True Forgiveness

[dizerner]

By the way, what is the name of the book you are referring to?

God Bless.

Pardon my answering, but I asked as well I believe he is referring to The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts by Philip W. Comfort & David P. Barrett. I plan to get a copy soon.

[dizerner]

Hi Steve7150,

The point I was trying to make in my reference to the cases of David and Moses is that I believe you can truly forgive someone without necessarily treating them as though the offense never took place. It appears to me that God treated both David and Moses differently after they sinned and were forgiven than He did prior to their sin.

God bless, Homer

This is an important and true point that, and I've also come to the same conclusion after many years of Bible study and prayer. To me forgiveness means releasing the obligation to pay back the damage, in whatever way that could be done, but it's not acting like something never happened—that's just dishonesty and a further devaluation of the reality of the damage done. If, for example, someone out of malice broke my legs so that I spent my life in a wheelchair, I can forgive them without some kind of denial about the pain that caused my life, or who was responsible. I release them from any obligation to pay it back, and I release any feelings of anger or hatred, but I don't go into an unreal denial about what they did such that if someone asked me why I am in a wheelchair, I would say "Oh I don't know, because I've forgiven." Or if I'm describing how much more difficult and painful my life is now, someone can't say to me "well you just haven't forgiven." (I've actually seen this done on more than one occasion.) I'm describing the tangible results of someone's actions, not the inner state of my resentment about it.

[Paidion]

To me forgiveness means releasing the obligation to pay back the damage, in whatever way that could be done, but it's not acting like something never happened—that's just dishonesty and a further devaluation of the reality of the damage done.

Dizerner that is a distortion of the position which I have expressed. I have never suggested "acting like something never happened." What I said was that when you truly forgive someone, your RELATIONSHIP with the offender is as if he had never offended. You won't keep bringing his offence up to him. You will be free to keep company with him, eat a meal with him, have Christian fellowship with him, etc. If you are unwilling to do that, I doubt that you have truly forgiven him.

If, for example, someone out of malice broke my legs so that I spent my life in a wheelchair, I can forgive them without some kind of denial about the pain that caused my life, or who was responsible. I release them from any obligation to pay it back, and I release any feelings of anger or hatred, but I don't go into an unreal denial about what they did such that if someone asked me why I am in a wheelchair, I would say "Oh I don't know, because I've forgiven."

Again, no one is suggesting that true forgiveness entails denial of what happened or who caused it to happen—rather that your relationship with the person has been restored. Your thought that to forgive is "to release them from any obligation to pay it back" is one meaning of "forgiveness," for example, forgiveness of a monetary debt. I think the King James translators had that idea in mind, too, when they translated "αφεσις" as "remission." For example in Matthew 26:28 "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." To remit is to pay. "Remission of sins" in English, would be "payment of sins." The translators' thought was that the blood of Christ was for the payment of sins, which is still a common notion in our day, and if I understand you correctly, you yourself subscribe to it.

I notice in Luke 4:18 where Jesus says that God had sent Him "to preach αφεσις to the captives, that NO translator renders the word as either "remission" or "forgiveness." The captives didn't need forgiveness or remission; they needed deliverance. And that is exactly the word the King James translators used to translate it in Luke 4:18. The verbal form of αφεσις means "to leave," and is used, for example when Jesus left the crowds and went up into the mountain to pray. In Luke 4:18, the captives to whom Jesus referred, needed to leave their prison.

Jesus didn't need to die in order to forgive our sins. Jesus forgave peoples' sins while He still walked this earth, prior to His death. Rather He died to deliver us from sin, or to enable us by His grace to leave our sins behind and enter into an new life as His disciples.

But back to the subject at hand. Jesus indicated that repentance is a condition for true forgiveness.

Watch yourselves! If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him. (Luke 17:3)

Notice the condition Jesus puts upon your forgiving him? IF he repents.

[dizerner]

Dizerner that is a distortion of the position which I have expressed. I have never suggested "acting like something never happened." What I said was that when you truly forgive someone, your RELATIONSHIP with the offender is as if he had never offended. You won't keep bringing his offence up to him. You will be free to keep company with him, eat a meal with him, have Christian fellowship with him, etc. If you are unwilling to do that, I doubt that you have truly forgiven him.

Slow down there, I never mean to target your arguments, I was just writing some thoughts out. I agree forgiveness means accepting a degree of fellowship.

I think the King James translators had that idea in mind, too, when they translated "αφεσις" as "remission." For example in Matthew 26:28 "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." To remit is to pay. "Remission of sins" in English, would be "payment of sins." The translators' thought was that the blood of Christ was for the payment of sins, which is still a common notion in our day, and if I understand you correctly, you yourself subscribe to it.

I notice in Luke 4:18 where Jesus says that God had sent Him "to preach αφεσις to the captives, that NO translator renders the word as either "remission" or "forgiveness." The captives didn't need forgiveness or remission; they needed deliverance. And that is exactly the word the King James translators used to translate it in Luke 4:18. The verbal form of αφεσις means "to leave," and is used, for example when Jesus left the crowds and went up into the mountain to pray. In Luke 4:18, the captives to whom Jesus referred, needed to leave their prison.

Well, the core meaning is "release." The disciples "released" their nets, Jesus "released" the crowds, the captives were "released" from prison, and we are "released" from our sins, both the consequences and abiding power.

