Forgive and Forget? No!
Image
If a Christian has been personally wronged by another Christian, should he just forgive and forget? I don’t believe he should. I think that would be a terrible mistake, and this attitude (while well-meaning) is very dangerous for local churches. It papers over disputes, and presents a false front of unity where, in fact, bitterness and sin often abound below the surface. Here is my position, briefly:
If a Christian offender has been made aware of his offense against another Christian, and if the offender refuses to repent and ask for forgiveness from the victim, then victim should not forgive him
Now understand - when I write this, I’m envisioning two professing Christians in the same congregation; one of whom is defiantly unrepentant. My position is drawn from this passage (Luke 17:3-4):
Take heed to yourselves; if your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him; and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, and says, `I repent,’ you must forgive him.
What is the situation?
One Christian sins against another. Matthew 18:15-19 deals with how a church should handle disputes among brethren. This passage addresses the individual aspect. This is about how you and the other Christian should handle the matter. This is important, so get this straight in your head up front - when we talk about forgiveness, there is a difference between a believer and an unbeliever. These are completely different categories. How so?
An unbeliever will act like an unbeliever. Expect it. Don’t expect repentance for sin (in a Biblical sense) or even an acknowledgment of sin. It likely won’t happen. You’re not dealing with a child of God, but a child of Satan. Unsaved people act like unsaved people. Big surprise, right?
Believers are members of the same family, saved by the same Gospel, indwelt by the same Spirit, and baptized by the same Spirit (cf. Ephesians 4). There is a shared understanding of the Gospel, sanctification, and the concepts of sin, repentance, atonement and forgiveness. On that basis, you hold a believer to a much higher standard. You don’t “forgive and forget” a believer’s deliberate sin. You expect and demand repentance, confession and (above all else) restoration between the two injured parties. Nothing less is biblical or right.
If you don’t understand this category distinction, this entire article will seem mean-spirited to you. I was once told that I was being “unloving” for demanding an unrepentant Christian, in deliberate and terrible sin, repent and confess his sins. How did I reply? I said, “When I’m commanding you to repent, confess and make this right, I’m actually doing the most loving thing possible for you.” The man didn’t agree, but you get the idea (I hope).
What should you do?
If your Christian brother or sister sins against you, you must confront him. If you decide to be childish, sulk in your pew, ignore the other person, and let your bitterness fester - then you’re in deliberate rebellion yourself. The other person may not know he did anything wrong. If you were sinned against, you have a duty to lovingly confront that person in a spirit of meekness. It’s possible you’ll decide to sulk, instead. Or gossip to other people about it, telling them just how evil that person was to you. That’s a mistake. You’re sinning yourself, at that point. Stop it, and confront the person. Please. You have a duty to.
When should you forgive?
You forgive if your brother repents. I can’t be any more clear. Black and white. Simple. Check the Greek, if you’re interested in what it really means. Here is what it really means: “and if he repents, you must forgive him.” Revolutionary. Now you know the truth. So simple. If the guy repents, you have a duty to forgive him. No tap-dancing necessary.
What is repentance?
God doesn’t want external, superficial change. He hates hypocrisy (read Zeph 1:2-6). There has to be an internal change, which produces outward action. That internal change is repentance – what is repentance? Repentance is when you confess your sin, and forsake it:
He who conceals his transgressions will not prosper, but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy (Prov 28:13)
In practical terms:
- you realize you’ve sinned against God, your Heavenly Father
- you’re sorry,
- you truly mean it,
- and you prove it by stopping your sinful behavior
Repentance is the seed that produces action, that produces progressive holiness, in your life.
What is forgiveness?
God forgives sinners. It doesn’t mean He forgets, because He doesn’t. He won’t ever forget your sins. But, if He forgives you, this means He promises He won’t hold your sins against you anymore. If you’re a Christian, that means you’ve repented (i.e. honestly confessed and forsaken your sin of rebellion) and believed in who His Son is and what He’s done. As a result, God declares you innocent of the crimes you’ve committed, and pardons you.
You’re given a clean slate. He knows your crimes, including the sins you’ve yet to commit. But, by forgiving you, God has declared in advance He won’t hold them against you.
When we forgive one another, we can’t promise to “forget” something happened. We don’t ever really forget, do we? Our forgiveness to other believers is modeled after God’s forgiveness to us, when we became Christians. So:
- We wait for repentance from the other party, and tell them we expect it
- When the other party repents, we extend forgiveness - which means we promise to not hold their sin against them any longer.
- This is precisely what God does with us, and it’s what we must do with other Christians
Are you saying I shouldn’t forgive somebody!?
