Should Forgiveness be "Unconditional"?
The forgiveness controversy
Back in 1999, I preached a series on the subject of forgiveness. Many folks in our congregation had never heard the approach I took. A number commented that they heard Christian leaders on the radio or in magazines take the opposite position during the weekdays between my sermons.
The world and much of evangelicalism believe that we should forgive unconditionally. Secular psychologists and popular preachers have formed an alliance that intimidates many of us from even considering the alternatives. Yet many Bible teachers believe that forgiveness is conditioned upon repentance. I am in the latter group.
Bible-believing Christians agree that we are to forgive others as God forgives us. If you believe God forgives unconditionally, this would logically lead you to Universalism, the belief that everyone is saved; no one is under the wrath of God because God’s wrath is not directed toward those who are forgiven. If God forgives unconditionally, then none are unforgiven. Most evangelicals recognize that multitudes are lost, yet many say that God forgives unconditionally. Do you see the contradiction here?
That the Lord does not forgive unconditionally is clear in Scripture: “Surely at the command of the LORD it came upon Judah, to remove them from His sight because of the sins of Manasseh… and the LORD would not forgive…” (NIV: 2 Kings 24:3-4).
So lets set aside our preconceptions and consider what the Bible actually teaches about forgiveness. See if my points are validated by God’s Word.
The manner of forgiveness
First, we are to forgive others in the same manner God forgives us. Ephesians 4:32 reads, “Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.”
God’s condition for forgiveness
Second, God’s manner of forgiveness requires our repentance. Acts 3:19 gives us a taste of Apostolic preaching: “Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord….” Note that repentance (a change of mind, including regret for sin) is the required condition for God’s forgiveness. God does not hold us to a higher standard than He holds Himself. His grace extends only to those who repent; He does not expect us to be more gracious than He is.
In Acts 8:22, after Simon had sinned by seeking to buy the Holy Spirit, Peter rebuked him with these words: “Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you.” Note that forgiveness is neither presumed nor assumed. It is conditioned upon repentance.
So if we forgive as God forgives, and God forgives in response to repentance, logically we are to forgive others when they repent.
Levels of forgiveness
Third, we must ask the question, “Forgiveness at what level?” When we turn from our sins (repent) and turn to Christ, all our sins are forgiven: past, present, and future—at least, as far as salvation goes. Nothing can take us out of God’s hand. We are given the righteousness of Christ and the seal of the Holy Spirit, and we are already legally seated in heaven (Ephesians 1-2).
Even though we cannot lose our salvation, we can lose our fellowship with God. When the believer lives in rebellion against God, sin blocks his ability to communicate with God (Psalm 66:18) and places him in a position to be disciplined by the Lord (1 Cor. 11:32). If we grieve the Holy Spirit (Eph. 4:30)—the One who assures us of our salvation (Rom. 8:16)—we could logically lose our sense of assurance as we quiet His voice.
How do we remedy this situation? 1 John 1:9 makes it clear: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” To my way of thinking, this implies that if we do NOT confess our sins, he will NOT forgive us our sins. If God forgives us unconditionally, the verse becomes meaningless.
Sometimes forgiveness involves God not zapping people physically here on earth. I think that when Jesus asked the Father to forgive those who crucified Him, He meant, “Don’t zap them.” His example clearly makes a distinction between sinning in ignorance (“for they know not what they do”) and sinning with full knowledge.
Forgiveness in relationships
Fourth, we must boldly apply these concepts to our relationships. If others confess how they have sinned against us, we are obligated to initiate the forgiveness process. That does not mean we immediately trust them, for credibility can only be restored through faithful behavior over time. Sometimes credibility can never be fully restored. In such a case, forgiveness (a restoration of relationship as if the offense had never occurred) can never be complete.
