When Forgiveness is Not an Option – Part 2 (an examination of Matthew 18:15-18)

Jul 6, 2009 | Articles

If a Brother Sins against You

As is clear from this statement, a person can sin against another individual.  Sin need not only be that which one commits against God. Here the term “brother” refers to any believer, male or female, who has committed some trespass against a fellow believer. Whether this sin is intentional, unintentional, known, or unknown is unstated. In reality the focus at this point in Jesus’ instruction is not so much aimed at the guilty part as it is at the responsibility of the one who has been injured. The injured party has the responsibility of illuminating his counterpart as to the grievance. And clearly this is a grievance which is real. It is not the product of a hyperactive imagination or narcissism. Neither is this a petty, insignificant mistake that all commit every day. This is a sin that if left uncorrected jeopardizes one’s eternal relationship with his brother and with God.

Go and Tell . . . Him Alone

That this is a personal sin is again clear from this statement. At this point in the process only two (and perhaps under some circumstances only the injured party) knows that a sin has been committed. This is not a public act committed against God or the community of believers we call the “church.” This is an action committed against a single individual which likewise requires a singular reaction. Far too often when Christians are injured they go to the “church” via gossip rather than going to the individual who allegedly committed the sin. When this is done the guilty party is maligned, alienated, humiliated, and put on the defensive. When such an environment has been created battle grounds are often drawn and reconciliation is all but impossible. However, when the guilty party is approached quietly, calmly, and with brotherly love there is much more likelihood that he will respond in a gracious and repentant way. He is not embarrassed or publicly humiliated.  The word Jesus uses here for “go and tell” literally means “reprove” and comes from the Greek “elencho” meaning to expose or bring to light. Thus the offender is to be made aware of the problem and his sin exposed.  The injured party is not to wallow in his grief. He is not too let his wounds fester. He is not to hold a grudge. Rather he is to quickly take proactive steps leading to resolution. When Matthew 6:23 and 18:15 are combined we get a picture of two parties (the injured and the guilty) rushing towards each other, meeting in the middle, not with clinched fists, but with open arms as they confess and repent of the sin.

You Have Gained Your Brother

“Restoration” is the desired result in each of these proceedings thus Jesus says “thou has gained thy brother” – to oneself and to God and salvation – to friendship and brotherhood. “Gained” is from “kerdaino” which was originally a term of commerce referring to financial profit or gain. Here is refers to the precious soul of an erring brother. See Proverbs 11:30, Galatians 6:1, and James 5:19-20.

Again it should be noted that the context of this teaching is “real sin.” In other words Jesus is talking about that which can convincingly be shown to endanger Christian fellowship. Jesus is not suggesting that every time a brother or sister does something that irritates us or demonstrates some minor fault that we beat down their door with our complaint. In fact scripture seems to indicate that petty grievances should be overlooked without malice realizing each is imperfect before God. Longsuffering is a Christian virtue (1 Corinthians 13:5).

But if He Will Not Hear You

Here we reach that which the title of our article suggests. There may be times when our initial attempt for reconciliation falls on deaf ears. In fact there may be times when “forgiveness is not an option” simply because the sinner refuse to repent.

Why the guilty party refuses to hear the injured pleas is not specifically stated. It could be because the guilty does not believe that he has injured anyone. It might be that in an initial state of shock at being approached he denies the allegation or seeks to dismiss it as trivial. Or it might be because the guilty party has a heart out of tune with the Lord thus he is not willing to admit his fault and take the proper steps producing repentance unto life. When this is the case the initial infraction actually begins to take a back seat to the more serious problem in this person’s life: the problem of rebellion.

Whatever the case, caution should be maintained on the part of the injured party as his contemplates what action to pursue. Again we remember that the purpose of Jesus’ teaching is to reconcile an erring brother. It is not to find convenient reason to drive him from the community of believers. Before the accuser rushes to get others involved he must make sure that he himself has a proper attitude, that he goes in humility and love, and that his repeated attempts to reconcile his brother have failed. Lenski says that the injured party might need to go more than once to the offender. Lenski further notes that the phrase “will not hear thee” carries the idea of a definite refusal to hear and be convicted (Matthew, p. 700). In other words the injured party must make sure that the sinner has time to fully process and understand the accusation against him. Only when it is absolutely certain that the dispute cannot be rectified are others to be informed.

