How do you define: forgiveness?

[bling]

I was in a discussion on a thread here and was shocked by a new definition of “forgiveness” which included someone always has to be punished or pay the just penalty for what was forgiven. Including the idea if a father forgives his child, then he is taking the punishment.

This sounded to me like we are back to the teaching of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

I am not talking about atonement here but the definition of forgiveness, which I see Christ defining in Matt. 18, but how do you define forgiveness?

 

[ViaCrucis]

To release, to pardon, to remit. The English word is etymologically concerned with the idea of releasing one's right or power to punish. The Latin perdonare (through French into English as "pardon") is effectively identical, per "through" and donare "give"; to grant release even as forgive is "for" and "give". The Greek word aphiemi, likewise means "to release" as in to release one from one's debts.

Hebrew has several words translated as forgive, with meanings of to "to cover", "to carry", and "to lift up"; the ideas conveyed here is that a sin or a wrong is covered up/over (in the sense of, say, a new coat of paint, or in the sense of how blood covered the seat of covering aka the mercy seat in the Temple for reconciliation and atonement of the nation); a burden is carried away, taken away from a person so that the person who has wronged no longer is saddled by the burden of guilt; and one is lifted up, perhaps in the sense of lifted up and restored to an agreeable relationship with the offended.

Forgiveness, I'd say then, is chiefly the act of releasing the offender from the burden of guilt, a guilt that would require recompense, as in the granting release from a debt, granting release from punishment. It is the total 180 of "eye for an eye" in that sense. Though you have taken my eye, I will not demand your eye, rather I release you from that burden. Forgiveness also does more than merely release one from the burden, but rather provides newness, a fresh start to begin, no longer saddled by guilt there is now a refreshment in the relationship, the offended and the offender are restored, or at the very least in the process of being restored.

Forgiveness releases debt, it releases punishment, it cancels guilt. It provides the offender a release of guilt and burden and affords them a fresh start.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Clare73]

I was in a discussion on a thread here and was shocked by a new definition of “forgiveness” which included someone always has to be punished or pay the just penalty for what was forgiven. Including the idea if a father forgives his child, then he is taking the punishment.

This sounded to me like we are back to the teaching of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

I am not talking about atonement here but the definition of forgiveness, which I see Christ defining in Matt. 18, but how do you define forgiveness?

Forgiveness is simply cancellation of debt.
It is an accounting term.

 

[bling]

To release, to pardon, to remit. The English word is etymologically concerned with the idea of releasing one's right or power to punish. The Latin perdonare (through French into English as "pardon") is effectively identical, per "through" and donare "give"; to grant release even as forgive is "for" and "give". The Greek word aphiemi, likewise means "to release" as in to release one from one's debts.

Hebrew has several words translated as forgive, with meanings of to "to cover", "to carry", and "to lift up"; the ideas conveyed here is that a sin or a wrong is covered up/over (in the sense of, say, a new coat of paint, or in the sense of how blood covered the seat of covering aka the mercy seat in the Temple for reconciliation and atonement of the nation); a burden is carried away, taken away from a person so that the person who has wronged no longer is saddled by the burden of guilt; and one is lifted up, perhaps in the sense of lifted up and restored to an agreeable relationship with the offended.

Forgiveness, I'd say then, is chiefly the act of releasing the offender from the burden of guilt, a guilt that would require recompense, as in the granting release from a debt, granting release from punishment. It is the total 180 of "eye for an eye" in that sense. Though you have taken my eye, I will not demand your eye, rather I release you from that burden. Forgiveness also does more than merely release one from the burden, but rather provides newness, a fresh start to begin, no longer saddled by guilt there is now a refreshment in the relationship, the offended and the offender are restored, or at the very least in the process of being restored.

Forgiveness releases debt, it releases punishment, it cancels guilt. It provides the offender a release of guilt and burden and affords them a fresh start.

-CryptoLutheran

I fully agree with all that, but the person I was discussing this with, always has the forgiver or someone else paying the debt for forgiveness to take place, so anything on that?

 

[bling]

Forgiveness is simply cancellation of debt.
It is an accounting term.