Jesus put it this way: “So watch yourselves. If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. If he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you and says, ‘I repent,’ forgive him” (Luke 17:3). Although shorter accounts of Jesus’ teaching could be wrongly interpreted to suggest unconditional forgiveness, the longer passage in Luke presents a more detailed truth and qualifies our obligation to forgive.
We cannot always simply choose to forgive; forgiveness can be a struggle that may take a long time; it sometimes involves a process of sorting through emotions and moving gradually toward forgiveness (complete reconciliation). Sometimes we might need to say, “With God’s help, I will try to forgive you, but I am not there yet.” Honesty is crucial at this point. Christians who believe they must immediately forgive an offense often become good liars—to themselves first, and then to others.
Even when someone does not repent, it is often in our best interest to let a hurt go, if we can. We should do so because we know that bitterness drains us and keeps us from enjoying the life God has given us. We should not do so out of false guilt, but for our own benefit. Do not confuse this with genuine forgiveness, which brings complete relational restoration.
I have seen people horribly victimized and then plagued by guilt because they cannot seem to forgive the one who abused them. This guilt adds to their heavy burden. Often such guilt is unwarranted because the offender has not even requested forgiveness or evidenced genuine repentance. Sometimes people simply do not want to forgive because they are grasping for control—withholders of grace. Forgiveness evens the score, and some of us want the advantage and excuse of being a wronged person.
God recognizes that some situations are so evil that it is natural for us to want to get even. God Himself is a God of justice, so since we are in His image, we desire justice. Paul wrote: “Do not repay anyone evil for evil…. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord. On the contrary: ‘If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Rom. 12:19-21). Find consolation in knowing that God will hold everyone accountable; none can evade Him.
I have presented what I believe to be the correct teaching of Scripture about forgiveness. My challenge to you is to study the Scriptures and test the above, especially since my understanding is the minority viewpoint. If you disagree with me, I’ll forgive you!
Ed Vasicek was raised as a Roman Catholic in Cicero, Illinois. During his senior year in high school (in 1974), Cicero Bible Church reached out to him, and he received Jesus Christ as his Savior by faith alone. Ed later felt a call to ministry and enrolled at Moody Bible Institute (B.A., Pastoral Studies/Greek). After graduating, he served as pastor of Victory Bible Church of Chicago (a branch work of Cicero Bible Church) and married Marylu Troppito. In 1983, the couple moved to Kokomo where Ed began pastoring Highland Park Church, where he still serves. Ed and Marylu have two adult children, Hannah and Luke. Ed loves to write. He has written over 500 weekly columns for the opinion page of the Kokomo Tribune, published articles in Pulpit Helps magazine, and populated his church’s website with an endless barrage of papers. You can access them at www.highlandpc.com.
- 515 views
[Jay C.]As someone stated above, we must interpret the shorter or less complete passages using the longer, more complete ones. Luke 17:3-4 seems to be clear when it says “if he repents, forgive him.” I have not seen any references which say “forgive him whether he repents or not.” Until then, I am going to stick with the principle found in Luke 17.So, I think the major underlying difference is whether or not repentance is required for a man to forgive another man.Yup, I think you hit the nail on the head. I’d say Yes, it is required.
Someone else said (above) that the problem is some define “forgiveness” as a feeling rather than a decision or transaction between persons. Clearly when God forgives us, it does not mean He simply changes His feelings for us. He judicially declares us free from the guilt of that sin and “cleanses us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). Giving up wrong feelings is necessary if you harbor bitterness toward someone or you are seeking vengeance. However, this is not the same as forgiveness even though it many times occurs at the same time.
