What the Bible says:
Luke 23:33-34
And when they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him there, and the robbers, one on his right hand and the other on his left. And Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." Now in dividing his garments they cast lots.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary):
And then the skies parted and God said, "Oh, well, then OK! I forgive all these people who are torturing, mocking and now killing you. Carry on with the crucifixion since Jesus asked Me to forgive all of you, go right on ahead with what you are doing."
God does not grant all of Jesus' requests.
What the Bible says:
Luke 22:42-43
Saying, "Father, if thou art willing, remove this cup from me; yet not my will but thy be done." And there appeared to him an angel from heaven to strengthen him. And falling into an agony he prayed the more earnestly.
What the Bible does not say:
Luke (imaginary)
And the angel who comforted Jesus said, "Psst! Keep it secret but God has granted your request and you are not going to be betrayed, arrested and crucified. We are just totally faking them out and Judas was just part of the punking reality show."
Only God decides regarding forgiveness. I don't know how so many people today think that if they can get a victim to "forgive them" that God will automatically do so. Further, I don't know how so many people today think that because Jesus asked God to forgive his tormentors and killers that God automatically did so. That is why I included the second passage to show that immediately before the request for forgiveness by Jesus and his crucifixion, Jesus asked something else of God which was denied. An angel was sent to comfort him, so God of course heard Jesus' prayer, but God did not grant his request to remove the cup of suffering from Jesus. That would not be done until Jesus had died and resurrected, and will himself pass judgment on humans with great strictness at the Second Coming.
Showing posts with label appropriate forgiveness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label appropriate forgiveness. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
Do not false hope that all sins forgiven
The good news is that people seem to increasingly understand that they have committed some terrible sins, and they are seeking information from their ministers and priests about forgiveness. They want to know if God, particularly through Jesus Christ, since it is through him the promise is made, forgives all sins. The bad news is that many who provide this spiritual direction give false information based on their own lack of understanding of the scripture and also the temptation to sugar coat bad news.
The hub of the problem is to distinguish between God’s ability and willingness to forgive all sins, even the worst of them (Yes) and God’s assurance that he will forgive every sin (No). In this blog post I will use “can” to indicate that certainly God is able to and has an infinitely merciful heart to be able to and to be motivated to potentially forgive even the worst of sin. I will use the word “will” to indicate what people are seeking, which is the absolute assurance that God will forgive their particular sin. Why is there a difference? Because there is, to put it in modern terms, an “eligibility requirement” for the forgiveness of sin, one that while it seems like one requirement, it actually has two parts. Far, far, FAR too many ministers and priests urge the first half and gloss over the second half. They thus give false hope to certain people that God has forgiven their particular sin.
Even the best of the best fall into this trap, such as the Rev. Billy Graham, who people know I greatly admire. Here is from a recent column. Title: “If you confess, God has promised to forgive you.” Question: “I’d give anything to know that God has forgiven me for a terrible sin I committed many years ago. But how can I know if he has? Maybe he decided I don’t deserve to be forgiven, and he’s condemned me to carry this burden the rest of my life.” The good news is that I fully support the majority of the Rev. Graham’s assurances that it is exactly for this reason, to demonstrate his love, but his hatred for sin, that God sent Jesus Christ his Son. People need to realize that anything (with one exception) can be forgiven by God. The one exception is that as Jesus states, offense against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. As I have blogged repeatedly, even Judas would have been forgiven if only he had not despaired and taken his own life. Imagine how he could have been one of the greatest witnesses to God’s mercy if he stayed alive and sought the forgiveness of Jesus Christ, who resurrected from the dead and appeared to the Apostles only three days after his crucifixion! So God is obviously, in his own words, but to put in modern terms, “ready, willing and able” to forgive even the worst of the worst. However, there are conditions and this is where I see ministers gloss over the second half of the conditions.
Excerpt from Answer: “What must you do? First, turn to Christ and confess your sins to him. Then trust him alone for your salvation and receive him by faith into your heart and life. The Bible says, “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord!” (Romans 6:23).
Sounds good, but here’s the problem. What does it mean that one MUST “receive him by faith into your heart and life?” Too many ministers make it seem as though to be forgiven of a sin one must only confess and trust in Jesus. Yes, sure, but you also must totally convert your sinful ways. It is not a coincidence that Paul uses the analogy of a paycheck “the wages of sin is death.” It’s not a fee for a one time sin. One must not only confess one’s sin but totally remove one’s self from the nesting place of that sin and stop encouraging it and enabling it, even if your hands no longer commit that sin. God will NOT forgive a sin until that is done. THAT is what it means to receive Christ into your heart and life.
Let’s use two modern analogies before getting into the actual scripture. The modern analogies help you to hone your discernment so you read the scriptures more correctly and thus get my point better.
Analogy One:
Jesus Christ went to medical school so that all people will be cured of cancer. Would you agree with this? Obviously you should not agree. Even if Jesus Christ went to medical school, he did not do so in order to eliminate all cancer, since anyone can see that if anything incidents of cancer have increased, not decreased. However, if you want to defeat cancer you emulate Jesus Christ and go to medical school. You do not claim that either Jesus, your yourself, will eliminate cancer.
Analogy Two:
You work for an investment bank and you totally ripped off a client, bankrupting him. You used legal tools and products available at the bank, but used unethical guidance. You ask God to forgive you of destroying that person’s life (and you’ve done nothing to fix his problem, perhaps he died in poverty since that was his retirement account). Yet, putting aside that you can’t fix what you did, here is the heart of the problem: You continue to work for that bank and that place of low ethics. Even though you never bankrupt the innocent again, you continue to work for an institution who can and does do so. Your “hands are clean” but you provide income by working at that bank for people who continue to have dirty hands. Why in the world would you think that God will forgive your sin in that circumstance?
Whoa, you are probably yelling at the screen. How do I know this? THAT’s not in the Bible you shriek or sniffle. Oh, but it is.
As you know in the Bible, Rome controlled the entire empire and collected taxes from all people, including the Jews. The tax collector appointed by Rome has the job title of “publican.” When you read the Bible you will observe that an entire group of all people who performed a single job, tax collector, were condemned not only by the people, but in God’s eyes, as being sinners en masse. When you read the Gospel of Luke (who was a professional himself, a physician), you understand this very clearly since he includes detail on not only the public’s opinion but that of Jesus Christ.
Luke 3:12-13
Then came also publicans to be baptized, and said unto him, Master, what shall we do? And he said unto them, “Exact no more than that which is appointed you.”
We see in the passage when John the Baptist is baptizing and preaching that publicans approached him and asked “what shall we do?” Why would an entire job class of people come to him and ask how to get out of a jam? Because this is evidence of what I am saying that the entire class of publicans, whether an individual was sinful or more just than the others, was viewed as notorious doomed sinners. John does not reply, “Oh, don’t worry, individual sin is between you and God and all will be forgiven.” No, John recognizes and validates the entire class of sin problem immediately by telling them not to exact more taxes than what is assigned to them (taxes were like bonus payments back then, where if the tax collector could get more from a person than Rome expected, he could pocket the rest). See the problem? Even an individual “good” tax collector was part of and supportive of an oppressive sinful system, and this is why they are all viewed as doomed sinners.
Here, Jesus has just finished teaching and preaching, when this occurs:
Luke 5:27-32
And after these things he went forth, and saw a publican named Levi, sitting at the receipt of custom [the tax collector’s place of work]: and he said unto him: “Follow me.”
And he left all, rose up, and followed him.
