Thursday, 04 September 2008

  • Why Couldn't God Just Forgive Us?

    willow by mr willow

    death on the cross

    There’s a lot on my mind lately, but, though it’s not really a great pressing concern to me, I keep coming back to one particular issue.  Perhaps that means it will be illuminating to somebody, so here it is.

    From several places, I’ve heard what appears to be a common objection to the Gospel message:

    “Why did Jesus have to die?  If God was so eager to forgive us, why go through the whole shtick of executing an innocent person?  Why is that even necessary—why couldn’t God just, well, forgive us?”

    This is a perfectly valid question, and it makes a lot of sense to ask it.  After all, there is something that seems just plain wrong about saying, “God decided to punish an innocent person instead of you… because He is so concerned about justice.” 

    But one thing I’ve found about many people’s objections to Christian beliefs is that they object to something that it is absolutely right to object to, except that it doesn’t happen to be a Christian belief.  (For instance, I saw a post the other week wherein somebody was railing against the Apostle Paul because (he said) Paul taught the false doctrine that Christians were obliged to keep the whole Old Testament Law to be saved.  That doctrine is certainly worth objecting to, which might be one reason the Apostle Paul objected so strongly to it in his epistles.)

    Be that as it may, I think we have a similar case here.  The idea that God punished an innocent person instead of just forgiving us does seem objectionable.  But is it really the Gospel message?  Maybe not.  Hang onto your hats; let’s take a look. 

    Part of the confusion here comes from what I call the “Person C” Fallacy.  Too often, you hear the Gospel message presented like this:  God (Person A) takes the crimes of a human being (Person B) and places them on an innocent third party, Jesus (Person C), whom He then proceeds to torture and kill so Person B doesn’t have to suffer the consequences.  Doesn’t Person B think Person A is a great guy?

    A typical skeptic would say to that, “But that’s so unfair, unjust, and cruel!”

    The typical skeptic would be absolutely right.

    The answer, like the answer to so many objections to the Bible, is 1) That idea really is a moral dilemma, and 2) That idea is not what’s taught in the Bible. At all.  Even if you’ve heard some Christians say it is.

    If your eyebrows are raised at this point, just work with me here.  Look at what the Bible teaches about Jesus. Jesus is said to be “God... manifested in the flesh” (1 Timothy 3:16).  In other words, He was not Person C; He was Person A.  God doesn’t punish some random innocent third party; He takes the penalty for our sins on Himself.  Punishing someone else may be cruel, but voluntarily suffering for someone else is heroic, heartbreaking, and amazingly gracious.

    That’s only part of it—even if Jesus is God, why did He have to die at all?  Again, if God is so anxious to forgive, why doesn’t he just wipe the slate clean, say “I forgive you,” and start all over again?

    The answer:  That’s exactly what God did do.  And that’s exactly why Jesus had to die.

    Confused?  Stay with me.  The confusion this time comes from our English word “forgive.”  We can use the word “forgive” in two different ways:

    1) You offend me or otherwise hurt me, but I say, “I forgive you.”  That means, “You hurt me, but I’ll overlook it because I don’t want it to wreck our relationship.  No hard feelings.” 

    2) You borrow a thousand dollars from me, fall on hard times, and can’t pay it back.  I say, “That’s OK; I’ll forgive you your debt.”  That means, “You now no longer owe me a thousand dollars.  On your records, it’s as though you’d never defaulted on the loan.” 

    On my records... well, I’m out a thousand dollars.  That’s the price I’d have to pay to forgive the debt.

    The Greek language, in which the New Testament was originally written, simplifies matters a bit by having a different word for each of these meanings.  (Charizomai is the first and aphiemi the second, for those interested.) 

    Now clearly, when people ask “Why couldn’t God just forgive us,” they’re thinking about meaning #1.  And it’s true that that first word does pop up in the Greek New Testament a few times in reference to forgiving people who have offended you.  But by far the more common word is the second—the one that’s used in reference to forgiving debts.  Here is just a quick sampling of some of the more notable uses:

    When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven you."  --Mark 2:7

    “Who can forgive sins but God alone?" –Luke 5:21

    “…the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins…" –Luke 5:24

    If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. –1 John 1:9

    And the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. –James 5:15

    It even occurs in the Lord’s Prayer: “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors” (Matt. 6:12).

    Now remember this is aphiemi, the kind of forgiveness that has to do not with overlooking the feelings but with clearing the accounts.  As an interesting word-study aside, aphiemi in other contexts can be translated “leave behind,” “let alone,” “send away,” or even “divorce”—it’s talking about making a clean and total break with something. 

