Paul's Passing Thoughts

As written about many times on PPT, blank check forgiveness is a Reformed principle that flows from Martin Luther’s Theology of the Cross. Luther’s ideology, and John Calvin can be included in this as well, rejected the idea of multifaceted justice amidst humanity. In Protestant Reformed thought, there is only one legitimate justice that must be satisfied; man’s sin against God. In Reformed thought, sin among men and a “Cry for Justice” is all but completely irrelevant.

And in fact, given the constant ongoing church drama regarding spiritual abuse what in the world is more obvious? We can “Cry for Justice” all day long and every day until the second coming; such is not a Protestant metaphysical or gospel reality. If you think differently, you might want to do a legitimate independent study on the Protestant Reformation. Luther and Calvin scoffed at the idea of justice among people.

Consequently, blank check forgiveness and discernment blogs are an oxymoron. A biblical definition of forgiveness calls for a cancellation of discussion surrounding the offence. This is why, in contradiction to Reformed orthodoxy, Christians will not appear at a final judgement where the law is present. This is why Biblicism calls for multiple resurrections and judgments as opposed to Protestant orthodoxy confused Protestants notwithstanding. Let me illustrate this from one of many Bible passages that define forgiveness:

“For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.”

And…

“I, I am he who blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins.”

And…

“then he adds, ‘I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.’”

Of course, God doesn’t have a bad memory; the idea is that He will not bring up the sin to himself, others, or you ever again, especially at a final judgement where the law is present. This isn’t hard to understand if you understand the gospel and the literal new birth that saved us; the former you that committed the sin died with Christ and was resurrected to new life that pursues law for the sake of love without fear of condemnation. This also speaks to the folly of endorsing blank check forgiveness via “We should forgive others the way we were forgiven.” Well then, stop bringing the offence into constant remembrance on your blog. You can call it a “journey” until the cows come home, but it is not forgiveness.

Common among discernment blogs is a constant harping about blank check forgiveness while documenting the “journey” in reliving whatever abuse was suffered. Biblicism defines forgiveness as a debt cancellation. Bill collectors don’t blog about debts that have already been paid.

Hence, without repentance and restitution where possible, we don’t grant forgiveness anymore than God does. He didn’t forgive you without repentance, and if you are going to forgive others differently from how God forgives, don’t argue for “forgiving others the way we were forgiven.” Huh?

Let me suggest the Biblicist way: we forgive those who repent, and we love those who don’t repent while leaving revenge to God. Sometimes I wonder; does God refuse to deal with spiritual abusers because we arrogantly grant forgiveness that is unbiblical and then put His name on it? And, does God lead people to repentance by continually reminding them of their unreconciled offences? See, when we say that the love of God leads people to repentance, this is what we are talking about. Love does not ignore the sin issue and fail to hold people accountable. Since when is that love?

Now, if your blog continually brings up the unrepentant abuse for the purpose of leading that person to repentance…you do well…but if you have actually forgiven them…

…shut down your blog.

paul