Four Tests of Forgiveness

Four Tests of Forgiveness

by | Jan 29, 2017 | Forgiveness, Tactical Articles

By R. Herbert
​

“… forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses” (Mark 11:25).

We all know that as Christians we must forgive if we are to receive forgiveness ourselves, but the path to forgiveness is often not an easy one.  Long after we have been hurt, cheated or abused by others – and long after we have tried to forgive and forget the injury – we may still have vivid memories of the hurtful situation, or ongoing reminders of what happened to us.

But if the hurt still feels real when memories do surface of ways we have been hurt in the past, we may need to ask if we have truly forgiven the individual or people who hurt us. Given what Christ said regarding the forgiveness of our own sins, it is imperative not only that we forgive, but also that we know we have done so.

How Can We Know if We Have Forgiven?

How can we know we have truly forgiven someone?  The apostle Paul’s writings touch on four principles that we can use in our own lives in making sure we have indeed forgiven someone who has offended us.  We can access those principles by simply asking ourselves the following questions.

Whenever you think of what the other person did to you …

1) … Do you think of how much you need forgiveness yourself?  This may seem backwards at first, but it is a baseline principle.  Paul wrote: “Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you” (Colossians 3:13).  Ultimately, we may never really forgive someone unless we come to see that the person’s betrayal of us is no worse than our own betrayal of God in every sin we have committed.  We can never presume that someone else’s sins are worse than ours, because only God knows the heart and mind – just as Jesus said that even persecutors who kill  the people of God “will think they do God a service” (John 16:2).  Remember this was exactly Paul’s own situation before his conversion.  Paul reminds us that: “… God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all” (Romans 11:32).

2) … Do you think about the fact that despite their faults, God loves the person who has hurt you just as he loves you?  (Matthew 5:45, Romans 5:8).  If you cannot see the offender’s good points and do not see him or her as someone loved by God, you may well not have forgiven them.  Forgiveness involves reaffirming in our own minds the spiritual potential of the wrongdoer. When we forgive we stop defining the wrongdoer by the wrong he or she did. Only when we can really think of the other person as having sinned against us through weakness, a failure of empathy, or a lack of understanding can we begin to see them with the kind of compassion that is necessary for forgiveness to happen.

3) … Do you think of ways you might be able to help them?  Jesus commanded his followers to   “… love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44).  Paul specified a way we might do that when he wrote: “Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse” (Romans 12:14).  Of course, in keeping these commands in mind, we can substitute “hurt,” “injure,” “mistreat,” “abuse,” or anything else someone might do against us. The end result is the same:  we must bless such people.  To love and bless someone means taking the opposite approach from resenting them and refusing to get over a wrong that they have done to us.  This aspect of forgiveness often involves thinking of ways we might initiate or increase reconciliation with the other person, when this is possible. Regarding a person who had sinned against the members of the church at Corinth, Paul wrote: “Now … you ought to forgive and comfort him” (2 Corinthians 2:7). It is not coincidence that Paul says we should forgive and comfort in the same breath – this is just one example of truly loving those we forgive.  In this case the person had repented of what they had done, but in every case we must come to the point where we love the person who harmed us and we are willing to pray for them and bless them in any ways that we can.

4) …Do you think that the offense – whatever it was – is ultimately not important?  This is a shocking concept for many people and perhaps the hardest stage of forgiveness to reach. But when we truly and deeply forgive, we begin to feel that the ways in which others have injured us really do pale into insignificance by comparison to what our sins did to Christ.  With this level of forgiveness we come to the point where we can honestly downplay the other person’s offense against us almost as though it did not happen.  Notice something Paul said in this regard to the Corinthians:  “… And what I have forgiven –if there was anything to forgive –I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake” (2 Corinthians 2:10, emphasis added). Did you notice the significance of Paul’s words when he says “… if there was anything to forgive…”? Paul knew there was indeed something for the Corinthians and for him personally to forgive and  specifically discussed this sin in his first letter to the Corinthians, yet after forgiving the sinner he shows us the attitude of downplaying the offense as though it was not ultimately important.

