Good evening, everyone. Let’s open God’s word to Matthew’s gospel and chapter six, Matthew six. And if you’re using the Pew Bible, it’s page 970.
This is one of the places where the Lord’s prayer is found. Though really, it would be better to call it the disciples’ prayer, because this is what disciples should pray. And a feature of their praying, of our praying as disciples, is forgiveness.
Asking for forgiveness under the assumption that we ourselves are forgiving. So let’s read Matthew six from verse nine down to verse 15. Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name.
Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.
For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. This is the word of God.
Let’s consider together the following scenario. Phil and Nathan, we’ll call them Phil and Nathan, are members of a church. But more than fellow members, Phil and Nathan are friends.
They’ve grown close to each other, and they trust each other. Indeed, while they are West of Scotland men, they have shared some of their deepest struggles and some of their most painful memories with each other. It’s been a good relationship so far.
However, over the last six months, Phil has noticed a change in Nathan. Nathan seems to be frequently off with Phil. And on several occasions, he’s been quite rude to him.
One day, this all explodes when Phil discovers that Nathan has been talking about him behind his back. Nathan’s been telling half the church all of the reasons why Phil is annoying. But maybe even worse, Nathan in doing so has also shared much of Phil’s personal, private information, not scandalous, but also not for others to know.
Phil feels betrayed. He confronts Nathan, but Nathan is startled and defensive. Yes, he admits to saying some things, but really Phil is blowing all of this out of proportion.
Well, over the next few weeks, things become awkward between the two men. Phil privately is praying about the matter. He’s praying for Nathan, and he says hello to him at church, but it’s really quite difficult.
The relationship clearly isn’t right. And so after the dust settles, after a couple of weeks, Phil meets with Nathan again. This time round, Nathan is considerably more responsive.
He apologises for his words, and particularly for breaching Phil’s trust. The apology is accepted, and the coffee even ends with a hug. Now, if you were a fly on the wall, in the months following this reconciliation, you would now see Phil and Nathan not just saying hello at church, but having a right good chat over coffee.
You would also witness them getting on fine and asking for one another’s needs and praying for one another in the community group. But if you observe them really closely, you may also notice that they never quite returned to being the best friends. Phil, as he went forward, was a little more cautious about sharing his most personal information with Nathan.
And over a period of years, he began to form a close friendship with another gentleman in another church. Well, it’s just an illustration, and I honestly can tell you it is a created illustration, but it does not sound like fiction because it faithfully reflects reality. As we start to near the end of our forgiveness series, with only three messages to go before the end, we must not avoid the most nitty-gritty questions that do come into play at what we might call the street level of conflict.
And there are two particular questions that we have not answered so far, questions I know that have come up in community groups and in some discussions, but which we haven’t dealt with from the front here. Question number one, is forgiveness always conditional? And question number two, does forgiveness eliminate all consequences? These are important questions. They are tricky questions.
But one thing I can say about them is they are not theoretical questions. We just saw that in the story of Phil and Nathan, that Phil in particular had to wrestle with these questions. When Phil initially confronted Nathan, he didn’t repent.
What was Nathan’s attitude meant to be then? He prayed for him, he loved him, he didn’t ignore him at church, and then he made another attempt to reconcile with him. And then after they reconciled with each other, there was an interesting twist, that while Phil forgave Nathan, he did not continue to confide in him freely. So these questions are not just theory.
These are the questions that Phil and Nathan and you and I need to grapple with in real situations. So with all of that said, let’s now try and grapple with them. We’re gonna look at these two questions in turn.
We’re going to be longer on the first, and about half the time on the second, just so you’re tracking when we’re gonna finish. So let’s start with number one. Is forgiveness always conditional? Is forgiveness always conditional? One of the books that we’ve been recommending in this series is the book by Chris Brauns, Unpacking Forgiveness.
It’s a really good book with lots of excellent teaching in it. And it has also been a very influential book among many people, among many evangelicals in recent years. Many people have read this book and they have been convinced by a conviction that Brauns has about forgiveness.
His conviction is that forgiveness is always dependent upon a condition. And that condition is repentance. And only when repentance comes should you think about forgiving the other person.
Now, it’s important to understand that Brauns and others who hold this view, they would certainly say that before a person repents, we are called to love them and to pray for them in the manner of Romans chapter 12. Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. But what he would be dead against would be calling that attitude forgiveness.
He would say that is an attitude of love, not forgiveness. So in Brauns’ view, when Jesus is on the cross, saying, Father, forgive them, or when Stephen is being martyred and when he is praying, don’t hold this sin against them, he would say, those are examples of loving your enemies and of praying for their future forgiveness. They are love, but they are not an expression of heart forgiveness.