MS -------------------------------- Luke 17:10
[MShep2]Mark, at least in my mind, this does not contradict unconditional forgiveness. Let me say this, from what I have seen, there seems to be at least two groups within the unconditional camp, those who believe we forgive even before someone asks for forgiveness(I am pretty sure I don’t agree with this) and those who believe forgiveness is always granted whenever a person asks. And I think the latter fits with the Luke passage. For what does it mean for a person to repent, practically? (this is another pivotal question) And who are they repenting to?[Jay C.]As someone stated above, we must interpret the shorter or less complete passages using the longer, more complete ones. Luke 17:3-4 seems to be clear when it says “if he repents, forgive him. I have not seen any references which say “forgive him whether he repents or not.” Until then, I am going to stick with the principle found in Luke 17.So, I think the major underlying difference is whether or not repentance is required for a man to forgive another man.Yup, I think you hit the nail on the head. I’d say Yes, it is required.
Someone else said (above) that the problem is some define “forgiveness” as a feeling rather than a decision or transaction between persons. Clearly when God forgives us, it does not mean He simply changes His feelings for us. He judicially declares us free from the guilt of that sin and “cleanses us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). Giving up wrong feelings is necessary if you harbor bitterness toward someone or you are seeking vengeance. However, this is not the same as forgiveness even though it many times accompanies it.
As a side, people keep saying how others are confusing forgiveness with a feeling, where is this and can someone clarify this position? I don’t understand it.
I did not seek the Lord, he sought me. “we love him because he first loved us.” Have we read the end of James? we go to the brother that is in sin. This whole line of discussion sounds IMO cold and unloving. It sounds like a justification of why I did not forgive my brother. You say you love God whom you can not see but you do not love your brother who you can see. I still remember the old Sheffy (sp?) video where the boy returned to ask for forgiveness for burning down the tents. the preacher told him how thrilled he was for seeing him, because he had forgiven the boy years ago, not even knowing who he was. Sheffy was thrilled to be able to forgive him in person.
Ed I read your paradigm
1. We forgive someone when they verbally ask for it. In many instances, we just move on and put the matter out of our minds. This is the most common type of forgiveness we exercise.
2. In more serious situations, this might be the beginning of the process. If the situation involves a serious or repeated breech of trust, we are now choosing to move forward and we are allowing the person a chance to re-establish credibility, and are hopeful that he will. Think of the early church’s struggle to forgive and accept Saul of Tarsus.
3. We trust someone when they have re-established credibility. Sometimes a Barnabas may take the risk of trusting one earlier than the rest of us might. That’s okay, as long as we are open.
#2 and #3 implies that we are holding their sin in our hearts against them. This leads to bitterness. The ‘victim’ of the sin suffers while the sinner walks around fine.
#1 implies that forgiveness is done over trivial matters that we did not need to address, we put it out of our minds. If I feel a need to ask for forgiveness then it is probably not trivial to me.
#2 you wait for the person, forgive them is the beginning of the forgiveness process? um, should it not be the end, death is the end of the dying process. What more did you want of the sinner, they asked for forgiveness. That is enough for God. Now if you are discussing the process of restoration. Forgive them and then begin working on restoring the relationship to where it should/could be.
#3 is trust, not forgiveness. I have forgiven many people that I do not trust. A man steals, I forgive but do not let him watch my money. Do we allow an abuser to watch our children? ever? I’d say not, it is the consequences of their sin.
Forgive, quickly, easily, often. offer the restoration of a relationship, trust is built up later in every relationship, even our kids have to earn trust. But if forgiveness comes only when they are ready to crawl over here and ask for it. Well, then Christianity is no better than the rest of the religions.
Jesus came and sought us out to forgive us. I will follow that paradigm.
He who created us without our help will not save us without our consent. - Augustine
What happened to “do not be overcome by evil but overcome evil with love.” If you love your brother’s how are you any better than the pharisees, do they also not do this?”Duane, nothing happened to this verse. But you cut the verse in half. What do you do with the first half?