Yes, I am. Actually, Jesus said it. God never forgives anybody unless they repent. Never did, never will. Don’t you realize that? Look past the Jell-O rhetoric and Christian-ese you’re so used to hearing, and think about it. Does God forgive people if they refuse to repent? No. Neither should you.
What does this text tell you:
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. (1 Jn 1:9-10)
This is what it tells me:
- You have to confess your sins. That means you have to acknowledge them, realize they’re sinful, offensive to God, and contrary to His holy law. In other words, you have to repent.
- If you do that, God is faithful and just to forgive you for your sin, and be cleansing you from all unrighteousness.
- If you pretend you haven’t sinned, then you’re making God a liar. John wrote this passage against proto-gnostic heretics who believed God freed us so that sin didn’t apply to us anymore - so we could do whatever we wanted. Nonsense, John said. Foolishness. Liar.
- Your brother is making God out to be a lair, if you confront him with his sin, and he refuses to acknowledge it and repent.
What does it mean to “not forgive” a fellow Christian?
Now we’re really getting down to brass tacks. It means you treat them with kindness, respect and grace - but you realize there is a breach of relationship there that must be healed. You don’t pretend it doesn’t exist. You certainly don’t promise to not hold their sin against them.
You also don’t “forgive and forget.” The Bible knows no such thing. If you disagree, show me where. Point to a passage (not an isolated verse), and explain from the context how it teaches this, and how it fits with the general theme of forgiveness from the entire Bible.
God only forgives people and adopts them into His family because He sent His unique and only Son in the likeness of sinful men to live a sinless and perfect life, and to die in their place, as their substitute. He didn’t forgive and forget. If your brother can’t be persuaded that he committed sin, take it to your Pastor(s). Eventually, if it cannot be fixed, church discipline may be necessary.
Church discipline! Isn’t that mean?
A lady told me once, “church discipline is a Roman Catholic thing! It’s not a Baptist idea.” How silly. Of course, it’s not entirely her fault. She’s never seen it in action. It sounds mean. Rude. Not Christian. Unloving. In our current culture, we don’t want to be unkind.
Christians are part of God’s family. We’re saved from bondage to Satan, and adopted into God’s household. We’re organized into local congregations; our local families. Sometimes, family members act silly. They do stupid and sinful things. These things need to be dealt with, so things can be healed.
In your biological family, people also do silly things. Eventually, things might get so bad it’s time for a “family meeting,” where everything is laid out on the table, and mom and dad call for a resolution. Enough is enough, they’ll say. Time to settle this, say you’re sorry, and move on.
Exactly. That’s what church discipline is about, in the church family. Settle this. Say you’re sorry. Admit you did wrong. Bury that hatchet (no, not into the other person’s head). The dispute is now over. Depart with the relationship healed and fixed. As long as the issue festers, there will be problems in the family.
What attitude should I have?
You should be living a life worthy of the adoption you’ve been called by God to. Your attitude, demeanor and conduct in your congregation, with the people in your congregation, should be characterized by meekness and lowliness. You must be patient with people, putting up with them because you love them. They’re not perfect, and neither are you.
Does this mean you should just sweep everything under the carpet and pretend nothing is ever wrong? Isn’t that the “loving” thing to do? Ignoring problems always makes things better, right?
Wrong. Re-read Luke 17:3-4 again.
Family strife is often the hardest. But, as the saying goes, they’re family - so you have to find a way to make it work. Why go to all that effort? ‘Cuz it’s family. It’s the same with your church family.
How often should I forgive?
An unlimited amount of times. Jesus made that clear. He didn’t mean, literally, “77 times.” He meant, “over, and over, and over, and over again.” He forgives you every day for your sin, doesn’t He? And, He’ll do the same tomorrow.
What about bitterness?
Pray for the person. Pray for the ability to love him, yet not pretend all is well. Pray for the Holy Spirit to heal the relationship. Pray for the Spirit to give a spirit of repentance and godly sorrow to the person.
Sounds easy. It isn’t. It’s very hard. The apostles responded to this by asking Jesus to increase their faith (Luke 17:5)! What are your thoughts about forgiveness and the Christian life?
Tyler Robbins 2016 v2
Tyler Robbins is a bi-vocational pastor at Sleater Kinney Road Baptist Church, in Olympia WA. He also works in State government. He blogs as the Eccentric Fundamentalist.
- 139 views
I hardly know where to start with this one.
First, forgiveness that does not include a commitment to treat a person as though the offense had never happened is meaningless, completely pointless. The usual word for forgive in the NT means to release, to let go, to leave (behind). It’s frequently used in reference to debt, and after the forgiveness occurs, there is no longer any debt. The relationship is no longer a “you owe me” relationtionship, but a “we are even” relationship.