Now, what is the biblical support that Brauns gives for this view? And let me just add, he’s not the only one that thinks this. There’s lots of other very respected evangelicals who think the same thing. There is really one fundamental argument that they make.
They argue that in the Bible, forgiveness is always conditional. They say that in Scripture, forgiveness is always tied to repentance and it always leads to restoration, so that there’s no such thing really as forgiveness where there isn’t repentance and restored relationship. One of the main passages they cite is Luke chapter 17, verses three and four.
Luke 17, three and four, where Jesus says this. If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them and if they repent, forgive them. The implication seems to be that if they don’t repent, don’t forgive them.
In other words, in the realm of relationships, in terms of a brother being reconciled to a brother, the forgiveness that heals that relationship is conditional on the person repenting first. And the argument continues that God himself is like this. God forgives on the basis of the condition of repentance.
In Acts chapter two, verse 38, when Peter comes to the end of his great evangelistic message, when the people ask him, what must we do to be saved? Peter answers with a condition. He says, repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Again, the forgiveness only happens if the crowd repents and shows their repentance in baptism.
So that is Brauns’ view, that there is only one kind of forgiveness. It is relational and conditional upon repentance. And many Christians and many theologians are persuaded by that view, but not everyone.
If you happen to pick up the book by Tim Keller, you may have discovered that Tim Keller has a different view to Brauns. Again, we don’t want to overemphasise these differences. Lots of excellent teaching in both of these books on forgiveness, but a different view on this issue.
And it’s not that Keller believes less than Brauns, he believes more than Brauns. He agrees with Brauns entirely about the fact that forgiveness in relationships is conditioned upon repentance, but he believes more. So he would say that on the one hand, there is a relational transactional forgiveness, the kind of forgiveness that brought back together Phil and Nathan upon the repentance of Nathan.
But Keller would argue that in the Bible, there is also a second level of forgiveness, a heart level of forgiveness. And this second level begins not when the person repents, but immediately when the other person sins against you. As you begin to cultivate a forgiving spirit and attitude of heart.
And of course, if the day comes when the person then repents and confesses their sin to you, you will already be in the right heart posture because you’ve already got a forgiving spirit already to forgive them in terms of the actual relationship. Now, again, Keller’s not alone. There’s others who agree with it.
I’m just using these as figureheads of these views. What is the main argument for his position? Well, it’s the opposite of the first one, basically. His argument is that in the New Testament, forgiveness doesn’t always appear with a condition attached.
In other words, there are examples where we’re called to forgive unconditionally. So he would say in most cases, the New Testament ties repentance to forgiveness, but not in some cases. For instance, we just read one in Matthew chapter six.
As part of the disciples’ prayer, we should pray, forgive us our debts as we also forgive our debtors. You will notice in that passage, there is no condition in the Lord’s prayer. Rather, it appears to be an absolute gospel principle.
He underlines it. He says that if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. No mention of repentance, but an expectation of forgiveness.
And Keller would say that what that is describing in the Lord’s prayer is a heart attitude of forgiveness. Now, a similar example, and maybe even clearer, is found in Mark chapter 11, verse 25. Mark 11, verse 25.
This is maybe even stronger. Jesus says, and again, notice the context here is prayer, and when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven will forgive your sins. Jesus doesn’t say, if you’re standing praying and you hold anything against anyone, stop praying, go find the person, sort it out, and then if they repent, forgive them.
None of that here. Indeed, Jesus seems to say that it is as you stand praying, as you stand praying, that you are called to forgive them. And so, Don Carson, who agrees with Keller’s view, summarises this second position in this way.
This is Carson. He says, “Sometimes the forgiveness of which the New Testament speaks presupposes repentance on the part of the offender, and sometimes not”. That’s the second view of things.
Now, I hope that by the end of that, we at least are getting some sense of what these two views are saying. By the way, there are many other arguments. This sermon was about a million minutes long when I first wrote it, and so what I decided to do was to, I’ve got a handout, there’s about probably a copy for every household, on the back desk next to the sound desk, and it’s got more arguments on either side.
Theological arguments, arguments about the Greek, and there’s some interesting points there. In my view, none of the other arguments are knockout arguments. I don’t think any of them kind of knock the other side down.