    So God doesn’t just overlook our sins and say “no hard feelings” (though He does that too of course).  He does something even greater: The sin that was in your account book gets crossed out.  That debt you couldn’t pay back gets canceled. Your sins are sent away—left behind—divorced.

    That’s great news for us, but what does it mean for God?  Remember, when a debt is forgiven, the creditor becomes the one who suffers the loss.  And sin carries a big loss with it: “The wages of sin is death,” according to the Bible (Romans 6:23).  Sin carries a consequence, just like work carries a wage.  You work an hour; you get a set amount of money.  You commit a sin, and something inevitably happens to your soul.  You die. 

    By the way, I don’t think that God decided to set an arbitrary punishment for certain actions: “If they covet, let’s see… I know, I’ll give them the death penalty, bwa ha ha ha.”  I see God’s moral laws as an attempt to keep us from doing something that would destroy us whether He made the rule or not: “DANGER!  KEEP OUT!  HIGH VOLTAGE! If you touch the wire, you’ll die!”  The sign is there to keep you from being killed, not to kill you. 

    So there’s the dilemma: God wants to forgive us our sins as a creditor would forgive his debtor.  But if He does that, He’s left with the debt, and in that case, that means He has to suffer death. 

    God can’t die.  But a human can. 

    If God became a human, then He could die and the debt would be absorbed.  The books would be balanced all around.  There would be both justice (because the books would be fairly balanced) and mercy (because we didn’t have to die).

    So Jesus is not Person C, nor even just Person A: He’s person AB.  If Jesus is not fully God and fully Man, this whole arrangement is impossible: If Jesus is only A, B, or C, there’s an insuperable moral dilemma.  But if Jesus is who the Bible says He is, there’s Amazing Grace.

    “In Christ God was reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them”
    (2 Corinthians 5:19).

    Do you ever wonder why Jesus had to die?

Comments (78)

  • Papillon_Mom@xanga
  • Psalm2@xanga

    Amazing grace how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me!

  • CrazySwede@xanga
  • Phoenix_Fire86@xanga
  • thaaiis@xanga
  • Pickwick12@xanga

    This is incredibly fantastic. I was discussing this with a Revelife friend the other day, and you said it much better than I did. Praise God. I get so excited when I read things like this! You're a blessing, Mr. Willow. 

  • sugartomyhoney@xanga

    What a great explanation!
    Blessings

  • droftreeology@xanga

    i've never actually wondered that, but this is great. thanks for the post, mr. willow. your insightful thoughts are refreshing to see on revelife. they get you thinking!

  • musterion99@xanga

    Good post. My view is that God wouldn't just forgive us, because of justice. If a person kills another person, most non Christians would not say that we should just forgive them and not punish them. I like how you explained about the 2 words for forgiveness.

  • bijou_bijou2005@xanga

    Wonderful! Thank you for such a well thought out and insightful explanation!

  • The_Guitarfan@xanga

    That was kickass.  Thank you so much.

  • LadyLibellule@xanga

    That was just about the most convoluted logic I've ever heard.  So, basically, your definition of "forgive" is actually "forget".  No wonder people are just as crazy as they were 2000 years ago; they go around "forgiving" all the time and never learn from their past mistakes!

    I have wondered why the whole charade was necessary, but your explanation explains nothing (except maybe a little something about your thought patterns).

  • patientlywewait@xanga

    Excellent post!! Wow, praise God!

  • nita105

    Mr. Willow - you scared me there for a moment. I actually only kept reading to get to the bottom of what you were trying to say. I think it would have come across a lot better spoken than written. If I understand correctly, you were trying to argue that it was not "unfair" of God to send His Son (actually part of Himself) to die for the sins we committed. Right

  • nita105

    @lovedme4me@xanga - You understood? Can you help me? I thought he was trying to say that it isn't unfair for God to have had to die for us.

  • mrwillow

    @LadyLibellule@xanga - If that's what you think I meant, I'm afraid you've misunderstood nearly the entire article.  (I empathize; it is pretty long.)  Refer to the section where I explain the two distinct meanings of the word "forgive."  Only one of them is "forget", and that's not the one the Bible uses in reference to our sins.  In fact, you could say my whole point is that God choosing to "forget" our sins is exactly what the Atonement is not about!

    Or put it another way: Would you prefer God to "let us learn from our mistakes" by giving us no choice but to suffer spiritual death and eternal separation from God?  How loving would that be?

  • mrwillow

    @nita105 - I think that depends on how you define "unfair."  If "fairness" means giving everybody exactly what they deserve, thus sending everyone who ever committed a sin into eternal separation from God, then yes, God's grace is certainly "unfair," thanks be to God! 

