Are Christians obligated to forgive everyone who sins against us without exception? What about those who remain hostile and unrepentant towards us? Several scriptures seem to indicate that we ought to unconditionally forgive those who sin against us (Matthew 6:12, 14-15; 18:21-35; Ephesians 4:32). Other scriptures seem to indicate that we are only obligated to forgive those who express repentance or seem to be genuinely repentant (Luke 17:3-4; 2 Timothy 2:4). How do we reconcile these seemingly contradictory texts?

What is Forgiveness?

To forgive means to pardon, remit, or overlook an offense or debt, and to treat the offender as not guilty and thereby not deserving of a response to their sin against us (cf. Webster 1828). First, we must observe that men cannot forgive others in the way that only God can forgive. We cannot forgive someone on behalf of God for their breaking of his law, rather, we can only forgive others in terms of the damage their sin has done to us. William Perkins explains:

“In every trespass which one does to his neighbor, be two things: the loss and damage whereby man is hindered in body, goods, or name; and an offense against God by a practice of injustice against His law. Now as a trespass is a damage unto man, so may a man forgive it; but as it is a sin against God in the transgression of the moral law, so God only pardons it. As when a man has his goods stolen, that damage done to him a man may remit, but the breach of the eighth commandment therein, God only can forgive.” (Exposition of Christ’s Sermon on the Mount, Works I, p. 474).

Three Kinds of Forgiveness

Secondly, theologians distinguish between three kinds of forgiveness referred to in the Bible, categorized according to what is remitted or pardoned. Scripture speaks of forgiveness 1) of revenge, 2) of punishment, and 3) of judgment. Perkins explains these:

“Forgiveness of revenge is when a man is not desirous of revenge from an inward grudge, but forbears to render like for like to those that wrong him. This is principally here meant [in Matthew 6:12, 14-15], for we must “always forgive our brethren” [Mark 11:25] in respect of revenge, “for vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, and I will repay” (Rom. 12:19). Forgiveness of punishment is the remitting of that punishment which another man’s wrongdoing justly deserves. This is not always to be granted, especially in the case of offense, which may tend to the public hurt; for then were the state of magistracy unlawful, whose office it is to punish offenses. The forgiveness of judgment is the remitting of that censure which an evil deed does justly deserve. Neither is this here meant, for being lawfully called thereunto, we may freely censure that which is evil done.” (Perkins, ibid., pp. 474-5).

Responding to an objection from 2 Timothy 4:14-15, “Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words”, Zacharias Ursinus notes that the Apostle Paul forgave Alexander the Coppersmith in respect of personal revenge and human punishment, but not in terms of human judgment nor God’s justice (‭‭Romans‬ ‭12‬:‭17‬-‭21). He writes that “judgment in reference to others”

“should not always be remitted; for God, who prohibits falsehood, will not have us to judge of knaves as honest men, but designs that we should distinguish the good from the bad. Christ enjoins the same thing, when he says, ‘Give not that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine’ and, ‘be wise as serpents, and harmless as doves’ (Matthew 7:6; 10:16). Paul did not, therefore, sin in entertaining an opinion of Alexander, as a wicked man, as long as he did not repent of his wickedness.” (Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, p. 652).

Forgiveness of revenge is unconditional. “Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you.” (Ephesians 4:31-32). “And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors….  For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” (Matthew 6:12, 14-15)

Unbiblical Forgiveness

Here it is appropriate to interject a fourth kind of “forgiveness” that is not biblical, but is a very popular idea today. “Therapeutic forgiveness” is when we forgive others for our own sake, to make ourselves feel better, and to dismiss the offense and the offender with resignation for the sake of our mental health or relieving stress. Oftentimes this also includes an element of ill-will and is based on ideas about fate or karma. While one benefit of true forgiveness may be that it takes a burden off of our heart, this should not be the fundamental reason we forgive—that is sinful self-centeredness.

Rather, we forgive because we have no right to exact revenge nor to have an ill-will towards others. “Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.” (‭‭Romans‬ ‭12‬:‭17‬-‭21). And because God himself loves even the sinner with a love of beneficence (Matthew 5:45) and benevolence (1 John 4:1; Luke 2:14); but not with a love of complacency or delight, which is specially reserved only for believers reconciled to God through Christ (Hebrews 11:6; John 14:21; Isaiah 62:3). We are to be like God in this regard (Matthew 5:38-48).

Forgiveness Does Not Absolve Consequences

Forgiveness of revenge does not mean that the offender (whether repentant or unrepentant) will escape the consequences of his actions and be fully reconciled as if the offense never occurred (Matthew 7:6; 10:16). Thomas Watson responds to the objection, “But suppose another has wronged me in my estate, may I not go to law for my debt?”

“Yes, else of what use were law courts? God has set judges to decide cases in law, and to give every one his right. It is with going to law, as it is with going to war; when the just rights of a nation are invaded, it is lawful to go to war; so when a man’s estate is trespassed upon by another, he may go to law to recover it. But the law must be used in the last place; when no entreaties or arbitrations will prevail, then the chancery must decide it. Yet this is no revenge, it is not so much to injure another, as to right one’s self; which may be, and yet we may live in charity.” (The Lord’s Prayer, p. 392; cf. Herman Witsius, Sacred Dissertations on the Lord’s Prayer, p. 322-323).

