The Instigator
linate
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
MissGoodChristian
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

from a christian perspective, people who are unrepentant, and know they are wrong, should be forgive

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
linate
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/2/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 600 times Debate No: 61181
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

linate

Pro

from a christian perspective, people who are unrepentant, and know they are wrong, should be forgiven

should this be the case?

it is common for people, including christians, to assume that it is automatic, that we must forgive everyone, automatically. but if you do a little research on it, the answer is not so clear. in my research, it seems most reputable scholars say you do not have to forgive, and some even say it's wrong to do. it is usually fluffy do good perspectives that just say forgive em all period.

still, i argue, the most meritorious choice is to forgive all evem if in no way required. the main reason is the logic of "the measure with which you use will be measured unto you" it is unfortunate that we might only measure differently to someone merely because we dont want measured against in an undesirable way. this helps us at our human level, and maybe there is something to be said about forgiving for its own sake.
also, while a person may be stubbornly unrepentant, at some level they probably do not know what they do (though this is debateable), and "forgive them father, they know not what they do" becomes an ideal we should strive for.

there are other close runner up approaches: 'if God forgives you, i do' and 'forgive them all and it's required to do by God'

here is a typical argument, and while it's a catholic arguing, it's not just a catholic who could or would argue it:

----------------------------
We arenA533;t obligated to forgive people who do not want us to. This is one of the biggest stumbling blocks that people have regarding the topic. People have seen "unconditional" forgiveness and love hammered so often that they feel obligated to forgive someone even before that person has repented. Sometimes they even tell the unrepentant that they have preemptively forgiven him (much to the impenitentA533;s annoyance).

This is not what is required of us.

Consider Luke 17:3A533;4, where Jesus tells us, "If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him; and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, and says, A533;I repent,A533; you must forgive him."

Notice that Jesus says to forgive him if he repents, not regardless of whether he does so. Jesus also envisions the person coming back to you and admitting his wrong.

The upshot? If someone isnA533;t repentant, you donA533;t have to forgive him.

If you do forgive him anyway, that can be meritorious, provided it doesnA533;t otherwise have bad effects (e.g., encouraging future bad behavior). But it isnA533;t required of us that we forgive the person.

This may strike some people as odd. They may have heard unconditional love and forgiveness preached so often that the idea of not indiscriminately forgiving everybody sounds unspiritual to them. They might even ask, "But wouldnA533;t it be more spiritual to forgive everyone?"

I sympathize with this argument, but there is a two-word rejoinder to it: God doesnA533;t.

Not everybody is forgiven. Otherwise, weA533;d all be walking around in a state of grace all the time and have no need of repentance to attain salvation. God doesnA533;t like people being unforgiven, and he is willing to grant forgiveness to all, but he isnA533;t willing to force it on people who donA533;t want it. If people are unrepentant of what they know to be sinful, they are not forgiven.

Jesus died once and for all to pay a price sufficient to cover all the sins of our lives, but God doesnA533;t apply
his forgiveness to us in a once-and-for-all manner. He forgives us as we repent. ThatA533;s why we continue to pray "Forgive us our trespasses," because we regularly have new sins that we have repented ofA533;some venial and some mortal, but all needing forgiveness.
---------------------------------------------------------------
there are more formidable argument against automatic forgiveness. but while these arguments exist, it is still a virtue to forgive, thus these arguments just show forgiveness is not required, just virtuous:
we do say "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who tresspass against us". one might argue, it says we are to forgive here. but the implied point is that we forgive when they ask for it, or something. not automatically.

as the catholic encyclopdia says, though it's not limited to catholics, but does explain the orthodox christian approach to it. under contrition it says forgiveness implies contrition. and it wasn't until the reformation that people started to act as if that wasn't the case. 'forgive' started to have new meaning.
also, as a pope said, though ti wouldn't be only a pope who'd say it
"Properly understood, justice constitutes, so to speak, the goal of forgiveness. In no passage of the Gospel message does forgiveness, or mercy as its source, mean indulgence towards evil, towards scandals, towards injury or insult. In any case, reparation for evil and scandal, compensation for injury, and satisfaction for insult are conditions for forgiveness."
MissGoodChristian

Con

Also as a Christian point of view: When people are unrepentant and they know it they should not be forgiven. Yet they are forgiven anyways.

