Forgiveness and Salvation

[beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees]

Copy-pasting this from what I had posted in the Soteriology forum following the suggestion of a mod:

Jesus commands us to forgive seventy-times-seven, meaning, of course, no matter how many times we've forgiven someone we must forgive them again and again, indefinitely. So first, I ask, is repentance required of the person we're forgiving, or are we expected to forgive them regardless of whether or not they ask for it?

If we are expected to forgive them even without their apologies, why then would God sentence an unrepentant non-believer to Hell? Shouldn't He forgive them unconditionally if this is indeed what He expects of His children?

If not, then what is the point of forgiveness, if there are terms and conditions that come with it?

Furthermore, sort of a bonus question for those of you that believe in the loss of salvation: if God can retract His forgiveness, is it then permissible for us to do the same? Would it be right to un-forgive your brother after you've already forgiven him?

 

[ebia]

Copy-pasting this from what I had posted in the Soteriology forum following the suggestion of a mod:

Jesus commands us to forgive seventy-times-seven, meaning, of course, no matter how many times we've forgiven someone we must forgive them again and again, indefinitely. So first, I ask, is repentance required of the person we're forgiving, or are we expected to forgive them regardless of whether or not they ask for it?

If we are expected to forgive them even without their apologies, why then would God sentence an unrepentant non-believer to Hell? Shouldn't He forgive them unconditionally if this is indeed what He expects of His children?

If not, then what is the point of forgiveness, if there are terms and conditions that come with it?

Furthermore, sort of a bonus question for those of you that believe in the loss of salvation: if God can retract His forgiveness, is it then permissible for us to do the same? Would it be right to un-forgive your brother after you've already forgiven him?

Salvation and forgiveness are not the same thing, and repentence and apologising are not the same thing. Repentence is turning from our own ways to God's plan - which doesn't have a mirror in human relationships.

It also needs noting that I can forgive someone unconditionally, but a restored relationship does require a response on their part as well - an acknowledgement of what they have done at the very least, and possibly some sort of restorative action.

It helps a lot if you throw away the model that thinks in terms of "people get sent to hell as an arbitrary punishment unless they say 'sorry' to God", because that's such a poor description of the salvation message as to be completely misleading.

The better picture is something like:
God is acting to put creation right. You are invited to be part of that - both the putting right and the final outcome, but to do that you need to be put right - to turn again to God's plan and allow him to transform you. If you choose not to then God will respect that but you cannot be part of final New Heavens and New Earth since all that has not been put right must be excluded from it.

 

[beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees]

Salvation and forgiveness are not the same thing, and repentence and apologising are not the same thing. Repentence is turning from our own ways to God's plan - which doesn't have a mirror in human relationships.

It also needs noting that I can forgive someone unconditionally, but a restored relationship does require a response on their part as well - an acknowledgement of what they have done at the very least, and possibly some sort of restorative action.

It helps a lot if you throw away the model that thinks in terms of "people get sent to hell as an arbitrary punishment unless they say 'sorry' to God", because that's such a poor description of the salvation message as to be completely misleading.

The better picture is something like:
God is acting to put creation right. You are invited to be part of that - both the putting right and the final outcome, but to do that you need to be put right - to turn again to God's plan and allow him to transform you. If you choose not to then God will respect that but you cannot be part of final New Heavens and New Earth since all that has not been put right must be excluded from it.

Thank you for the very informative response, ebia. I just had a feeling that the folks here, smart as you all are, would have an idea how to clear these questions right up for me. I like this site already.

 

[heymikey80]

Copy-pasting this from what I had posted in the Soteriology forum following the suggestion of a mod:

Jesus commands us to forgive seventy-times-seven, meaning, of course, no matter how many times we've forgiven someone we must forgive them again and again, indefinitely. So first, I ask, is repentance required of the person we're forgiving, or are we expected to forgive them regardless of whether or not they ask for it?

That's the conventional conclusion -- if you're a Christian. Christianity is not a payback faith, it's a pay-forward faith: "forgive as you're forgiven."

There are also differences in the way forgiveness is approached, and I'll point it out now: forgiveness seems to mean two different things. On occasion Scripture talks about "forgiveness" as a heart-response. That's the motivation, the source for the second meaning -- a process of reconciling the offender by seeking out the offender's change for the better. The passage you're quoting is about the process (cf Lk 17).