How different is the procedure Jesus describes in these verses than that which so often occurs in Christian circles? Without patience and love an injured Christian may find himself tempted to become the real aggressor as he seeks to retaliate against his brother. But remember, revenge is never the proper motive for discipline. The procedures Jesus describes, which call for action on the part of first the individual and eventually the church, are aimed at restoration. At their core is a genuine concern for the sinner’s soul. Jesus’ instruction is not a recipe for ridding ourselves of those with whom we have personality problems.

Take Two or Three Witnesses

Whether the offended party takes one or two witnesses seems to be left up to him. In any event those chosen must be impartial, wise, and godly men (1 Corinthians 6:5). This step in the procedure is not for the purpose of forming of a lynch mob or a gang.  The witnesses’ role is not to brow beat the offender into submission. Neither are they to show favoritism between parties. Their role is one of wise counsel and impartiality toward the facts and proceedings of the case. These witnesses are present to verify that a sin actually took place and to make sure that the offender is properly and lovingly handled. Lenksi says, “In case the matter is ever inquired into, and any dispute or uncertainty arises, the case can be properly settled as to the facts by the two or three witnesses” (Matthew, p. 701). Broadus says, “These witnesses can declare what passed in the private interview” (Matthew, p.388).

The principle Jesus sets forth is not only logical but actually has its roots in the Mosaic Legal system. Moses commanded that accusations be confirmed by two or three witnesses to ensure that innocent people were not falsely accused (Deuteronomy 19:15). Thus every Jew, including the apostles, knew the precept and used it on various occasions (John 8:17, 2 Corinthians 13:1, 1 Timothy 5:19 and Hebrews 10:28).

Tell it to the Church

In outlining the steps mentioned above we see yet again the truth of Matthew 18:14. God is not willing that any should perish and thus provides ample opportunity for restoration.  Note that as time passes the process expands to involve more Christians. At first the rebuke is private. Then with the addition of witnesses it becomes semi-private. Only if this fails is the matter to be opened to public scrutiny.

By this time in the process the matter may not be so much about the initial infraction as it is the attitude of the brother in question. If after witnesses are called and the allegation has been probed and proved legitimate the sinner refuses to make amends, then there is obviously a deeper problem than the initial sin. When any believer is stubborn to the point of refusing to hear the pleas of righteous witnesses, then he is insubordinate and out of line with the authority of Christ. Thus the first sin that initially brings the action is simply an indication of a much deeper spiritual sickness within the guilty party. Hence it is also on this level that the church must now be made aware of the situation.

If He Neglect to Hear the Church

By “church” (ekklesia) Jesus means the “assembly” or “congregation” of baptized saints.  Here Jesus anticipates those congregations that his own apostles will establish after Pentecost.

Of all influences in ones life, the church should be that body which most likely convinces the sinner to repent. For one to refuse the advice of the church indicates a deep spiritual rebellion against Christ and God. It should be noted, however, that in order for the church to positively affect its own members when they go astray there must already have been some preventative work done. If bonds of fellowship and friendship have been nurtured then an erring member will more naturally want to return to the fold. He will remember the genuine love of his spiritual family. If, however, the church has done nothing to foster spiritual unity and fellowship their rebuke may seem more an affront than a demonstration of love. He might well respond, “”The church was never concerned about me before why should I return? What right do you have to meddle in my affairs?”

In any event the sinner by this point has had repeated time and opportunity to repent and amend his ways. He has been approached quietly and privately – perhaps more than once. He has been approached by a small group of spiritual witnesses. Finally he has been approached formally by the church in all of its official capacity. In each instance, for whatever reason, the sinner has refused to repent of his sin. Therefore the sin that was once private is now a matter of public concern. It now becomes the obligation of the entire community of believers to take action. Once again, in such a case forgiveness is not an option. Sin that is not confessed and repented of cannot be forgiven. Christ cannot wash the feet that are not willingly presented to him.

Let Him Be a Heathen

Admittedly Jesus language may seem harsh and uncaring if taken out of context. However, as we have shown the individual in question has stubbornly shown his resistance to the gospel and to spiritual persons who are interested in his soul. Thus, for all practical purposes this man is already a “heathen.” He has shown disregard for the basic component of God’s plan: forgiveness of sins.