And Levi made him a great feast in his own house; and there was a great company of publicans, and of others that sat down with them.
But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying “Why do you eat and drink with publicans and sinners?”
And Jesus, answering, said unto them, “They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”
Here is what you see as hard evidence in the scriptures:
1. Jesus calls Levi, who will become named Matthew, out of his place of work in total. Unlike the fishermen Apostles who continue to fish to feed their families, Jesus does not let Matthew “stay in the job.”
2. Publicans are throughout the Gospel identified by name as, here, as a group of doomed sinners, despite the behavior of any individual, just or not, within them. Tough luck: that is reality. By distinguishing publicans from the other “sinners” common thought is that they are not only sinners like the other average Joes, but doomed as a group.
3. Jesus does not discourage that attitude. He in fact acknowledges that publicans as a group are on his list of sinners in need of repentance.
4. This is why you can see that Jesus goes a step beyond John the Baptist (which is why Jesus is Jesus and John the Baptist is John the Baptist). He doesn’t just tell Levi to continue working but take no more than what is due to him; Jesus removes Levi in total from the publicans, something he did not do to those who fished among other fishermen for a living.
Yeah. I thought you might not have noticed that.
Luke 5:37-8
And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles, and both are preserved.
You must read the scriptures with your eyes and your fingers, but also in a holistic understanding of the action that is taking place, as it is Jesus role modeling the truth. Jesus does not lecture the crowds that they are being “mean” to publicans and “discriminating” against them. In fact, he demonstrates, by voting with his feet, that he loves Levi as an Apostle, even though he is a publican, but hence removes Levi entirely from the context of sin he was in. We, of course, do not know since the scriptures do not say if Levi was one of the good, moderate, or bad publicans, if he was a huge sinner or a moderate sinner within the context of publicans. All we know is what the scripture demonstrates is that his sins were forgiven and he was made an Apostle only because Jesus removed him in entirety from the group of publicans.
John the Baptist was not incorrect, as he, presumably, baptized the publicans and told them not to gouge the people with extra taxes for their own benefit. But John did not speak for God. Jesus spoke for God, both in his speech and in his actions, which we must emulate in total for any assurances of what God promised is possible.
5. We can now notice the fifth point, which is that Levi throws a dinner for Jesus and invites many publicans.
Levi is no longer of the publicans, but he immediately, through the grace he has already received in just one day from Jesus, upon his calling by Jesus and his acceptance to Jesus, casts a life net for those he has totally left. Levi did not stay within the publicans, since Jesus took him totally from them, but through grace immediately throws the life net to the publicans by inviting many to meet Jesus. Too many ministers focus only on the lesson that Jesus reached out to sinners and miss that other point. Levi and Jesus both underscore through their actions that not gouging people is not enough: people within a group of sinners must have a total conversion of life and heart, symbolized here by their being invited to meet Jesus outside of the sinful workplace, to totally leave their participation therein. They must do their outreach and ministry from the outside, not the inside. That is another way to understand the parable of the new wine being placed in new bottles, and not put into old bottles, where both will be destroyed as they are now incompatible.
When one has committed a dreadful sin, one must not only find God through Jesus and repent, but he or she must also with total and immediate sincerity, as Rev Graham puts it, “receive him by faith into your heart and life.” That’s heart AND life. It’s not enough to love Jesus but still live within the conditions that caused not only your sin, but enables others to continue doing so. To be forgiven in such circumstances, like the publican, you must leave in entirety and belong in your life totally to Jesus. As Paul explains it, you can no longer continue to obtain your wages via sin. If you are still paid by or enabling the people who promote the sin that you committed, you cannot remain among them and be at all assured that God has forgiven you for that sin. No one is being kind or doing you a favor by telling you otherwise. You must follow Jesus and the scriptures for any certainty, and not wishful thinking.
Is it not abundantly better to follow precisely the role model of someone who you know was saved, Levi who became Matthew, as specified in scripture, rather than read into God’s infinite capacity for the forgiveness of sins a free pass that is not truly there? If it was “OK” for Levi to remain a publican but he is now “a good one” and does that work in order to, like the fishermen Apostles, financially support the early Christians, then Jesus would have done so, I mean, duh. Jesus removed Levi from the group that everyone everywhere considered doomed sinners. John the Baptist kind of told them what was wrong with them, that they had to stop gouging extra money from the tax payers who were suffering under the burden, but only Jesus can “fix it.” Yes, Jesus died because of humanity’s sinfulness and also for the forgiveness of sins, but scriptures clearly demonstrate that Jesus did not give a clear pass for continued tacit participation and lack of full repentance from sinful situations.
Ministers and priests must emphasize their own words of spiritual direction so that they and others do not listen with half an ear, hoping for the easy answer. Do not be the one who tells someone that God has forgiven their sin, and then when that person dies they find themselves in hell or at the very least some very tough purgatory. I mention purgatory not to get in a quarrel with those Christians who deny purgatory but, rather, to not totally freak out people in the situation such as the author of the question to Rev Graham. God knows all the circumstances of the terrible sin, since he is, as I constantly remind all people, the All Knowing. It is possible that even a person with an unforgiven sin, that God in his mercy will strip away the sin in purgatory and allow what remains of the soul to enter heaven. But it is also possible, since God knows all the circumstances, that he will cast into hell the person who thinks they were forgiven but are not, since they did not bring Jesus into their life and their heart from that point in their confession onward. If they continue to earn their wages in the place of the sin, that does not look good for forgiveness. But it really is that easy to obtain forgiveness from God, when one follows exactly, not through wishful thinking, what is documented in the Gospel as said and done by Jesus Christ who alone spoke for God with authority. If you remain in the sin factory or the sin wagon where your individual, but genuinely, regretted terrible sin occurred, you are still reaping the wages of sin and have not completely brought Christ into your life and heart, which is required for total forgiveness of sin. Believing that Jesus existed and trusting that he’s a good and merciful guy, and even loving him is not enough if you do not also have him dwell in your heart and your life, peeling away the wages of sin.
I hope that you have found this helpful.
The hub of the problem is to distinguish between God’s ability and willingness to forgive all sins, even the worst of them (Yes) and God’s assurance that he will forgive every sin (No). In this blog post I will use “can” to indicate that certainly God is able to and has an infinitely merciful heart to be able to and to be motivated to potentially forgive even the worst of sin. I will use the word “will” to indicate what people are seeking, which is the absolute assurance that God will forgive their particular sin. Why is there a difference? Because there is, to put it in modern terms, an “eligibility requirement” for the forgiveness of sin, one that while it seems like one requirement, it actually has two parts. Far, far, FAR too many ministers and priests urge the first half and gloss over the second half. They thus give false hope to certain people that God has forgiven their particular sin.
Even the best of the best fall into this trap, such as the Rev. Billy Graham, who people know I greatly admire. Here is from a recent column. Title: “If you confess, God has promised to forgive you.” Question: “I’d give anything to know that God has forgiven me for a terrible sin I committed many years ago. But how can I know if he has? Maybe he decided I don’t deserve to be forgiven, and he’s condemned me to carry this burden the rest of my life.” The good news is that I fully support the majority of the Rev. Graham’s assurances that it is exactly for this reason, to demonstrate his love, but his hatred for sin, that God sent Jesus Christ his Son. People need to realize that anything (with one exception) can be forgiven by God. The one exception is that as Jesus states, offense against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. As I have blogged repeatedly, even Judas would have been forgiven if only he had not despaired and taken his own life. Imagine how he could have been one of the greatest witnesses to God’s mercy if he stayed alive and sought the forgiveness of Jesus Christ, who resurrected from the dead and appeared to the Apostles only three days after his crucifixion! So God is obviously, in his own words, but to put in modern terms, “ready, willing and able” to forgive even the worst of the worst. However, there are conditions and this is where I see ministers gloss over the second half of the conditions.
