True Forgiveness

[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).

Let's say the adulterer is the man. If his wife has truly forgiven him, she would not even consider getting a divorce. Any wife who would divorce her repentant husband has definitely not forgiven him.

[TheEditor]

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.

Hi Paidion,

No, I haven't accepted that definition. But I do see degrees of addiction (and I only picked this sin because it was handy, any number would have sufficed). I have known people that just plain liked getting drunk, but were never addicted to booze in any real sense. I have known others that, while never drunk, always "needed" to have a drink; got shaky if they didn't. So, as with all things biological, there is going to be overlap. But I will use another if this is too complicated an issue. Let's try temper.

I know people with a hair-trigger. Wasn't learned by watching abuse or violence in the home. Indeed, I believe the "blank slate" theory of human psychology to be laughably inadequate to explain human behavior. But for whatever reason, some people are easily annoyed to the point of rage. Others are singularly phlegmatic. Hence, I see it a greater temptation for the one with self-control issues, to bear up under verbal abuse. The latter could absorb all the abuse in the world and they would never be tempted to lose their cool. Now, keeping Jesus' illustration of the "widow's mite" in mind, who would be worthy of greater praise, the intemperate one struggling to hold back his anger, or the stoic one, who under the same trials, gleefully whistles through them?

As far as your friend, apparently he could do just fine in any capacity. But that is his unique case. As far as people being "delivered" in any practical way from temptation by Christ; I think some are. But for most I suspect there is a measure of effort to one degree or another.

Regards, Brenden.

[Homer]

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.

I also have a story to tell about someone I know. Let's call him "Joe". Joe lived a very bad life, a life that consisted of continual drunkenness and womanizing. One day Joe was discussing how miserable he was with a lady I know who worked in the office of Joe's employer. She told Joe he needed Jesus. Joe began attending the church the lady attended (which we also attended at the time) and accepted Jesus as his Lord and Saviour. One Sunday Joe was asked to pass the communion trays. He did so in tears. Joe on several occasions was asked to give a short devotion for communion. Always speaking extemporaneously, and often with tears of joy, Joe would tell of how Jesus changed his life, how he was always broke before but now always had money to spare to help someone. Yet Joe has on occasion slipped off the wagon and gotten drunk. The last occasion resulted in his arrest and permanent loss of his driver's license due to past incidents before he was a Christian. After one occasion I counseled Joe that the Christian life was like climbing on a trail up a great mountain. And that though a person might slip and fall off the path, he needed to pick himself up and get back on the path. I sensed that Joe was very remorseful and disappointed n himself. And he got back on the path.

According to what you claim, Joe never repented of his drinking problem. And since he never repented, Joe was never a Christian. I am surprised; that sounds very Calvinistic of you.

[robbyyoung]

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).

Let's say the adulterer is the man. If his wife has truly forgiven him, she would not even consider getting a divorce. Any wife who would divorce her repentant husband has definitely not forgiven him.

Hi Paidion,

If Yeshua said you can walk away from the marriage (get divorced) in the case of adultery, what are you saying Yeshua is guilty of?

God Bless.

[Paidion]

According to what you claim, Joe never repented of his drinking problem. And since he never repented, Joe was never a Christian. I am surprised; that sounds very Calvinistic of you.

One again, that is not my claim.

[Paidion]

If Yeshua said you can walk away from the marriage (get divorced) in the case of adultery, what are you saying Yeshua is guilty of?

A most unfair question, Robby! I am surprised at you. First of all, Jesus didn't say that you can divorce in the case of ADULTERY. What He said was, "Whoever sends away his wife except for the matter of prostitution, makes her an adulteress..." This statement was not a licence to divorce or even to send away one's wife. It is a warning against sending away one's wife for any reason other than prostitution, and that so doing makes her an adulteress. It may also be noted that this "exception clause" is found only in Matthew.

The lexical form of the word "ἀπολυω" does not mean "I divorce"; it means "I send away." Here are some other passages in which the word is found:

Matthew 15:39 And after sending away the crowds, he got into the boat and went to the region of Magadan.
Luke 14:4 But they remained silent. Then he took him and healed him and sent him away.
Acts 15:30 So when they were sent off, they went down to Antioch, and having gathered the congregation together, they delivered the letter.

The word masculine noun "πορνος" (pornos) means "consorter with prostitutes", and is translated as "whoremonger" by the King James Version in Eph 5:5. The feminine noun "πορνη" (pornā) means "prostitute" and is so translated in modern translations. The noun "πορνεια" (porneia) when applied to a man refers to the practice of consorting with prostitutes, and when applied to a woman refers to the practice of prostitution. The King James renders this word as "fornication."

With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. Revelation 17:2 AV)

In verse 1, the "authorized version" calls this woman "the great whore." But later the meaning of "πορνεια" (porneia) or "fornication" was expanded to include other forms of sexual immorality, and thus several modern translations always render the word as "sexual immorality."