Clare we have been through this before, it is rarely used in accounting. In accounting you debit the debt and credit cash and do not use the word "forgive" unless it is not paid.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I fully agree with all that, but the person I was discussing this with, always has the forgiver or someone else paying the debt for forgiveness to take place, so anything on that?

Nothing that I can see. Forgiveness does not require scapegoating, in the sense that someone else has to pay/be punished.

I sense someone is trying to find a way to define forgiveness in such a way as to make penal substitution an intrinsic property of forgiveness. But that simply isn't the case; and that really isn't how penal substitution as a theory of the atonement works anyway.

Penal Substitution assumes the older view of Satisfaction Theory. Anselm argued that God's honor needed to be satisfied, later on Thomas Aquinas argued that it's not God's honor, but God's justice.

Luther relied strongly on this language of Satisfaction. But it is satisfaction of righteousness/justice. Namely that Christ was obedient and therefore satisfied the just requirements of the Law. While Penal Substitution is in a lot of ways more of a Reformed thing, it is teased about in the writings of Luther and early Lutheran fathers. Specifically this: That Christ was perfectly obedient, and yet by His own choice bore the weight of our sin on the cross; in this way Christ bore our punishment, "the wages of sin is death". But this satisfaction of righteousness and bearing the penalty of death isn't in order that God can forgive us, but rather here is what Luther called the "Happy Exchange". The exchange is that Christ took our wretchedness with Him to the cross, and in exchange, gives us His righteousness. That's about Justification.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[bling]

Nothing that I can see. Forgiveness does not require scapegoating, in the sense that someone else has to pay/be punished.

I sense someone is trying to find a way to define forgiveness in such a way as to make penal substitution an intrinsic property of forgiveness. But that simply isn't the case; and that really isn't how penal substitution as a theory of the atonement works anyway.

Penal Substitution assumes the older view of Satisfaction Theory. Anselm argued that God's honor needed to be satisfied, later on Thomas Aquinas argued that it's not God's honor, but God's justice.

Luther relied strongly on this language of Satisfaction. But it is satisfaction of righteousness/justice. Namely that Christ was obedient and therefore satisfied the just requirements of the Law. While Penal Substitution is in a lot of ways more of a Reformed thing, it is teased about in the writings of Luther and early Lutheran fathers. Specifically this: That Christ was perfectly obedient, and yet by His own choice bore the weight of our sin on the cross; in this way Christ bore our punishment, "the wages of sin is death". But this satisfaction of righteousness and bearing the penalty of death isn't in order that God can forgive us, but rather here is what Luther called the "Happy Exchange". The exchange is that Christ took our wretchedness with Him to the cross, and in exchange, gives us His righteousness. That's about Justification.

-CryptoLutheran

What verses, parables, people, might you use to show forgiveness (outside of atonement) does not require someone "paying" the penalty?
I would use Matt. 18 or Romans 3:25 but those takes a lot of explaining. Can you show forgiving someone does not mean you take their punishment?

 

[ViaCrucis]

What verses, parables, people, might you use to show forgiveness (outside of atonement) does not require someone "paying" the penalty?
I would use Matt. 18 or Romans 3:25 but those takes a lot of explaining. Can you show forgiving someone does not mean you take their punishment?

"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." - 1 John 1:9

When we come before the throne of grace, confessing our sin, God forgives us.

Christ gave His Church the authority to remit sins, historically exercised through the office of the keys.

"Jesus said to them again, 'Peace be with you. As the Father has sent Me, even so I am sending you.' And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, 'Receive the Holy Spirit. Whoever's sins you forgive are forgiven them; whoever's sins you retain are retained." - John 20:21-23

I think it's abundantly clear in Scripture that forgiveness is freely given.

But let's just talk about ordinary human relationships. If your friend does something that injures you, when you forgive them what's going on? Are you paying anything? Is someone else? Are you taking on their "debt", is someone else? No, of course not. Forgiveness is freely given.

"Forgive us our sins as we forgive the sins of others" - the Lord's Prayer.