If we are expected to forgive them even without their apologies, why then would God sentence an unrepentant non-believer to Hell? Shouldn't He forgive them unconditionally if this is indeed what He expects of His children?

OK, so looking at this conventionally, who is God paying forward for ...? Essentially Himself. He has the ultimate free choice over what to do about evil.

To my knowledge nothing has absolutely exculpated the sinner from punishment for his sin. Even for Christians Jesus died for something: that's the basis for the substitutionary theory of Christ's Atonement. The punishment is still applied. So the fact that we are to forgive as God forgives us, does not of itself absolve us of our own sin, nor anyone else of theirs. If we did that all our lives and didn't have something else involved in our lives, we'd still be responsible to accept the punishments for the evil that we've done in our lives. That is: being forgiving alone doesn't absolve us of our evil. Our being forgiving is a result, not a cause, of our forgiveness.

And God's just. He didn't just "let go" of the punishment. It was applied.

If not, then what is the point of forgiveness, if there are terms and conditions that come with it?

This remains a good question, but Christian thought slips by it. "What's the point of forgiveness?" means "What's the point of the point?" Generally y'don't look for the reason for a purpose, in the consequences of it. The point of forgiving is that you've been forgiven. The point of being forgiven is very different -- something in my theology we call "grace", or "unmerited favor." But we forgive because we're forgiven. We don't forgive in order to be forgiven.

Furthermore, sort of a bonus question for those of you that believe in the loss of salvation: if God can retract His forgiveness, is it then permissible for us to do the same? Would it be right to un-forgive your brother after you've already forgiven him?

Another good question. Mt 18:21ff, again a process-forgiveness context, seems to say that the conditions of forgiveness can be revoked if the "pay-forward" scheme is rejected by the one forgiven. Remember, though, these are parables. It's easy to get lost in minute details. Parables aren't allegories, and it's not entirely certain how to apply this parable slightly out of kilter with the question Peter's asking. However, given the question Peter's asking, Jesus concludes the reverse. It would be rejecting our own forgiveness, if our gratefulness did not lead us to forgive others.

 

[Bible2]

beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees posted in message #1 of this thread:

Shouldn't He forgive them unconditionally if this is indeed what He
expects of His children?

Greetings.

God does expect his children to forgive others unconditionally (Mark
11:25-26), because his children are sinners themselves, just as
others are (Romans 3:9). But because God is not a sinner himself
(Deuteronomy 32:4), and because he is the Creator of everyone
(Romans 9:21), he has the right to forgive others conditionally.

beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees posted in message #1 of this thread:

what is the point of forgiveness, if there are terms and conditions

The point of God's forgiveness is to keep his children from eternal
torment in the lake of fire (Revelation 21:8, 14:10-11). His terms
are that they do three things: keep their faith in Jesus' atoning
blood (Romans 3:25), repent from their sins (Hebrews 10:26-27),
and obey what he commands them to do (Matthew 7:21). And God
helps his children to do all three of these things (Hebrews 12:2,
Galatians 5:16, Philippians 2:13).

beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees posted in message #1 of this thread:

for those of you that believe in the loss of salvation: if God can
retract His forgiveness, is it then permissible for us to do the same?

It's not so much that God retracts his forgiveness for any instance of
sin which he has already forgiven; it's more that he only extends his
forgiveness to instances of sin that are past (Romans 3:25),
instances of sin that have been repented from and confessed to him
(1 John 1:9). He does not extend his forgiveness to sins which are
presently being continued in without repentance (Hebrews 10:26-27).
So this goes back to his terms for initial forgiveness, which he has the
right to set, whereas we sinful humans have no right to set any terms
for our forgiveness of others.

 

[the.Sheepdog]

anf forgiveness really isnt even for the other person anyway. Its for the one forgiving.

 

[hlaltimus]

Forgiveness implies an offended party, so when God commands us in particular to forgive, He is then speaking of forgiveness for offense committed against us, and not at that point of an offence committed against Himself which is yet a second matter. We are responsible to forgive transgression against our account, yes...but against God's account, no. A sin against a believer then and a sin against God are two different things in that two different parties being mentioned, there are two different liabilities to reckoned with and cancel. When a person sins soley against God in some sort of private or secretive fashion, that sinner's liability then is directly against God, but when a sinner sins directly against a believer, his liability is both against that believer and indirectly against the God who indwells and owns that believer. When God then requires of us forgiveness of an offending party, he is mostly concerned at that point with our releasing of the offender, His releasing of the offender being yet a second issue that must be settled between the sinner and the Mediator appointed for sinners.