But back to the issue at hand. There is a writing in which supposedly the good Shepherd appeared to Hermas and gave him commands. Some of them dealt with how a Christian was to behave if his or her spouse committed adultery. If they separated, they should remain unmarried because the offending spouse might repent:

But it is therefore commanded that both the man and the woman should remain unmarried, because such persons may repent. (Commands Hermas 5:10)

The idea was that the adulterer or adulteress might repent, and could then be forgiven and received again.

Paul understood Christ's teachings in much the same way:

To the married I declare—not I but the Lord—that the wife should not separate from her husband, but if she does she should remain unmarried [single] or be reconciled to her husband, and the husband should not leave his wife. (I Cor 7:10,11)

[Jepne]

To divorce a spouse who had been in adultery, but now repented and made restitution in every way possible sounds punitive, like 'payback' - which one does not do when one forgives.

[Homer]

Paidion,

This is very important if true:

In verse 1, the "authorized version" calls this woman "the great whore." But later the meaning of "πορνεια" (porneia) or "fornication" was expanded to include other forms of sexual immorality, and thus several modern translations always render the word as "sexual immorality."

Could you provide any information to substantiate this? If so it would mean that the exception for divorce, Matt 19, would only apply to a case where the wife charged a man or men for sex, but if she took a lover, or had multiple lovers who paid her nothing, the exception would not apply? And what about the incest in 1 Corinthians? Was Paul incorrect when he described that as porneia?

[Paidion]

Could you provide any information to substantiate this?

What I have provided is all that I know. I showed that "pornos" is translated as "whoremonger" and "pornA" is translated as prostitute. I gave an example of "porneia" as applied to a prostitute. A man practises "porneia" by consorting with prostitutes.

If so it would mean that the exception for divorce, Matt 19, would only apply to a case where the wife charged a man or men for sex, but if she took a lover, or had multiple lovers who paid her nothing, the exception would not apply?

That's the way I see it. Though some men might temporarily separate from her while praying for her repentance. Other men might not separate while praying for her repentance.

And what about the incest in 1 Corinthians? Was Paul incorrect when he described that as porneia?

I was sure that someone would ask me this question. Paul was correct in describing the man's act as "porneia." Why do you call it "incest"? Webster defines "incest" as "sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that they are forbidden by law to marry." The man wasn't copulating with his mother. He was copulating with his father's woman—paramour. I think you know that the Greek word "γυνη" is used to mean either "woman" or "wife." Since Paul called it "porneia," I suspect that the woman was a prostitute, and that his father was having her for a price. There is no indication that the man's father was a Christian. Paul says that it was porneia of a kind such that was not found even among the gentiles (The early Christians called non-Christians "gentiles". I'm sure the church at Corinth had many non-Jews, but they would not be considered as gentiles since they had become part of the Israel of God). Why was it worse than the usual use of prostitutes? I suspect the reason to be that it was the prostitute whom his father was using. Here is my translation of 1 Cor 5:1. I tried to be as literal as possible:

It is heard among you fornication, and such fornication which is not among the gentiles, so as to have the woman of the father.

[robbyyoung]

If Yeshua said you can walk away from the marriage (get divorced) in the case of adultery, what are you saying Yeshua is guilty of?

A most unfair question, Robby! I am surprised at you. First of all, Jesus didn't say that you can divorce in the case of ADULTERY. What He said was, "Whoever sends away his wife except for the matter of prostitution, makes her an adulteress..." This statement was not a licence to divorce or even to send away one's wife. It is a warning against sending away one's wife for any reason other than prostitution, and that so doing makes her an adulteress. It may also be noted that this "exception clause" is found only in Matthew.

Hi Paidion, Oops! Of course you are right on the "Adultery" slip, I knew that but got careless. However, you are contradicting yourself in your staements above. First you said:

This statement was not a licence to divorce or even to send away one's wife.

Then you say,

It is a warning against sending away one's wife for any reason other than prostitution

Well then immorality or prostitution is "A License" to send her away! Isn't that what Yeshua said???

But back to the issue at hand. There is a writing in which supposedly the good Shepherd appeared to Hermas and gave him commands. Some of them dealt with how a Christian was to behave if his or her spouse committed adultery. If they separated, they should remain unmarried because the offending spouse might repent:

But it is therefore commanded that both the man and the woman should remain unmarried, because such persons may repent. (Commands Hermas 5:10)

The idea was that the adulterer or adulteress might repent, and could then be forgiven and received again.

Paul understood Christ's teachings in much the same way:

To the married I declare—not I but the Lord—that the wife should not separate from her husband, but if she does she should remain unmarried [single] or be reconciled to her husband, and the husband should not leave his wife. (I Cor 7:10,11)

Wait a minute Paidion, a Christian is required to forgive inspite of any unrepentant sin of the person. Therefore, if The Lord allows the wife to seperate and remain unmarried, it is not a Forgiveness issue, rather it's a trust issue. She can forgive and remain a Godly woman and not go back to an untrustworthy husband. This idea is dicussed by Yeshua in Luke 16:11.

God Bless.