Month: February 2012

Forgiveness is…

Silva

Forgiveness might be one of the most significant concepts in relationships.  It also might be the most misunderstood.

First, we cannot discuss forgiveness if we depart from the basis of forgiveness with God: the death of Christ.  Christ’s blood has satisfied the justice of God, having broken down the walls between God and us.  Paul the apostle applies this in Ephesians 2:13-15 where he explains this means in Christ there is no barrier between us.  What is important to note is the blood of Christ (Ephesians 2:13b) is the same basis of forgiveness between believers.  When I was brought near to God through Christ, I was also brought near to all others who were previously brought near to God through Christ; Paul highlights this in Ephesians 4:32.

But what is the nature of forgiveness?  It is the actual wiping away of our sins so that they no longer testify against us.  It is two-fold: event and process.

Event: asking and granting forgiveness on the basis of someone else’s work

Process: remembering and living in that event in the strength of someone else’s work

When are the “events” of forgiveness between God and us? When I first repent and believe in Him and each time I repent and believe (: 1 John 1:9)  What is the “process” of forgiveness for God and us?  He chooses to remember the blood of Christ on our behalf instead of our sins and we continue to repent when we sin.  Why does God keep doing this?  Because our forgiveness is not founded on our perfections but Christ’s; we have Christ’s perfection counted to us rather than our imperfections counted to us.

When we consider these things between men and women in the faith, it is functionally no different.  For the Christian, forgiveness is always a possibility.  We sometimes act as if what someone has done against us is so serious that it is beyond forgiveness.  There may be genuine and horrific sin against you but the Scripture tells us that it is not unforgivable. When are we typically unforgiving people?  In three cases: a) when we forget what God has done in forgiving us (Matthew 18:23-33); b) when we belittle our own transgressions against God and, c) when we forget just what had to happen so that we could live as free-people.  For the Christian, forgiveness is also a duty.  As we will see from passages like Luke 17:3-5 and Ephesians 4:32, we must choose forgiveness.  God clearly holds us to forgive even so that we might be forgiven:

Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not and you will not be condemned; forgive and you will be forgiven (Luke 6:37)

We may overlook offenses or we may only ever be able to adopt a disposition of forgiveness due to an unrepentant sinner, but these at least we must do.

For the Christian, forgiveness is a gift.  One of the two principal words for forgiveness in the Old Testament has as its core idea, “to lighten by lifting.”  We will discuss the nature of sin as incurring a debt.  Many know what it is like to carry debts: houses, cars, credit cards, etc., none of these is desirable and we long for a time when we are debt-free.

Forgiveness is the means that God has ordained that we would experience relationships debt-free.  In other words, through forgiveness we may have closeness, openness and safety that we would not have without it.

Forgiveness is not.

We often persist in sinful un-forgiveness because we don’t know what it means!  Or we have a view of it that makes forgiving too hard.  In the Bible, forgiveness is not a feeling.  Therefore it isn’t only required when someone has recovered a sense of affection or good will towards a sinner (how easy would that be?).  Instead, it is an act of the will after all God commands us to do so.  Forgiveness is not passive.  As we said above, to forgive involves someone sinned against canceling a live debt that he is owed.  It involves both the sinner and the one sinned against to think-speak-act.  It is also not forgetting.  Forgetting is passive and is never guaranteed.  We cannot think that until we have forgotten we have forgiven or that if we’ve forgotten we’ve forgiven.  It is not excusing.  As we will see, forgiveness is transactional and so it automatically assumes a wrong done for it to be valid.  Sin creates debts that we as humans instinctively recognize (cf. Romans 2:14-15).  We also recognize that as we sin against others we are saddled with a deepening burden for that debt over time.

Forgiveness does not allow this as it doesn’t automatically release a wrongdoer of the consequences.  Consequences are often our teachers that instruct us and keep us from repeating sins against God and other people.  Forgiveness takes the reality of sin into account and sets us on this path of learning (cf. Numbers 14:20-23 and 2 Samuel 12:11-14).

Forgiveness is.

As a process, it is keeping no active record.

Jeremiah 31:34b: “…For I will forgive their iniquity and I will remember their sin no more.”

Isaiah 43:25: “I, even I, am the one who wipes out your transgressions for My own sake, And I will not remember your sins.

Psalm 103:11-12: “For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us.”

Psalm 130:3-4: “If you, O Lord, should mark iniquities, O Lord who could stand?  But with you there is forgiveness, that you may be feared.”

