17, 2008
1:50 AM
The Online Etymology dictionary says that the modern sense of “forgive” is “to give up desire or power to punish.” Used that way, “forgive” would be the right word for what the Lord has told us to do.
But tonight I searched “forgive” through the concordance and by the time I got through, I saw that the Bible doesn’t seem to use the word forgive in that sense…the Bible uses it in the sense of mutual restoration and reconciliation after the
wrongdoer has repented. The parable of the unforgiving servant, for instance, illustrates this.
I have to admit, I’m surprised. I know you’re smart, Tim, yet I thought this could be an area where I might simply see it differently than you; but the Bible is clear, just as you said.
This is a concept that would be pretty foreign to the church at large (kind of like church discipline.) I see that acceptance of it and rejoicing in it has to do with one’s view of God. We’re too little to forgive unrepentant wrongdoers.
51. Terry Rayburn
February 17, 2008
2:50 AM
Jeri,
With all due respect, it’s not a simple as just breezing through some concordance references. It goes to an application of the heart of the believer as intended by the heart of God.
The whole tenor of the New Testament is that God doesn’t want us holding things against one another, but to have fervent love for one another that covers a multitude of sins.
1 Corinthians 13 teaches us more about forgiveness than any specific verse using the actual word. But in your concordance study, did you see Ephesians 4:32? It is a foundational verse regarding the heart attitude of the forgiver:
“Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you.” No word of a required repentance from the offender, but a heart attitude called for in the offended.
With forgiveness comes a WILLINGNESS to reconcile, but if the offender will not repent and reconcile, the forgiveness is still in the heart of the offended, if they are walking in the Spirit.
I forgive even unto reconciliation seventy times seven if my brother repents, but only because forgiveness is already in my heart whether he repents or not.
52. mike rucker
February 17, 2008
3:01 AM
jeri wrote…
…the Bible uses it in the sense of mutual restoration and reconciliation after the wrongdoer has repented. The parable of the unforgiving servant, for instance, illustrates this.
help me understand: where did the unforgiving servant repent? are we reading our theology back into the simple story?
53. Timothy
February 17, 2008
6:01 AM
Firstly, thanks for your post!
I believe that believers must repent, based not only on the passage you quoted, but also seeing from passages like Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19, Mark 6:12, etc. And I believe that we must preach repentance to believers and unbelievers alike.
But I don’t see the repentance of a person as a pre-condition for God’s pardon because then God’s decision in rescuing me from my sins and the consequences (namely His wrath) depends on me and my actions. Rather, I see it as a “post-condition” you must be in once you received God’s forgiveness.
Again, not that God’s forgiveness will depend on you from your conversion onwards, but as much as God continues to forgive your sins after you’d become a believer, one must continue to live a life of repentance (ie. continue being in the right “post-condition”).
It is the only right response we can give as a result of God’s decision in saving us through Jesus’ sacrificial death.
54. Robert N. Landrum
February 17, 2008
8:35 AM
I think the key is the distinction between reconcilliation and forgiveness as has been observed above. Remember that repentance itself is a gift of God. We see his goodness and forgiveness towards us and it prompts in us a repentantive attitude. I am glad that God does not deal with us thus. For who would be saved? Furthermore what sense does it make to pray for the lost if we are not willing to have a spirit of forgiveness in our own heart? How are we any different from the world if we only forgive those that repent? Even the lost do this one for another. But Christian love covers a multitude of sins. This is what gives us a unique identity. God bless.
55. Seth Fuller
February 17, 2008
12:06 PM
Tim,
In the context of Reformed theology, this topic becomes quite complex, in light of the relationship between human responsibility and God’s sovereignty. There is a sense in which we must repent for God to forgive us, but there is the over-arching truth that our reconciliation to God took place as we were unable to repent.
With your influence in the blogosphere, I encourage you to be very thorough and careful with such a topic. This entry suffers from ambiguity, and could possibly communicate against the precious doctrines of grace. I hope you will pull this entry and rewrite it.
56. Joel
February 17, 2008
1:14 PM
The “unconditional forgiveness” position is firmly-entrenched in traditionalism.
But the older tradition agrees with Tim. Which won’t earn him any points in the Reformed blogosphere. :)
57. Jeri
February 17, 2008
6:39 PM
“The whole tenor of the New Testament is that God doesn’t want us holding things against one another, but to have fervent love for one another that covers a multitude of sins.”