I think it does come down to really this issue of, do you think the absence of conditions in certain verses means that we have to unconditionally forgive people from the heart? Where do I personally land? When I read Brauns, I agreed with him, and then when I read Keller, I agreed with him. It is a tricky issue. I think there is a possibility, probably a strong possibility, New Testament speaks of both a heart-level forgiveness and a relational level.
But let me say this. Few things. We mustn’t get hung up on the issue of terminology.
And you say, well, that’s a bit hypocritical because we’ve just spent the last 10 minutes discussing what’s the right terminology. And that’s right because terms in the Bible matter, right? It matters what label you put on things. But all that being said, we need to recognise that however we define the terms, the practise of all this is challenging, whatever view you take.
You might not think it’s biblically right to speak of having a forgiving spirit towards someone, but you still are clearly commanded to love that person and to pray for them in your prayers. Now, that sounds an awful lot like what the other person is saying when they speak of having a gracious, forgiving spirit. .
And let me also add this observation. And I want to kind of push back a little bit on either view, depending on where you land. That if we put all of the emphasis on the heart or all of the emphasis on the reconciled relationship, either way, we’re going to miss the balance of the Bible.
Think of it this way. If you make forgiveness all about your attitude to the person, then you will fall into the trap of what we could call therapeutic forgiveness. This is one of the things that Brauns is pushing back strongly against in his book.
And I absolutely agree with him on this. That in our culture, forgiveness has been reduced to personal therapy. Forgiveness essentially is forgive the other person in order that you will feel better in yourself.
And the danger of that is obvious. There is really no love for other people in that at all. It’s a completely self-love thing.
It’s a sort of thing that creeps in in the aftermath of a terrorist shooting. You know, where the widow gets up after just a few hours and tells the world that the perpetrator is forgiven. And that’s a wonderful thing.
They’re forgiven of their sin. Now, it’s a wonderful thing if they have a forgiving spirit towards the person. And if that’s what they’re saying, it’s a good thing to say, and it’s an amazing witness to the world.
But the even greater witness is to say that even as I have a forgiving spirit towards this person, I long for this person’s forgiveness before God. And I am praying for their repentance at the foot of Jesus’ cross. That would be the even greater witness.
If we focus on just the heart at the expense of the person’s relationship restoration, then we’re only caring for ourselves, and we’re not loving the other person at all. And yet, on the other hand, of course, there’s also a danger with the other view, isn’t there? If we took it the wrong sort of way. And Brauns admits this in the book.
And not because he thinks he’s wrong, but because he thinks our sinful nature is so problematic. He says, the danger of what I am saying is that we could take this in such a way that we think, well, until the person repents, I am gonna harbour disdain and bitterness for them in my heart until the moment they repent. And then I’ll begrudgingly forgive them.
And Brauns says that’s a great danger of his view. Not because he thinks he’s wrong, but because of the sinfulness of our hearts, and of the way that we twist the Bible to suit our own heart’s inclinations. So wherever we land on the terms, let’s guard our hearts, and let’s aim for the most important goal of full restoration.
We need to hurry on to the second question. Let’s hurry on much quicker to the second thing. And the second question was highlighted in Phil and Nathan’s story.
And it’s this. Are there no consequences for the forgiven? Are there no consequences for the forgiven? Biblically, I think this is more straightforward than the first question. Even though I think emotionally this is sometimes harder to accept.
But I think biblically it’s clear. The Bible’s answer, I think, is this. That forgiveness removes the most important eternal consequences.
But it does not remove all of the temporary consequences. I think the Bible’s answer is, number one, that there are some removed consequences. When a person’s forgiven.
I mean, think of some of these just briefly. When someone is forgiven, the eternal consequence of judgement is removed. When someone is forgiven, the condemnation and deserved punishment of their sins is taken away.
Romans 8, verse one. There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. So eternal judgement removed.
To a great extent, alienated relationships are removed. Relationships that were broken, completely severed, can be restored and repaired by forgiveness. This is seen in passages like Matthew 5, 24, where there’s a confrontation about an offence and it leads to reconciliation.
Thirdly, there is often the removal of bitterness and ongoing resentment towards the person who has sinned. And so if you’re the person who’s perpetrated the sin, that’s a wonderful thing. That this other person is not bitter towards you every time you encounter them.
Ephesians four, Colossians three, Hebrews 12, and other passages. This is incredibly difficult to practise. It’s not easy to maintain these heart attitudes, but it’s the aim and the direction for the Christian who forgives that we do not live in bitterness towards those we forgive.