Why would God, then, be interested in our forgiving a sinner when, (possibly,) He himself will not forgive them given they never apply to Him for forgiveness? Are we more benevolent and forgiving than God is? Never. The truth is, that when we forgive someone for something wrong that they have done against us, this forgiveness doesn't expiate or atone for the sinner's guilt in the least. I can't release someone from eternal liability and you can't either, so when God requires us to forgive, this "forgiveness" is non-expiatory and has us as it's primary object of benefit, and only potentially the sinning party as an object of benefit. If you forgive a clear assailant against you and he/she doesn't repent, then you will be blessed for your mercifulness while the impenitant surely will not. However, if after they curiously study your sincere, unconditional, loving and supernatural spirit of clemency, they are inspired as to the source of your forgiving love, inquire and discover God's mercy relationally themselves thereby, then both you and they will have been blessed. God desires of us to forgive any offending parties because primarily speaking, it is something that is beneficial for us, and then secondarily and potentially speaking, it may indeed prove to be something eternally beneficial for the offender, as no doubt many a flagrant sinner has been won over to Christ purely by a nagging curiosity of, "Why is he so very forgiving?"

 

[freeport]

Copy-pasting this from what I had posted in the Soteriology forum following the suggestion of a mod:

Jesus commands us to forgive seventy-times-seven, meaning, of course, no matter how many times we've forgiven someone we must forgive them again and again, indefinitely. So first, I ask, is repentance required of the person we're forgiving, or are we expected to forgive them regardless of whether or not they ask for it?

If we are expected to forgive them even without their apologies, why then would God sentence an unrepentant non-believer to Hell? Shouldn't He forgive them unconditionally if this is indeed what He expects of His children?

If not, then what is the point of forgiveness, if there are terms and conditions that come with it?

Furthermore, sort of a bonus question for those of you that believe in the loss of salvation: if God can retract His forgiveness, is it then permissible for us to do the same? Would it be right to un-forgive your brother after you've already forgiven him?

I really don't like people talking about Heaven and Hell as if they have been there. And I mean that for Christians as well. Salvation is not about Heaven and Hell. It is about knowing God and being with God.

Being without God is Hell.

God did not give people a lot of details on what the specifics are of the afterlife beyond the truth which Christians know in their heart about the everlasting life found in the Spirit of Christ, which is the Spirit of God.

Being with God is Heaven.

God always relents. This is said constantly in the Bible. Will there be a point where there is no escape? Very possibly! For instance, when God sent Jonah to Nineveh he tried not to go. Why? Because he hated Nineveh who were sinful and did not know God, but he knew God and knew God would save the city regardless of what God had him say.

Most would be overjoyed at being sent to Nineveh by God. They would be overjoyed to see the city destroyed. God did not send them, however, he sent Jonah -- and Jonah understood that God is merciful and gracious.

Jonah preached God's message at Nineveh. No hope of salvation. Destruction of the city imminent. That is it. Well, the king of Nineveh did not assume that was it and called a city wide repentance saying, "Who knows that God might not relent".

And so they did. The city was saved. And Jonah sat in his anger.

God tried to explain to him that Jonah cared about the little plant which gave him shade -- but not about that entire city of people. Jonah did not understood and God just shook his head.

Is that then, lying? No, of course not. It is trust in God. God means what He says, but He is also fair. If people change their behavior, He will relent.

The same is said to be true with promises: if God promises blessings to a city and it becomes corrupted, God will revoke those blessings.

Are you surprised at such an alien explanation of God? Why should you be?

It is your choice whether you wish to believe men who did not come from Heaven and who speak for themselves, or if you wish to believe Jesus Christ.

Do not think you can go to God and blame someone else. You have read at least some of what Jesus said.

Who cares if there are people who have lied to you about Jesus? Are the Gospels full of so many words you have never bothered to read them?

It is people's own choice whom they will believe. They believe so many men. Sad they won't stand up for Jesus -- who stands up for them.