Therefore we should not be easily offended! When we love people fervently, we do overlook many things. I don’t have to forgive my children for their trespasses; I may overlook them or I may need to confront my children about them, but even if I’m angry or disappointed, I wouldn’t normally put it in terms of needing to forgive them. In the normal course of the life of the church I think it would be the same ideal. I know at my church, there are many opportunities to take offense at real or imagined slights and hurts, but we’re to overlook them out of our genuine love for each other and Christ and not be thin-skinned and self-absorbed. On the other hand, a man robbed a drink machine on our church property about 10 years ago and in the course of it, shot and killed the church’s beloved minister of music. People there are still shaking their heads and talking about how they just can’t forgive the guy (who is still smug and arrogant about what he did)…they are struggling. Well guess what…God hasn’t forgiven the guy, either, so how can we go beyond that…how can we be “bigger-hearted’ than God? Does God offer this man forgiveness and restoration on condition that he repent and be sorrowful for his sin? Yes, and so should we…and most of these people have just that kind of heart attitude towards the man. That is all they are required to do. I think the truth of what Tim is talking about here is good news for these folks. I think if they knew this, they could gain some freedom.
As for the unforgiving servant, he applied for mercy and promised to repay the debt; the king said that’s why he forgave the debt.
58. Chris Brauns
February 17, 2008
8:04 PM
I’ve put several posts up about forgiveness including a technical discussion of the relationship between reconciliation and forgiveness.
I also put up a post that includes quotes from Piper, MacArthur, Sande, and Justin Taylor: http://gotpreaching.wordpress.com/2008/02/18/others-on-conditional-forgiveness/
59. D.L. Kane
February 17, 2008
9:31 PM
Thank you Seth - I think your comment showed a great deal of wisdom and I hope that Tim considers your counsel.
For His Sake,
D.L. Kane
60. Justin
February 18, 2008
2:27 AM
I have to say that I also agree with Seth’s words. Because of your popularity, you have a great responsibility that most of us other bloggers can slide through (not that we should). I agree that there is ambiguity in this topic. But I’m less concerned about that than I am with exactly what Seth finishes with: “This entry suffers from ambiguity, and could possibly communicate against the precious doctrines of grace”.
I have to say that with a lot of evangelical theology that the doctrines concerning grace are easily diminished and/or thrown out the window all together. Your writing is well presented, but it only takes a couple of questions to arise before you find that your logic begins to have some fallibility. I’m not going to sit here now and say, “here’s the RIGHT view,” I don’t believe myself to be that arrogant. I wonder what this post would have looked like had it been stated in the form of questions for thought on forgiveness being conditional rather than a discourse on this view being reality.
As Mike Rucker said, I worry about boxing God in with our theology. To me, God seems so much bigger on this issue than the few verses you chose to provide a biblical foundation to “prove” your hypothesis.
Unfortunately, many people read your blog and take it as (no pun intended) gospel because 1) you’re popular, 2) you ARE a skilled writer, and 3) unfortunately many people don’t critically challenge what you or I might say because they trust us. A lot of people trust you, and to me this post is irresponsible with that trust. Please don’t take that as a mean statement, I mean it with the utmost respect, and hope that I am practicing what I’m preaching. If not, I am now more aware of that responsibility than ever and will try harder to act accordingly.
I think that this is a good conversational topic, and am glad that you want to post on this topic and allow others to read and discuss, but I have to say that your conclusions far from close the debate on God’s forgiveness and our responsibility to forgive others.
I humbly submit this, and pray that you hear the love and concern in my voice when you read this. No condemnation is meant, just stating my humble opinion.
With much grace and love
justin
61. mike rucker
February 18, 2008
10:07 AM
jeri had excellent thoughts:
Therefore we should not be easily offended! When we love people fervently, we do overlook many things. I don’t have to forgive my children for their trespasses; I may overlook them or I may need to confront my children about them, but even if I’m angry or disappointed, I wouldn’t normally put it in terms of needing to forgive them.
she just took the thoughts in the wrong direction.
perhaps, in the end, our theology that is based on our needing to be forgiven by God is as much a slap at Him as it is us?
something to think about.
not that you will, of course, but i remain ever the optimist as i look for silver linings among all you black clouds…
:)
oh, by the way - good morning to all. it’s a beautiful day here in Georgia.
mike rucker
-
62. Joel
February 18, 2008
12:44 PM
As Mike Rucker said, I worry about boxing God in with our theology. To me, God seems so much bigger on this issue than the few verses you chose to provide a biblical foundation to “prove” your hypothesis.