Choosing Forgiveness

We may never be able to forget memories we have of ways in which others have hurt us – in the same way that we may still have scar tissue from an old physical wound. But forgetting is not necessary for forgiving, and we must never feel that because we cannot forget, we cannot forgive.   People sometimes say “I have tried to forgive the person who hurt me, and I just cannot.”  But God does not give us this option – not forgiving others is choosing that God will not forgive us.  Some people also think that they cannot forgive because the pain they feel is  “too great,” but ironically the pain will always be there until we forgive.

When the first thought we have about a person who hurt us is not the pain they caused in our life, we are certainly beginning to forgive. But the process must be completed.  We must ask God’s help to reach the point where we always think more about how we need forgiveness than we do regarding the sins of another against us. We must reach the point where we firmly accept that God loves the offending person just as fully as he loves us – whatever our opinion of their failures.  We must come to the point where thoughts about the person include thinking of ways we might pray for them and bless them, and where we come to realize that in the larger picture of God’s plan for all humanity, what others have done to us is ultimately not important compared to his plan being fulfilled in our – and their – lives.

A Lesson About Knowledge

A Lesson About Knowledge

by | Jan 22, 2017 | Knowledge & Wisdom

Picture


​The second epistle of Peter has sometimes been called the “knowledge” epistle of the New Testament.  The apostle’s short letter speaks of “knowing” and “knowledge” eleven times – five times in the first chapter alone – and focusses on the importance of what we know more than any other section of the Christian Scriptures.
​

Notice how Peter begins his epistle directly after addressing his readers: 

“Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness” (2 Peter 1:2-3, emphases added).

In contrast with the false teachers of that era who taught that true knowledge was hidden and only attainable by a few, Peter stresses that ultimately, true knowledge is knowledge of God and his Son, and that we all have access to everything we need through the knowledge that God openly gives us.

After his introduction, Peter describes what we might call a “spectrum” of spiritual qualities:

“For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; and to godliness, mutual affection; and to mutual affection, love” (2 Peter 1:5-7, emphases added).

This “spiritual spectrum” ranges from faith through love with the “hope”-related quality of “perseverance” or “endurance” at the center (1 Thessalonians 1:3).  As such, we can see that Peter’s list is an expansion of the three qualities of faith, hope and love we know so well from Paul’s writings (1 Corinthians 13:13). 
 
But notice something else about this “spectrum.” If we look carefully, we see that Peter sets the individual qualities in groups of two:  faith/goodness, knowledge/self-control, perseverance/ godliness, mutual affection/love.   When we consider these pairs closely, we see that the first quality of each pair represents a mental attitude and the second quality involves a practical application.  So faith, knowledge, perseverance (or hope), and mutual affection are all things within our own minds, whereas goodness, self-control, godliness, and love are all things relating to what we do – that we apply in life. 

So the “spiritual spectrum” that Peter gives helps teach us that we must have action as well as knowledge. Peter summarizes this fact when he tells his readers later in his letter that we must “… grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18).  We must have positive change in our lives along with the growth of knowledge or we will fail to grow spiritually as we should.
 
The pairs of qualities that Peter gives us deserve some thought.  How do the qualities relate? What is the connection between each of them?  Perhaps above all, Peter’s list shows us that a feeling of affection is not love – that we may have good feelings toward others without really loving them. Mutual affection, Peter’s list shows, is an attitude; love is an action – something we actively do for others.

It is only as we grasp and apply this fact that we will be using the knowledge God gives us as he intended. Peter himself tells us, directly after listing the qualities of his “spiritual spectrum”: “For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:8). 

Becoming One and Being Many

Becoming One and Being Many

by | Jan 15, 2017 | Fellowship

Picture

 
“Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many” (1 Corinthians 12:12-14).

In his letter to the church at Corinth, Paul uses a double analogy that is worth meditating upon.  First, the apostle reminds us that by the means of the one Spirit that is given to us, we are made part of the one body of Jesus Christ (vs. 13a). 
 
But Paul then extends the analogy of being baptized in the Spirit just as we are baptized in water to say that we are “all given the one Spirit to drink” (vs. 13b),  just as we drink water.   Paul frequently talks about baptism in his letters and uses other analogies such as that of the Israelites being completely baptized in the Red Sea by means of the water around them and the cloud (water vapor) above them (1 Corinthians 10:2).   In 1 Corinthians 12, however, Paul extends the analogy in a unique manner by saying that after baptism, we are all given the Spirit to “drink.” 

Paul’s words here are reminiscent of those of Jesus, of course, when he said “…Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink” (John 7:37).  Notice also Paul’s statement earlier in 1 Corinthians regarding the Israelites in the wilderness, that they “… drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:4).

So the overall analogy that Paul makes is that we are first baptized in the Spirit and then we drink the Spirit.  To be baptized means that we enter into the water, and to drink means that we let the water enter us.   We are surrounded by water on the outside in baptism, then filled on the inside as we “drink” the Spirit.

In saying this, Paul first stresses that we must never be content to stay at the point where we were baptized and received the initial deposit of the Spirit of God –  we are then called to drink more and more of that Spirit till we are filled with it (Ephesians 5:18).

We drink the Spirit in a number of ways.  Jesus said:  “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (John 6:63), and we drink as we study those words and make them part of us. We drink as we pray for the Spirit: “… If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” (Luke 11:13).  We drink to the degree that we set our minds on the things of God as opposed to the things of this world:  “Those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit” (Romans 8:5).

But there is a final aspect to what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12:12-14 that we should not overlook – it is what Paul says regarding the one body and many.  Paul makes it clear that if we repent and are baptized, we receive a portion or deposit of the Spirit of God and in so doing we become part of the one body of Christ (vs. 13a) – we are the same as all other believers in this.  But he then stresses that although we are all given the one Spirit to drink, “Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many” (vs. 14).    We are one with and like all other believers in baptism, but to the different degrees we drink the Spirit, we are separate and unique. 

Paul’s message is a powerful one – through baptism we receive the Spirit and are granted inclusion in the one body of Christ. Our identity is lost in his.  But it is to the degree that we then continue to seek and drink the Spirit that we become different – different parts within the same body, with different gifts and responsibilities.  Paul’s simple analogy teaches us that while we can rejoice in becoming part of the one body through baptism, we must never rest there.  We must then continue to drink the Spirit.  To the degree we do, we are a unique part of the body, having in that sense a unique relationship with God – and God may uniquely use us.

It’s All in a Handshake

It’s All in a Handshake

by | Jan 7, 2017 | Fellowship

Picture

The custom of shaking hands is known in many parts of the world and is far older than most people realize. Archaeological artifacts and works of art depicting people shaking hands  have been found dating back to as early as the ninth century B.C. (the Assyrian King Shalmaneser III sealing an alliance with a Babylonian ruler), and the practice may be much older.  The custom was known in ancient Greece and Rome and may well be what is meant in the New Testament when the apostle Paul says that fellow disciples “gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship” (Galatians 2:9).  Most researchers believe handshaking was not widespread in the Western world, however, till the 17th Century when Quakers seem to have popularized the simple clasping of hands as a better alternative to bowing when meeting someone.

But whatever the origins of the practice, shaking hands has been used as a way of greeting people, confirming agreements, sealing contracts and for many other things.  In all these situations, however, handshaking is based on making a connection with another person.  The simple act helps us relate to people and establish a rapport with them whether we are meeting them for the first time or we are greeting old friends.

Today, those who are particularly health conscious sometimes claim that shaking hands and other hand greetings such as “high fiving” tend to spread illnesses through the transfer of bacteria.  Some of these people urge simple “fist bumping” as a “healthier alternative” greeting, and while this may help curb the spread of disease between sick people and healthcare workers, most of us continue to shake hands as people have done for centuries.

Other forms of greeting are used in various areas around the world, of course, and some were clearly in existence in biblical times.  Paul advised the Christians in several congregations to “Greet one another with a holy kiss” (Romans 16:16, 1 Corinthians 16:20), and Peter likewise encouraged his readers to “Greet one another with the kiss of love” (1 Peter 5:14).

The point that we should take from this is that however we greet people – with handshakes, fist bumps, or “holy kisses,” we should focus on the act of connecting with others.  Peter and Paul were not advocating some religious ritual; they were simply stressing that we should greet others with Christian sincerity and love.  So often our greeting of others can be a formality that is hardly noticed – like asking someone “How are you?” when we see them, and perhaps not even expecting or waiting for an answer to the question.

The principle of greeting one another with the kiss of love suggests that every Christian should put more into a handshake than simply clasping hands.  Do our eyes meet with those we greet and do our eyes show our sincere interest in them?   It may be a small thing, but research has shown that when we greet people for the first time, they form most of their impression of us in the first five seconds of meeting us.   If we are truly desirous to let our light shine, we should remember this.  But it is not a matter of just making an impression of interest and concern – a  handshake may be the first and best opportunity we have to begin to show the Christian love we have for others.  

The Gifts of Cain and Abel

The Gifts of Cain and Abel

by | Jan 1, 2017 | Giving

Picture


 “… Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil.  In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord.  And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering,  but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor…”  (Genesis 4:2-5).

Many people believe that in this prelude to the story of the first homicide, God did not accept Cain’s offering because it was not a true sacrifice involving the slaying of an animal as we find in the later Mosaic sacrifices.  According to this view, God had instructed the first man and woman in how to sacrifice when  he made clothing for them from the skins of animals (Genesis 3:21).   But however logical this view might seem, it is, of course, speculative in that the Bible does not say this or even mention sacrificial offerings at all before this point.
​
The sacrifices of Cain and Abel described in Genesis 4 are not depicted in any way as being made to cover sin or to seek atonement. In fact, we should note that the Hebrew word used for the offerings of both individuals is not one of the specific words for animal sacrifices found later in the Old Testament; it is minhah – which is usually translated a “gift” or “offering” of any type.

But although this scripture does not clearly indicate that the difference between the two offerings was one of blood sacrifice and non-blood sacrifice, it does give us important clues to what the problem was with Cain’s offering and the lesson we can learn from it.
​  
First, we should notice that the text tells us that Cain brought “some” of the fruits of the soil as his gift (vs. 3).  There is nothing in the Hebrew to suggest anything special about this offering – the word “some” could connote randomly selected items, or even items selected that were of no particular distinction. 

This is contrasted with what we are told of Abel’s offering – that it was an offering of “fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock” (vs. 4).  In Abel’s case we see that the same word “some” is qualified with “of the firstborn of the flock.”  Giving of the firstborn was a principle that was later incorporated into the Mosaic sacrifices because even apart from any symbolic aspect, to give the firstborn was a greater sacrifice in the sense that it meant those giving the offering had to wait to obtain the next cycle of animals for themselves.

Additionally, we are told that Abel gave from the “fat portions” of some of these firstborn animals. The meaning is clear – Abel was highly selective – he offered the choicest parts of selected firstborn animals as his gift to God – a description which is very different from the fruits Cain offered which were merely “some” of those available to him.  Clearly, Abel’s gift was a generous and appreciatively chosen one, while Cain’s gift was not at all special and possibly even an inferior one.
 
But we must notice that God’s reaction to Cain and Abel was not primarily toward the gift – which would have been the case if Cain’s offering had been of the wrong type – but toward the givers:  “…The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor…” (Genesis 4:4-5).  The Hebrew stresses it was primarily with Cain that God was displeased and this is made clear in the following verses:

Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast?  If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it” (Genesis 4:6-7).

Genesis 4 paints a picture then, not of improper sacrificial ritual, but of the very different attitudes exhibited by Cain and Abel – between the generous and sacrificial spirit of Abel and the less generous and unsacrificing attitude of Cain.

The lesson for all of us, as we read this story, goes far beyond any point of sacrificial form to one of sacrificial intent.  As always, God looks more closely at the heart of the giver than at the gift.