Lavish Forgiveness Ernie Baker Introduction:

Transcription

1 Lavish Forgiveness Ernie Baker Introduction: I. Understanding the issues: There are two views on the nature, timing and granting of forgiveness (unilateral or conditional transactional). My view is going to be an expansion of the unilateral view. John MacArthur: Some take the position that this teaches forgiveness should always be conditional. Their rationale goes like this: God forgives only those who repent. Therefore, if we are going to forgive in the same manner as we have been forgiven, we should withhold forgiveness from all who are unrepentant (117). To make conditionality the gist of Christlike forgiving seems to miss the whole point of what Scripture is saying. When scripture instructs us to forgive in the manner we have been forgiven, what is in view is not the idea of withholding forgiveness until the offender expresses repentance (118). It is a mistake to assume that verses like Luke 17:3 ( If your brother sins, rebuke him ) and Matthew 18:15 ( If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, NIV) are absolute prescriptions for every kind of transgression. If we were obligated to confront one another for every paltry misdeed, we would be doing little else. Indeed, Scripture gives us another principle for dealing with vast majority of petty infractions: overlook the offense. Forgive unilaterally, unconditionally. Grant pardon freely and unceremoniously. Love demands this. Keep fervent in your love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins (1 Pet. 4:8). Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all transgressions (Prov. 10:12). He who covers a transgression seeks love (Prov. 17:9). Love does not take into account a wrong suffered [but] bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things (1 Cor. 13:5-7). The New International Version renders 1 Corinthians 13:5 this way: [Love] keeps no record of wrongs , John MacArthur, The Freedom and Power of Forgiveness (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1998),

2 Jay Adams: It is clear that forgiveness promising another never to bring up his offense again to use it against him is conditioned on the offender s willingness to confess it as sin and to seek forgiveness. You are not obligated to forgive an unrepentant sinner, but you are obligated try to bring him to repentance. All the while you must entertain a genuine hope and willingness to forgive the other and a desire to be reconciled to him or her. Because this teaching runs counter to much teaching in the modern church, it is important to understand it. Such forgiveness is modeled after God s forgiveness which is unmistakably conditioned on repentance and faith. 2 My question: Is forgiveness just a transaction that leads to reconciliation? II. Understanding biblical thinking on the lavishness of forgiveness (Please note that in most of these N. T. passages there are no conditions of repentance). A. Aphieemi: to send away, let go, cancel, forgive Mark 11:25; Matthew 6:12, (please note the danger involved with not forgiving!); Matthew 18:35 B. Charidzomai: to give undeserved favor, freely give, pardon, forgive Colossians 3:12-13 Paul s example of doing this in 2 Timothy 4: (this is Paul s attitude) C. Apoluo: to pardon, set free, release, to forgive Luke 6:36-37 D. Related concepts on how we should treat enemies: 1. Commands of mercy for the heathen is it possible to be merciful and not be forgiving? Luke 6:36-37; James 2:13 2. Commands to love enemies is it possible to love an enemy without forgiveness? An enemy, by nature of being an enemy, is unrepentant (Matthew 5:40-44). III. Taking another look at Ephesians 4: Jay Adams, From Forgiven to Forgiving: Learning to Forgive One Another God s Way (Amityville, NY: Calvary Press, 1994), 36. 2

3 A. Traditional teaching B. Understanding the context 1. Broader context: Chapter 1 and 2:8-10 compared with chapter 4: Immediate (4:20-5:2) Put off Be being renewed in the spirit of the intentions/motives (cf. meaning of nous) Put on In conclusion, in verses Paul gives specific exhortations regarding the lifestyle of the new person. The exhortations have a tripartite structure: )1) a negative command; (2) a positive command; and (3) the reason for the positive command designed to give motivation to follow the command (Harold Hoehner, Ephesians, An Exegetical Commentary on Ephesians, 641). C. Understanding kathos the options from Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich 1. Comparison, just as 2. As, to the degree that 3. In a causal sense, since, in so far as (please note that Ephesians 4:32 is listed here as an example). This usage makes the most sense in the context of Ephesians 4. D. Conclusion: I appreciate Lenski s comments, Let me put this plainly since even pastors misunderstand it. The moment a man wrongs me I must forgive him. Then my soul is free. If I hold the wrong against him, I sin against God and against him and jeopardize my forgiveness with God. Whether the man repents, makes amends, asks my pardon or not, makes no difference. I have instantly forgiven him. He must face God with the wrong he has done but that is his affair and God s and not mine save that in the case he is a brother I should help him according to Matthew 18:15 ff. But whether this succeeds or not and even before this even begins I must forgive him (Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul s Epistles to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, and to the Philippians, Logos Bible Software on Eph. 4:32). IV. Taking another look at Luke 17:3-4 A. The context take sin seriously B. The circumstance when someone comes to you repeatedly (it s unlimited) and repents I am to forgive. Even if I question the sincerity of the offender. 3

