quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:

So I reiterate that forgiveness is a weakness that will be exploited by your enemies every time

Can you point to anything that demonstrates conclusively that forgiveness has been the sole reason that a problem has been resolved.

Me. I'm an example of that. I'm just as undeserving of forgiveness as that guy who shot Charlie Kirk, yet before I was even born and knowing full well how sinful I would be, Jesus died for me and gave me his forgiveness. My life has definitely been different as a result, and the same could be said for millions of others.

For those who do profess to be Christians, I came across something last night that reminded me of this discussion and I wanted to share. Our small group is starting a new study on prayer, and last night we kicked it off by looking at the Lord's Prayer. It's a passage that many of us have memorized, but usually I stop at the "Amen".


Matthew 6:9-15

9 “Pray, then, in this way:

‘Our Father who is in heaven,
Hallowed be Your name.
10 ‘Your kingdom come.
Your will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
11 ‘Give us this day our daily bread.
12 ‘And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
13 ‘And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil.[For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.’]

14 For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.


As a Christian, those last two verses are pretty clear: we're called to forgive. We're commanded to forgive. And the consequences of not doing so are extreme. On the flip side we have the First Peter passage from the video that Para posted above, which talks about the benefits that come from extending forgiveness.

I wouldn't hold a non-Christian to that standard...that's their decision and ultimately it's between them and God. But for those of us who profess to believe in Him, He's pretty clear on what the expectation is.

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

My first reaction was, “Can’t we forgive them, then kill them?"

Right concept, wrong order. Sequence is important.

It’s because we read right to left…

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:
It’s because we read right to left…

I read semaphored "YMCA", now I've got village people earworming me to distraction.

----

92fstech, thanks for reminding us of verses 14.& 15.

Should the perp who killed Mr. Kirk get life imprisonment, I hope that someone begins a TV or podcast series entitled Lifestyles of the Celebrities in Prison where he is a frequent guest. Followed to the latrine, eating his bologna sandwiches three days a day (when the kitchen has bologna) with plain water, out on work assignments making very small rocks out of very big rocks, picking up dead skunk carcasses from the roadways...

fify...

quote:

Originally posted by rat2306:
Should the perp who killed Mr. Kirk get life imprisonment, I hope that someone begins a TV or podcast series entitled Lifestyles of the Celebrities in Prison where he is a frequent guest. Followed to the latrine, eating his bologna sandwiches three days a day (when the kitchen has bologna) NUTRI-LOAF with plain water, out on work assignments making very small rocks out of very big rocks, picking up dead skunk carcasses from the roadways...

Wouldn't eating Nutri-Loaf be considered cruel and unusual punishment? According to the Wiki it is in NY, MA and MN, but what's his name will be in UT or Federal lock-up. Serve it up to him!

Some thoughts about forgiveness from a secular point of view.

Like many admonitions and commandments in scripture that are believed to have been divinely inspired, advice about forgiveness can be valid for practical, nonreligious reasons as well.

As many people have noted, forgiving someone can help the one who was wronged overcome the feelings of harm that they experience. But that sort of putting behind does not require a feeling of, “That’s okay, I no longer resent you for what you did.”

I’m not even sure what to forgive a wrong really means, and especially when someone says they forgive, but that forgiveness does not mean the person should not be punished (if appropriate). If we say we forgive some sort of debt—money or work owed, for example—that means the debt no longer must be paid. That’s hardly the case, though, if I forgive someone for burning my house down, and yet still expect him to be punished for the act.

From my standpoint, what we should very often do in response to being wronged is to simply put it behind us in terms of how we think about it. I never forgave the unknown person who broke into my car and stole a radio, but by accepting that there is nothing I can do about the incident and its inconvenience is long over, then it’s no longer necessary for me to obsess over it. I don’t have to wonder if he’ll ever be caught or think of appropriate punishments he should suffer.

In addition to the benefit to the individual of allowing things to move into the past and no longer bother us (much), it’s also good for community life, and especially in smaller, tighter-knit groups.

If it’s necessary to interact with someone who has wronged me, or even if they just live next door, it’s much better for everyone concerned—him, me, and even the community at large—if I’m willing to let it go. And of course that’s how our judicial system works: With limited exceptions someone who is convicted of a crime receives some level of punishment, and then that’s it. An extreme example of the opposite view is that every wrong must be avenged, and in some cultures that has led to “blood feuds,” sometimes lasting for generations. What could be worse for a community than that sort of constant internal strife among its members?

Putting wrongs behind us and no longer feeling we must do something about them can be a benefit to both our individual peace of mind, and also for the group as a whole. That’s especially true for small groups subject to external pressures.

But should we, and especially the community as a whole, excuse or at least put every wrong behind us? Of course not.

At the individual level, we can put many things behind us just because of the passage of time and recognition that nothing can possibly be done to achieve any sort of satisfaction. If, however, we know something could be done, but isn’t, that’s an entirely different matter. If I knew who had my stolen radio, but the police had no interest in helping me recover it, I might still be forced to put the entire thing behind me, but it would be more difficult than if I had known at the time of the crime that there was no possibility of catching the thief.

Failing to control wrongs also affects communities at large, even if any particular crime affects only one individual victim at the time. This is a fact that leftist officials in many jurisdictions around the county have deliberately ignored for any number of years, and the effects on the communities are obvious to the point that many victims don’t even bother reporting certain crimes. The science fiction editor John Campbell observed that it’s not power that corrupts, but immunity. When criminals realize they are immune from the consequences of their illegal acts, that only results in more criminals and more crime, reported or not.