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.” 21Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.I integrate the first and last half of this verse into my paradigm. I believe in doing right, even with my enemies, and not stooping to their level. Right now, I don’t know if I have any personal enemies — at least not bad ones— and I hope I never will. I have had experiences with people I do not like and have struggled with hating people in the short term. I am fortunate that way. But I would have no guilt about doing what duty demands for my enemies (Exodus 23:4 sort of things) and then taking consolation that they will answer to God. I feel this way about Osama Bin Laden, for example. And I have no twinge of guilt. But if I were a prison doctor and Osama were in prison and in pain from a gall bladder, I would do my best to perform a good surgery.
Please explain: how do you integrate the first part of this verse or the Revelation 6:9-11 verses cited above into your paradigm?
I think that there are some concepts we are leaving out. One is emotional distance. Reconciliation implies WARMTH and goodwill. “Forgiveness” with emotional distance
is what takes the spark out of many marriages, for example. I would argue that what is on the line here is honesty with one’s self. We are not robots. We do not want to cheapen reconciliation or restoration through word games. We do not want to say “Peace” when there is no peace because we are under the delusion that God demands
an instant on/off switch be thrown. We can decide to forgive, but our emotions and trust do not necessarily follow, so we have to be honest to ourselves about where we are at.
In 2 Kings 24:4, we read:
For he had filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, and the LORD was not willing to forgive.If not forgiving a sin makes one bitter, then can we say God is bitter in this context?
My argument is simple: Above all else, we must be HONEST with ourselves and how we feel. Pressure to deny our feelings and thoughts – because we wrongly believe we must instantly forgive any offense, no matter how grievious — causes us to go underground in our own hearts. The whole unconditional forgiveness paradigm is an invitation to personal dishonesty and denial, IMO. It short-circuits genuine forgiveness and replaces it with a superficial counterfeit.
To answer some of your other comments, brother, I think that forgiveness varies. Certainly you must admit that in some cases, complete reconciliation is impossible, yet a certain level of forgiveness is (e.g., child molesting). In other instances, the hurt party needs time to recover, as in a marital affair, for example. And sometimes experiences happen that convince us to avoid a person because he is a fool (Proverbs 22:24).
Hermenutically, I would suggest that the issue is whether we embrace a paradigm that includes ALL the information or just some of it, one that distinguishes between summary statements and more extensive teachings.
"The Midrash Detective"
[Matt Walker]…..What about Luke 6:27-36? How should we treat those who hurt us? Jesus says (1) love them, (2) do good to them, (3) bless them, and (4) pray for them. Now how can I love someone, do them good, bless them, and pray for them, and not forgive them at the same time? Suppose a man hits me in the face and then he says to me, “I’m glad I did it and I’d do it again if I had the chance.” Clearly, he’s not repentant. What if he steals my coat and says, “I’m glad I did it and I’d do it again if I had the chance.” How should I treat him? Shouldn’t I love him in return offering up the other cheek and offering up my shirt? By the way, isn’t this how God is toward those who are ungrateful and evil? I do not see how it is possible that I can “be merciful, just as your Father is merciful” and not forgive someone.John3:16 says, “God so loved the world” or as some translate it, “This is how God loved the world.” God loves us with His infinite love and yet doesn’t forgive us until we repent and ask for forgiveness. Not forgiving someone who has not repented ≠ being unloving, doing bad to someone, cursing someone or refusing to pray for someone. We can do all of these things for the someone who has done the worst things to us but this does not necessitate that we forgive the person until he has repented.
I think that if we boldly applied this to our own situation we would be more apt to forgive…even those who would rather die than say “I’m sorry.”
In regards to mercy, God is merciful to all, even those who reject Him and refuse to repent and accept Christ as Savior. However even though God loves an unsaved person, is merciful to him, and provides him with many blessings, he will still die and go to hell if he does not repent of His sin, ask God for forgiveness and accept Christ as Savior.