In addition, however, Jesus’ words probably stem from a special Jewish context. Most Jews of Jesus’ day fellowshipped only those whom they held to be ceremonially clean. To rub shoulders with outright sinners such as tax collectors brought spiritual contamination. While this belief was not true in a literal sense (befriending a sinner does not in and of itself automatically make one unclean) Jesus uses the idea to demonstrate a spiritual truth. Evil company corrupts good morals. If the church were to harbor the guilty party in all his rebellion it would indeed expose the body to spiritual contamination. One cannot “buddy up” with sin and not eventually be affected by it. In the case before us the one who refuses to hear the church must be withdrawn from so that his insubordination does not destroy the entire body. This is the same concept that Paul addresses in 1 Corinthians 5:6 as he too deals with an erring brother. His warning that sin spreads like leaven is to ever be a legitimate concern.

By saying that the sinner in Matthew 18:17 is to be as a tax collector is the same as saying that one is not to have intimate association with him. In the similar case that we have noted in 1 Corinthians Paul says, “Not even to eat.” In other words there is to be no social (let alone religious) communion with this person.

Finally, that the church has the authority to withdraw fellowship from an erring brother is seen in Jesus’ comments in verses 19 and 20. When, after the proper procedures have been followed a brother or sister demonstrates contempt for the authority of Christ the church has no other option but to withdraw that the fellowship which Christ once extended through the waters of baptism – this  because in reality Heaven now withdraws its fellowship. The church is simply doing that which Heaven has already placed its stamp of approval upon.

Conclusion

We began our study with the title “When Forgiveness is Not an Option.” Matthew 18 clearly shows that while it may be painful there are times when it is outside of human prerogative to extend forgiveness. When a sin has not been confessed and repented of it cannot be forgiven (1 John 1:9). While we must anxiously stand and wait for the sinner to return, while we extend our hand and beckon him home, and while it may even be necessary to take the first step, in the end it is the sinner who must turn his heart toward home. Christians have no right to forgive sins that Christ has not forgiven.

Mike Criswell

mikecriswell@sbcglobal.net

When Forgivness Is Not An Option – Part 1

Jun 30, 2009 | Articles

A common trend in modern evangelical thought is that a Christian must forgive unequivocally and regardless of the circumstances. If someone offends or hurts you it becomes your obligation to forgive the perpetrator even though he or she demonstrates no remorse and refuses to correct the transgression. In other words the “stronger” brother must forgive the “weaker,” overlook the sin, draw no lines of fellowship, and just be the bigger person in the whole situation. To carry the burden, so the theory goes, damages the injured party even more emotionally. Therefore to be psychologically whole he needs to release the anger, turn it over to God, forgive the infraction, and carry on as if nothing ever happened.

If the above description seems an unfair assessment of modern day evangelicals then may I suggest listening to a few of the self help sermons that float across the airways of “Christian Radio.” Admittedly the theory sounds good. Did Christ not look down from the cross on unrepentant sinners and say, “Father forgiven them for they know not what they do”? Is it not true that anger saddles the heart with untold burden? Is it not more righteous when wronged to simply suffer for it? And what of someone who has harmed us and then dies before they make restitution. What of the alcoholic father who abuses his children and then dies before he sees the error of his ways? Is the child to simply carry the infraction of his life and not bring closure to his grief by forgiving his deceased parent?

Obviously nothing good ever comes from harboring the emotional weight brought on by wrongs that others have committed against us. And it is certainly true that Jesus asked God to forgive the unrepentant reprobates that nailed him to the cross. But the above theology of forgiveness is not entirely biblical in spite of how righteous it sounds. Certainly Christians must be willing to suffer abuse without retaliation (Matt. 5:39). We must be willing to be a bigger person in the petty grievances that mark every day life. But to forgive someone that neither seeks restitution nor demonstrates any regard for God’s law is quite a different matter.

At the outset we must remember that biblical forgiveness is not simply an emotional exercise whereby we release our anger. While releasing anger may be very helpful to our psychological disposition, and may be scriptural (Eph 4:26), it does not take into account the fact that biblical forgiveness involves more than just me and the person who harmed me. Biblical forgiveness involves God. I have neither the right nor the ability to wholly forgive someone whom God has not forgiven. Now there may be situations where we have no choice but to defer to God and ultimately let Him be the judge. However, this does not erase the fact that forgiveness of another’s sin ultimately brings is God’s decision for He alone forgives sin.

We must also understand that biblical forgiveness has strings attached. Biblical forgiveness must be accomplished in accordance with God’s will. His word must be the guide for how and when one is forgiven. To simply decide unilaterally that we will forgive someone is not our ultimate prerogative. Even after Jesus prayed to God that his murders be forgiven, he commissioned the apostles to take the gospel (God’s saving plan) to them. As demonstrated at Pentecost until sinners repented of their sins and obeyed the gospel they were lost (Acts 2:38).