And then fourthly, in some cases, exclusion from fellowship and church membership is something that is reversed. This is obviously in the case of very significant sins that would maybe cause someone to be removed out of the fellowship of a church. But Paul speaks of this in 2 Corinthians two, of someone who sees the error of their ways, turns back to Christ, confesses their sin openly, and there is not only the joy of restoration with God, but there is that joyful welcome back into the family of God, back around the Lord’s table, and back into that close communion as a brother or sister in Christ.
And so these are just some of the amazing consequences that are removed when an individual is forgiven. But does that mean there are no remaining consequences? No, it doesn’t. The Bible itself makes this quite clear.
Here are some of the possible remaining consequences, and these won’t all be at play in every case, but here are some of them. Even after someone has been forgiven by God or by a brother or sister in Christ, there can be personal consequences. All sin leaves a mark personally.
For example, even when God forgives, we will often continue to wrestle with regret and shame about the things that we have done. And we see this, for example, in some of the Psalms of David, where even years after the fact, he is having to work through some of the stuff that he has done. Certainly, the gospel brings comfort.
Romans 8, we just said that a moment ago, and other passages. But the memories of our sin won’t be easy to shake this side of glory. There can also be very practical consequences that come from our sin.
Whether harm to the body through substance abuse or some ill effect of sexual misbehaviour or financial mismanagement that leaves a lasting effect. There is in life a kind of Galatians 6, verses 7 and 8, reap what you sow reality. It’s just part and parcel of living in the world of the creator.
In some cases, there can also be civic consequences. Where a Christian has breached the law of the land, they can be forgiven in the church by their brothers and sisters. But we are still called to respect the civic authorities and submit to its just punishment.
Romans 13, 1 Peter 2. It is wrong to say that once sin has been forgiven, human justice is not required under the laws of the land. Thirdly, even after forgiveness, there will sometimes be relationship consequences. Forgiveness won’t always mean that all relationships remain the same.
In some very sad cases, marriages may be ended. Children may not be as understanding of the parent’s repentance as you would like them to be. And they may be more guarded around their parents or want to spend less time with them.
We saw in Phil’s case, a friendship that was built on trust, that no longer had the trust to be at quite the same level. In the story of King David, David was forgiven by God, but as a direct consequence of his sin, relationships in his family disintegrated and sadly became fractured, 2 Samuel 12. And then finally, there are consequences sometimes for trust and consequences of boundaries.
Forgiving someone does not automatically restore immediate trust in their character. Particularly in cases of long-term deception or repeated harm, it is loving and prudent to establish boundaries and to bring protection. In the church, some leadership role should not be immediately restored, or in some cases ever restored, this side of heaven.
Because the Bible teaches that leaders must be above reproach and be considered in high regard among all the members of the church, 1 Timothy 3. Appropriate avenues for service can still be found, but the credibility of the gospel and the well-being of the community must remain paramount, even over an individual’s personal feelings. I think the illustration earlier captured this so well. Nathan was treated with love.
He was treated as a brother. He no longer had a broken relationship with Phil, but there were still some implications because of what he had done. The Bible is both realistic and yet incredibly hopeful about the aftermath of forgiveness in this world.
I was very struck this morning about, it’s in a slightly different context, but even the fact that the Lord Jesus himself had to endure for a time the messiness and the fallout of human behaviour and relationships in this world. As he entered into the brutal consequences that resulted from my sin and from your sin. Of course, Jesus didn’t deserve a single moment of that unfair treatment, but he had to pass through it in this world so that final forgiveness would be ours.
We also sang a hymn this morning, I don’t know if you caught the words, just before the sermon. Jesus, God’s righteousness revealed. And there was a line in it that really caught my attention.
It spoke of Jesus as being now justified and now glorified. Jesus went through that court of Pilate where he was condemned, a sinless man in his case, condemned. And now he has reached that place where he is justified and seen in all the righteousness of who he is.
That’s the perfect Lord Jesus. In our case, we are sinners. In our case, we are fully deserving of any consequences that come our way, this side of glory.
But as we look to the place that Jesus is in now, we see in his justification the reality one day of our justification. When we will stand fully forgiven, fully restored, fully justified in the Lord Jesus himself. Let’s pray together.
Father, thank you that we’ve been able to consider these important matters together. And Lord Jesus, we glory in your sinlessness, your perfection. We thank you that you who never sinned paid all of our debts and took all of our consequences.
Help us then to be grateful for all that you take from our shoulders, the burden of sin, even in this life. Help us to bear the little things by comparison to that great destiny, knowing that one day we will be justified and glorified with you. And we ask this in your precious name, amen.
The post No conditions? No consequences? – Matthew 6v9–15 appeared first on Greenview Church.