MS -------------------------------- Luke 17:10
[Duane Braswell]…….2. In more serious situations, this might be the beginning of the process. If the situation involves a serious or repeated breech of trust, we are now choosing to move forward and we are allowing the person a chance to re-establish credibility, and are hopeful that he will. Think of the early church’s struggle to forgive and accept Saul of Tarsus.No, it doesn’t. You are equating holding bitterness and/or seeking revenge with not forgiving someone who has sinned against you. It is wrong to have sinful thoughts and feelings towards someone who has wronged you; but repenting of those thoughts/feelings, praying for the person, and trusting God that He will make all things right in the end ≠ forgiving that person.
3. We trust someone when they have re-established credibility. Sometimes a Barnabas may take the risk of trusting one earlier than the rest of us might. That’s okay, as long as we are open.
#2 and #3 implies that we are holding their sin in our hearts against them. This leads to bitterness…..
MS -------------------------------- Luke 17:10
[Daniel] Ed, I don’t want to speak for everyone on the unconditional side, but I don’t think anyone is saying that you suppress your feelings and thoughts, although some feelings no matter the offense are never correct, hatred for example. (Mark, is this what you meant in regards to your comment about people making it about feelings?)Right. People are hurt when someone sins against them, and it is not wrong to be hurt. As part of the reconciliation process the offender needs to acknowledge and apologize for hurting someone.
However hating someone and wishing for his grand failure or death is sin. And when people release those sinful, hateful feelings they feel much better themselves, but this is not the same as forgiveness.
MS -------------------------------- Luke 17:10
That doesn’t mean that his lack of repentance will not have further consequences either. He may end up under church discipline (Matthew 18). But to conclude that it is okay to withhold forgiveness based on this text is seriously suspect, IMO.
The same exegetical fallacy is employed in reading The Lord’s Prayer “forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us” to be I am repenting of my trespasses and therefore I will forgive those who trespass against me and repent to me as I have to You.” The one reading does not necessarily work the other way.
BTW: if you haven’t read Carson’s book, it is well worth your time…. I read it twice. It was embarrassing to think through the many times I’ve used faulty logic, read my own opinions into the text, or twisted it to mean something it doesn’t. Hopefully, I do less of that in the future.
Perhaps my separating the two is the reason for some of the confusion…at least on my part. Am I wrong to separate those out? Does anyone else see it that way?
Reconciliation is a two way street. But forgiveness is one-way. Repentance is one way. This is why I said the underlying difference is whether or not repentance is required for forgiveness. But really, it should be, is genuine repentance required for forgiveness? Or what level of repentance is required for forgiveness?
One view we have represented here (Ed’s) is
a. We can forgive unilaterally, and in many situations should, but are not required to across the board
b. The condition of repentance obligates us to forgive… one seeking forgiveness (synonymous with “repentance” in this case) must be granted it
View two:
a. We must forgive whenever someone seeks it (regardless of whether repentance is evident or not. In this view, seeking forgiveness and being repentant are not necessarily the same?)
b. We must also forgive when a person does not seek it
c. When a person is not repentant, forgiveness must be granted but reconciliation is not possible
I think my summary is still a bit sloppy (would like to get the two views expressed in parallel terms), but am I pretty close?
Am I correct that nobody is saying….
a. In every situation you can only forgive if the offender expresses repentance
b. You can only forgive if the offender comes to you (vs. being confronted by you)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[Aaron Blumer] OK, just to see if I understand…I think this is a point-on summary.
One view we have represented here (Ed’s) is
a. We can forgive unilaterally, and in many situations should, but are not required to across the board
b. The condition of repentance obligates us to forgive… one seeking forgiveness (synonymous with “repentance” in this case) must be granted it
View two:
a. We must forgive whenever someone seeks it (regardless of whether repentance is evident or not. In this view, seeking forgiveness and being repentant are not necessarily the same?)
b. We must also forgive when a person does not seek it
c. When a person is not repentant, forgiveness must be granted but reconciliation is not possible
I think my summary is still a bit sloppy (would like to get the two views expressed in parallel terms), but am I pretty close?