Excerpt from Answer: “What must you do? First, turn to Christ and confess your sins to him. Then trust him alone for your salvation and receive him by faith into your heart and life. The Bible says, “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord!” (Romans 6:23).
Sounds good, but here’s the problem. What does it mean that one MUST “receive him by faith into your heart and life?” Too many ministers make it seem as though to be forgiven of a sin one must only confess and trust in Jesus. Yes, sure, but you also must totally convert your sinful ways. It is not a coincidence that Paul uses the analogy of a paycheck “the wages of sin is death.” It’s not a fee for a one time sin. One must not only confess one’s sin but totally remove one’s self from the nesting place of that sin and stop encouraging it and enabling it, even if your hands no longer commit that sin. God will NOT forgive a sin until that is done. THAT is what it means to receive Christ into your heart and life.
Let’s use two modern analogies before getting into the actual scripture. The modern analogies help you to hone your discernment so you read the scriptures more correctly and thus get my point better.
Analogy One:
Jesus Christ went to medical school so that all people will be cured of cancer. Would you agree with this? Obviously you should not agree. Even if Jesus Christ went to medical school, he did not do so in order to eliminate all cancer, since anyone can see that if anything incidents of cancer have increased, not decreased. However, if you want to defeat cancer you emulate Jesus Christ and go to medical school. You do not claim that either Jesus, your yourself, will eliminate cancer.
Analogy Two:
You work for an investment bank and you totally ripped off a client, bankrupting him. You used legal tools and products available at the bank, but used unethical guidance. You ask God to forgive you of destroying that person’s life (and you’ve done nothing to fix his problem, perhaps he died in poverty since that was his retirement account). Yet, putting aside that you can’t fix what you did, here is the heart of the problem: You continue to work for that bank and that place of low ethics. Even though you never bankrupt the innocent again, you continue to work for an institution who can and does do so. Your “hands are clean” but you provide income by working at that bank for people who continue to have dirty hands. Why in the world would you think that God will forgive your sin in that circumstance?
Whoa, you are probably yelling at the screen. How do I know this? THAT’s not in the Bible you shriek or sniffle. Oh, but it is.
As you know in the Bible, Rome controlled the entire empire and collected taxes from all people, including the Jews. The tax collector appointed by Rome has the job title of “publican.” When you read the Bible you will observe that an entire group of all people who performed a single job, tax collector, were condemned not only by the people, but in God’s eyes, as being sinners en masse. When you read the Gospel of Luke (who was a professional himself, a physician), you understand this very clearly since he includes detail on not only the public’s opinion but that of Jesus Christ.
Luke 3:12-13
Then came also publicans to be baptized, and said unto him, Master, what shall we do? And he said unto them, “Exact no more than that which is appointed you.”
We see in the passage when John the Baptist is baptizing and preaching that publicans approached him and asked “what shall we do?” Why would an entire job class of people come to him and ask how to get out of a jam? Because this is evidence of what I am saying that the entire class of publicans, whether an individual was sinful or more just than the others, was viewed as notorious doomed sinners. John does not reply, “Oh, don’t worry, individual sin is between you and God and all will be forgiven.” No, John recognizes and validates the entire class of sin problem immediately by telling them not to exact more taxes than what is assigned to them (taxes were like bonus payments back then, where if the tax collector could get more from a person than Rome expected, he could pocket the rest). See the problem? Even an individual “good” tax collector was part of and supportive of an oppressive sinful system, and this is why they are all viewed as doomed sinners.
Here, Jesus has just finished teaching and preaching, when this occurs:
Luke 5:27-32
And after these things he went forth, and saw a publican named Levi, sitting at the receipt of custom [the tax collector’s place of work]: and he said unto him: “Follow me.”
And he left all, rose up, and followed him.
And Levi made him a great feast in his own house; and there was a great company of publicans, and of others that sat down with them.
But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying “Why do you eat and drink with publicans and sinners?”
And Jesus, answering, said unto them, “They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”
Here is what you see as hard evidence in the scriptures:
1. Jesus calls Levi, who will become named Matthew, out of his place of work in total. Unlike the fishermen Apostles who continue to fish to feed their families, Jesus does not let Matthew “stay in the job.”
2. Publicans are throughout the Gospel identified by name as, here, as a group of doomed sinners, despite the behavior of any individual, just or not, within them. Tough luck: that is reality. By distinguishing publicans from the other “sinners” common thought is that they are not only sinners like the other average Joes, but doomed as a group.
3. Jesus does not discourage that attitude. He in fact acknowledges that publicans as a group are on his list of sinners in need of repentance.
4. This is why you can see that Jesus goes a step beyond John the Baptist (which is why Jesus is Jesus and John the Baptist is John the Baptist). He doesn’t just tell Levi to continue working but take no more than what is due to him; Jesus removes Levi in total from the publicans, something he did not do to those who fished among other fishermen for a living.
Yeah. I thought you might not have noticed that.
Luke 5:37-8
And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles, and both are preserved.
You must read the scriptures with your eyes and your fingers, but also in a holistic understanding of the action that is taking place, as it is Jesus role modeling the truth. Jesus does not lecture the crowds that they are being “mean” to publicans and “discriminating” against them. In fact, he demonstrates, by voting with his feet, that he loves Levi as an Apostle, even though he is a publican, but hence removes Levi entirely from the context of sin he was in. We, of course, do not know since the scriptures do not say if Levi was one of the good, moderate, or bad publicans, if he was a huge sinner or a moderate sinner within the context of publicans. All we know is what the scripture demonstrates is that his sins were forgiven and he was made an Apostle only because Jesus removed him in entirety from the group of publicans.
John the Baptist was not incorrect, as he, presumably, baptized the publicans and told them not to gouge the people with extra taxes for their own benefit. But John did not speak for God. Jesus spoke for God, both in his speech and in his actions, which we must emulate in total for any assurances of what God promised is possible.
5. We can now notice the fifth point, which is that Levi throws a dinner for Jesus and invites many publicans.
Levi is no longer of the publicans, but he immediately, through the grace he has already received in just one day from Jesus, upon his calling by Jesus and his acceptance to Jesus, casts a life net for those he has totally left. Levi did not stay within the publicans, since Jesus took him totally from them, but through grace immediately throws the life net to the publicans by inviting many to meet Jesus. Too many ministers focus only on the lesson that Jesus reached out to sinners and miss that other point. Levi and Jesus both underscore through their actions that not gouging people is not enough: people within a group of sinners must have a total conversion of life and heart, symbolized here by their being invited to meet Jesus outside of the sinful workplace, to totally leave their participation therein. They must do their outreach and ministry from the outside, not the inside. That is another way to understand the parable of the new wine being placed in new bottles, and not put into old bottles, where both will be destroyed as they are now incompatible.
When one has committed a dreadful sin, one must not only find God through Jesus and repent, but he or she must also with total and immediate sincerity, as Rev Graham puts it, “receive him by faith into your heart and life.” That’s heart AND life. It’s not enough to love Jesus but still live within the conditions that caused not only your sin, but enables others to continue doing so. To be forgiven in such circumstances, like the publican, you must leave in entirety and belong in your life totally to Jesus. As Paul explains it, you can no longer continue to obtain your wages via sin. If you are still paid by or enabling the people who promote the sin that you committed, you cannot remain among them and be at all assured that God has forgiven you for that sin. No one is being kind or doing you a favor by telling you otherwise. You must follow Jesus and the scriptures for any certainty, and not wishful thinking.
