9

Question: Why is it necessary to verbally forgive someone of their sins as indicated in these cases when Jesus' death and their faith should be enough? If verbal forgiveness is not necessary, why does he say that they are forgiven?

Jesus says "your sins are forgiven" twice that I've found:

The paralytic in Luke 5:

20When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.”

21The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, “Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

22Jesus knew what they were thinking and asked, “Why are you thinking these things in your hearts? 23Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? 24But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the paralyzed man, “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.”

And the sinner woman in Luke 7:

44Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. 45You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. 46You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. 47Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—as her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little.”

48Then Jesus said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.”

49The other guests began to say among themselves, “Who is this who even forgives sins?”

50Jesus said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”

The sacrificial system is very well established in the old testament that blood must be shed in exchange for forgiveness of sins. My understanding is that the death of Jesus is the sacrifice which fulfills this requirement.

  • I think there are two questions here; one, regarding the sacrificial system, and forgiveness; and two, the significance of verbal declarations of forgiveness. If I understand this right, I will try to re-answer the question focusing instead on "the place of verbal declarations". – elika kohen May 27 '15 at 18:48
1

We may notice that Jesus 'saw their faith' and then said 'your sins are forgiven'. The interpretation that will not contradict the doctrines of scripture which has it that anyone with faith in Messiah is forgiven, can only mean this:

  • the words 'your are forgiven' are declarative of the condition that Jesus saw directly resulting from the fact that they had faith in him
  • the words are in no way required, or increasing that forgiveness that they are are declared to have obtained by their faith.
  • as Jesus was also God the words actually coincide with actual forgiveness beyond the mere recognition of that forgiveness

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.(ESV John 3:36)

Jesus could say to anyone that believed in him, on any occasion, 'Man/Woman you have eternal life, you have forgiveness'. He is simply acknowledging their faith in him and declaring their blessed state on that account. Jesus also saw those before his death under the old sacrificial system, if believing in his future coming, to also share in this same forgiveness and eternal life by the same faith. Even Abraham believed in Jesus from afar off and was forgiveness under the teaching of Jesus.

To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” (ESV Acts 10:43)

Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” (ESV John 8:56)

So we see the words are just a recognition of the sate of those who believed in Messiah and that condition would be unchanged if the words were not uttered.

Now the fact that the Son of man had the 'ability to forgive sins' means first, he is able to recognize and declare who believes in him without error, in addition, being one with the Father is at the same time actually forgiving those sins whenever faith is first directed to him. So althout we could declare someone's 'sins are forgiven' assuming their faith in Christ, only God can declare it without error and actually be the one who forgives it all in the same breath. So there is this extra dimension that appears to be the deeper trigger for your question, if I understand it correctly.

  • Mike, (A.) You seem to be saying that faith alone, specifically in the Messiah, is enough to forgive sins--and that this is true under "both covenants". Yet even demons believe, and tremble, (James 2:19), but not forgiven. (B.) The Jewish point of view is repentance is also required, (in 1 Kings 8), which John the Baptist affirmed, (Luke 3:3), and Peter in Acts 2:38. (C.) How would your reconcile these passages regarding repentance? – elika kohen May 28 '15 at 16:57
  • @e.s.kohen - yes you understand what my view is. Faith and faith alone in God's progressive revelation of mercy first commencing in the promise that the seed of the woman would crush the head of the serpent, developing into Abrahams seed, then into a child born in Bethlahem etc. is what made people righteous from the beggining of history until now. But to believe this is to repent of all other views, so its the flip-side of the coin. So wether it was Abrahan or Rahab, outwardly righteous or not so appearing as so...simple faith in God's mercy no matter how vague it understood producing change. – Mike May 29 '15 at 6:00
  • @Mike Except for the hooey about "as Jesus was also God the words actually coincide with actual forgiveness beyond the mere recognition of that forgiveness" your post was, in my always amazingly humble view, spot on, and actually impressive. I'd love to learn more about where you gained such a good understanding! Did you just do the digging yourself? We can take this to chat. – Ruminator Sep 10 '17 at 0:52
0

Question Restatement: How is Jesus' declaration, to forgive sins, reconciled with the previous sacrificial system.

If I understand this question, this question has multiple parts, (*I think):

  1. Was it necessary for Jesus to verbally state that they were forgiven, and if not, why did he do it?
  2. Jesus' authority to forgive sins;
  3. Whether the shedding of blood is required for forgiveness.

Why Did Jesus Publicly Pronounce Forgiveness?

Technically, forgiveness is a legal thing, (the cancellation of debt), and witnesses are needed for such acts.

2 Cor. 13:1, NASB - This is the third time I am coming to you. Every fact is to be confirmed by the testimony of two or three witnesses.

However, this does not answer why Jesus didn't just say this to this man, with only his disciples present.

Answer, Part 1: The text states that Jesus knew exactly what was on their heart, and intentionally provoked them until there would be a "crux", a point at which there could be no resolution through debate, (whether he had authority to forgive sins)--and people would either believe, seeing the Power of God, or reject him, under the Wisdom and Traditions of Men :

Luke 5:20-26, NASB - 20 Seeing their faith, He said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven you.” 21 The scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, “Who is this man who speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?” 22 But Jesus, aware of their reasonings, answered and said to them, “Why are you reasoning in your hearts? 23 Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins have been forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? 24 But, so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins,”—He said to the paralytic—“I say to you, get up, and pick up your stretcher and go home.” 25 Immediately he got up before them, and picked up what he had been lying on, and went home glorifying God. 26 They were all struck with astonishment and began glorifying God; and they were filled with fear, saying, “We have seen remarkable things today.”