Jesus didn't need to die in order to forgive our sins.

I love you, but this is heresy and an antichrist spirit. The Bible couldn't be more clear that Jesus died, in part, to forgive sins.

[Singalphile]

It was cool for me to see that the Greek/English dictionaries define the verb aphiémi and the related noun, aphesis primarily as "to send away, leave alone, permit", "lay aside, leave, let go, omit", or "send forth, discharge, send away, let go, loose, set free, acquit of, put away" and so on. It's the same word translate as "deliverance" or "release" or "freedom/liberty" in Luke 4:18 when Jesus is reading from Isaiah that "He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives ..." (ESV).

The word "forgive" might be an accurate translation in a narrower sense of the English word (like to "forgive" a debt), but nowadays it seems to have more of an emotional meaning, which I think probably misses the mark a bit.

There is another word translated as "forgive" a few times, charizomai.

God does love us even while we were (or are) sinners (Rom 5:8), and he has made a way for us to put away/release/remit our sins and cleanse us. That is good news and an encouragement.

[robbyyoung]

By the way, what is the name of the book you are referring to?

God Bless.

Pardon my answering, but I asked as well I believe he is referring to The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts by Philip W. Comfort & David P. Barrett. I plan to get a copy soon.

Hi dizerner,

Yes, I believe this is correct. I'll add this one to my library as well, thanks.

[Paidion]

Yes, that is the book. Below is page 392 from the book. The large number 2 starts John 2, a transcript of a work from papyrus 66, copied by someone around 150 A.D. The book transcribes the ancient Greek characters to modern Greek characters (which a person would learn if he studied Hellenistic Greek today) It shows where a new leaf for p66 begins— just after the words [leaf 4 verso]. Here is the wonderful thing about that book. The words on the page are arranged exactly as they were in papyrus 66! Each line begins with the characters as in p66. I have included below this book page a photocopy of leaf 4 from p66 so that you can compare the two. Part of the transcript of this leaf occurs on the next page of the modern book, and so you can compare only the first 15 lines with the ancient Greek manuscript (papyrus 66). Now look at the beginning of line three (under leaf 4 verso) on the book page. You will find the characters "τι εμοι" . Now look at line three of the page from p66 and you will see that the characters correspond. Of course there were no spaces between words in the ancient manuscript.

Oh! I just noticed there is a clearer example, namely the last word in line one. It is the word "οινον." Now look at the last word in line one of P66. It appears something like "OINON", all written in capitals, of course. (For those who don't know Greek, the character "v" in modern Greek is a nu and corresponds to the letter "n" in English).

[Homer]

Paidion wrote:

I notice in Luke 4:18 where Jesus says that God had sent Him "to preach αφεσις to the captives, that NO translator renders the word as either "remission" or "forgiveness." The captives didn't need forgiveness or remission; they needed deliverance. And that is exactly the word the King James translators used to translate it in Luke 4:18. The verbal form of αφεσις means "to leave," and is used, for example when Jesus left the crowds and went up into the mountain to pray. In Luke 4:18, the captives to whom Jesus referred, needed to leave their prison.

That is hardly proof of your argument; words often bear more than one meaning in different contexts.

Dizerner that is a distortion of the position which I have expressed. I have never suggested "acting like something never happened." What I said was that when you truly forgive someone, your RELATIONSHIP with the offender is as if he had never offended. You won't keep bringing his offence up to him. You will be free to keep company with him, eat a meal with him, have Christian fellowship with him, etc. If you are unwilling to do that, I doubt that you have truly forgiven him.

It may be sin to treat the person as though the offense never occurred. For example, a day-care employee who has molested children, although forgiven, should never be placed back in the same circumstances. It is not loving to subject the children to danger and neither is it loving to subject the offender to temptation where the person has demonstrated a weakness. The same would hold for an accountant who has embezzled money, and I'm sure many other cases could be cited. (Thanks Michelle if you are reading this.)

[Paidion]

If a person has truly repented, he will not repeat his past offences, and if you have truly forgiven him, you will not hold his past offence against him in any way. There are many who say such things as, "I forgave him, but I'm not going to go out to lunch with him," or "I forgave him but I can't trust him any more, and I'm not going to associate with him on a social basis."

What if God "forgave" you but continued to hold your past offences against you. Suppose He said, "I forgave you, but I can't trust you any more. I forgave you, but don't bother praying to me; I won't listen." Would you be satisfied with that kind of "forgiveness" from God?

Jesus taught His disciples to pray, "Forgive us our trespasses AS (or "in the same way") we forgive those who trespass against us." If we cannot fully forgive people in the sense of establishing again the relationship we once had with them, it may well be that God will do the same with us. If we remember their offences, and no longer trust them, can we expect any thing other than the same from God?

However, when God forgives us, it is a full forgiveness. He doesn't hold our past against us. He can trust us again.

...for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. (Jeremiah 31:34)
And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. (Hebrews 10:17)

Isn't this "I will remember their sin no more" a figure of speech meaning "I will never hold their past sins against them"?

[robbyyoung]

If a person has truly repented, he will not repeat his past offenses...

Hi Paidion,

I don't think this is an accurate statement altogether, for only God truly knows the heart of an individual. 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 seemingly forever in place to be our advocate if we are found in sin. Does it 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".

God Bless.