Justin, although I agree with Tim on the conditionality (is that a word?), I think you have a point. God’s perspective on forgiveness is necessarily more complete than our can be, and there are certainly factors that we don’t know.
One thing that comes to mind is the nature of repentance. Is it really as cut-and-dried as we make it? I know there have been times when I wanted to repent and knew I should, but I couldn’t get any farther than “God, please make me as sorry as I should be.” (He did just that, in ways I really didn’t enjoy, but that’s another story.)
If the Lord sees depths in our hearts that we don’t even know are there, He knows if we would repent if we weren’t so overcome by sin. It seems to me that He may well forgive in advance of our repentance, knowing that eventually He will drag us away from that sin and bring us to that point of repentance. We are bound by time and cause-and-effect; God is not. So by our limited lights, He may appear to forgive the unrepentant, but He knows better.
Carrying on with this, maybe we are required to forgive in like manner, in the certain hope that repentance will follow if it’s God’s will. (Not that that obliges us to forget: if you steal from me and I forgive you, I’m still not going to trust you with my ATM card. That’s not unforgiveness, just prudence.)
I don’t see anything in scripture that says that God is required to limit Himself to our limited understanding of forgiveness.
63. Justin
February 18, 2008
2:08 PM
Joel,
Thanks for your words, and may I say beautifully stated! I am actually mirroring this same sort of discussion on my own blog, I’m going to cut and paste your response, and if you aren’t ok with that then please let me know ASAP, and I will be glad to take it back down.
I love the questions you ask. I love the WAY you ask the questions and the lack of definitiveness in your comments. That’s a much more authentic approach, and an approach that invites discussion.
“If the Lord sees depths in our hearts that we don’t even know are there…” a beautiful phrase! (sorry I know its out of context). Its statements like this that opens back up the depth and breath of God that we can’t see, touch, or even truly know. I know that people have a problem when I say this, but you know what, that BIG God is the God I want to worship. To me, any other smaller view of god seems almost like idolatry. But that’s a personal preference, not a judgmental statement. I hope it comes across that way! I’m not ACCUSING anyone else of idolatry, and Tim, please don’t read it as such. I am saying that I can’t settle for a smaller view of God in my own personal views or I feel as if I’m committing idolatry.
Your last statement Joel, “I don’t see anything in scripture that says that God is required to limit Himself to our limited understanding of forgiveness.”, is a great one. I would agree with your wholeheartedly. In fact I would say that the precedence in scripture is that God is not to be limited. It seems the meta narrative of the Israelites into the early Ch. Is saying over and over again, “you thought this about God, well then I’m about to blow your mind and show you something you never even considered possible!” I think we see that in Abraham, Moses, the prophets, the early Ch. (think inclusion of gentiles), and most of all, in an incarnational Christ!
The fact remains, that although our Bible is THE a #1 source of knowledge of the Christian God, He cannot be bound between the leather. I can (have and will) spend my whole life deeply studying the scripture, and the depth of that will never be fully explored (it hasn’t yet). But in the same way, I can’t believe that everything that God is can found in those 66 writings.
thanks again, and if you want to visit my blog just click my name! Any other thoughts you have there are also appriciated as I don’t check this as much. Tim gets way ahead sooooo fast! It really is amazing how he does this, and I applaud him for his posting persistence!
64. Joel
February 18, 2008
2:46 PM
Justin, help yourself to anything I said that you think might be useful. I just glanced at your blog, and I’ll have a closer look when time allows. The current post looks meaty.
65. mike rucker
February 18, 2008
7:17 PM
justin - i appreciated your comments.
one more thought about forgiveness, and then i’ll shut up.
(pause)
nahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh… :)
anyway, one of the things that we all find ourselves generally guilty of (oooh - poor choice of words…) is not thinking about God when things are going well, right? it was (and is) at my darker moments when i go looking for Him - not that He ever moved, of course, but you know what i mean.
so imagine this: uncivilized man, living a few thousand years back. everything’s going reasonably well, sun is shining, crops are growing, nice cave to live in, wife that he had to keep in furs (yes, even back then…) fixes a lunch for him every day, ample game around to kill, guy across the street had just invented fire, another one nearby was working on the wheel, etc….
then one day a terrible storm came through, blowing out the fire, flooding his cave, wheel got stuck in the mud, wife crying for new dry-washable furs, fields ruined, all his food got wet, etc….
it was at this time that he had the thought that would imprison humanity for centuries:
“ugh-grumba-booka-booka-wunka-dinna-hey!”
