True Forgiveness

[Paidion]

Hi Robby,

I don't think this is accurate. We repeat numerous sins all the time, and yet, we ask for forgiveness daily and possibly repent daily. I'm sure you would agree, this isn't a "one-time" action in the believers life. Aren't we reminded of the great Apostle Paul's, possible, daily struggles with sin, "Romans 7:14-25". Also, 1 John 2:1 lets us know Christ is forever in place to be our advocate if we are found in sin, and it doesn't matter if we are repeat offenders, "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous".

I don't think you and I have have the same concept of "repentance." You seem to hold the common idea of repentance—that is, if you repent of an action, you feel sorry that you did it. We find this common understanding of "repentance" in modern dictionaries. For example, Merriam-Webster defines it as "to feel or show that you are sorry for something bad or wrong that you did and that you want to do what is right."

This is not the meaning of "μετανοεω," the verb translated as "repent" in the Bible. This verb literally means "to have a change of mind." If we have truly had a change of heart and mind about what we have done, we aren't going to repeat that offence. Concerning that matter, we have been regenerated. The new man, the man with the new, changed, heart and mind will not repeat the offence. The apostle Paul put it this way:

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither consorters with prostitutes, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were rendered righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.(1 Cor 6:9-11)

"Such WERE some of you." Paul didn't expect that these people would continue in their previous way of life and again participate in their previous actions. God had changed them, sanctified them, and rendered them righteous.

[robbyyoung]

Hi Robby,

I don't think this is accurate. We repeat numerous sins all the time, and yet, we ask for forgiveness daily and possibly repent daily. I'm sure you would agree, this isn't a "one-time" action in the believers life. Aren't we reminded of the great Apostle Paul's, possible, daily struggles with sin, "Romans 7:14-25". Also, 1 John 2:1 lets us know Christ is forever in place to be our advocate if we are found in sin, and it doesn't matter if we are repeat offenders, "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous".

I don't think you and I have have the same concept of "repentance." You seem to hold the common idea of repentance—that is, if you repent of an action, you feel sorry that you did it. We find this common understanding of "repentance" in modern dictionaries. For example, Merriam-Webster defines it as "to feel or show that you are sorry for something bad or wrong that you did and that you want to do what is right."

This is not the meaning of "μετανοεω," the verb translated as "repent" in the Bible. This verb literally means "to have a change of mind." If we have truly had a change of heart and mind about what we have done, we aren't going to repeat that offence. Concerning that matter, we have been regenerated. The new man, the man with the new, changed, heart and mind will not repeat the offence. The apostle Paul put it this way:

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither consorters with prostitutes, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were rendered righteous in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.(1 Cor 6:9-11)

"Such WERE some of you." Paul didn't expect that these people would continue in their previous way of life and again participate in their previous actions. God had changed them, sanctified them, and rendered them righteous.

Hi Paidion,

This does not concern the concept of repentance, no matter what semantics are applied. This concerns the concept of "zero tolerance" that leads to NO ONE eventually being saved. For instance, if you ever had repeated sinful thoughts or repeated anything, your "zero tolerance" contradicts 1 John 2:1, which we know covers the believer when they do sin again, needing repentance once more. How do you answer to Paul's struggle, for he clearly eludes to being a REPEAT offender.

By the way, 1 Cor 6:9-11 does not contradict 1 John 2:1, John lets us know WE ARE NOT perfect human beings, so if you were in the state of 1 Cor 6:9-11, be of good cheer, I have GOOD NEWS!, we have An Advocate if we fall into sin again, therefore, we REPENT as often as necessary.

I don't think we need to necessarily make this into a salvation issue, but rather a perseverance and Spirit filled life issue.

God Bless.

[TheEditor]

(1 Corinthians 6:9-11) Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. And yet that is what some of YOU were. But YOU have been washed clean, but YOU have been sanctified, but YOU have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God. 