1 Corinthians 13:5: “…[love] does not take into account a wrong suffered” (NASB)

Forgiveness is canceling debts people owe you.  When people sin, they create a debt; they owe you.  Ken Sande writes that to forgive is, “To release from liability to suffer penalty or punishment and to bestow favor freely and unconditionally.”  How did the Matthew 18 parable depict this?  First, Jesus equates sin (18:15, “if your brother sins…”) with debts (18:23, “settle accounts with his servant”).  Secondly, Jesus equates forgiveness (Luke 17:3, “…and if he repents, forgive him”) with exacting payment (18:24-25, “one [servant] was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents.  And since he could not pay…”).  Sin creates a debt while forgiveness cancels the debt.  In other words, forgiveness means that someone has done a wrong against you and they owe you / deserve punishment but you give up your right to recoup what they owe / punish them.

Forgiveness is costly.  Sin-debts are real: they violate the covenants between people.  Sin-debts are specific: those violations are never vague as they transgress real boundaries (see the Ten Commandments for example).  Sin-debts are costly: they weigh on both parties.  And sin-debts have lingering effects.  Forgiveness minimizes none of these things.

Forgiveness is hard work: Matthew 18:22. What must’ve the disciples thought when Jesus answered the way He did?

[Isn’t there a limit!  That’s too much!]

Forgiveness works.

There is a distinct process in forgiveness written in many places.  Luke 17:3-5 provides a condensed and effective summary.  First, forgiveness is an event that involves a confrontation: 17:3, “If your brother sins, rebuke him; if he repents, forgive him.”  In order to bring about forgiveness, there must be a confrontation.  It must either be initiated by the one sinned against as in this case (cf. Matthew 18:15) or by the one who committed the sin (Matthew 5:23-24). So, who has the burden of forgiveness?  The sinner and the saint.

Still, Jesus highlights that it is also a process: 17:4, “and if he sins against you seven times in the day and turns to you seven times, saying, ‘I repent’ you must forgive him.”  Someone who commits sin and repents must be forgiven.  Lane and Tripp say, “The principle [of Luke 17:5] applies to countless offenses and even the same endlessly repeated offense.  We’re tempted to think that once we have forgiven someone we’re done.  But forgiving someone is not just a past event.  It’s something we must continue to practice even when we’re dealing with an offense we have already forgiven.”  In other words, the process of forgiveness is on-going or willful.  Or acts of our conscious choice each time we have the opportunity or the need.  Remember that God holds our sins against us no more when He forgives.  He certainly remembers, but chooses not to act on a past, forgiven incident.  It is a canceled debt.

  • Would it make sense if a bank, whose debt you paid off, came to you and wanted to keep talking about the debt you used to owe?

When we say, “I forgive you,” we are pledging ourselves to this process where we actively say to each other:

I will not think about this incident anymore;

I will not bring up this incident again and use it against you;

I will not talk to others about this incident;

I will not allow this incident to stand between us or hinder our personal relationship.

For each incident “I forgive you” means an affirmative answer to each of these questions about the incident.  No one should suggest forgiveness is easy.  In order to absorb the wrongs done, God will have to strengthen the offended party.  Forgiveness in the strength of self-will lasts a very short time, if at all.  Each offense contains painful detail, a decision to absorb them, a looking past the urge to punish and a commitment to treat the offender almost as if he never did them!  Who is up to this task?!

Forgiveness’ language.

Language in forgiveness is very important. What is the difference between “I’m sorry” and “Please forgive me”?  Usually, “I’m sorry” involves accidents while “Please forgive me” addresses sins committed.  “I’m sorry” is sometimes very unrepentant; merely “I’m sorry I got caught” or “I’m sorry your such a wimp and you can’t handle this,” etc.  “Please forgive me for…” makes no mistaking that a debt settlement is underway!

Jay Adams says, “Seeking forgiveness is not apologizing.  There is nothing in the Bible about apologizing…[it is] the world’s substitute for forgiveness that doesn’t get the job done.  You apologize, and say “I’m sorry” but have not admitted your sin.  The offended party feels awkward, not knowing how to respond.  You are still holding the ball.  You have asked him to do nothing.”

The nature of sin is to create a debt, something objective.  The nature of forgiveness is to forgive that debt in detail.  Repentance and forgiveness must carry specificity in the language.  When we confront an offense, we must be specific.  We must be able to point to specific violations of God’s law (not preferences, remember?).  So, be specific:

“I believe you have sinned against me by your coarse language”

“I believe you have sinned against me by not leading our family and asking me to do so”

You see that to use this language does two things: a) points out a biblical wrong has been done – this isn’t just a preference that’s been violated and, b) it calls the offender to action.