Am I correct that nobody is saying….
a. In every situation you can only forgive if the offender expresses repentance
b. You can only forgive if the offender comes to you (vs. being confronted by you)
"The Midrash Detective"
The “if he repents, forgive him” does not mean “if he doesn’t repent, don’t forgive him.” This is one of the logical fallacies that D.A. Carson addresses in his book, Exegetical Fallacies.So I guess we are back to the bigger issue, is God’s example of forgiveness the standard or not.
If so, the same logic would then apply to I John 1:9. And thus we have verses that really do not mean anything.
The idea of loving our enemy is like that of God’s love for mankind in sending his Son (John 3:16) despite the hatred God feels toward us because we are sinners (Psalm 5:4-5). We must HARMONIZE God’s viewpoints on these things, not set them against one another. Loving our enemies can be a love that runs contrary to our feelings.
Some good practical places to employ loving an enemy: a divorce settlement, a custody case, a relative who runs off with the inheritance, a crooked politician or criminal. These situations often involve a lack of repentance and forgiveness.
I agree that God does not want us to hate others. He has given us the instruction to confront precisely so we can avoid or work through our hatred. Leviticus 19:16-18 are some of the most important verses in the Bible in this area:
‘Do not go about spreading slander among your people. ” ‘Do not do anything that endangers your neighbor’s life. I am the LORD. 17 ” ‘Do not hate your brother in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in his guilt. 18 ” ‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.The 2 Corinthians 2:7 passage is a corrective because the offender had proven himself sincere, and now the church was to forgive him in the fullest sense. 2 Corinthians 2:10 suggests that forgiveness was something that occurred after a time of withholding forgiveness. But note that the church was working through the situation. They started off WRONGLY by forgiving him immediately, in my interpretation, being proud of their willingness to accept such a wrong (I Corinthians 5:2).
Sometimes it takes TIME to work through wrongs, hurts, repentance, and forgiveness. But I think we should be committed to pursue the process and to be as reconciled as we can be.
"The Midrash Detective"
R. Pittman brought up these verses:
“And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses. [emphasis added] (Mark 11:25-26).”At this point, we are dealing with something broader than forgiveness, but the nature of Jesus’ teachings recorded in the Synoptics in general, particularly the Sermon on the Mount. I am going to be lazy because my book deals very much with this. So let me quote myself. The advantage is that I agree fully with myself at this time! :)
correlate with
“For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses (Matthew6:14-15).”
“So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses (Matthew 18:35)”
From my book, The Midrash Key, p. 93
The reader must remember that Jesus is reducing detailed teaching down to general, “hands on” principles. He is demonstrating how Torah passages could be expanded and applied to life in his day. These condensed, black and white generalities provide a starting point, not necessarily an ending point. They are not complete treatises, but wise sayings which sometimes must be weighed against other wise sayings.From The Midrash Key, pp. 49 and 51
We have no idea how many minutes of conversation are not recorded between Matthew 5:41 and 5:42 or 5:43, so we must assume that these are summaries of longer discussions. It is unlikely that Yeshua rattled off these truisms in machine-gun like rapidity.
If we read The Sermon on the Mount aloud, it would take approximately 11 minutes. Christ probably spoke 3 to 4 hours, but even if he spoke as little as two hours, where is the full text? This leads us to an obvious conclusion: the words we have in the Gospels are summary highlights. ..Put simply, these are statements of the general principle or attitude we are to take, not detailed treatises. Much like “give to everyone who asks of you” or “seek and you shall find.”
Yeshua simplifies the principles behind these Deuteronomy passages to make them “hands on,” readily accessible for daily life. Rabbinic summations made mitzvot user-friendly, but they were never intended to replace the more detailed teaching of the Torah. Both Jesus’ words and the Torah will never be destroyed; the Scriptures teach that there is a sense in which the Law has passed away, yet there is another sense in which it is eternal and relevant.
"The Midrash Detective"
Discussion