Second, not letting go is a path to bitterness and self destruction. It is called, quite simply, bearing a grudge.
Third, forgiveness always has to be understood in terms of relationships. Where much of the confusion comes in is when persons not in the debt relationship try to forgive the debt. For example, when a person commits a crime, I do not have the power to forgive him. His debt may include me, but he also has a debt to society and to the law. I can forgive his offense against me, but I can’t release him from his debt to society and the law.
Similarly, sins can be against an entire local congregation, and in these situations, I can forgive the sinning brother for his offense against me, but I can’t release him from his debt to the church.
Of course, none of us can release anyone from his/her debt to God. So our forgiveness is always in reference to ourselves and our individual relationship with the offender. Only the “creditor” can forgive the debt, so in the case of a debt to the church, the matter must be forgiven by the church as a group.
Disqualification is a separate category from forgiveness. With all debts released, the actions involved may still have other consequences. These are not relational consequences. Those have been released. So when, for exampled, a youth worker is found to have committed sexual abuse of a minor, there is a debt to God, a debt to society and the law, a debt to the church, and then debt to affected individuals.
In theory all of these debts could be released (not that any president is likely to pardon that sort of crime!), but other consequences would remain. The individual should be permitted to work with youth in ministry again. Ever. That’s a separate matter from forgiveness.
One final matter. Scripture also speaks of forbearance (Rom. 2:4, Col. 3:13). This is nothing less than unilateral forgiveness without confrontation and without the offending party making any kind of apology. We do have the power to do this in many situations. It tends to be very small things, but there is no rule that says it has to be. Confronting people over every little thing is certainly not Christlike…. nor is holding onto offenses after doing something we’re incorrectly calling forgiveness.
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.
There were too many caveats to list here, and I suspected there would be a negative reaction. I am specifically aiming at a scenario where there is a real issue of real sin, that is causing a real problem, between two Christians in a congregation. I have seen many of these situations where Christians believe forgiveness means to “pretend nothing is wrong.” I don’t believe that will do anything but destroy the victim, and enable the unrepentant offender. I have seen it eat away at the victim over time, and embolden the offender, who was never confronted.
Does forgiveness mean to forgiveness and forget, and pretend nothing is wrong? No loving confrontation? No call for repentance? I just can’t see that.
The call to put up with each other’s issues (Eph 4) is important, but my scenario goes beyond that. I’m referring to deliberately, unrepentant sin against somebody else that is being deliberately ignored. Every person has to consider where the line is - to my way of thinking, you need to have a conversation with the other party once you have reason to believe the sin is deliberate. Please understand, I ‘m not against forbearance. I just believe it has been used as a crutch to avoid dealing with issues in a church.
I’ve seen disputes simmer and boil away below the surface, while people pretended all aas well. But, they could do that because they thought forgiveness meant “pretend nothing’s wrong.” That is my concern, here. I hope that makes things a little clearer.
To be sure, this is a big topic. This is really about how Christians should handle interpersonal issues in a church, and the nature of forgiveness. I could have expanded the article out over a few weeks, but decided to stick with the short version for effect. I ‘ve thought about this topic a lot, because I had to deal with it a lot. I am very interested in other people’s perspectives.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
We should not accept “I’m sorry” as a replacement for genuine repentance in the home or in the church. Too many people today say, “I’m sorry,” as a way to defuse the situation yet avoid admitting they sinned against someone else and were wrong. “I’m sorry” for what? For sinning against you or for you being offended? “I’m sorry” is often a crutch phrase people use when they want to appear contrite, but don’t necessarily want to admit complete wrongdoing. It’s a way to save face.
When someone has to be confronted about sin (whether in a family situation or a church situation), the only proper response that leads to forgiveness is, “I sinned against you and God by doing/saying X. Please forgive me.”
If a Christian has wronged you terribly, and they refuse to repent, what should you do? I believe forgiveness is predicated on repentance, and means you promise to not hold their sin against them anymore. It’s a promise among brethren.
So, what should you do in this scenario? I think you should:
- Speak to the person about the issue in a loving, Christlike way
- Determine if there is a deliberate sin and, if so, ask for repentance
- Give the person time
- If he refused to repent, let him know you’re ready to forgiveness whenever he’s ready to repent.
Does this produce bitterness? Not in my personal experience. It really depends how you define “forgiveness,” and how you think serious, interpersonal issues among believers should be handled. Thoughts?