The response mirrors the confrontation:

“Please forgive me for using coarse language and treating you as if you aren’t truly valuable to me”

“Please forgive me for failing to lead our family”

You see that to respond in this language admits to both points above: a) a sin’s been committed and, b) action is being taken.

Un-forgiveness.

An unrepentant sinner may not keep us from forgiveness.  Mark 11:25 says, “And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses” (see also Luke 6:28 and Acts 7:60).  God calls us to an attitude of forgiveness towards those who sin against us.  We may have to hold onto an attitude of forgiveness until the offender repents.  The attitude of forgiveness will transition into actual forgiveness when a sinner repents and asks for forgiveness.  However, this may never happen.  To fail to have an attitude of forgiveness violates Mark 11:25 and will inevitably lead to bitterness (Ephesians 4:31; Hebrews 12:15).

Rules for Christian Blogs

Silva

We have all been to blogs that want to make us spit nails.  Sometimes, it’s because the content makes us mad.  Other times, the blogger makes us mad.  In my work of pastoral ministry, I encourage people to adopt a set of ground rules that governs how folks communicate with each other.  I think it makes a good foundation for rules for Christian blogging, too.

Rule #1: There is only one agenda on our blog: God’s.

We draw this from 2 Corinthians 5:20, “Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making His appeal through us.  We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.”  I would suggest that no matter the topic at hand, God has something to say to us or through us.  We cannot assume that our blogs are places where we may write untethered from this reality.  No one knows just who will read our posts or when; perhaps we might reach into the heart and soul of a person who previously was hardened against the message of repentance and faith. Who knows?  We cannot blog as if it is our own sovereign universe, free for us to do with as we will.  No, brothers, our blogs belong to Him.

Rule #2: On our blogs, we will assume no harm about those with whom we differ.

We are an opinionated lot.  I do not need to belabor the essential need that we maintain our positions of truth and grace in this world that crumbles around us.  As we have rehearsed in our own communion before, the “parties” present in our church, the commitments to doctrine, piety and cultural engagement are essential.  Since we’re a bunch of strong-willed, fire-brands, it is inevitable that we will get sideways with each other.  Nevermind that, Christ has wrought our union with Him and with each other (John 17:22) and that means that neither you nor I need to be preeminently concerned about making sure we’re right to the expense of each other.  If I’m one with you, and you’re one with me, then there is far more we have in common than we do not.  Therefore, you are far more likely to act for my good, than for my ill.  So, I will assume no harm with you until I have to.

Rule #3: We will not give the darkest interpretation on events, comments or actions of others on our blogs.  When it looks like we would be justified in assuming the worst, we will work hard to find another interpretation.

Of course this is related to the others.  In our blogs, as we journal publicly, are we truly justified in darkly interpreting the words and works of another who confesses faith in the same Lord?  We must exhaust our efforts to find interpretations to words and works of brothers that would leave our unity intact and their reputations unsullied.  This means our blogs might taste like vanilla ice cream rather than Rocky Road, but the desserts in heaven are far better anyway.  Work harder, brothers, in finding ways to give the benefit of the doubt.

Rule #4: On our blogs, we will assume that our greatest enemy is within us, the sin that we must yet mortify, rather than those things external to us.

We lose sight of the tentacles of sin in our thoughts, words and deeds.  Like spending a week at the beach in the sun produces a rich tan – on the top.  How many of us are surprised by the fish-belly white of our obscured and covered parts?  You can’t be tan all over.  We cannot think that we’ve mastered the influence of the kingdom of self in our lives.  The depths of darkness are long and unknown.  Are we not better served by thinking that our blogs are steeped in self rather than God?  Wouldn’t that force us to measure our words and govern our writings?  Our denominational commitments to cultural exegesis for the purpose of the preaching and the application of the gospel has a dark underside: pride and contempt for those who disagree.  No matter the “party” this is always a possibility.

Rule #5: Since we are human and lacking in perspicuity with each other, we will assume we don’t know the facts or motivations until we ask.

You’ve read blogs where there are charitable exchanges of viewpoints.  One writer will blog anticipating another will respond and so it happens that in the end there is a winsome and safe and brotherly result.  (I remember reading something like this between Kevin DeYoung and Tullian Tchividjian.)  Brothers, we don’t ask because we don’t care.  We don’t ask because we want to be correct.  We don’t ask by and large because we’re pathetically in love with our own reputations.  We love the kingdom of self.  The problem with the kingdom of self is that all others become servants there.  Chances are you’re a poor servant in my kingdom; you will need instruction, rebuke, chastisement and even punishment to get it right in my kingdom.  In my kingdom, I know everything about you – or so I think.  Wrong.  I know nothing about you until I ask you.  On our blogs, before we stake out territory that we earnestly believe needs to be marked and defended at the expense of others, we must know and so we must ask.  Brothers, we truly just don’t know until we do.