In what point do we argue this? In God's point or in our Christian people's point? The reason I ask this question is because, Christians may have a perspective similar to God's. Some Christians do not. If all Christians came to the same conclusion it would be somewhere along these lines: " We sin everyday. Its a natural thing. We should not be forgiven yet we are." People should not have to forgive someone for doing something and not being repentant about it.

In (And I quote) Luke 17:3A533;4, where Jesus tells us, "If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him; and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, and says, A533;I repent,A533; you must forgive him." That's IF he repents.

That only says to forgive them if they turn to you seven times and say "I repent". Your argument topic says people who are unrepentant. Yes, it would be nice to forgive everyone but, why should we?

Unless they repent and want to be forgiven or if you want to forgive them(As long as they have repented), They shouldn't be forgiven.
Debate Round No. 1
linate

Pro

the text i quoted in the opening post had that bible verse, where he made the same argument. i will just highlight his following points, basically stating that even if it's not required, it's still or can be meritoriious to forgive anyway.

"Consider Luke 17:3A533;4, where Jesus tells us, "If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him; and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, and says, A533;I repent,A533; you must forgive him."

Notice that Jesus says to forgive him if he repents, not regardless of whether he does so. Jesus also envisions the person coming back to you and admitting his wrong.

The upshot? If someone isnA533;t repentant, you donA533;t have to forgive him.

********If you do forgive him anyway, that can be meritorious********, provided it doesnA533;t otherwise have bad effects (e.g., encouraging future bad behavior). But it isnA533;t required of us that we forgive the person."
MissGoodChristian

Con

They are unrepentant that means they are not sorry for their sins. This person knows that they are unrepentant that means they know they are not sorry for what they did. They know they are in the wrong but the question is: Did they repent? If they did therefore your use of that verse was correct in this content. If they did not repent then that verse is unless because it does not say anything about if they do not repent to forgiven them anyway.
You just stated that they were unrepentant and they knew they were wrong. You did not state that they repented because, I would guess that was not the case. They are not sorry for what they did they do not truly want forgiveness. If they did I'm sure they would have been repentant.
Debate Round No. 2
linate

Pro

reiterate
MissGoodChristian

Con

Only because you did not hear me clearly. I make a statement multiple times NOT for my health but for clarification. This is the last argument you made: 'the text I quoted in the opening post had that bible verse, where he made the same argument. I will just highlight his following points, basically stating that even if it's not required, it's still or can be meritorious to forgive anyway.

"Consider Luke 17:3A533;4, where Jesus tells us, "If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him; and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, and says, A533;I repent,A533; you must forgive him."

Notice that Jesus says to forgive him if he repents, not regardless of whether he does so. Jesus also envisions the person coming back to you and admitting his wrong.

The upshot? If someone isnA533;t repentant, you donA533;t have to forgive him.

********If you do forgive him anyway, that can be meritorious********, provided it doesnA533;t otherwise have bad effects (e.g., encouraging future bad behavior). But it isnA533;t required of us that we forgive the person." '

Now if your brother sins Rebuke him. IF he repents forgive him. It is required that we forgive him if he repents. This person is unrepentant. He has not been sorry for his sins so he should not be forgiven. It is rewarding to forgive yes, but Your are just wasting breath patience and thought forgiving someone who doesn't want to be forgiven ( an unrepentant).
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
forgiveness is at the heart of the faith walk . Jesus teaching in the 11th chapter of Mark said that speaking to the mountain will only work when we have forgiven those who have done us wrong.Faith is the most powerful force in existence. And it will only work by love.If Jesus had not forgiven those who crucified him he would not have been raised from the dead.But he did and he was.Without love, faith would be the most destructive thing we know. Jesus spoke to the wind and the sea. And in Mark 11:22-24 he said we can do the same thing. Of course he was only talking about whosoevers. If you are not one of those you cannot speak by faith and move mountains.But if you are just help yourself to the faith walk.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
linateMissGoodChristianTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con argued that it wasn't necessary to forgive them, Pro showed that a Christian perspective indicates it's not necessary, but is more meritorious--and he indicated that was his argument in R1, so this isn't an issue of resolution. Con argued against it, but, given Pro sourced his contentions and they came from a Christian perspective, I don't think Con's rebuttals were enough. Arguments, rather narrowly, to Pro. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.