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
I agree “I’m sorry,” by itself, isn’t repentance at all.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
[TylerR]If a Christian has wronged you terribly, and they refuse to repent, what should you do? I believe forgiveness is predicated on repentance, and means you promise to not hold their sin against them anymore. It’s a promise among brethren.
So, what should you do in this scenario? I think you should:
- Speak to the person about the issue in a loving, Christlike way
- Determine if there is a deliberate sin and, if so, ask for repentance
- Give the person time
- If he refused to repent, let him know you’re ready to forgiveness whenever he’s ready to repent.
Does this produce bitterness? Not in my personal experience. It really depends how you define “forgiveness,” and how you think serious, interpersonal issues among believers should be handled. Thoughts?
A refusal to repent initiates the next step in church discipline. That being said, there may be situations when a sinning believer is given time, space, and grace to repent after confrontation before escalation is sought.
I agree 100% with that. I also think Christians should put up with each other’s issues (Eph 4), and there are many issues that don’t need confrontation. But, for those that do require a discussion, it would be a terrible mistake to “forgive and forget.” I don’t think that is real forgiveness at all. Where in the Bible do we see “forgive and forget,” without repentance? The problem is how to discuss this, without assuming you’re giving the offended party permission to hold a grudge and be bitter. I hope I’m not giving that impression.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Has anybody here ever:
- Been aware of a serious issue between two Christians in a church
- where one (or both parties) has legitimate grievances with the other that require attention
- and, instead of dealing with them like adults, the two Christians pretended nothing was wrong
- and, meanwhile, everybody knows they hate each other
- but, nobody ever talks about it
… and things actually ended well? I doubt it! That is my pastoral concern, here. We must solve real differences with our fellow believers as soon as we can, if the matter rises beyond the level of simple forbearance. We can’t paper things over. We must resolve our differences, and repent and confess sin, if we truly love each other in our churches. I’ve seen the “I’ll just pretend nothing is wrong, never say anything, and forgive and forget” approach, and I’ve seen what it does to people. I think it’s a terrible mistake. It produces bitterness and hatred. It won’t do anybody any good.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
…is that Strong’s 3340 can also be translated “agree with” or “change one’s mind”. So to repent of a sin means, in a way, to agree with God that (a) it was offensive to Him and (b) one ought to try to undo the damage which has been done.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Bert, I think you’re right. Repentance is a term that hasn’t fared well in American evangelicalism. Some people even deny it’s a component of the Gospel. You can read my own discussion about repentance here (pgs. 11-18), from a lesson I gave about how to share the Gospel with kids, located at this page.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
….that repentance isn’t dealt with well in American fundagelicalism, and that’s all the more striking when we consider that the lesson is given at least twice; in the context of Scripture as it’s noted that it must be associated with action, and then in the very etamology of the word.
There is a lesson there somewhere, maybe something about the idea that higher education and ancient languages aren’t necessary or helpful for a pastor. I remember once noting something from the Greek, and my so-called “pastor” at the time noted that the only Greek he knew came from a gyros stand.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
I’ve been having a conversation with a man about this article. Here is something I elaborated on in a messagr to him:
If we assume we should forgive a fellow Christian who has wronged us without waiting for them to repent, then (in effect) we’re advocating “forgive and forget.” There”s a piece missing here, somewhere. There’s a term or a construct I haven’t hit on yet, that will tie this whole thing together. It all hinges on two points (1) what, exactly, is “forgiveness” among brethren? How do you define this? And (2) what should your attitude be towards a fellow Christian who refuses to repent of deliberate sin against you, and what do you “label” this attitude as? I don’t think we can, or should, call it “forgiveness.” If so, we’re back to “forgive and forget.”
I believe we’re really playing a semantics game. It’s mean to say, “I won’t forgive,” so what will you say? “I forgive, but you must still repent for your sins?” Does this mean the guy hasn’t been forgiven yet? What does it mean?
So, we can claim, “Oh, I forgive,” but we all realize we’re waiting for the other party to acknowledge guilt, and until he does, things won’t be right. That’s a basic concept, all throughout the Levitical laws about sacrifices for unintentional and deliberate sins; see for example, Lev 5:5. For guilt offerings (Lev 6:1-6), when the offender committed some deliberate crime against a fellow covenant brother, should we assume repentance is not included in the restoration of stolen property? These laws are the backdrop for Zacchaeus’ story of repentance and faith; he was so repentant he restored the goods he stole by 400%, not the 120% Lev 6 told him to!
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
There is really no mystery to what it means. aphiemi means to let go, to release from a debt, to leave.
I think this is a case of overthinking it.
