Forgiving Others
- Thread starter Lucky
- Start date
Freak
New member
I already answered your questions. We should forgive those who repent and those who do not....
Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.
I will not pretend to know what Knight's intentions are, but it is natural to hate people who are intent on killing you. They certainly hate us!!!! If I let down my guard, I will become a victim.
Sorry Freak, I HATE the men who killed Nick Berg. I would kill them myself if the situation was provided.
It is what it is.
Now wait a minute. I didn't say I would never forgive, Freak, you are twisting my words. Go back a page to my first posts in this thread, you will see that your accusation isn't accurate.
However, those evil, butchering, Arab terrorists are no where near repentance. As such, I hate them and would kill them if I had the opportunity.
I'll take my chances with God and what he may think about my actions.
"Heated?"
Maybe he needs to go off and have a cigerette, and then recoup his forces somewhat.
Luke 17:3, Matthew 18:15-17.
Our forgiveness does not depend on whether we forgive others because we are already forgiven. Those who were under the dispensation of circumcision had to forgive (the repentant) in order to be forgiven by God. That was who Jesus addressed. But those under the dispensation of uncircumcision should forgive (the repentant) because we are already forgiven.
And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you. Ephesians 4:32
So according to Paul were are supposed to forgive others similarly to how God forgave us. Now, does God forgive the unrepentant? When you put your faith in Christ, did you do so with an attitude of unrepentance?
Luke records it this way:
- "And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you, saying, 'I repent,' you shall forgive him." Luke 17:4
And right before the verses you quoted, Jesus laid out that one should rebuke the sinner, if he repents, forgive... if he doesn't, turn up the heat... and if he utterly refuses to repent, "let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector." In other words, don't forgive him anyway.
- "Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that "by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.' And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector." Matthew 18:15-17
temple2006
New member
Knight...Who says he did not forgive the other thief?
adajos
New member
Knight:
You'll notice that when Christ is asking the Father for something He wants, but thinks He can't have--not being crucified--He qualifies His request with "if it is possible". There is similar qualification of Christ's request of the Father in the second passage He spoke at Gethsemene.
Not so with "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do" from the cross. In that, He knew He was not asking for something that would undermine the salvation of humanity, as He knew in your examples.
Your objection of, "we don't know if the Father really did forgive them" is very weak, because there is no good answer to that last question, which seems to be the position you espouse in order to cast doubt on a fact that destroys your argument.
Yes, the text is very clear. It's that very clarity of the text that shows your arbitrary creation of two distinct sins requiring separate forgiveness for one act is unBiblical.
Nope, I'm saying the Bible doesn't break the sins for which the Roman soldiers needed forgiveness into two categories like you do.
The Bible doesn't say that the Roman soldiers knew He was innocent, you are assuming they do. You are further assuming that pagan Roman soldiers were aware that they were committing a sin in following the orders given to them to execute a man believed to be innocent by Pilate. You are even further assuming that even if they thought they were sinning that the same act would need to be forgiven twice.
Again, it's the clarity of the text that highlights your false assumptions. If you abide by the situation as written in that passage without tenuous theorizing, then you're whole theology of "never forgive unless forgiveness is asked for" is uprooted. No wonder you have to take such flights of fancy with the text.
I would say "nope". I can think of nowhere in the Bible where the same act needed to be forgiven twice as apparently the Roman soldiers did in your interpretation. Without your artificially constructed sin dichotomy, your deck of cards collapses.
I don't know about "beat to death." I do think we've come to a point where you're not going to budge, even in the face of compelling evidence.
I disagree with your assessment of my case--but then again, I think your case is built on nothing other than biased speculation
You'll notice that when Christ is asking the Father for something He wants, but thinks He can't have--not being crucified--He qualifies His request with "if it is possible". There is similar qualification of Christ's request of the Father in the second passage He spoke at Gethsemene.
Not so with "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do" from the cross. In that, He knew He was not asking for something that would undermine the salvation of humanity, as He knew in your examples.
- Do you agree Christ had the power to forgive sins?
- Would Christ ask the Father to forgive the same sin that Christ Himself would not forgive?
Your objection of, "we don't know if the Father really did forgive them" is very weak, because there is no good answer to that last question, which seems to be the position you espouse in order to cast doubt on a fact that destroys your argument.
Yes, the text is very clear. It's that very clarity of the text that shows your arbitrary creation of two distinct sins requiring separate forgiveness for one act is unBiblical.
Nope, I'm saying the Bible doesn't break the sins for which the Roman soldiers needed forgiveness into two categories like you do.
The Bible doesn't say that the Roman soldiers knew He was innocent, you are assuming they do. You are further assuming that pagan Roman soldiers were aware that they were committing a sin in following the orders given to them to execute a man believed to be innocent by Pilate. You are even further assuming that even if they thought they were sinning that the same act would need to be forgiven twice.
Again, it's the clarity of the text that highlights your false assumptions. If you abide by the situation as written in that passage without tenuous theorizing, then you're whole theology of "never forgive unless forgiveness is asked for" is uprooted. No wonder you have to take such flights of fancy with the text.
I would say "nope". I can think of nowhere in the Bible where the same act needed to be forgiven twice as apparently the Roman soldiers did in your interpretation. Without your artificially constructed sin dichotomy, your deck of cards collapses.
I don't know about "beat to death." I do think we've come to a point where you're not going to budge, even in the face of compelling evidence.
I disagree with your assessment of my case--but then again, I think your case is built on nothing other than biased speculation
Last edited:
Melody
New member
Mat 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Luk 6:27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
Luk 6:28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.
Luk 6:29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the [one] cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not [to take thy] coat also.
Knight-
I think Melody's point is that the verse doesn't say to only forgive them if they ask for it. It only says that we are to forgive them, when they do. I will not depend on someone else's hate to define my love. But just because I have forgiven, that doesn't mean I will forget. And it definitely doesn't mean that I will let it happen again.
I think Melody's point is that the verse doesn't say to only forgive them if they ask for it. It only says that we are to forgive them, when they do. I will not depend on someone else's hate to define my love. But just because I have forgiven, that doesn't mean I will forget. And it definitely doesn't mean that I will let it happen again.
Freak
New member
Yes, the text is very clear. It's that very clarity of the text that shows your arbitrary creation of two distinct sins requiring separate forgiveness for one act is unBiblical.
Are you saying the Roman soldiers weren't aware that Pilate had stated in public....
So Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowd, “I find no fault in this Man.” - Luke 23:4 [/quote]
Nope, I'm saying the Bible doesn't break the sins for which the Roman soldiers needed forgiveness into two categories like you do.
The Bible doesn't say that the Roman soldiers knew He was innocent, you are assuming they do. You are further assuming that pagan Roman soldiers were aware that they were committing a sin in following the orders given to them to execute a man believed to be innocent by Pilate. You are even further assuming that even if they thought they were sinning that the same act would need to be forgiven twice.
Again, it's the clarity of the text that highlights your false assumptions. If you abide by the situation as written in that passage without tenuous theorizing, then you're whole theology of "never forgive unless forgiveness is asked for" is uprooted. No wonder you have to take such flights of fancy with the text.
I would say I just proved you wrong on that.[/quote]
I would say "nope". I can think of nowhere in the Bible where the same act needed to be forgiven twice as apparently the Roman soldiers did in your interpretation. Without your artificially constructed sin dichotomy, your deck of cards collapses.
Yep, this pretty much sums it up biblically. Case close. :up: :chuckle: