I’m currently working on a case study for one of my classes. It involves forgiveness. One of the “highly suggested books” to read is called Unpacking Forgiveness by Chris Brauns. It’s an interesting book. The basic premise is that we are not called to forgive a person until they repent and ask for it. He states that is called Biblical forgiveness. He believes that forgiveness and reconciliation can never be separated and can only be given to a person who wants to be forgiven. He believes that Christians should always be ready to forgive.
He defines forgiveness as a commitment by the offended to pardon graciously the repentant from moral liability and to be reconciled to that person, although not all consequences are necessarily eliminated. (pp. 72)
His three basic ideas about forgiveness when dealing with an unrepentant offender are:
- Resolve not to take revenge
- Proactively show love
- Don’t forgive the unrepentant, but leave room for the wrath of God.
Of course, his third principle is the most controversial. He quotes Romans 12: 17-21, especially verse 19 as his proof text. THose verses say,
17Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”[d]says the Lord. 20On the contrary:
“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”[e] 21Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (emphasis his)
So, I know this is kind of unfair since you haven’t read the book (or maybe some of you have) but I’m curious what are you thoughts about his definition and his principles of dealing with the unrepentant person? Please don’t assume that I agree or disagree with the guy. I had to read the book and apply it the case study. I’m chewing on that paper now. I’ll look forward to your thoughts.
The book can be found at Amazon here.
![Image of The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31Jl6fhDLxL._SL75_.jpg "The Prodigal God (An Unabridged Production)[2-CD Set]; Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith")
111 Comments(+Add)
OK, I’ll bite.
The guy sounds like an idiot…
Seriously, though, that seems like the worst advice you could give someone, honestly. I’ve seen people who refuse to forgive a person who is “unrepentant” towards them, and it end up causing the wronged party more harm than good.
As far as his exegesis of Romans 12, it seems bass ackwards to me. I would read the “leave room for God’s wrath” to mean don’t let try to set yourself as the final judge of a person. Forgive them, don’t take revenge, and trust God to hold them to account or bring them to a place of repentance.
Beyond that, telling someone to love someone who offended them but not forgive them seems to me to be an impossibility. How can you really love someone while still holding unforgiveness toward them?
Luke 17:3-4 puts a condition on the forgiveness process:
.”
I would assume this is the basis of this author’s premise.
The other Gospel accounts do not incluce the “repent” condition. However, it can be argued the more stringent/detailed account takes precedence over the less stringent/detailed.
However, God’s forgiveness on Calvary was unilateral. We did not repent before we were forgiven. However, said forgiveness is not applied/effected without faith with its implied repentance. So perhaps the author has a point. I have heard this teaching before.
John Hughes,
He uses that as one of his arguments. He also states that one should always be prepared to offer forgiveness as soon as it is asked for. To be honest, it sounds semantics to me but I have to take a defensible position and the Prof agrees with this joker.
What if a person who has offended you dies? Do you still harbor some sort of unforgiveness towards them?
The way I see it, the repentance part of the forgiveness process is not something that the wronged party demands. It’s something that the person doing the wrong has to to freely give. I cannot demand repentance from someone who has wronged me. Anyone who has tried to make a child apologize for something they’ve done should realize this. It’s not much different with adults.
Mark 11:25 says:
This seems to indicate that forgiveness is something we must do regardless of the repentance or non-repentance of the person who wronged us. And then, also, of course is Paul’s description of love in 1 Corinthians 13 that says it “keeps no record of wrongs”. How, if we are keeping no record of something can we be in a place where we have some condition on our forgiveness for that wrong?
Can forgiveness be affected without repentance? On the one hand unilateral forgiveness positively affects the forgiver and if nothing else prevents a root of bitterness from taking hold. Also, it is possible to offend and not be awear of it so the offender does not even know they need to repent of something. So again, a unlateral forgivenss on the part of the offended is beneficial to the offended’s spiritual (and even physical) well being and can maintain the relationship which might otherwise be harmed by the offense.
Sometimes my wife may offend me and not repent and even think her offense is justified. (Of course the situation would never be reversed!) Unilateral forgiveness on my part is beneficial on many levels. So in almost every scenario I can think of, unilaterial forgiveness is the most beneficial option, so I would say forgiveness is beneficial irregardless of the repentance of the offender.
Phil I was looking for that verse!!! Wonderful. This has been a success already.
Joe,
Is this post just a trick so you can get us to write your paper for you?
haha. I think best in discussion and I’m not sure which direction to take on this one.
Joe – perhaps we are dealing with two distinct things here – which the author has conflated into a single item:
1) Forgiveness (of the heart – internal) – this is something that should be occurring immediately on our part (and likely what most of us associate with “forgiveness”).
2) Forgiveness (the act – external) – this is the physical act of forgiving the person who wronged you – it is something verbalized and directed toward the wrongdoer.
If you view this as two separate concepts, then I could possibly suppport the author’s contention.
Why?
Because it’s pretty darn hubristic to tell someone “I forgive you for (x)” if someone doesn’t consider that they’ve sinned against you by doing (x). In fact, it quite often ticks them off even more (as it should).
Example 1: You’ve just pointed out (for the twenty-kajillionth time) that Pastor Smith has lied about a prominent Christian figure.
Pastor Smith says – “You are being disrespectful and divisive about one of God’s anointed. I forgive you, but you should repent, lest God not do so.”
In this case, Pastor Smith has made the assumption that a) you’ve sinned; b) his spoken forgiveness is not an attempt to be a sanctimonious jerk; and c) this will somehow meet Jesus’ teaching of forgiveness.
Example 2: Pastor Smith writes an article on the internet about you, and calls you an agnostic. After reading this, you decide to just say “grace and peace to you, Pastor Smith”, and to forgive him in your heart.
Years later, Pastor Smith comes to you and says “I’m sorry, Joe. I lied about you, and it was wrong of me to slander you so.” You then say “That’s OK, Pastor Smith, I forgive you”.
When did you forgive Pastor Smith? In your heart, hopefully you did right after he lied about you. Verbally, though, you did not forgive him until he asked for your forgiveness…
So – looking at Phil’s verse (Mark 11:25 ) – this seems to be speaking to internal forgiveness.
However, looking at the one John H cited (Luke 17:3-4), this seems to be speaking to external (directed) forgiveness.
Chris L.
I forgive you.
His premise makes forgiveness a reward and not a grace. Paul asks Philemon to forgive Onesimus not becaue Onesimus is repentant, but because Philemon owes Paul.
What if I sin and do not ask God forgiveness, does God still forgive me or am I doomed?
Actually, Rick I think this argument works against your premise. You do believe that God forgave the sins of the world at the cross but unless a person repents that forgiveness does not redeem them from Hell. In other words, even though God is prepared to forgive us, He does not until we repent, correct?
I agree with Chris on the two aspects of forgiveness. I also think something is missing here. I’m currently studying Matthew 18, specifically the parable of the unmerciful (unforgiving) servant. Suppose somebody borrowed $1,000 from you and they promised to pay it back in 4 months. Now suppose the 4 months came around and they didn’t have the money. What does it mean to forgive them?
Forgiveness (attitude) is for my benefit, so that I do not allow a root of bitterness to grow and to impede my prayers and Christian witness. Unforgiveness can become an idol! It can be all we think about!
Forgiving someone is about you; it also gives glory to God. It also opens a door for reconciliation when and if repentance happens. If you are holding a grudge, or not forgiving that person, and he or she approaches you to seek forgiveness, then you will have a hard time giving that person forgiveness, for a larger barrier has been built.
Pastorboy stole some of my thunder but I’ll say this anyway.
Who benefits most from the act of forgiving? The one forgiving or the one receiving the forgiveness? I think the former. It’s part and parcel of releasing the mess and the junk that was attached to the wrong. Forgiving can be part of a healing process.
I think that’s where Brauns is missing the importance of forgiving, even when the wrongdoer is unrepentant. Who benefit’s the most? I do, if I forgive, Lord knows we all have enough baggage! Am I good at it? Nope!
A thief robs my house and then repents and ask for forgiveness. I forgive him but, wisdom tells me NOT to let him housesit for me next Thursday.
I was told that wasn’t true forgiveness…
Scotty and John C.
He actually has a part of the book where he agrees with what you guys say. He’s not saying you shouldn’t forgive, he’s saying you can’t forgive until the person repents. All you can do is be prepared to forgive.
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved. The repentance is from unbelief to belief, it has nothing to do with repenting of your sins.
I never thought about my sins when I was saved. If only sins that we “feel sorry” about and ask for forgiveness are forgiven, then no one is saved.
Stephen forgave those who stoned him without them repenting or asking for forviveness. Forgiveness is not our to allocate, it is God’s and we must forgive everyone.
He’s not saying you shouldn’t forgive, he’s saying you can’t forgive until the person repents.
I’m not sure what his point is. Why not forgive? Seems like a thin argument unless I’m missing his point.
Two questions:
1) Why can’t I.
2) Why say “don’t forgive”, if you can’t.
Me thinks you were told wrong.
Forgiving only if the person repents is just an ewxcuse not to forgive.
I agree Neil, just thought it interesting.
As many here have also, I am sure, I have been in the position of having to forgive HUGE offenses. Not of me, but out of alot of prayer and grace, and humbling, God gave me the ability to do so. One person was totally repentant and wanted to rebuild our relationship. We have. One person was in utter denial, offering an “I’m sorry you feel that way”. That person is forgiven by me, and we have a good relationship, but not deep. The last person has never mentioned the wrong done to me, and I have never brought it up. They are forgiven by me, and we have rebuilt a good relationship. All of them have been forgiven by me. Forgiveness by God is between them and God. Not my business. But I am right with God, because I have forgiven. That forgiveness was/is sometimes a daily decision to act as though I have forgiven, showing grace and kindness even when I don’t feel like it. But that is a part of the process of healing that God takes you through.
Like love, forgiveness is a decision and NOT a feeling.
Forgiveness has nothing to do with the subsequent actions/words of the offender. NEVER NEVER NEVER in the bible does it say NOT to forgive or that forgiveness is based on the offender’s actions. If I am wrong, please show me, but I have not found any hint of such teaching.
And truthfully, that teaching is very disturbing.
Excellent, Zan.
Well, Zan, what would you say about the verses that I quote in the OP? What about the “if” in I John 1:9…”If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive…”
It seems to me that the conditionality being talked about in 1 John 1:9 isn’t God’s forgiveness but rather our repentance. There is no question about whether God will forgive or actually has forgiven, but rather the question is rather we will be honest and admit that we have sinned. It becomes clearer if you look at the context:
So, John isn’t talking about God’s stance towards us, but rather our stance towards God.
I also have a hard seeing how someone can take a verse like that and turn it into a rule for all human relationships. It really is taking verses addressing one topic (what happens if Christians sin) and making them answer something completely different (what should our response be to those who have offended us).
is “if” always a exclusive conditional term?
does it always intimate…B will happen only if A precedes it?
or does it ever mean…
in the potential moment of your repentance you will be forgiven?
is I John 1:9 about our repentance or is it about the guarantee of God?
UGH…phil’s and my comments crossed in the ether.
Also, getting back to the verses in the original article, the guy seems to be coming at them from a Calvinist/Reformed perspective, which is one thing, but he doesn’t even seem to be consistent in that hermeneutic. He seems to be saying that if we forgive an unrepentant person that we are in essence not leaving room for God’s wrath. So in essence, we are tying God’s hands. So much for God’s sovereignty, I guess.
Phil, I think you address my biggest issue with the guy’s position. Part of what he writes resonates with me as coming from the Text. I’ve probably done a poor job of representing him but that wasn’t my intent, I needed to work through this. The rule aspect seems pretty graceless. My initial reaction is that he is mixing up reconciliation and forgiveness. But he swears he’s not. He is definitely coming from the reformed position
“But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son is cleansing us from all sin.”
Rick, that’s another great verse but to be fair, it does have an “if” in it as well.
“Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance.”
~Bonhoeffer
Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.
The Lord’s Prayer says nothing about those who tesspass against us asking for forveness. All grace is cheap, in fact, free. If repentance is necessary for grace, then grace is a reward for works.
i’m taking these “ifs” as being written to a community of faith. not unbelievers.
paul writes about “if there is anything lovely, if there is anything pure,” etc. etc.
the “if” isn’t an “if” that questions where “lovely” or “pure” things are around or not.
it’s an “if” that presumes they exist.
it’s the “if” that says: “if there is anything lovely…and there is…”
i wonder if that is the same kind of “if” going on…
Everyone thank you for allowing me to use this forum as my sounding board. I have some good tacks to follow for this paper now.
Firstly, I did confess my sins when I accepted Christ as my savior. Even if I don’t confess my most recent sin, I have been forgiven for all my sins, past, present, AND future. That is God’s redemption. My not confessing now is a matter of my ongoing growth as a Christian, not my being forgiven.
Secondly, about the middle example I gave of the person who wouldn’t take responsibility….In the forgiving process, I took baby-steps. 1. I had to be ok with MY not taking revenge, but I could visualize God really reaming them when they got to Heaven. 2. I had to accept that they might never realize their culpability. and finally, 3. I had to be ok with the idea that God might NEVER give them “their just desserts”, that He most definitely would (because they were Christians) welcome them with complete grace just as He will me. When I was able to accept the idea that they would never experience God’s wrath for the wrongs they did to me, I knew I was free. Do I still battle recurring emotions? Yes, but I remember I am covered by the same grace they are, and resolve to act as a forgiving person.
not if the grace and the repentance and the faith are all gifts of God – Ephesians 2:8-10
Saving Grace is available and it is free but it must be accessed by faith and repentance, also both gifts of God- otherwise you have universalism.
Common grace is what we all experience every day- the sun, the rain, food, breathing, love between people, relationships..etc. These things are also God’s gifts, but for everybody. Nothing needs be done, they are there as a result of the kindness of God.
Calvinism is a “enjoy the ride” theology. We are nothing more than marrionettes.
Here is an example of pure forgiveness, as well as evidence to the authenticity of a prophetess. (The linked article portrays something a lot less innocuous than an apostate church)
Well, once again, when does a person who portrays himself as a believer in Christ, who falls very publicly, return as a valid shepherd of a church?
Ingrids predictions seem to be spot on in terms of the sick level that we have fallen to as we dishonor Christ and the sanctity of His church that He died for because we refuse to practice even a modicum of discipline.
Just because we discipline does not mean that we lack forgiveness. We can forgive a wrong, but that does not mean it is without consequence.
What Haggard did was wrong in the eyes of God and broke the laws of man. What process of restoration is enough before he can take on the mantle of minister again?
Forgiving the unrepentant is kind of a moot point when we can’t even forgive the repentant, isn’t it?
John C, could you answer your own question?
What would you say to that question?
He has not wronged me personally, so I do not need to forgive him.
Billy Graham says that if a minister falls, they should never be a minister again.
More importantly, the Bible has pretty stringent standards for elders.
1 Tim 3:2 Therefore x an overseer [1] must be above reproach, y the husband of one wife, [2] z sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, a hospitable, b able to teach, 3 not a drunkard, not violent but c gentle, not quarrelsome, d not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own household well, with all dignity e keeping his children submissive, 5 for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for w God’s church? 6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may f become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover, he must be well thought of by g outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into h a snare of the devil.
Titus 1:5 o This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and p appoint elders in every town as I directed you— 6 q if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, [1] and his children are believers and not open to the charge of r debauchery or insubordination. 7 For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, 8 but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. 9 He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.
Sounds like the scripture disqualifies him also.
“Ingrids predictions seem to be spot on”
And she is the first to let everyone know. It seems this guy is holding a prayer meeting. Why not let the elders over him take responsibility and not someone’s wife.
Of course that is if you believe the Bible. Ingrid is nothing more than a busybody and a gossip, and she exposes those who otherwise tout sola Scriptura as compromisers.
John – Answer this question before God:
If Haggard never got involved with ministry again, but was restored personally and became a servant in the church he attends, would Ingrid post that and claim she was wrong?
She is a vulture waiting to offer the next dead flesh for another unchristian feast. Rummaging through world wide news wires to find things to print about can only be descibed as spiritually macabre.
John C, so you are saying that once someone falls, they could not serve again in your church? The truth is I agree with Rick about Ingrid, I think she is nothing more than a glorified gossip, who hides and takes pot shots. I could honestly care less about Haggard, I’m trying to understand you.
If someone got involved in an adulterous affair PRE- Christ is is something entirely different than a person who claims to be a Christian and a Pastor I think. Correct me if I am wrong.
Why do we stand with sin and not with Christ?
And what is this intense, hateful desire to do the exact same thing you guys claim of Ingrid? If you don’t like her writing or her ministry, then why do you feel it necessary to continually be a busybody and a gossip when it comes to her? Engage her ideas, not her person. There is a difference.
On the topic of forgiveness, it seems you have a root of bitterness that you harbor against your usual suspects. Check out the log in your eye when it comes to anything Ingrid has to say, whether it is legitimate or not. I suggest forgiveness.
I am addressing the idea that a Pastor should continue being in authority over people once he has fallen. He himself calls his little gathering a church. Maybe in Rob Bell’s Ceasar church- not the body of Christ.
PB,
Where do you draw the line at what sins a pastor can commit and never be pastor again. Your standard seems rather arbitrary. Where exactly are you getting these rules from?
#51.
There’s the John Chisham I know and well know.
#53 you don’t love me joe?
#52 The scriptures I quoted above, Phil (#47) I do not know how the Message or the NIRV puts it, but it seems pretty clear.
John, I find it amusing that you can somehow always bring Rob and Mars up in a comment thread. Cracks me up. Truly it does.
All of those verses are clearly talking about behaviors that a person is currently engaged in. They say nothing of someone who sinned, repented, and has submitted to discipline. I suppose you could use the “well thought of by outsiders” requirement, but if we’re going to start applying that literally, I’d say a good 50% of pastors should probably resign.
John C,
My NIV puts your verses from #47 in the same light. However, as a number of pastors have pointed out in sermons on this topic over they years, Paul is writing in the present tense.
As such, “above reproach” need not be a permanent ban for a public sin that has been repented of, and an appropriate time has passed (as determined by the church community in which he is a member).
#51 – I do attack Ingrid personally, I engage in a ministry of correction. You’ve heard of that, I presume?
I cannot say whether Haggard should be a pastor, but I do know when somebody is engaged in bottom feeding and distance judgment.
I have often said that I do not put Ken Silva in the same category because he is an ordained pastor and he deals mostly with doctrinal issues, despite his penchant for hyperbole and self links.
Anyone who cannot recognize the viscious and unscriptural nature of the kind of things Ingrid posts about, as well as her claim to a prophetic ministry (otherwise known as “I told you so”), is not unbiased and loses credibility.
And even when confronting the destructive essence of her creative attacks on people like Miley Cyrus, Ingrid openly insinuated that we who objected in principle were lusting after a 15 year old girl.
Where were you, John Chisham when she did that? (Let me guess, you were not aware of it.) That is just one especially savage piece of Ingrid’s attack portfolio.
#58 – Should read “I do not attack Ingrid personally”. Some have, I do not, although she claims I do. She is sensitive to attacks on her but profoundly careless in her words toward others.
[Redacted - by Chris L. for inappropriate content]
#61 _ I could stop if she wouldn’t keep providing continual evidence. It’s righteous indignation.
Is Cash your first or last name?
Cash is my first name. My mother was a Johnny Cash fan. She dressed me in black until I was old enough to fight back.
Johnny Cash became a Christian. He always had struggles but I believe he was saved.
What I find offensive about Ingrid’s prediction is her… well, prediction. What point does it serve to make such a prediction.
In a vacuum I would say none… but given her history I am sure her prediction will be correct – because whatever position he may take at whatever church at whatever time in the futire – she’ll simply declare them apostate and insert a hyperlink to her prediction.
Such predictions serve no purpose to the furtherance of the Kingdom or benefit to the Church.
I’m not even sure what this means… but what purpose does it serve? Bell is not the topic of the thread, he has never been in such a situation. Pray tell, what purpose does this swipe serve?
The man sinned greatly and was exposed world wide. He almost lost his wife and he was embarrased and shamed in front of his children. He will always pay a high price for his sin. But our calling is redemption.
If we cannot find redemption in the church, then there is no redemption. Judging Haggard is easy and clean; restoring him is difficult, messy, and without exception will make you susceptible to accusations of condoning sin.
I believe this is what he did… where do he do otherwise.
seems mr. cash needed some editing…
“out of the heart…” and all that…
I would forgive Cash but as of yet he is not repentant.
#64
In fact, Billy Graham was somewhat of a mentor of Johnny Cash’s. Anytime Johnny would fall off the wagon, Billy would counsel him. Billy once said that Johnny got saved more times than anyone else he’d ever met.
re: Caesar church- This was an illustration of the type of church that would not practice discipline.
re: restoration: I do not know, but I believe that above reproach may be in the present tense ( I believe it is) however, when you do something so big, so public, so heinous, will you ever really be above reproach, or will you be bringing reproach to the name of Christ?
re: Ingrid you have called her a witch, a busybody, a gossip, and many other things. that sounds personal to me.
Perhaps the Miley Cyrus comment hit close to home with a lot of guys? Perhaps when they heard ‘nudity’ they did a google search? Perhaps Ingrid hit a little close to home on that one, eh?
“Perhaps the Miley Cyrus comment hit close to home with a lot of guys? Perhaps when they heard ‘nudity’ they did a google search? Perhaps Ingrid hit a little close to home on that one, eh?”
You are a wicked man, John, and your evil surmise exposes your carnality as well as your defense of Ingrid in spite of anything she might say. Is that a little too close to home?
Busybody and gossip are Biblical descriptions. Are you against Biblical correction? You have no credibility left, if you had any at this point. You are like moct people, entrenched in one camp and will not even police your own. You practice a constricted set of doctrinal discipline and refuse to correct those who hate in the same direction as do you.
I have never called Ingrid a witch, so please retract that if you still have a conscience.
John – Will you publicly correct Ingrid for calling Rob Bell androgynous looking and demeaning his appearance? How about calling teenage girls “painted girls of Sodom”? How about suggesting comments were raping her?
You are a joke.
Personally, I find pastors being unloving and spreading gossip in a public arena much more heinous than someone having a gay affair. Of course they’re both damaging and hurtful to people, but at least Haggard admits what he did was wrong.
in the odm world, being unloving and spreading gossip is practically a qualification for “ministry”…
Pastorboy,
I am disappointed that you would not let previously dealt with comments lie.
And your quip about Cyrus hitting close to home is indefensible. Just when I think we can have a civil disagreement on things you say something like that.
Seriously dude, have you know filter for appropriateness?
a person who revels in divulging information is a gossip.
a person who spends their days looking around on the internet for bad info and getting in people’s backyards is a busybody.
the witch thing was clearly a joke. get the pole out of rear end and calm down.
So Ingrid decides it is acceptable to predict what Haggard will do – which serves no purpose.
And you decide you know what Mars Hill would do as well.
Christianity without redemption is atheism. Continuing to follow a fallen brother for the express purpose of pouncing on any miscues is nothing but gossip.
Some blogs are like a peep show for sin.
We all like to gossip, Rick. That’s why I come here. I like hearing the latest gossip about Ken and Ingrid and ODM’s. Nathan, #78 is a perfect description of what you and Rick and everyone here does. Sitting on the internet looking for bad stuff to report. Rick reads the VCY blog every day looking for stuff to bitch about. That’s his only reason for going there and he knows it. Nathan – the pole in the rear end thing, out of the abundance of the heart and all that right? I got my comment deleted and yours stands. Not sure the standards on here yet.
“Rick reads the VCY blog every day looking for stuff to bitch about.”
In house correction. I rarely talk about Ken because he deals with issues. Ingrid deals in the sin of others where she has no authority and her only source is secular news articles.
That is just wrong.
Cash – You have a wrong definition of gossip.
Webster – ” a person who habitually reveals personal or sensational facts about others”
probably because it’s a pretty mild metaphorical picture of how uptight you are…
would you prefer I say that you have a “bee in your bonnet”?
re:#78
i get it Cash…
someone builds a whole “ministry” around obsessing with what’s going wrong with, well, EVERYONE and that’s ok.
one little person occasionally comments on a blog and it’s tantamount to a denial of the divinity of Christ.
maybe, if you expressed some proportional “outrage”, you’d have some credibility.
until then…the pole remains…
I publicly accuse Nathan of pole dancing.
@cash,
now that i think about it some more, what’s so different about you coming here to check up on the occasional comment from Rick or me or anyone else here who’s said strong things about a certain lady’s “ministry”?
do you really want to go around and around on this?
oh, but Rick…i was contextualizing…
#73 I never said you did. I believe that was Nathan.
Have you had a look around, many of the little tweens wandering around look like painted girls of Sodom, not that the men of Sodom seemed to care.
But we all look wicked and wretched in the sight of God, no matter our outward appearance. That is why it is sooo important that we become new creatures in Christ.
Rick, none of that stuff was even close to be directed at you. I feel that your attacks on Ingrid show your heart towards her. I wish you could be as gracious towards her as you are towards others who do not even claim to be in the faith. You side with people who, in their wicked works, claim to still follow Jesus, yet you will not give that grace to Ingrid. I think you have a problem with her.
But I still love you. And I forgive you, even if you have not repented. ;0
#77
Neil, maybe it did hit close to home for some! Are you denying that men have a problem with lust, and this is the very reason she, along with other tween starlets, try to look like adult women with all thier makeup and low cut clothing?
It is at least as inappropriate to continue to bash Ingrid for something she said months ago and continue to chase her down as what I said, not that what I said was inappropriate- because it seems like it needed to be said according to the reactions I am getting.
“You side with people who,”
I believe my words accurately reveal I side with no one. I believe God has a problem with Ingrid, and I find it interesting that people will recoil and suggest a problem when things are directed at Ingrid, but find no problem with the continuing stream of attacks emanating from CR.
“I wish you could be as gracious towards her as you are towards others who do not even claim to be in the faith.”
I suggest we must show much grace to the lost so that we may win some, but true correction is within the body. Remember your reformed roots – you cannot correct a dead man.
“Neil, maybe it did hit close to home for some!”
How in God’s dear Name would you know that? Someone’s wife should not be suggesting preachers lust after Miley Cyrus. I did not even see the pictures that Ingrid LINKED TO.
What abject stupidity.
most of the men i know either are unaware of miley cyrus, or don’t care who she is…
why, oh why, oh why, PB, can’t you just admit that that woman’s “ministry” is a farce?
why can’t you admit, by your own standards, that she arrogates to herself a role that is not hers?
why can’t you eschew the accusation of “rape” and “bullying” every time a man has the balls to call her out–and on the basis of her own professed beliefs?
Pastorboy,
Just so I understand you logic.
1) Ingrid makes a defensive accusation
2) Some find it offensive.
3) Therefore, you believe “some” are guilty as accused
4) Your “therefore” is called inappropriate
5) Therefore your therefore has merit.
So, if I make some outlandish accusation against you and you are offended – my accusation has merit.
This is, of course, not true.
Please cf. Debunking>Paragraph 1
#93
As we say in the open-air preaching world-
If you throw a stone into a pack of dogs, the one that yelps is the one you hit.
So when Ingrid (or anyone else for that matter) makes a statement like that, the ones who scream foul the loudest may be the ones who are getting hit.
Thats my logic.
I still, for the life of me, admire and enjoy Rick Freuh and his writings. I think he is fair and just and I agree with him most of the time, and even where I find disagreement, it is not so severe that I would accuse him of anything but good intentions and a fine attempt, certainly not heresy.
I think Ingrid and his relentless attacks and focus on her is his one weak area as far as his writings and comments.
I think it says a lot that you equate preaching with throwing stones…
The fact that people get irritated with open-air preachers or ODM types usually just indicates that those people are being jerks.
Speaking of Miley Cyrus, it’s kind fo funny, when my wife got home last night she was telling how bad traffic was on campus yesterday evening, and neither of us could figure out why. As it turns out, Miley Cyrus was here in concert, and neither of knew anything about it – yeah, I’m so obsessed with her…
Your comment was over the line that PB’s came close to crossing in #72.
There were comments that got deleted several months ago that were aimed at Ingrid, speculating on personal matters and insinuating a degree of psychological “projection”. This isn’t the place for that, regardless of the target…
FYI – You can see our updated commenting policies here. (Always helpfully linked at the top of the sidebar)
“I think it says a lot that you equate preaching with throwing stones…”
As well as your view of the lost.
#99
True, true
I love the lost, thats why I preach.
I do not hate them, as false preachers do, and lie to them.
Remember, God hates the lost.
Psalm 7:11 God is a righteous judge,
and a God who feels indignation every day.
Romans 2:5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed.
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
I would think it safe to say that he is at least angered at their behavior.
I too, am familiar with the whelping dog illustration.
But to be offended by broad-brushed accusation of latent pedophilia – based on disagreeing with Ingrid – is beyond the scope of the metaphor.
If Ingrid were to apologize for her characterizations – I think it would settle the issue… at least as far as I am concerned.
In this case Phil, I thinks it’s an innocent metaphor – it actually came to my mind as well…
God’s emotions are cryptic at best and couched in anthropomorphic terms. And without a disingenuous word twisting, God loves the entire world.
The topic of the OP is the question of forgiveness and it’s dependency on repentance (between humans)
Let’s drop the tangents.
If have something to add to the OP discussion please fell free.
yelping dogs…how convenient.
what a lesson…
i guess i’ll head out and be a total dick, say it’s in the name of God, and when somebody gets mad…at my behavior and my attempt to spiritualize it…just say it’s cuz the problem is with them.
perfect.
oy.
i forgive pb for his obstinancy and rank intellectual dishonesty…
and he didn’t even have to ask.
i forgive cash for his personal obsession with other people’s perceived obsessions.
and he didn’t have to ask either.
#109
Thank you, oh your holiness.
@110
“Your Grace” will do.