There are situations where a matter can be forgiven unilaterally (my coworker said something insensitive, someone misspelled my name in the bulletin, someone spoke harshly to me for no good reason, etc.). Sometimes these can even be big things, as in when we (a) have no access to the offending person or (b) no ability to communicate with them (they have closed all channels of communication, including—maybe especially—face to face). In this situation, the absolute best thing anyone can do is let it go and move on. (It might be necessary to let it go repeatedly!)
There are situations where a wrong needs to be confronted both for the edification of the offending person and because you just can’t seem to let it go. The latter can be a problem of maturity, or it can be a situation where letting it go would be wrong (this is usually not the case unless they are harming others as well).
So when do we “forgive and forget” and “when do we confront”? There is no easy answer to this. There are obvious cases, and many not obvious ones. When a person is sinning in a major way (all the NT examples of church discipline are acts that clearly bring extensive harm), they are harming the name of our Lord, harming His church, as well as harming particular victims. This is not a matter of “somebody treated me badly” or “someone offended me” etc. It’s in a different category.
We can only forgive when a debt is owed. When a debt is owed, we can always choose to either collect or let it go. Always.
When the debt is owed to more than just us personally, then it’s not our place to let it go. It may also not be our place to confront it. It depends. In these situations, it’s mainly about the primary and secondary victims. The offender owes a debt to them. It’s mainly “them” who must collect it or forgive it.
As for “I’m sorry…” Isn’t it pretty obvious that this can be an expression of genuine repentance or it can just be superficial? But again, there is no absolute here. We can’t see people’s hearts and judge whether they “mean it” or not. Over time, their actions will show that they meant it.. or didn’t. But the Christlike thing to do is generously, humbly, excessively, and amazingly, forgive.
Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you. (Eph 4:32)
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, you wrote:
We can only forgive when a debt is owed. When a debt is owed, we can always choose to either collect or let it go. Always.
Let me ask a few questions along this line. Pretend a person in your church is gossiping about you, saying you’re a terrible worker with the K-6 kids at your church, and the pastor should remove you. This comes to your attention via several other church members:
- Will you ask for the man’s repentance?
- What will you do if he refuses to admit his wrong, and refuses to repent? Do you “let it go” at that point?
- If you decide to “let it go,” what does that mean? Has he been “forgiven?” Is the matter over? Is “forgiveness” contingent on anything this man does?
- How is “let it go” different than “forgive and forget?”
- How does the “let it go” approach (in the case of deliberate, unrepentant sin) help anything?
- If, for the sake of argument, you acknowledge there is now a breach of relationship that must be healed (even with the “let it go” approach), then is just partial forgiveness? Is the process complete if the man never repents or acknowledges his guilt?
- If there are personal and eclesiastical consequences for the man’s deliberate, unrepentant sin - how is this “forgiveness” complete?
- What Biblical basis do you have for “letting it go?” What about Lk 17:3-4? What about the principle of repentance as a precondition of forgiveness throughout Scripture?
- Is there a Biblical basis for the distinction between complete forgiveness (e.g. repentance and restoration) and the concept of “I’ve just forgiven him in my heart, instead?”
Of course, anyone can answer these questions. I don’t believe there is such a thing as “partial” forgiveness, and I believe everybody acknowledges the process is not complete if and unless the other party acknowledges his guilt and repents. I think “forgive and forget” or “let it go” are well-meaning, but counterproductive and mushy concepts that have no Biblical basis. I understand many people disagree. I wrote the article anticipating this.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
I understand what people mean when they have a serious dispute with a fellow Christian, the person refuses to repent or acknowledge guilt, and the offended party says, “I’ve forgiven him in my heart.” I get it. I agree with the sentiment. I’m just not sure we can call that “forgiveness.” I think we ought to call it something else - not sure what:
- If you have a serious, legitimate issue with a fellow Christian, and he refuses to repent or acknowledge guilt
- and you “let it go” and “forgive him in your heart”
- and if this terminology means “I release him from his debt to me” (to borrow Aaron’s definition, above)
- but you acknowledge the relationship is ruined and will continue to be ruined until he acknowledges and confesses his guilt
- then have you really “released him” from a debt, at all?
I don’t think you have. This is why I agree with the sentiment, and have used it myself on many occasions, but I don’t think we can call this “forgiveness,” because the matter isn’t over, and the relationship will continue to be broken unless and until the other party confesses and repents. Whatever we call this intermediate stage, I don’t think it’s “forgiveness” at all. Perhaps we should call it “honest willingness to forgive.” This is what I’d appreciate feedback on. I hope ya’ll understand the distinction I’m making; I think our terminology of “forgiveness” for this intermediate stage is wrong.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Discussion