Forgiveness of revenge does not prohibit our seeking civil or ecclesiastical justice and censure, and much less does it require “the making such a one as hath so injured us our intimate and bosom friend” (Matthew Poole, Commentary on Luke 17:3-4). Thomas Boston explains what forgiving our debtors entails, and connects this to the distinction between loving someone with goodwill and loving someone as a trusted friend:

“It is our hearty forgiving them the injury done to us (to forgive the injury against God is not in our power), entertaining no hatred or malice against them, but loving them with a love of goodwill, heartily wishing their good, and being ready to do them good, Matthew 5:44-45, ‘But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, pray for them that despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven, for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.’ But it does not extend to a love of complacency or delight in them, in whom there appears no ground for that, either as men or as Christians. Psalms 26:4, ‘I have not sat with vain persons,’ says David, ‘neither will I go in with dissemblers.’” (Body of Divinity, Works, vol. 2, pp. 617-618)

John Calvin likewise distinguishes between forgiveness and reconciliation, stating that “there are two ways in which offenses are forgiven:”

“If a man shall do me an injury, and I, laying aside the desire of revenge, do not cease to love him, but even repay kindness in place of injury, though I entertain an unfavorable opinion of him, as he deserves, still I am said to forgive him. For when God commands us to wish well to our enemies, He does not therefore demand that we approve in them what He condemns, but only desires that our minds shall be purified from all hatred. In this kind of pardon, so far are we from having any right to wait till he who has offended shall return of his own accord to be reconciled to us, that we ought to love those who deliberately provoke us, who spurn reconciliation, and add to the load of former offenses. 

“A second kind of forgiving is, when we receive a brother into favor, so as to think favorably respecting him, and to be convinced that the remembrance of his offense is blotted out in the sight of God.” (Calvin’s Commentaries vol. 16, pp. 364-366, commentary on Matthew 18:21 & Luke 17:4).

Calvin states that the former is required of all, but the second is only given upon repentance when the brother is won and restored to fellowship after private admonition or ecclesiastical censure (Luke 17:3; Matthew 18:15-20). Someone may be formally restored to good standing in the church and yet not necessarily restored to personal friendship. William Perkins similarly wrote:

“Whether must we forgive those that wrong us, if they will not confess their fault nor ask us forgiveness? Answer. We must forgive them freely in respect of revenge. Objection. But it is said, “If he repent, forgive him” (Luke 17:3), therefore, unless he repents, we need not to forgive him. Answer. That place is meant of ecclesiastical censures, that those must proceed no further, after the party offending does repent.” (ibid., p. 475).

Forgiveness Requires Prudence

Calvin continues, that we must be shrewd and not naive when it comes to others expressing their regret for their actions: “Christ does not deprive believers of the exercise of judgment, so as to yield a foolish readiness of belief to every slight expression, but only desires us to be so candid and merciful, as to stretch out the hand to offenders, provided there be evidence that they are sincerely dissatisfied with their sins… when any man, through his light and unsteady behavior, has exposed himself to suspicion, we may grant pardon when he asks it, and yet may do so in such a manner as to watch over his conduct for the future, that our forbearance and meekness, which proceed from the Spirit of Christ, may not become the subject of his ridicule.” (Calvin ibid., p. 365-6).

Thomas Watson succinctly stated, “it is an indispensable duty to forgive; we are not bound to trust an enemy; but we are bound to forgive him.” (The Lord’s Prayer, p. 390). While we must always forgive, it is not necessarily prudent to express that forgiveness to the offender immediately nor at all times (cf. WLC 99, A5). Wilhelmus a Brakel notes that, “To say, ‘I forgive you’ when such is not warranted is a triumphant boasting of your kindness and will harden the offender in his sin.” (A Christian’s Reasonable Service vol. 3, p. 566). Brakel’s point is that in so far as we are able, we should be careful that our expressions of forgiveness do not become a stumbling block to others (Romans 14:19). We are always to forgive, but never to withdraw our prudence, caution, or honest yet charitable evaluation of others, nor to open ourselves up for further harm. “God, who prohibits falsehood, will not have us to judge of knaves as honest men, but designs that we should distinguish the good from the bad. Christ enjoins the same thing, when he says, ‘Give not that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine’ and, ‘be wise as serpents, and harmless as doves’ (Matthew 7:6; 10:16).” (Ursinus, ibid., p. 652).

Conclusion

Benjamin Morgan Palmer (1818-1902) summarizes this nicely. Regarding Christ’s beatitude, “blessed are the merciful” (Matt. 5:7), Palmer said, “The duty of forgiveness is absolute, irrespective of the offender’s attitude to us.” While God’s forgiveness requires repentance, Palmer said the analogy between God and man fails because “God is not a private person” and humans are not “able to work this grace of repentance in another.” Thus, “our duty is simple and hearty forgiveness.” However, “Forgiveness does not necessarily include restoration to full confidence, as before the offence,” and “the offence may disclose attributes of character.” So while we must forgive others, “it may be sometimes our duty to protest against a wrong which we heartily forgive, by the withdrawal of intercourse—not as an act of resentment, but as a judicial testimony against sin.” (Selected Writings of Benjamin Morgan Palmer, pp. 146-151, H.T. Zachary Garris).