Correct me if I am wrong, but if one is a drunkard, or a reviler, does this not connote and ongoing life-course? To say "that is what some of you were" would indicate that this was once their life-course. However, in so saying, it does not preclude the possibility of one committing the same sin. Presumably, the man living in fornication with his step-mother in Corinth was a believer that had fallen into a practice of sin and needed church discipline. Paul says that they should "hand such a man over to Satan" (I suppose metaphorically) for the salvation of the spirit. If he were not a true member of the congregation, why hand him over to Satan to save the spirit? Why not just say what John did about true apostates "they went out from us because they were not of our sort"? It would appear to me, then, that leaving a life-course of sin, and then falling into the same sin again, does not mean that the person never was really repentant in the first place else they wouldn't have repeated the act. But rather, repentance includes regret and a determination to not fall into the same life-course.

Regards, Brenden.

[robbyyoung]

(1 Corinthians 6:9-11) Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. And yet that is what some of YOU were. But YOU have been washed clean, but YOU have been sanctified, but YOU have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God. 

Correct me if I am wrong, but if one is a drunkard, or a reviler, does this not connote and ongoing life-course? To say "that is what some of you were" would indicate that this was once their life-course. However, in so saying, it does not preclude the possibility of one committing the same sin. Presumably, the man living in fornication with his step-mother in Corinth was a believer that had fallen into a practice of sin and needed church discipline. Paul says that they should "hand such a man over to Satan" (I suppose metaphorically) for the salvation of the spirit. If he were not a true member of the congregation, why hand him over to Satan to save the spirit? Why not just say what John did about true apostates "they went out from us because they were not of our sort"? It would appear to me, then, that leaving a life-course of sin, and then falling into the same sin again, does not mean that the person never was really repentant in the first place else they wouldn't have repeated the act. But rather, repentance includes regret and a determination to not fall into the same life-course.

Regards, Brenden.

Hi Brenden,

Yes, I agree with your "life-course" terminology in sync with the doctrinal examples given.

God Bless.

[Paidion]

Hi Brenden and Robby,

So if what you are affirming is the case with all people, then why can you not totally forgive the repentant person and restore your previous relationship with him, just as if he had never committed the offence? Why must you distrust him, and keep it in the back of your mind that he may offend again—any more than any other person? Is it because you think this particular person has a greater propensity to offend in that particular manner than other people? That would not be the case if he truly repented.

I can see not trusting an unrepentant person. That is true in my own experience. Sometimes I sent a pupil to the school office with money to be turned in. I certainly wouldn't have trusted one particular girl who had previously stolen money out of a teacher's purse. But the girl hadn't repented. If the teachers had seen that she truly had had a change of heart and mind concerning stealing, they could have forgiven her and trusted her thereafter with carrying money to the office. Of course, if the teachers hadn't been convinced that the girl had had a genuine change of heart and mind, it would be only rational to continue to distrust her. Indeed, if they thought the girl had repented but were not certain, sending her to the office with money would be a test of her repentance or lack thereof.

[Homer]

My Dear Brother Paidion,

Where did you ever get the idea that if a person ever repeated a sin that means he had never repented of it? I must say that is absurd. I know personally that God may remove the propensity to sin in a particular manner, but then He may not remove that susceptibility to fall when temptation comes. He will provide a way out but that is no guarantee a person will not be overcome.

Galations 6:1, New American Standard Bible
Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted.

Why didn't Paul say that the ones who had not repented of the particular sin should be careful? Those who have repented of it are immune!

What Paul should have said: "Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who have repented of that sin, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, have no concern for yourself because you are immune to the temptation".

It would be nice if what you say is true. We could simply repent of every kind of sin and thenceforth become perfectly sinless. But wait...isn't that what we are all supposed to have done?

[Paidion]

Where did you ever get the idea that if a person ever repeated a sin that means he had never repented of it?

I didn't get the idea from anywhere. I don't hold to the idea. But if the person repeats the sin over and over, he has not appropriated the enabling grace of God made available through Christ's sacrifice. And if he repeats it with a clear conscience, then he has never repented of it. I know I said, "If we have truly had a change of heart and mind about what we have done, we aren't going to repeat that offence." But I actually meant we are not going to repeat it with a clear conscience so that we cannot be trusted.

I must say that is absurd. I know personally that God may remove the propensity to sin in a particular manner, but then He may not remove that susceptibility to fall when temptation comes.