Is it not abundantly better to follow precisely the role model of someone who you know was saved, Levi who became Matthew, as specified in scripture, rather than read into God’s infinite capacity for the forgiveness of sins a free pass that is not truly there? If it was “OK” for Levi to remain a publican but he is now “a good one” and does that work in order to, like the fishermen Apostles, financially support the early Christians, then Jesus would have done so, I mean, duh. Jesus removed Levi from the group that everyone everywhere considered doomed sinners. John the Baptist kind of told them what was wrong with them, that they had to stop gouging extra money from the tax payers who were suffering under the burden, but only Jesus can “fix it.” Yes, Jesus died because of humanity’s sinfulness and also for the forgiveness of sins, but scriptures clearly demonstrate that Jesus did not give a clear pass for continued tacit participation and lack of full repentance from sinful situations.
Ministers and priests must emphasize their own words of spiritual direction so that they and others do not listen with half an ear, hoping for the easy answer. Do not be the one who tells someone that God has forgiven their sin, and then when that person dies they find themselves in hell or at the very least some very tough purgatory. I mention purgatory not to get in a quarrel with those Christians who deny purgatory but, rather, to not totally freak out people in the situation such as the author of the question to Rev Graham. God knows all the circumstances of the terrible sin, since he is, as I constantly remind all people, the All Knowing. It is possible that even a person with an unforgiven sin, that God in his mercy will strip away the sin in purgatory and allow what remains of the soul to enter heaven. But it is also possible, since God knows all the circumstances, that he will cast into hell the person who thinks they were forgiven but are not, since they did not bring Jesus into their life and their heart from that point in their confession onward. If they continue to earn their wages in the place of the sin, that does not look good for forgiveness. But it really is that easy to obtain forgiveness from God, when one follows exactly, not through wishful thinking, what is documented in the Gospel as said and done by Jesus Christ who alone spoke for God with authority. If you remain in the sin factory or the sin wagon where your individual, but genuinely, regretted terrible sin occurred, you are still reaping the wages of sin and have not completely brought Christ into your life and heart, which is required for total forgiveness of sin. Believing that Jesus existed and trusting that he’s a good and merciful guy, and even loving him is not enough if you do not also have him dwell in your heart and your life, peeling away the wages of sin.
I hope that you have found this helpful.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Denying the faith and the Holy Spirit
I'm making just a quick "hold that thought" note about a complicated topic. This morning after watching Mass on EWTN (Father Pacwa hit his sermon right out of the ballpark, right away, totally excellent, I would have added just one thing :-) there was an excellent brief segment about one of the early church fathers. I'll talk more about who when what later but just want to make this point.
He was a bishop who lived a few centuries after Christ, during a time of terrible on and then off persecutions. The emperors and/or their local people would periodically decide to torture and force Christians to renounce Jesus Christ and worship idols, or die.
This became a huge topic (besides the obvious) in the early Christian Church. Remember that is YOUR church too, there was no "Protestant" versus "false church," you ALL come from the truth and the blood of the one true Church.
The topic was... what to do when a persecution was over with, and people who had denied Christ and thus saved their lives repented and wanted to return to the Church, while those who had not denied Christ had died for the faith. Remember, it was not just words mumbled at the point of a sword. Those who were forced to abandon Christ actually had to now regularly worship idols and false gods, not just cross their fingers behind their back and tell a fib. They truly had to turn their back on Jesus Christ AND actively worship idols.
Some in the Church rightly felt this was unforgivable. However some in the Church rightly felt this was forgivable. This is why there is a "Pope," a "Peter," by the way, not to make stuff up because he feels like it, but to help people to respond to the thorny theological questions of the time when they are in it, I mean, duh. By the way, the Pope during the time of this bishop was martyred in the persecution.
The Popes who reigned during the persecutions came to conclude that this was forgivable and believe you me, that was a really unpopular decision for some. The Popes decided on the side of scripture where Christ said that one should not forgive just once, or seven times, but seventy times seven times. The Popes and the bishops, however, felt that not just a hand wave was needed for such people, but genuine repentence and genuine penance (prayer and deeds) to atone for abandoning Christ.
Now, here is why some people correctly could hold the opposite view-that apostacy or whatever it is called-is not forgivable, and I will advise you how to understand how Christ reconciled the two facts that fuel each side in the debate.
Those who feel it is unforgivable cite the scripture when Christ said that offenses against the Holy Spirit are not forgivable. They correctly understand that denying Jesus Christ and then worshipping idols is an offense against the Holy Spirit. This is why people against forgiveness were not being mean, but were God fearing scripture readers, just like the forgiveness side.
Here is the distinction. Christ is saying to freely forgive genuine human weakness. People who broke under torture, or who feared torture on behalf of themselves and their families, were responding to genuine human weakness. Who cannot forgive genuine human weakness when it is genuinely mourned and repented, and conversion of the heart then occurs? That is why Christ says to forgive them repeatedly, as he would have done.
However, here is where that would not qualify for the repeated or even one time forgiveness. The primary offense against the Holy Spirit is to be cynically willing to sin with the planned assumption that "Hey, I'm going to get forgiven anyways." So those who jumped to worship idols, not doing so out of weakness and terror, but doing so because they figure God is mushy and will just forgive them anyways, they are the ones who will be denied forgiveness because they were committing an offense against the Holy Spirit.
So the "forgiving" side and the "tough" side were equally grounded in scripture and equally correct. They needed to discern the difference between those many who caved in due to genuine terror and weakness, and those who caved in due to attempting to manipulate the forgiveness of God through the Holy Spirit. This is why the Popes and the bishops in general decided on the side of forgiveness, trusting that God in his final judgment will sort out the hopefully minority of those who cynically jumped to abandon Jesus Christ, figuring it didn't really matter to God, who was "sure" to forgive them, anyway.
Here is a modern analogy to make it clearer. Sadly this is an all too common scenario.
A single mother lives with a "boyfriend" who abuses the mother's baby. She does not report the boyfriend until the baby is actually seriously injured or killed, and the cruelty is thus uncovered at the hospital by police.
One such mother scenario is that she is weak and craven and is so scared of the "boyfriend" that she lets the baby be hurt and die. That is still absolutely no excuse, either morally or legally, but she would be "eligible" for lack of better words for appropriate forgiveness after genuine repentence.
The other such mother scenario is that she is weak and craven but also cynically figures that at least she still "has" the boyfriend, and that even when they are caught she can claim that she was too scared to stop the abuse. She is planning ahead her "excuse" for her own selfish reasons (continue to have sex, money or whatever from the boyfriend while he abuses the baby). She, spiritually (and legally, of course) is not eligible for forgiveness, using our analogy.
This, by the way, is one reason the Catholic Church is against the death penalty. They hope against hope that even the worse of the worse can experience genuine conversion and repentence, even if they were cynical about it all their miserable lives.
So I wanted to deeply warn, as I have before, those of you who know the truth of the faith yet continue to deny Jesus Christ and the one true God, obeying him, figuring that you can always do it "later" because good old mushy God and "JC" will "forgive you anyway." That is in the realm of the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit. And yes, Protestants, Paul warns against grieving the Holy Spirit too... I know a lot of you feel better when Paul says so "in addition" to Jesus Christ himself! :-)
But those of you who cynically worship idols for money or whatever reasons, including fear, but do not do so from weakness, but from cynical strength, counting on God's mushy and easy forgiveness, even if you are absolved by a priest and so forth, if you are under false pretenses you can well wake up in hell, believe you me, just like the man Jesus talks about in Luke 16.
