FORGIVENESS
FORGIYENESS
57
there is added 'of sins,' in one 'of trespasses,' in one the same words are in tlie immediate context, and in the two remaining instances the word stands absolutely. (AV renders nine times 'remission,' six times 'forgiveness.') The verb with the same meaning occurs about forty times in the synoptic Gospels, once in Ac (8--), three times in Jn [Gospel once (20^), 1 Ep. twice (1* 2'-)], and twice elsewhere (Ro 4', Ja 5"). It is found predominantly with the usual word for ' sin ' {a/mprla) or ' sins ' expressed or implied in the context, but other words — 'debt,' 'trespasses,' 'iniquities' — are also used. The verb implies the complete removal of the cause of offence. The sin is taken out of the way, out of sight. The debt is cancelled : the debtor released from his obligation (cf. Mt IS-'""*). As far as the offender is concerned, the trespass is done away. He no longer has the sense of sin, of guilt and liability to punishment ; he is restored to the harmonious relations which existed before. (It is noticeable that though this is the favourite word of the Gospels and Acts, it is scarcely found in the NT outside them : the idea of forgiveness is merged in the wider ones of justification and salvation). Instead of this word St. Paul uses one (xapl^firBat ten times) which has the special sense 'confer a favour on,' ' be gracious to ' — of men towards one another and of Christ in relation to them (2 Co 2'- '" 12'», Eph 4'^ Col 2^ 3"). St. Luke has this word twice (Lk T""- ■"), each time of a debt ( AV ' frankly forgave '), and twice he has also a word {airoXvw, 637 »u)^ meaning to ' loose from,' ' release,' ' set at liberty.' In the Apocalypse the nearest equiva- lent is found probably in the idea of the olood • loosing ' from sin and 'cleansing' {e.g. Rev 1° 7" ; cf. 1 Jn l'-»)-
The teaching of the NT as to forgiveness is sufficiently represented by (1) the sayings of Christ which led up to St. Peter's question and the answer to it (Lk 17»- *, Mt 18>'-" and 18=>- ^-), and the Parables of the Prodigal and of the great Debtor (lik 15"-«^ Mt 18'^-*>) ; (2) the clause in the Lord's Prayo.' ;>fith the comment which is added Mt 6"- '», ct Mk ll^*- ^); and (3) the allusion to blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Mt 12^' and parallels), and St. John's mention of sin 'unto death' (1 Jn 5").
(1) The teaching is given much more fully in Mt than in Lk, but the full essence of it is in the words of Lk, ' If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him ; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent ; thou shalt forgive him.' It is clear at once that, if certain conditions are satisfied, the teaching of Christ admits of no limitations to the law of forgiveness. The account in Mt more vividly enforces this point. It represents Christ as at first only enunciating the general jirinciple. St. Peter seeks for further guidance, wishing to reduce the principle to the compass of a definite rule, and asking, ' Lord, hoio oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him 1 till seven times ? ' and it is in answer to his question that tlie words are elicited which raise the duty out of the sphere of mere numerical calculation — ' I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.' There is to be no limit whatever to the readine.ss of a follower of Christ to forgive. On the other hand, it is equally clear that some- thing is required on the part of the oH'cnder before he can be the recipient of forgiveness. ' If tliy brother . . . turn again to thee, saying, I repent ' — this is the condition : there must be the con- sciousness of sin, the free avowal of error (cf. Lk 1.5^'), the recognition of wrong-doing and the turning away from it, and, it seems, the willingness to make amends (cf. Lk 19'). That there must be
such repentance * (change of mind, acceptance of s new ideal of life) is still more plainly shown in the account of Mt : the Christian is not to remain passive till the olicnder of his own accord comes to him penitent and begging reconciliation — he ia, on the contrary, to adopt all rational means he can to bring home to him the error and evil of his conduct ; and should he stiU remain inpenitent and obdurate, there is no forgiveness for him — he places himself outside the pale of Christian life — ' Let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican.'
The Parable of the Prodigal Son shows the same relation between forgiveness and repentance. The wish to leave the father — the revolt against his will, his plan of life^was the sin : the return is in itself sufficient proof of repentance, even though it was prompted by the sense of failure and physical himger ; the father recognizes it as such, and hastens to meet and welcome the offender, and forgives him before he has had time to put into words his confession of sin ; the son is in that moment restored to the position in his father's household which he had forfeited. (The teaching of the apostles as described in Ac lays similar emphasis on repentance as a first condition of salvation [e.g. Ac 2^], baptism being from one point of view the outward mark of repentance). So, too, the publican goes do^-n to his house 'justified' because penitent (Lk 18").