Societies as a whole therefore cannot afford to simply “forgive” and put certain things behind them. We hire people to be police officers for the purpose of not forgiving anyone, but to do the things that we don’t want individuals doing on their own. It’s also why we pay to have military forces: there are things that a nation must not ignore and say, “Well, we just won’t think about that.”

Not putting certain things behind us (or “forgive” if one prefers) is not limited to communities as a whole, however. We as individuals also have that right, and in many situations that obligation. Not only is there nothing wrong with having no tolerance in our hearts for certain things, some things warrant our eternal enmity. That doesn’t mean our reactions should all be the same. They may be limited to no more than “Never forget,” because it’s vital that some things never be forgotten by societies as a whole.

At the other end of the spectrum is aggressive, vicious military action. The author Rick Atkinson in his book An Army at Dawn points out that when soldiers were initially involved in the first major US military action of WWII, the invasion of North Africa, they were criticized for not being willing enough to fight and risk death in their early engagements. By the time the campaign ended, however, they had “learned to hate” their enemies, and had become more effective. Can we imagine anyone telling a military formation that they should treat a German SS soldier with kindness because perhaps he’s having a bad day just as we all do?

None of that is to suggest that we on the Right should commit the same sorts of evil acts that have become all too commonly committed—and condoned—by members of the Left; what we should and are able to do is a matter for the individual to decide. It does mean, however, that there is no overarching imperative that we should love and forgive all of our neighbors for whatever they do.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:

It’s because we read right to left…

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
....

Whatever the case, he's got that light shining out of him that I've seen coming from former hell-raisers cleansed in the blood of Christ.
...

What a treasure. Calm, intelligent and well presented. I could see sitting down with this guy and having a cup of coffee and talking about knives, guns, and life. I needed this today. thank you.

"Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats" H.L Mencken

This message has been edited. Last edited by: redstone,

An opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal discussed forgiveness and the differences among the views expressed by Erika Kirk and President Trump and the Jewish view.

“Three Ideas About Forgiveness
“Mrs. Kirk embraces it, Trump rejects it. The Jewish view is a happy medium.”

...

“Here, on vivid display, were two opposed understandings: the Christian ethos of forgiveness and the pagan ethos of vengeance.” …

“The Jewish view stands between these poles. While forgiveness is a divine attribute, human beings must earn it. On Yom Kippur we are instructed that while we can earn forgiveness from God for sins through ritual confession and sincere repentance, which is hard, earning forgiveness from human beings we have wronged is even harder.

“The latter requires us to admit our fault to the offended party, take responsibility for what we have done, feel genuine remorse, make restitution and strive never to repeat the wrong. Only when we have done this is the offended party required to forgive us.” ...

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/th...od=itp_wsj,djemITP_h

It is quite incorrect to imply that, because Christians are compelled to forgive in accordance with the example provided by Christ, that we expect others to forgive us in the same manner.

In my experience, Christians believe exactly as the Jews do, as described in the excerpt you provided.

The article cited this passage:

Colossians 3:13: “Bear with one another and, if anyone has a complaint against another, forgive each other; just as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive.”

Like many of the commandments and admonitions in the Bibles, people obviously interpret it in different ways.

The language in the excerpts seemed, to me, to be commending the Jewish culture on its willingness to "earn" forgiveness, while implying that because Christians believe in Christ-like forgiveness, we expect to receive it the same as we're willing to give it.

Christians believe in earning forgiveness from those we've wronged. But we don't believe it needs to be earned by those to whom we owe it.

The example of Mrs, Kirk is one of offering forgiveness, but the article only had commentary on the Jewish belief of earning (receiving) forgiveness.

I may have misinterpreted.

KSGM, with all respect, you really need to discuss this with your pastor/priest.

It is a constant theme, throughout the NT.

Not being able to edit is annoying.

I’m referring to the idea of not being required to forgive.

I’ve thought a lot about this topic for the past week. It seems to me the point of the directive to turn the other cheek is to prevent vengeance. Self defense is quite different from vengeance. I think we are not expected to endure relentless violence without some kind of defense against the assault. My conclusion is hence, that we’re not to avenge Charlie by returning murder for murder. We are to pursue justice and defend ourselves if further attacks occur.

Aglifter, can you quote specific portions of my post(s), to help me understand what you mean? I think I must have poorly-worded a piece of my thoughts.

I think it may have been that/my poor reading skills while watching an infant. .

The bit about Christians having the same belief on forgiveness as the Jews in your 8:28 post.

quote:

“The Jewish view stands between these poles. While forgiveness is a divine attribute, human beings must earn it. On Yom Kippur we are instructed that while we can earn forgiveness from God for sins through ritual confession and sincere repentance, which is hard, earning forgiveness from human beings we have wronged is even harder.

As Christians, we need to earn forgiveness from God by being genuinely repentant, and we'll also be compelled by the Spirit to atone with the one(s) we've wronged. The other direction is when our views differ. Apparently the Jews (according to doctrine implied in the article) will not extend forgiveness to an offending party until certain apology criteria is met.

quote:

“The latter requires us to admit our fault to the offended party, take responsibility for what we have done, feel genuine remorse, make restitution and strive never to repeat the wrong. Only when we have done this is the offended party required to forgive us.”

This is the part I was referring to, when I said our beliefs are the same. Though in Christianity, both among Christians and in interactions with nonbelievers, I don't think it's implied that anyone is "required" to forgive. It wouldn't mean anything anyway, if it was by requirement, and not of the heart.