The satisfying of righteousness--that our sin renders us unrighteous, condemned under the Law; that the Law is a curse for us because of our sin (not that the Law is bad, for the Law that was intended to bring life instead brings death because of sin, as Paul said) that is meted out by Christ's righteousness. Christ has satisfied all righteousness.

The payment, the ransom paid, is that we should no longer be the hostages of sin, death, and the devil.

Forgiveness is free, God willingly forgives us.

This is the difference between saying, "Jesus died in order that God could forgive us" as though God was powerless to forgive us otherwise; and saying "Jesus died and you are forgiven", the cross is God's forgiveness. And He tells us that we are forgiven, and He forgives us. He gave His Church "the keys of the kingdom" that sins should be proclaimed forgiven in Christ's name. He promises that when we confess our sins, our sins are forgiven.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[bling]

I think it's abundantly clear in Scripture that forgiveness is freely given.

But let's just talk about ordinary human relationships. If your friend does something that injures you, when you forgive them what's going on? Are you paying anything? Is someone else? Are you taking on their "debt", is someone else? No, of course not. Forgiveness is freely given.

I agree with you here, but some seem to be saying, you're taking the injury, means you are paying the price punishment, Just thinking about it even if they are punished you still were injured, so it would be double payment?

 

[Clare73]

Clare we have been through this before, it is rarely used in accounting. In accounting you debit the debt and credit cash and do not use the word "forgive" unless it is not paid.

"Rarely used" verifies its actual use., which is my point.

To forgive is to cancel a debt.
Perfect description of Biblical forgiveness.

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

how do you define forgiveness?

Technically:
"to remove the guilt resulting from wrongdoing—‘to pardon, to forgive, forgiveness.’" [Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). In Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 502). United Bible Societies.]

Practically:
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”
[The New King James Version (Ro 4:5–8). (1982). Thomas Nelson.]

 

[bling]

"Rarely used" verifies its actual use., which is my point.

To forgive is to cancel a debt.
Perfect description of Biblical forgiveness.

Most of the time the debt is cancelled is because it is paid. Yes, forgiving a debt does cancel the debt, but cancelling the debt does not mean it was forgiven.

 

[bling]

Technically:
"to remove the guilt resulting from wrongdoing—‘to pardon, to forgive, forgiveness.’" [Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). In Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., Vol. 1, p. 502). United Bible Societies.]

Practically:
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”
[The New King James Version (Ro 4:5–8). (1982). Thomas Nelson.]

If you are forgiven does someone else pay your penalty?

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

Concerning Jesus, I know the LORD laid on Him the iniquities of us all, and by His stripes we are healed. I'm not sure it can be generalized to apply to every act of forgiveness. It's not a question I ever ponder.

 

[Clare73]

Most of the time the debt is cancelled is because it is paid. Yes, forgiving a debt does cancel the debt, but cancelling the debt does not mean it is forgiven.

It does in the usage of "forgiven" in accounting.

And it does in the usage of Jesus' cancelling our debt on the cross.

 

[bling]

It does in the usage of "forgiven" in accounting.

And it does in the usage of Jesus' cancelling our debt on the cross.

So God did not forgive our debt?

 

[Clare73]

So God did not forgive our debt?

Forgive is to cancel.

He cancelled it, didn't he.

 

[JohnD70X7]

I was in a discussion on a thread here and was shocked by a new definition of “forgiveness” which included someone always has to be punished or pay the just penalty for what was forgiven. Including the idea if a father forgives his child, then he is taking the punishment.

This sounded to me like we are back to the teaching of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

I am not talking about atonement here but the definition of forgiveness, which I see Christ defining in Matt. 18, but how do you define forgiveness?

All that matters is how God defines forgiveness.

 

[Clare73]

All that matters is how God defines forgiveness.

And that is determined by the meaning of the words used in texts.

 

[bling]

Forgive is to cancel.

He cancelled it, didn't he.

"Canceling" sounds mechanical and forgiving a debt is more then just canceling a debt which can be done with a payment of the debt and no forgiveness is needed. God forgave a debt that could not be paid.