4 This is addressing how often should I forgive if I approach someone about a sin and he repeatedly repents to the point that I question his sincerity. But, what passages address, What if the person has sinned against me and is not even seeking forgiveness? How about passages on how we are to deal with unbelievers? Matthew 5, etc? Seven times in one day =unlimited (cf. Matt. 18 and 70x7) From the world s point of view a sevenfold repetition of an offense in one day must cast doubt on the genuineness of the sinner s repentance. But that is not the believer s concern. His business is forgiveness (Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Luke: An Introduction and Commentary, 256). C.The conditional phrase (ean) Third class condition Commentators on if : J.C. Ryle: This expression is remarkable. It doubtless cannot mean that we are not to forgive men unless they do repent. At this rate there would be much bitterness constantly kept alive (J.C. Ryle, Luke, Vol. 2, 225). Philip Graham Ryken: Jesus said, if he repents. Unfortunately, some have taken the word if here as an absolute qualification on our forgiveness. Thus they have understood Jesus to mean that we have the right to withhold forgiveness in our hearts until someone actually comes to us with satisfactory repentance. But this is contrary to the example of Jesus himself who forgave his enemies even before they asked (Luke 23:34). It is also contrary to the whole direction of his teaching in this passage, where the emphasis falls on freely offered forgiveness (Reformed Expository Commentary, Luke Vol. 2, page 213). D.Concerns 1. The conditional view makes this passage about the conditional clause repent and then uses this passage as the lens to guide interpretation of other passages. 2. This is inconsistent with our teaching on what constitutes real repentance. A change of mind/intentions/heart that has evidence. There s not even time to show fruit in keeping with repentance in this passage! 3. Adds layers/phases to forgiveness an attitude of forgiveness which bypasses clear commands to forgive. 4

5 E.The conclusion: The disciples increase our faith! Philip Graham Ryken, With customary hyperbole, Jesus is telling us to take forgiveness to the ultimate extreme. He is telling us to forgive the unforgivable. (Reformed Expository Commentary, Vol 2 Luke chapters 13-24, 213). V. Common questions/objections: A. This view won t take sin seriously B. This is not Jay Adam s view or what I was taught at a CDT C. Can we still hold people accountable if we have forgiven? In other words, if we promise not to hold it against them or not bring it up to use it against them are we violating biblical thinking by going back to the person or to the authorities (Church or Civil)? I agree with Grudem, We should see the passage on church discipline and this passage [Matthew 18:21-35; my addition] as complementary, not contradictory. As individuals we must always forgive in our hearts and not bear grudges. Yet we can certainly forgive someone in our hearts and still seek church discipline for the good of the other person who is committing a sin, for the good of the church, for the honor of Christ, and because God s word commands it. (Systematic Theology, Grudem, 1994, 900). D. You are describing the attitude of forgiveness --I m to stand ready to forgive. My answer: I don t see just an attitude of forgiveness in Scripture. It is actual forgiveness. If I stand ready for anything it is to stand ready to be reconciled. E. When do you grant forgiveness? VI. A proposed adaptation of the four promises of forgiveness from The Peacemaker by Ken Sande. Conclusion: My story I will not dwell on the personal offenses. I will not bring this incident up to maliciously use against you. I will not talk to others about this incident for the purpose of tearing you down. It is not my desire to have this incident stand between us or hinder our personal relationship. 5