There is an overflowing abundance of mercy like flowing waters for the genuinely weak and flawed, even if it takes them at the point of the sword to denying Jesus Christ. Manipulators and semi-believers cannot count on that, though, as Jesus Christ, and later Paul, both warn.
He was a bishop who lived a few centuries after Christ, during a time of terrible on and then off persecutions. The emperors and/or their local people would periodically decide to torture and force Christians to renounce Jesus Christ and worship idols, or die.
This became a huge topic (besides the obvious) in the early Christian Church. Remember that is YOUR church too, there was no "Protestant" versus "false church," you ALL come from the truth and the blood of the one true Church.
The topic was... what to do when a persecution was over with, and people who had denied Christ and thus saved their lives repented and wanted to return to the Church, while those who had not denied Christ had died for the faith. Remember, it was not just words mumbled at the point of a sword. Those who were forced to abandon Christ actually had to now regularly worship idols and false gods, not just cross their fingers behind their back and tell a fib. They truly had to turn their back on Jesus Christ AND actively worship idols.
Some in the Church rightly felt this was unforgivable. However some in the Church rightly felt this was forgivable. This is why there is a "Pope," a "Peter," by the way, not to make stuff up because he feels like it, but to help people to respond to the thorny theological questions of the time when they are in it, I mean, duh. By the way, the Pope during the time of this bishop was martyred in the persecution.
The Popes who reigned during the persecutions came to conclude that this was forgivable and believe you me, that was a really unpopular decision for some. The Popes decided on the side of scripture where Christ said that one should not forgive just once, or seven times, but seventy times seven times. The Popes and the bishops, however, felt that not just a hand wave was needed for such people, but genuine repentence and genuine penance (prayer and deeds) to atone for abandoning Christ.
Now, here is why some people correctly could hold the opposite view-that apostacy or whatever it is called-is not forgivable, and I will advise you how to understand how Christ reconciled the two facts that fuel each side in the debate.
Those who feel it is unforgivable cite the scripture when Christ said that offenses against the Holy Spirit are not forgivable. They correctly understand that denying Jesus Christ and then worshipping idols is an offense against the Holy Spirit. This is why people against forgiveness were not being mean, but were God fearing scripture readers, just like the forgiveness side.
Here is the distinction. Christ is saying to freely forgive genuine human weakness. People who broke under torture, or who feared torture on behalf of themselves and their families, were responding to genuine human weakness. Who cannot forgive genuine human weakness when it is genuinely mourned and repented, and conversion of the heart then occurs? That is why Christ says to forgive them repeatedly, as he would have done.
However, here is where that would not qualify for the repeated or even one time forgiveness. The primary offense against the Holy Spirit is to be cynically willing to sin with the planned assumption that "Hey, I'm going to get forgiven anyways." So those who jumped to worship idols, not doing so out of weakness and terror, but doing so because they figure God is mushy and will just forgive them anyways, they are the ones who will be denied forgiveness because they were committing an offense against the Holy Spirit.
So the "forgiving" side and the "tough" side were equally grounded in scripture and equally correct. They needed to discern the difference between those many who caved in due to genuine terror and weakness, and those who caved in due to attempting to manipulate the forgiveness of God through the Holy Spirit. This is why the Popes and the bishops in general decided on the side of forgiveness, trusting that God in his final judgment will sort out the hopefully minority of those who cynically jumped to abandon Jesus Christ, figuring it didn't really matter to God, who was "sure" to forgive them, anyway.
Here is a modern analogy to make it clearer. Sadly this is an all too common scenario.
A single mother lives with a "boyfriend" who abuses the mother's baby. She does not report the boyfriend until the baby is actually seriously injured or killed, and the cruelty is thus uncovered at the hospital by police.
One such mother scenario is that she is weak and craven and is so scared of the "boyfriend" that she lets the baby be hurt and die. That is still absolutely no excuse, either morally or legally, but she would be "eligible" for lack of better words for appropriate forgiveness after genuine repentence.
The other such mother scenario is that she is weak and craven but also cynically figures that at least she still "has" the boyfriend, and that even when they are caught she can claim that she was too scared to stop the abuse. She is planning ahead her "excuse" for her own selfish reasons (continue to have sex, money or whatever from the boyfriend while he abuses the baby). She, spiritually (and legally, of course) is not eligible for forgiveness, using our analogy.
This, by the way, is one reason the Catholic Church is against the death penalty. They hope against hope that even the worse of the worse can experience genuine conversion and repentence, even if they were cynical about it all their miserable lives.
So I wanted to deeply warn, as I have before, those of you who know the truth of the faith yet continue to deny Jesus Christ and the one true God, obeying him, figuring that you can always do it "later" because good old mushy God and "JC" will "forgive you anyway." That is in the realm of the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit. And yes, Protestants, Paul warns against grieving the Holy Spirit too... I know a lot of you feel better when Paul says so "in addition" to Jesus Christ himself! :-)
But those of you who cynically worship idols for money or whatever reasons, including fear, but do not do so from weakness, but from cynical strength, counting on God's mushy and easy forgiveness, even if you are absolved by a priest and so forth, if you are under false pretenses you can well wake up in hell, believe you me, just like the man Jesus talks about in Luke 16.
There is an overflowing abundance of mercy like flowing waters for the genuinely weak and flawed, even if it takes them at the point of the sword to denying Jesus Christ. Manipulators and semi-believers cannot count on that, though, as Jesus Christ, and later Paul, both warn.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Bible Reading and Commentary re: forgiveness
Many people correctly focus on the importance of forgiveness in the Christian faith, and as a principle for humanity as a whole. The Gospels and Epistles are filled with the teaching of Jesus in regard to the importance of and necessity for forgiveness. The Old Testament also discusses God’s requirement for forgiveness, but that is expressed in terms of the Law, where debts must be forgiven, both of monetary debts and the lending of goods. But there is a problem with how moderns have transmuted the understanding of forgiveness in ways that are contrary to the words of the Bible, in black and white, that are plain to be read.
The reason that moderns now misunderstand and actually preach an incorrect gospel is that they hope that Christians are obligated to forgive all sins. Therefore moderns feel that they are easily let off the hook of sin. That is far from true and a very dangerous “interpretation.”
First of all, forgiveness for sin only comes from God, not from humans. Humans cannot forgive each other their sins! Humans can forgive individual wrong doing against one another with one huge exception that will be bulk of my discussion here today. So a human can and should forgive wrongs if it is reasonable to do so. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that a parent, for example “must” forgive the murderer of their child. One cannot transfer responsibility for a wrong from the shoulders of the wrong doer onto the shoulders of the victim. So look again with clear eyes at how Jesus taught the “Our Father” prayer:
Matthew 6:12
And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
This is one of the two passages that people constantly point to as Jesus teaching forgiveness. But notice that Jesus is consistent in the Lord’s Prayer with referencing the Old Testament viewpoint of a forgiveness of debts. His parables also focused on the forgiveness of debts. No where in the Bible, either Old or New Testament is it portrayed as necessary to forgive grave wrongs of a behavioral nature. I know, as you read this you are burning to point out to me the second example I mentioned above, but hang on for a minute. There is another point to first make about Matthew 6:12. Notice that it is a chain of forgiveness. The one praying forgives another person his or her debts to him or her, and then in return God forgives the one praying for sins. God is still in control of the forgiving of sins! The humans can forgive each others debts, but they cannot forgive each other’s sins.
The Bible teaches, repeatedly, that sin is an offense against GOD. When someone sins and harms another person, yes, one has then harmed a person with that sin, and the harm is legitimate discussion for potentially generous forgiveness. But the sin itself cannot be forgiven by the victim of the sin because sin is an offense against God because it is defiance of God, his will and what he has plainly ordered of humans. Suppose someone robs you. Yes, you can forgive the person for the harm of the robbery, but you cannot forgive them of their sin that violates one of the Commandments. Do not ever forget that. Ultimately God alone judges whether sin is forgiven.
Thus the important exception to what is the Christian credo of forgiveness is that one cannot forgive a sin that is directed against God, even if the actions of the sin are directed toward the person. The obvious example is that prophets sent by God cannot and did not ever forgive those who persecuted them. I know, you are itching to tell me that I am wrong, but no, you are wrong. Prophets cannot forgive those who defy God by refusing his messengers. It is not within their power because their bodies and what happens to them is in the service of God. So it’s not as though “their feelings are hurt” or they are tortured in and of themselves. When a prophet is persecuted it is sin against God to his face, even if the prophet’s body is the one who bears the scars. No prophet can forgive their persecutor; only God can do that.
So now you are not so eager to point out the second example of Jesus, are you? For now you are beginning to understand. Jesus did not forgive his tormentors. He ASKED God to do so. What was done to Jesus was sin against God and can only be forgiven by God. First of all, recall what Jesus said after he had been scourged and is carrying the cross to his own crucifixion:
Luke 23:27-32
A large crowd of people followed Jesus, including many women who mourned and lamented him. Jesus turned to them and said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep instead for yourselves and for your children, for indeed the days are coming when people will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed.’ At that time people will say to the mountains, ‘Fall upon us!’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us!’ for if these things are done when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?” Now two others, both criminals, were led away with them to be executed.
Now, this was a lot for Jesus to say as he was suffering up the path to Golgotha. Jesus did not say, “Hey, it’s going to be alright, because I forgive them all and so does God.” Instead, Jesus takes the time to point out that they should not mourn him, God’s prophet about to be executed, but they should mourn themselves because as a result really bad times will come. Jesus is the green wood. To understand this you must understand that green wood is freshly cut wood that still has water in it as it is still alive, and thus it is nearly impossible to burn. So Jesus is the living green wood, there as a sign of God’s love among people, with the water of life still in him. Jesus is saying that if they crucify him, the green wood, while he is still among them, how much worse will it be when Jesus has been away from them, the green wood is now gone, and only the dry brown wood that will quickly burn is remaining. So Jesus is warning the women who mourn him that people will deeply regret the sin against God that is the crucifixion of Jesus.
Luke 23:33-34
When they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him and the criminals there, one on his right, the other on his left. Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, they know not what they do.” They divided his garments by casting lots.
Um, notice that Jesus is not forgiving the people himself. Jesus is not leaning over (as best as he can as he is being crucified after being scourged) and offering forgiveness as he is being crucified. Jesus asks God to forgive them. Jesus does not attempt to forgive them himself. People continually misquote this passage even though it is as plain as the nose on your face. Jesus does NOT do what he cannot do, which is forgive those who are putting to death God’s prophet. Jesus never can or would want to say anything that is misleading, and is anything but perfect in God’s will and truthfulness. So obviously he can not and would not “make a good example by forgiving those as they are nailing him.” I mean, would you actually read the scripture please?
Jesus had previously made the point that sins are the purview of God to forgive, and not humans forgiving each other for sin. That is plain when Jesus actually lists what sins (those against the Holy Spirit) that God will NOT forgive.
Matthew 12:31-32
Therefore, I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
This seems difficult to understand but it is not. Notice that Jesus is referring to himself as the Son of Man, not the Son of God. Thus he is referring to his bodily presence. Therefore if someone blasphemes Jesus he is wronging another human person, and thus can be forgiven by God, in theory. Jesus is saying that any wrong done against him (foreshadowing the crucifixion) can be forgiven if one repents and God wills forgiveness, as it is a “human on human” sin. However, one cannot sin against the Holy Spirit in a “human on human” way. A sin against the Holy Spirit is a sin that is totally different from a sin against Jesus himself, because a sin against the Holy Spirit is directly against God.
Thus Jesus is underscoring that he is God’s prophet, in human body, the Son of God but also the Son of Man. However, the point that anything against him can, in theory, be forgiven, should there be genuine repentance is only made in order to deliver one of his starkest and blunt warnings. When one sins against the Holy Spirit one is not committing a “human on human” offense, but defying and blaspheming God’s will to his face. This is true even if it is a human-on-human method by which one sins and blasphemes the Holy Spirit.
That is why Jesus says “speaks against the Holy Spirit.” Speaking is a human on human action, where someone is speaking and someone listens. So if someone blasphemes the Holy Spirit to someone else, it’s not like the listener can say, “Wow, you said a really bad thing about the Holy Spirit, but I forgive you.” THAT is the point that Jesus is driving home and it is crucial that people understand.
This is because, again, like killing a prophet, it’s not a matter of hurting the feelings of the listener or bruising, cutting or killing the prophet’s body. Just as the persecution and murder of a prophet of God is a direct sin against God, and not per se against the prophet, blaspheming the Holy Spirit is an attempt to hinder the work of salvation that the Holy Spirit is engaged in, constantly. A Holy Spirit blasphemer is not “hurting the feelings of the Holy Spirit” or of the person who reads or overhears the blasphemy. A Holy Spirit blasphemer is attempting to thwart God’s will to save as many people as possible by attacking the faith through blasphemy. Thus the Holy Spirit blasphemer is saying to God, “No, I will not allow you to save people and reach their souls, and bring them to salvation, because I with my mind and my mouth and my deeds will oppose you.” A Holy Spirit blasphemer is assigning his or herself the role of Lucifer.
So when moronic teenagers get on the Internet and “deny the Holy Spirit” in order to test God and demonstrate that they do not believe, they are totally being childish and missing the point. A Holy Spirit blasphemer works against the saving of souls, not just mouth a stupid test into the cameras. Thus someone blasphemes the Holy Spirit when they tear down and embarrass and profane those who are working for salvation under the inspiration and protection of the Holy Spirit. THAT is what cannot be forgiven because the Holy Spirit blasphemer is attempting to hinder God’s work through the Holy Spirit of the rescuing and saving of souls.
Suppose a nun is raped. That is an example of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit and the nun cannot forgive that on God’s behalf. Why? Because the rape is done to degrade and terrorize the faithful and take them off of the path of salvation. The nun can forgive the battering of her body and her degradation, but she cannot forgive the reasoning and objective of the attack and degradation, which was to terrorize and spread disbelief. Thus when someone rapes a nun, in this example, he or she is basically saying, “Look, I have defiled one of your believers. If you, God, actually exist, you would have stopped it.” Thus the rapist is not only a dirty beast of a human, but defying God in order to destroy the salvation of those around who observe the nun’s disgrace.
How do we know this? Again, look at the example of Jesus.
Matthew 27:26-31
Then he released Barabbas to them, but after he had Jesus scourged, he handed him over to be crucified. Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus inside the praetorium and gathered the whole cohort around him. They stripped off his clothes and threw a scarlet military cloak about him. Weaving a crown out of thorns, they placed it on his head, and a reed in his right hand. And kneeling before him, they mocked him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” They spat upon him and took the reed and kept striking him on the head. And when they had mocked him, they stripped him of the cloak, dressed him in his own clothes, and led him off to crucify him.