If God removes "the propensity to sin in a particular manner," then you may trust a person who has truly had a change of heart and mind concerning sinning in that manner and has had that propensity removed. And if you have truly forgiven him, you WILL trust him.

[TheEditor]

Hi Paidion,

I know I said, "If we have truly had a change of heart and mind about what we have done, we aren't going to repeat that offence." But I actually meant we are not going to repeat it with a clear conscience so that we cannot be trusted.

Maybe I am missing something, or am not fully understanding what you are saying. To me, to repeat a sin with a clear conscience, means that we don't even recognize it as a sin, wouldn't that be the take away? If someone is a drunkard, becomes a Disciple, and repents from drunkenness, then I would assume that person would never again repeat the sin "with a clear conscience." But to say they would never be tempted to drink heavily again, or to say that they never would again, would be a mistake in my opinion. Old habits sometimes die hard. I could accept a drunkard as a repentant sinner in the bonds of fellowship, but still wonder if it is wise for him to tend bar, or work in a liquor store, even if it were the only job to be had. However, I would trust my wife to run a distillery since she has zero temptation to drink. Maybe I am failing to understand all this.

Regards, Brenden.

[robbyyoung]

And if you have truly forgiven him, you WILL trust him.

Hi Paidion,

Forgiveness and trust does not necessarily conflate with one another, else the adulter can be truly forgiven, by the spouse, and yet still wish to get a divorce because of the breach of trust (Matt 19:9). I think your statement above is flawed due to how you cannot seem to separate "trust" from forgiveness. Take a look at what the Lord said in Luke 16:11, one must prove themselves before another can have confidence in them, this has nothing to do with forgiveness???? Godly wisdom was given for a reason (James 3:13-18), and we Christians should exercise it to the fullest.

God Bless.

[Paidion]

Hi Brenden,

I could accept a drunkard as a repentant sinner in the bonds of fellowship, but still wonder if it is wise for him to tend bar, or work in a liquor store, even if it were the only job to be had. However, I would trust my wife to run a distillery since she has zero temptation to drink.

Maybe that's because you've bought into the A.A. mentality—that alcoholism is a disease, and that there is no "cure" for this disease—that the alcoholic must never touch a drop again, or he will have no self-control. If alcoholism is a disease, one should be able to recover from that disease. However, A.A. affirms that an alcoholic is always recovering, but the process is never complete. According to A.A. an alcoholic is someone who has "no mental defense against the first drink." Dictionaries don't give the disease-definition of "alcoholic". For example Merriam-Webster's definition is "a person who frequently drinks too much alcohol and is unable to live a normal and healthy life." A good expanded definition is found in Judy Dobbie's pamphlet "Substance Abuse among the Elderly." Inside the front cover, she gives the following definition of "alcoholic":

An "alcoholic" is a person, who, as a result of the abuse of alcohol, is experiencing serious and recurring personal and social problems or health damage, and who, because of these problems, would benefit from treatment. However, there is a wide range of personal styles of consumption — including occasional light drinking and constant heavy drinking — and the shadings between different levels of consumption are imperceptible. Thus there is no clear line of separation between "hazardous drinking" and "alcoholism."

I recommend the book "Heavy Drinking: The Myth of Alcoholism as a Disease" by Herbert Fingarette:
http://www.amazon.com/Heavy-Drinking-My ... 0520067541

I have a friend who was an alcoholic, and who was delivered from alcoholism by the power of Christ. He continued to attend A.A. meetings. The participants are required to say, "My name is — . I am an alcoholic". My friend knew he was no longer an alcoholic. He could take a drink or two any time, and not once did he "go off the rails". However, he became convicted of saying, "My name is Wilbur Delaney (not his real name) . I am an alcoholic." He became convicted of lying. So he made up his mind, at the next meeting to say, "My name is Wilbur Delaney . I am no longer an alcoholic. I have been delivered by the power of Christ." He was sure he would be kicked out of A.A if he said this, but he carried out his intention, and sure enough, he was kicked out.

Brenden, would you consider it unwise for Wilbur to tend bar or work in a liquor store? I feel quite certain that Wilbur would have no problems at all in doing so.