    On the other hand, it is not "unfair" in the sense that God chose to wrongfully punish an innocent person while letting a guilty one walk free.  God chooses to graciously ("unfairly" if you will) absorb the debt of our sin, and His voluntarily suffering the consequences we deserved was a necessary part of the arrangement. In other words, He unfairly took our sins upon Himself, and thus He fairly could pay the consequences for them.

    Does that make it clearer?

  • WasaiWarrior@xanga

    Good explanation... except for the fact that, if God really really wanted to and creates something out of nothing all the time, there's no reason he would actually have to hold himself accountable to repaying the debt.  By saying that it must cost God something, you are binding him to the laws of cause and effect, debt and reconciliation.  While God chooses to abide by these rules, he is by no means obligated to them.  He simply feels like it.

  • brerjohn_lives@xanga

    Yes, it is about balance. Damage was done, it is not just a matter of forgetting, there are also the consequences of the actions of sin. A price must be paid to show that God is no respecter of persons when it comes to judgment.

    I think in part this is due to Satan standing ready to accuse God should He act in a way that shows partiality, for Satan himself has been judged by God, and God must be able to demonstrate to any witness, angelic or human, that He is absolutely consistent when it comes to doling out consequences for actions that have caused unjust gain, especially at others' expense.

    But none of this makes sense unless it is seen in the larger picture of God's purpose. God's purpose is that man would collectively become God's "other half," by partaking of His divine life and nature. The mystery of redemption is not merely that sinners are saved, but that we receive God's life because of that righteousness demonstrated at the cross. We have life because of righteousness.

    And to WasaiWarrior, I would say that God is totally committed to this creation, as demonstrated by the fact that He Himself became joined to it through incarnation. At that point, there was no turning back for Him. Furthermore, the blood of Jesus also binds God to us so that He MUST save us, whether or not He finds us still "loveable" after trillions or gazillions of years.

    The "marriage contract" that exists between God and us stands upon righteousness, even though it was love that motivated God to enter into it for our assurance. According to Psalms 89:14 and 79:2, God's throne in the universe is established upon righteousness. Thus, if He were to ever do anything that was unrighteous, such as break His contract of salvation based upon Christ's blood towards us, it appears His own throne over this universe would become forfeit (and presumably that is why Satan watches so closely!)

    Anyway, God acts according to His nature. He cannot let things go, or else the standard that has become the goal of our own salvation's process is compromised, and our own salvation cheapened.

  • lomal@xanga

    God abides by eternal laws. Because He is a God of truth, He will never break His own laws. It would be impossible for us to have faith in an arbitrary God. God the Father did not heap the sins of the world upon His separate and distinct Son (“that they may be one, even as we are one” John 17:22).


    Jesus knew from before the foundation of the world that a Savior would be needed and He offered in the council in Heaven to willingly take those sins and pay that price. Our sins create a gap over which we cannot cross by ourselves. We do not fully understand how His suffering and blood and death paid for our sins, but many of us have felt the result of his Atonement. We have felt our sins remitted and have felt the darkness turned to light and our sorrow to joy. We have seen the effect of it in our lives over and over again as clearly as any cause and effect experiment.


    The real question I would ask is: Why did Jesus have to die for my sins? Why do I continue to sin both by my actions and my inactions so that He had to make that infinite and eternal sacrifice and suffer for me. Not only do my sins break my heart, but it breaks my heart that He ever had to suffer because of me. He not only loves me in spite of His suffering for me, He loves me because of His suffering for me. I owe Him all that I am and all that I can ever hope to be. I love him as my brother and friend, my Savior and King.

  • michael21582@xanga

    @WasaiWarrior@xanga - In response to your comment on "Why can't God just forgive us: Sin is an offense against God's very nature, so when we sin against Him we're not just offending His things, we're offending His very self.  If in sinning we were merely destroying matter, His creation, yes, He could just recreate it and there would be no "debt".  But we're not merely sinning against His things, we're offending Him, the divine being Himself.  So it would be impossible for Him not to demand justice, because He would cease to be Himself.  You might say, 'but nothing is impossible for God', well in the general understanding of that, its true, but if you want to be technical, there are things that are impossible for God, He cannot cease to be Himself.  He cannot be conquered.  He cannot be limited.  He cannot do or be anything less than love. 

  • DANN192@xanga
  • IMChurchmouse@xanga

    I liked the A B C (NO! A B AB) argument. Stunning!

  • claire8688@xanga

    Jesus died so that we'll have the salvation. I guess it is as long as we have the spiritual hunger for God will do and never ever fall back!

  • too_pretty_to_die@xanga

    sacrifice and resurrection are very common themes in many religions.  Jesus wasn't the first deity to die and come back to life... i doubt he'll be the last.   

  • Choose Identity

  • Give eProps (?)

  • New! You can now edit your comments for 15 minutes after submitting.

About this Entry