Rule #6: We will adopt the Golden Rule of Blogging: we will blog about people like we’d want to be blogged about.

Lastly, I’m quick (typically) to poke someone in the eye and call it “standing for truth” or “just rebuke” or “saving them from the pit.”  Perhaps.  I’m quicker to lash out at someone when I get poked for all the same reasons.  Let’s make a deal: I’ll blog however I want, and you blog however I want.  Sound OK?  Um, no.  I suggest instead that I blog how YOU want, and you blog how I want.  I would say this is Philippians 2:3-4 applied to the blogosphere.

In the end, ground rules like these will be guard rails that can keep us focused on the right things.  If cyberspace has introduced anything, it is the temptation to establish public mini-kingdoms where we operate independently from authority thinking and writing what is best in our own minds.  If we press on into new technological territory for Christ, we can’t (and shouldn’t) leave Him behind.

All…ya’ll

Silva

Every year I have a season where I rediscover a basic Christian discipline.  Usually it’s prayer; I recognize that my prayer times have flagged, that I’m getting a bit more anxious or angry quicker than I should, etc.  Recently it was the discipline of regular reading of the Bible.  The Bible is a story about a Man, Jesus.  It tells me that He has done something His Father asked Him to do and it involves me.  It is a wonderful story full of intrigue, unexpected plot twists, death and even resurrection.  The story ends well for Him and, therefore, it ends well for me.  Why wouldn’t I want to read and re-read a story that ended well for me?!

Nonetheless, in my reading I’ve been making my way through the songbook of the Bible, the Psalms.  Today it is Psalm 34.  I was dumbfounded (literally, stopped cold in my reading) by the writer’s use of the word “all.”

I sought the LORD and he answered me and delivered me from all my fears (34:4)

This poor man cried and the LORD heard him and saved him out of all his troubles (34:6)

When the righteous cry for help, the LORD hears and delivers them out of all their troubles (34:17)

All my fears…all his troubles…all their troubles.  There’s one more use of it in the Psalm that I’ll save for the end but these are astounding assertions.  In fact, the same writer says:

Oh, taste and see that LORD is good!  Blessed is the man who takes refuge in him!

I guess so!  That man who takes refuge in the Lord will have all of his fear and troubles taken away.  Of course, if you’re still reading (as I’m still thinking) you might want to jump to the many examples of where you cried out to Him and your situation did not change.  Life brings with it the temptation to call God a liar, doesn’t it?  We might not say that out loud, but like Abraham’s wife, Sarah, we laugh at the thought of God doing what He says He’d do.  Life also brings with it an opportunity to “dumb down” the ALL-ness of statements like these in the Psalms.

But, both are true: the ALL-ness of these promises God makes in the Bible and the difficulties in our lives that seem intractable.  Unfortunately, many among us (me, included) will be tempted to tilt toward the half-empty viewpoint and dismiss the largeness of the promises of God and His power with it.  And so we either don’t read the Bible (because it reminds us of things that don’t make sense) or we read it and we dumb down the things it says.  What do we do?

Keep reading the Psalm:

Many are the afflictions of the righteous but the LORD delivers him out of them all (34:19)

The LORD redeems the life of his servants; none of those who take refuge in him will be condemned (34:22)

And so the song ends.  The scope of God’s gaze concerning our lives extends far beyond what we can see and what we can imagine.  The Bible never shirks away from the facts of pain and suffering; neither did this Psalm that so lavishly spoke of the promises of God.  Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but the Lord delivers him and he is not condemned.  My regular issue is that the scope of the gaze of my life is that I not experience any of the difficulty that I regularly do.  I define a blessed life in terms of the absence of bad things.  God defines a blessed life by the presence of intimate relationship with Him (remember 34:8?).  A definition like that is big enough to include bad things and good things; mine is not.

The burden of the righteous is to work hard to make sense out of the difficulties that come their way AND the lavish promises of God.  It is not easy to see how they work together.  But, it really is like gardening: breaking up clods, pulling roots and weeds, spraying against disease, watering, etc. eventually yields produce which brings contentment.  Sweat on the front end, sweetness in the end.  I am reminded today to remember that I should work harder to see the ways that the Lord has, in fact, heard my prayers and answered them.  And, to dwell on the greatest answer of all: that He has said because of Jesus Christ, I am not condemned by my sins (as I should be) and am His son and part of His family.  This is a great story!