While the modern theology of unconditional and unilateral forgiveness probably stems from noble motives it is not biblical. Society, so enamored with its no-fault polity, would rather sweep sin under the rug than hold a guilty party accountable for their actions. Society teaches us that to keep from offending others we must not demand accountability. God, on the other hand, does not forgive until His stipulations have been met. We may sweep things under the rug and walk away feeling good about our generosity. In time we may “forgive” and forget. However, God does not forget when His criterion has been satisfied.

At first brush the above analysis may seem harsh and unchristian. As we will see, however, even though biblical forgiveness is conditional once God’s terms have been met it must be offered without reservation. There is never one so willing and eager to forgive as the true follower of Jesus Christ. With this in mind let us look at what Jesus has to say about dealing with a sinning brother in Matthew 18. What we will see is that forgiveness is never passive. So precious is the restoration of a sinning brother that the injured party, in spite of being hurt, takes the initiative of reconciliation. Much as God did with a sinful world, the wounded party steps outside himself and his own pain to pursue peace.

As with all scripture, Matthew 18:15-20 must be interpreted in light of its broader context. Generally speaking Matthew 18 is about “seeking the lost.” From verse 10 to the end of the chapter the theme is reconciliation and forgiveness. In verse 10 Jesus begins his assessment of the value of each “little one” (ie: believers, no matter how humble in status) as he tells the parable about a lost sheep. The point of this parable is that when lost the “one” takes precedent over the “many” that are safe in the fold. Thus Jesus concludes his teaching in verse 14 by saying, “Even so it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish” (NKJV). Luke’s parallel poignantly sums up this parable and notes, “I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance” (15:7).  Notice that Jesus emphasizes the effort of the shepherd who goes into the rugged mountainous terrain to seek the wandering sheep. Though it is not the shepherd’s negligence that causes the sheep to go astray; nevertheless as a mature leader the shepherd takes the initiative to restore the wanderer. In the next section, which we will return to later and which serves as a bridge in the chapter, the same principle is taught.

The last section of Matthew 18 takes a bit different turn as Jesus describes the believer’s responsibility to forgive in view of God’s forgiveness. The “king” (vs. 23) represents God with the first servant (vs. 24) representing the believer who has been forgiven of his sin debt. In turn, the second servant (vs. 28) represents others who might from time to time stand in the need of our forgiveness. Though much less guilty in comparison to our guilt before God, our fellow man gives us a chance to demonstrate how we really feel about forgiveness. God will not forgive those who do not forgive.

Jesus summation is found in verse 25 when he says, “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.”  Recall that Jesus began is ministry with similar teaching in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:14-15).

The last section of Matthew 18, however, is not without its own context. In verse 21 Peter comes to Jesus and poses a difficult question. Having heard Jesus say that a Christian must forgive one who has trespassed against him, Peter wants to know the limits of this forgiveness. Peter asks, “Up to seven times?” Jesus replies, “Seventy times seven.” Peter’s statement probably stems from scribal tradition which held that forgiveness should be extended but three times to a fellow brother. Peter, thinking he is being generous, doubles the number and then adds one to make it a perfect seven times. Jesus’ response to Peter’s munificence is shocking. Obviously Jesus does not have in mind forgiving a literal 490 times, which might be impossible to keep track of anyway, but is teaching that forgiveness must be open ended. As long as there is true repentance on the part of a sinner then forgiveness is to be extended. Luke 17:4 qualifies Matthew 18 and adds “and seven times in a day returns saying I repent.” Thus the initial point of our study is sustained that forgiveness is not a unilateral action but requires some kind of repentance on the part of the sinner before true reconciliation can be brokered. This is further demonstrated by the fact that the king, after initially offering forgiveness to the first servant, retracts his offer when it becomes apparent that the servant rather enjoys justice over mercy. The first servant, by rejecting his fellow man’s request for mercy, demonstrates insincerity in his own previous request to the king. One cannot ask for that he refuses to give!

In any event, Peter’s question in verse 21 no doubt comes as a response to Jesus’ teaching on reconciliation in verses 15-20. As we shall now notice, Jesus reminds his disciples of the value of a single soul and, like a sheep, the erring must be sought and saved. In reality the instruction that Jesus gives on dealing with a sinning brother is simply a practical application of the parable he has just completed (vss. 10-14).

Mike Criswell

mikecriswell@sbcglobal.net