Do you notice Jesus is not “forgiving” them as they rip his flesh off with whips, tear his forehead and head with the crown of thorns, strip him in front of the invited throng of the audience, strike him on the head, spit on him, and mock him? Notice that the soldiers “gathered the whole cohort around” Jesus. They deliberately got together a crowd to witness his mockery and torture. That is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, using Jesus as the mechanism. They degraded Jesus in order to defy and degrade the Holy Spirit, and those are the people who will not be forgiven. Jesus only asks God to forgive those who are nailing him to the wood when he is actually being crucified and raised on the cross. There is, as in everything Jesus said and did, great significance, for both hope but also for dire warning. Jesus did not walk in a procession of forgiving everyone as they did it because he would not and could not. Prophet killing and the degradation of those who preach God’s word is direct sin against God, not human on human subject for forgiveness.
This is why God is asked by Jesus to forgive those who are actually doing the nailing of him to the cross. Jesus does not speak a word of forgiveness during all the torture as lead up to the crucifixion, and he never presumes to forgive sin against God on God’s behalf as the sin is taking place. Jesus warned that some sin, the blaspheming of the Holy Spirit, will not be forgiven. That is why he told the women that they should mourn themselves and their people, going forward, not Jesus himself, because the consequences of such sin will be dire. Jesus could not have been more clear throughout the Gospel of the difference between sinning against him as the Son of Man (and thus the potential for forgiveness though, as we saw with Judas, he did not avail himself of that possibility) and “speaking against” and thus blaspheming the Holy Spirit.
The reason that moderns now misunderstand and actually preach an incorrect gospel is that they hope that Christians are obligated to forgive all sins. Therefore moderns feel that they are easily let off the hook of sin. That is far from true and a very dangerous “interpretation.”
First of all, forgiveness for sin only comes from God, not from humans. Humans cannot forgive each other their sins! Humans can forgive individual wrong doing against one another with one huge exception that will be bulk of my discussion here today. So a human can and should forgive wrongs if it is reasonable to do so. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that a parent, for example “must” forgive the murderer of their child. One cannot transfer responsibility for a wrong from the shoulders of the wrong doer onto the shoulders of the victim. So look again with clear eyes at how Jesus taught the “Our Father” prayer:
Matthew 6:12
And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
This is one of the two passages that people constantly point to as Jesus teaching forgiveness. But notice that Jesus is consistent in the Lord’s Prayer with referencing the Old Testament viewpoint of a forgiveness of debts. His parables also focused on the forgiveness of debts. No where in the Bible, either Old or New Testament is it portrayed as necessary to forgive grave wrongs of a behavioral nature. I know, as you read this you are burning to point out to me the second example I mentioned above, but hang on for a minute. There is another point to first make about Matthew 6:12. Notice that it is a chain of forgiveness. The one praying forgives another person his or her debts to him or her, and then in return God forgives the one praying for sins. God is still in control of the forgiving of sins! The humans can forgive each others debts, but they cannot forgive each other’s sins.
The Bible teaches, repeatedly, that sin is an offense against GOD. When someone sins and harms another person, yes, one has then harmed a person with that sin, and the harm is legitimate discussion for potentially generous forgiveness. But the sin itself cannot be forgiven by the victim of the sin because sin is an offense against God because it is defiance of God, his will and what he has plainly ordered of humans. Suppose someone robs you. Yes, you can forgive the person for the harm of the robbery, but you cannot forgive them of their sin that violates one of the Commandments. Do not ever forget that. Ultimately God alone judges whether sin is forgiven.
Thus the important exception to what is the Christian credo of forgiveness is that one cannot forgive a sin that is directed against God, even if the actions of the sin are directed toward the person. The obvious example is that prophets sent by God cannot and did not ever forgive those who persecuted them. I know, you are itching to tell me that I am wrong, but no, you are wrong. Prophets cannot forgive those who defy God by refusing his messengers. It is not within their power because their bodies and what happens to them is in the service of God. So it’s not as though “their feelings are hurt” or they are tortured in and of themselves. When a prophet is persecuted it is sin against God to his face, even if the prophet’s body is the one who bears the scars. No prophet can forgive their persecutor; only God can do that.
So now you are not so eager to point out the second example of Jesus, are you? For now you are beginning to understand. Jesus did not forgive his tormentors. He ASKED God to do so. What was done to Jesus was sin against God and can only be forgiven by God. First of all, recall what Jesus said after he had been scourged and is carrying the cross to his own crucifixion:
Luke 23:27-32
A large crowd of people followed Jesus, including many women who mourned and lamented him. Jesus turned to them and said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep instead for yourselves and for your children, for indeed the days are coming when people will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed.’ At that time people will say to the mountains, ‘Fall upon us!’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us!’ for if these things are done when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?” Now two others, both criminals, were led away with them to be executed.
Now, this was a lot for Jesus to say as he was suffering up the path to Golgotha. Jesus did not say, “Hey, it’s going to be alright, because I forgive them all and so does God.” Instead, Jesus takes the time to point out that they should not mourn him, God’s prophet about to be executed, but they should mourn themselves because as a result really bad times will come. Jesus is the green wood. To understand this you must understand that green wood is freshly cut wood that still has water in it as it is still alive, and thus it is nearly impossible to burn. So Jesus is the living green wood, there as a sign of God’s love among people, with the water of life still in him. Jesus is saying that if they crucify him, the green wood, while he is still among them, how much worse will it be when Jesus has been away from them, the green wood is now gone, and only the dry brown wood that will quickly burn is remaining. So Jesus is warning the women who mourn him that people will deeply regret the sin against God that is the crucifixion of Jesus.
Luke 23:33-34
When they came to the place called the Skull, they crucified him and the criminals there, one on his right, the other on his left. Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, they know not what they do.” They divided his garments by casting lots.
Um, notice that Jesus is not forgiving the people himself. Jesus is not leaning over (as best as he can as he is being crucified after being scourged) and offering forgiveness as he is being crucified. Jesus asks God to forgive them. Jesus does not attempt to forgive them himself. People continually misquote this passage even though it is as plain as the nose on your face. Jesus does NOT do what he cannot do, which is forgive those who are putting to death God’s prophet. Jesus never can or would want to say anything that is misleading, and is anything but perfect in God’s will and truthfulness. So obviously he can not and would not “make a good example by forgiving those as they are nailing him.” I mean, would you actually read the scripture please?
Jesus had previously made the point that sins are the purview of God to forgive, and not humans forgiving each other for sin. That is plain when Jesus actually lists what sins (those against the Holy Spirit) that God will NOT forgive.
Matthew 12:31-32
Therefore, I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
This seems difficult to understand but it is not. Notice that Jesus is referring to himself as the Son of Man, not the Son of God. Thus he is referring to his bodily presence. Therefore if someone blasphemes Jesus he is wronging another human person, and thus can be forgiven by God, in theory. Jesus is saying that any wrong done against him (foreshadowing the crucifixion) can be forgiven if one repents and God wills forgiveness, as it is a “human on human” sin. However, one cannot sin against the Holy Spirit in a “human on human” way. A sin against the Holy Spirit is a sin that is totally different from a sin against Jesus himself, because a sin against the Holy Spirit is directly against God.
