Samuel Lamerson on forgiveness

[Yorzhik]

Originally Posted by PureX

And anyway, you can "rebuke" them and still forgive them.

And by putting rebuke in quotes, you really mean "not rebuke", right?

Because forgiveness and rebuke are mutually exclusive.

 

[PureX]

Purex, I became a Christian because of Bob Enyart's ministry. So apparantly your "logic" about rebuke hardening people is not universally applicable.

But Bob Enyart didn't convince you of anything you didn't already want to believe. And if you hadn't heard what you wanted to hear from him, you'd have heard if from someone else. The truth is all around us. It isn't lack of access that stops us from hearing it. It's our lack of willingness.

And I'm not saying that your shouldn't "rebuke" someone when you believe that it's the right thing for you to do. All I'm saying is that you can forgive them whether you rebuke them or not. And they don't even have to know.

Christian forgiveness is about reconcilliation, not personal "feel-good." And reconcilliation takes both parties, not just one. My "feelings" aren't the main object of Christian forgiveness.

This is all well and good, but you're forgetting about the bad effect of holding onto resentments and grudges against people within your own self. Even your bible tells you not to let the sun go down on your anger or resentment against someone else.

 

[Ecumenicist]

My take on the subject. I think Sam pulls together too many scriptures here, he
neglects to understand that in some cases, Jesus is directing humanity on how to
act in interpersonal relationships, and in others, Jesus directs the disciples about
how to act in situations where members of the group, the body of Christ, the Church,
require discipline.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=797076&postcount=172

 

[PureX]

And by putting rebuke in quotes, you really mean "not rebuke", right?

I put the word "rebuke" in quotes because I doubt the sincerity of it in many cases.

Because forgiveness and rebuke are mutually exclusive.

No they aren't. We can easily "rebuke" someone for an offense that we have already forgiven them for.

 

[jeremiah]

Outstanding!
Since I live close to Denver, I had the privilege of hearing Brian Rohrbaugh {SP?} speak a couple of weeks ago and say the same thing. His son Daniel was killed at Columbine. How could he, or any of us, forgive Kleibold and Harris, since they never voiced any repentance before they killed themselves. Yet someone put crosses up for the two killers as well as all the victims.
The key is that the offer stands, and is unshakeable. If you repent, then we who are the forgiven, will in turn forgive you. The offer is so beautiful in its simplicity.
The opposite is equally beautiful, in its simplicity. If you repent, and ask us for our forgiveness and we refuse; then we have never been forgiven ourselves, because we never truly repented and asked God for His forgiveness. We are therefore, not the children of God!

 

[temple2006]

Nin...I am talking about how you (or anyone else) treats people whom you (or anyone else) considers unsaved dog vomit. Would you share table with them? Jesus did,

 

[Yorzhik]

I put the word "rebuke" in quotes because I doubt the sincerity of it in many cases.

Well that's just great thinking... because you say next -

No they aren't. We can easily "rebuke" someone for an offense that we have already forgiven them for.

- can only be true if "rebuke" isn't actually a rebuke! Forgiveness doesn't allow it! This is where the label "idiot" is correctly applied. It is simply recording a fact. PureX; you are an idiot. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

 

[Yorzhik]

Oh, I almost forgot. PureX; I forgive you for being an idiot - you idiot.

 

[PureX]

Well, can't we all see who you are, today!

If you believe that someone has offended you, and you have forgiven them. You can still "rebuke" them for having offended you. I don't see any reason why you couldn't. And I don't see you giving me any reason why you couldn't.

That being said, what reason would there be for not forgiving someone who has offended you except that you want to wallow in the sense of superiority that you feel from lording their offense over them? I think this is exactly why a lot of people want the offender to bow in repentance before them, and I think it's exactly why a lot of people so love to "rebuke" others in the first place. Which is why I put the word "rebuke" in quotations. I believe that in many cases what's going on is not a genuine rebuke at all, but a petty exhibition of self-righteous indignation.

 

[Servo]

It's great when non-Christians try to council Christians on the Bible and what is right and wrong.

 

[Turbo]

Well that's just great thinking... because you say next -


- can only be true if "rebuke" isn't actually a rebuke! Forgiveness doesn't allow it!

Or it could be that the "forgiveness" is insincere. Why would someone rebuke others for things he has supposedly forgiven them for? That would be evidence that his forgiveness was disingenuous.

 

[Turbo]

It's great when non-Christians try to council Christians on the Bible and what is right and wrong.

Especially when said non-Christians don't believe that what is right and wrong is objective and can be known. :hammer:

 

[PureX]

Why would someone rebuke others for things he has supposedly forgiven them for?

Because they believe that it's the right thing to do. Isn't that the reason for the "rebuke" in the first place? Rebuking others isn't about how we feel, is it? It's about "teaching them" that they have done something wrong.

 

[Yorzhik]

If you believe that someone has offended you, and you have forgiven them. You can still "rebuke" them for having offended you. I don't see any reason why you couldn't. And I don't see you giving me any reason why you couldn't.

It's really simple. Forgiveness is excusing the offense. Rebuking is demanding redress for the offense. They are exclusive. Opposites. They cannot both be true at the same time.

 

[PureX]

It's really simple. Forgiveness is excusing the offense. Rebuking is demanding redress for the offense. They are exclusive. Opposites. They cannot both be true at the same time.

I don't think "rebuking" is demanding redress for an offense. I think it's calling the offender's attention to the offense. Here is the pertinent definition from dictionary.com: "To criticize or reprove sharply; reprimand. See Synonyms at admonish." I don't see anything here about demanding redress. It appears that you've misunderstood the meaning of the word "rebuke".

 

[Yorzhik]

PureX, you idiot, a reprimand or admonishment is a punishment. Are you saying that you can simultaneously punish and forgive?

 

[PureX]

PureX, you idiot, a reprimand or admonishment is a punishment. Are you saying that you can simultaneously punish and forgive?

No a reprimand is a correction, not a punishment. But I'm sure that if you post enough other similar words besides "rebuke" you will eventually find one that means punishment. Why can't you just admit that you were wrong? Lots of people misunderstand words, it's no big deal, really. Is your ego so fragile that you have to call me names and lie about the definitions of words just so you can be right?

 

[temple2006]

Hi Nin.....Looking for an answer.

 

[Ecumenicist]

No a reprimand is a correction, not a punishment. But I'm sure that if you post enough other similar words besides "rebuke" you will eventually find one that means punishment. Why can't you just admit that you were wrong? Lots of people misunderstand words, it's no big deal, really. Is your ego so fragile that you have to call me names and lie about the definitions of words just so you can be right?

Is "you idiot" a rebuke or a punishment, reprimand or admonishment? :chuckle:

 

[Rimi]

Nin...I am talking about how you (or anyone else) treats people whom you (or anyone else) considers unsaved dog vomit. Would you share table with them? Jesus did,

Oh, great, the typical, "Well, Jesus ate with sinners" routine. . .

Listen up:

He didn't have a choice! We're all sinners, dopey. Do you get it! How could He NOT eat with sinners??? Tell me. Someone. ANYone. Tell me how Jesus could avoid eating with sinners!!!!