which, of course, when translated, means:
“the gods must be angry with us!”
we’ve been living in that paradigm ever since.
hope a number of you are planning to attend the band of bloggers 2008 meeting (link below); please promise me you’ll leave your hammers and nails at home…
http://timmybrister.com/2008/02/15/band-of-bloggers-registration-starts-monday/
mike rucker
-
66. Joel
February 18, 2008
8:20 PM
To me, any other smaller view of god seems almost like idolatry. But that’s a personal preference, not a judgmental statement. I hope it comes across that way! I’m not ACCUSING anyone else of idolatry, and Tim, please don’t read it as such. I am saying that I can’t settle for a smaller view of God in my own personal views or I feel as if I’m committing idolatry.
Actually, if you follow that out, we all are committing idolatry, as none of us is capable of comprehending God as he actually is. I think He is aware of our limitation in that area and doesn’t hold it against us. No Christian intentionally sells God short.
which, of course, when translated, means:
“the gods must be angry with us!”
we’ve been living in that paradigm ever since.
Mike, that’s true, and I think it’s an outgrowth of Man’s insistance on thinkinng it’s all about HIM. It never occurs to our caveman that the gods might be angry with someone else, and he happened to be nearby, or that they’re pleased with someone else and his misfortune is a corollary of that guy’s blessing, or even that they had some other reason altogether. No, it’s gotta be “They’re angry with me, for something I did, and so I hope they’ll forgive me. It’s the self-centeredness of fallen man.
67. Terry Rayburn
February 18, 2008
10:25 PM
Chris,
Re your comment #58…
I appreciate the homework you’ve done, but in reading the words of the men you cite, I’m convinced even more how important it is to diefine “forgiveness” before commenting on whether it’s conditional or not.
The only one of the men you cite who actually defines “forgiveness” in those quotations is Jay Adams who diefines it as, “promising another never to bring up his offense again to use it against him.” I think that’s a terrible definition, and allows the offended one to harbor all sorts of resentments, bitterness, anger, hurt, etc., as long as he doesn’t “bring it up again”.
No one has addressed the following from my first comment #13:
a. Tim wrote, “It is a letting go of the anger or hurt that has been caused”. The logical alternative if there is no repentance is to hang on to the anger and hurt. Absurd.
b. It makes absurd the Scriptural injunction to “Above all, keep fervent in your love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins.” How does love cover a multitude of sins if they all have to be repented of? Every church get-together would be a confrontation-fest Not to mention get-togethers with unbelievers, whom we also need to forgive, and who are unlikely to be very repentant.
c. It doesn’t allow for the forgiveness of those who have died.
d. It doesn’t allow for the forgiveness of those who are unable to repent (e.g., the drunk who killed your child, and is now in a coma, or vegetative state).
e. Perhaps most important, to continue to hold unforgiveness against someone because they haven’t repented is a sure road to bitterness, and then to a root of bitterness. Don’t you see this all the time?
Until those are addressed, I think “forgiveness” is just being defined wrongly as automatically including “reconciliation”, which I don’t think is accurate to the spirit of biblical intent.
I know you said you were going to post on the “bitterness” argument, but I haven’t seen it yet. Did I miss it?
Blessings,
Terry
68. Darren
February 23, 2008
9:28 PM
Hi, I can see the point in Tim’s arguements.
It also makes me think of David when he prayed that God will destroy his enemies.
Any thoughts on this?
69. James
September 22, 2008
8:32 AM
Forgive me if this is redundant, but the matter seems very simple to me. I don’t see the need for complexity in the discussion, unless forgiveness is being defined as anything other than the human type of stopping all feelings of anger or resentment or to cancel an owed debt. I believe the word is being misused. The forgiveness we have for one another is on a totally different scale than the forgiveness God has for us.
Although I understand the arguments against this simple logic, I find no place in scripture where my own salvation is tied to the actions or feelings of another person (other than Jesus, of course). If a drunk driver is killed in the same accident where he kills my child, clearly he has not had the chance to be repentant. Does that mean my own salvation is in jeopardy even if I truly forgive, if that forgiveness is in the absence of repentance?
While no one verse in the Bible “trumps” another, there is one clear theme that should be the overall litmus test of whether we have the right attitude. In 1 John 4, we are told to love one another for how can we not love a person we have seen and then love a God we have never seen. I don’t think “God is Love” is a metaphor. God *is* Love. That’s the goal, and once we achieve that, we might be qualified to be among the many called and few that will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
Let’s take theology out of Christianity.