Thus Jesus is underscoring that he is God’s prophet, in human body, the Son of God but also the Son of Man. However, the point that anything against him can, in theory, be forgiven, should there be genuine repentance is only made in order to deliver one of his starkest and blunt warnings. When one sins against the Holy Spirit one is not committing a “human on human” offense, but defying and blaspheming God’s will to his face. This is true even if it is a human-on-human method by which one sins and blasphemes the Holy Spirit.
That is why Jesus says “speaks against the Holy Spirit.” Speaking is a human on human action, where someone is speaking and someone listens. So if someone blasphemes the Holy Spirit to someone else, it’s not like the listener can say, “Wow, you said a really bad thing about the Holy Spirit, but I forgive you.” THAT is the point that Jesus is driving home and it is crucial that people understand.
This is because, again, like killing a prophet, it’s not a matter of hurting the feelings of the listener or bruising, cutting or killing the prophet’s body. Just as the persecution and murder of a prophet of God is a direct sin against God, and not per se against the prophet, blaspheming the Holy Spirit is an attempt to hinder the work of salvation that the Holy Spirit is engaged in, constantly. A Holy Spirit blasphemer is not “hurting the feelings of the Holy Spirit” or of the person who reads or overhears the blasphemy. A Holy Spirit blasphemer is attempting to thwart God’s will to save as many people as possible by attacking the faith through blasphemy. Thus the Holy Spirit blasphemer is saying to God, “No, I will not allow you to save people and reach their souls, and bring them to salvation, because I with my mind and my mouth and my deeds will oppose you.” A Holy Spirit blasphemer is assigning his or herself the role of Lucifer.
So when moronic teenagers get on the Internet and “deny the Holy Spirit” in order to test God and demonstrate that they do not believe, they are totally being childish and missing the point. A Holy Spirit blasphemer works against the saving of souls, not just mouth a stupid test into the cameras. Thus someone blasphemes the Holy Spirit when they tear down and embarrass and profane those who are working for salvation under the inspiration and protection of the Holy Spirit. THAT is what cannot be forgiven because the Holy Spirit blasphemer is attempting to hinder God’s work through the Holy Spirit of the rescuing and saving of souls.
Suppose a nun is raped. That is an example of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit and the nun cannot forgive that on God’s behalf. Why? Because the rape is done to degrade and terrorize the faithful and take them off of the path of salvation. The nun can forgive the battering of her body and her degradation, but she cannot forgive the reasoning and objective of the attack and degradation, which was to terrorize and spread disbelief. Thus when someone rapes a nun, in this example, he or she is basically saying, “Look, I have defiled one of your believers. If you, God, actually exist, you would have stopped it.” Thus the rapist is not only a dirty beast of a human, but defying God in order to destroy the salvation of those around who observe the nun’s disgrace.
How do we know this? Again, look at the example of Jesus.
Matthew 27:26-31
Then he released Barabbas to them, but after he had Jesus scourged, he handed him over to be crucified. Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus inside the praetorium and gathered the whole cohort around him. They stripped off his clothes and threw a scarlet military cloak about him. Weaving a crown out of thorns, they placed it on his head, and a reed in his right hand. And kneeling before him, they mocked him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” They spat upon him and took the reed and kept striking him on the head. And when they had mocked him, they stripped him of the cloak, dressed him in his own clothes, and led him off to crucify him.
Do you notice Jesus is not “forgiving” them as they rip his flesh off with whips, tear his forehead and head with the crown of thorns, strip him in front of the invited throng of the audience, strike him on the head, spit on him, and mock him? Notice that the soldiers “gathered the whole cohort around” Jesus. They deliberately got together a crowd to witness his mockery and torture. That is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, using Jesus as the mechanism. They degraded Jesus in order to defy and degrade the Holy Spirit, and those are the people who will not be forgiven. Jesus only asks God to forgive those who are nailing him to the wood when he is actually being crucified and raised on the cross. There is, as in everything Jesus said and did, great significance, for both hope but also for dire warning. Jesus did not walk in a procession of forgiving everyone as they did it because he would not and could not. Prophet killing and the degradation of those who preach God’s word is direct sin against God, not human on human subject for forgiveness.
This is why God is asked by Jesus to forgive those who are actually doing the nailing of him to the cross. Jesus does not speak a word of forgiveness during all the torture as lead up to the crucifixion, and he never presumes to forgive sin against God on God’s behalf as the sin is taking place. Jesus warned that some sin, the blaspheming of the Holy Spirit, will not be forgiven. That is why he told the women that they should mourn themselves and their people, going forward, not Jesus himself, because the consequences of such sin will be dire. Jesus could not have been more clear throughout the Gospel of the difference between sinning against him as the Son of Man (and thus the potential for forgiveness though, as we saw with Judas, he did not avail himself of that possibility) and “speaking against” and thus blaspheming the Holy Spirit.
Friday, July 25, 2008
People might forgive too soon
Two nights ago just before my evening prayers I had an ominous feeling that people who had wronged me, grievously wronged me, around thirty years ago were going to be severely chastised by God. While these people have done nothing to indicate atonement and certainly have done nothing spiritually or materially generous in recompense in my direction, I was moved to pray to God for him to have mercy on them.
Even I, who knows God very, very well, was surprised at the rebuke that I received. I don't mean like I was yelled at or something went wrong to me, but I viewed a very swift chastisement of people who have benefited materially by my being wronged. I was given to understand quite clearly by God that I am not to forgive people who do not repent, atone, and ask for forgiveness. God describes it with this kind of image, that a person being beaten and tortured cannot have the torturers scream at her "forgive us" while they assault her further.
I thought I would share this communication because I wrote recently on this very topic, and there has been a pressure put upon pious people to "forgive," even before the sinner or criminal has made even nominal admission of guilt and regret.
So, sorry a-holes, but I'm not to forgive anyone for anything, even though I reluctantly, but sincerely, tried (half knowing the answer in advance but still surprised at how swiftly God responded to demonstrate that his chastisement, even decades later, will come to those who refuse to repent). Additionally, do remember that God promises that his vengence for wrongs to him and against the innocent will fall on multiple generations (since those who benefit, especially materially, from their parents' trangressions will also have to pay for the injustice). Therefore, a delay in chastisement often only means that God will chastise multiple generations, and I've seen some examples of that recently. It's not like the Bible hasn't made that abundantly clear. "Experts" ought to be more thorough in their Bible study and not cherry pick.
Even I, who knows God very, very well, was surprised at the rebuke that I received. I don't mean like I was yelled at or something went wrong to me, but I viewed a very swift chastisement of people who have benefited materially by my being wronged. I was given to understand quite clearly by God that I am not to forgive people who do not repent, atone, and ask for forgiveness. God describes it with this kind of image, that a person being beaten and tortured cannot have the torturers scream at her "forgive us" while they assault her further.
I thought I would share this communication because I wrote recently on this very topic, and there has been a pressure put upon pious people to "forgive," even before the sinner or criminal has made even nominal admission of guilt and regret.
So, sorry a-holes, but I'm not to forgive anyone for anything, even though I reluctantly, but sincerely, tried (half knowing the answer in advance but still surprised at how swiftly God responded to demonstrate that his chastisement, even decades later, will come to those who refuse to repent). Additionally, do remember that God promises that his vengence for wrongs to him and against the innocent will fall on multiple generations (since those who benefit, especially materially, from their parents' trangressions will also have to pay for the injustice). Therefore, a delay in chastisement often only means that God will chastise multiple generations, and I've seen some examples of that recently. It's not like the Bible hasn't made that abundantly clear. "Experts" ought to be more thorough in their Bible study and not cherry pick.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