1 Cor. 2:4, NASB - and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, 5 so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power [δυνάμεως] of God.

John 10:38, NASB - but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.”

Reconciliation Jesus' Authority as High Priest

The Christian texts assert that forgiveness is officiated, by the Great High Priest, and the perfect sacrifice offered once and for all--no longer having to continue offering up imperfect Sacrifices.

Answer, Part 2 - From the Christian point of view, as the former law only "foreshadowed" this "heavenly/eternal" priestly service, Jesus' service as High Priest fulfills the Eternal requirements, and so would have authority, and fulfilled any temporal requirements reflected in the Law of Moses--which was only temporary.

Hebrews 8:1-6, NASB - 8 Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man. 3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices; so it is necessary that this high priest also have something to offer. 4 Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law; 5 who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, “See,” He says, “that you make all things according to the pattern which was shown you on the mountain.” 6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

Hebrews 9:11-14, NASB - But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Sacrifice isn't Necessary for Forgiveness

The Jewish viewpoint is that there seems to be misunderstanding regarding the "previous" Sacrificial system--the way Jews today perceive it as well. See Atonement in the Absence of Sacrifices?

In exceptional circumstances, prayer was sufficient to find forgiveness, when the Temple/High priest were unavailable.

This is not at all incompatible with the Christian Point of View, that forgiveness was possible without blood sacrifice. John the Baptist preached the "Gospel"--repentance for the forgiveness of sins--even before Jesus began his ministry, (Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3, Acts 2:38).

In 1 Kings, 8:37, Solomon, very clearly, acknowledges that the Temple, and its sacrifices are unnecessary for forgiveness.

Answer, Part 3: If Jesus did know the heart of the person he was speaking to, he could legitimately say, and recognize, that they had been forgiven, under 1 Kings 8, and the "disaster of the Roman Occupation"--without the necessity of a sacrifice, or even looking forwards to him being the sacrifice.

1 Kings 8:46-50 - 46 “When they sin against You (for there is no man who does not sin) and You are angry with them and deliver them to an enemy, so that they take them away captive to the land of the enemy, far off or near; 47 if they take thought in the land where they have been taken captive, and repent and make supplication to You in the land of those who have taken them captive, saying, ‘We have sinned and have committed iniquity, we have acted wickedly’; 48 if they return to You with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their enemies who have taken them captive, and pray to You toward their land which You have given to their fathers, the city which You have chosen, and the house which I have built for Your name; 49 then hear their prayer and their supplication in heaven Your dwelling place, and maintain their cause, 50 and forgive Your people who have sinned against You and all their transgressions which they have transgressed against You, and make them objects of compassion before those who have taken them captive, that they may have compassion on them.

NOTE: Hebrews 9:23 seems to be the only exception in the New Testament, indicating that forgiveness cannot occur without "blood". But, this really should be addressed in another question. However, this passage can be reconciled in view of the passage/concept about the "Serpent being raised in the desert, (John 3:14)." Which speaks of "looking forward to," and beyond the "shadow/foreshadowing", etc; and also in view of the differences between purification, cleansing, and forgiveness.

  • In regards to needing sacrifice for forgiveness, what about Romans 6:23 - "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Surely if sacrifice is not necessary, then Jesus did not need to die? I'm contemplating asking another question to address this. – user640 May 28 '15 at 19:55
  • @Stacey, Christian texts state that it wasn't Jesus' "death", so much, that is significant, but his obedience unto death--even death on a cross, (Phil 1:8), and also that, obedience is better than Sacrifice. "*Samuel said, "Has the LORD as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices As in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams, (1 Sam 15:22). Also, the issue of what happened "on the cross", is talked about here: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/18632/… – elika kohen May 28 '15 at 22:00
  • @e.s.kohen I disagree with your assertion. Surely, the Christus Victor atonement theory says what you assert, but I disagree about it being the best use of the word "Christian". I think the problem you have is that you read certain passages without looking through the lens of scripture, particularly Hewbrews 9:23. I would argue vociferously that the death of Christ was intrinsic to salvation, though not the entirety of what happened on the cross. If we allow Hebrews 9:23 to speak for itself, you can then interpret the other passages more fully and more correctly. – mbm29414 May 29 '15 at 2:43
  • @mbm29414 (A.) Hebrews 9:22 is significant, and its use of "almost" (B.) However, I think you are mischaracterizing what I said: certainly: "obedience to death, even death on a cross", is intrinsic, (Phil 2:8)--otherwise the analogy like "a lamb land to the slaughter," doesn't apply; (C.) Regardless of what we think about Hebrews 9:22, we cannot simply throw out 1 Kings 8, and every other statement in the Bible from the prophets emphatically stating that God didn't desire sacrifice. (D.) I am not certain how to pursue a discussion on this, (perhaps another question?), – elika kohen May 29 '15 at 3:16
  • @e.s.kohen Perhaps chat is the best way, but I'll just make a small point here: 1. God's forgiveness is always based upon the shed blood of Jesus Christ, whether a text specifically mentions it or not. 2. God desiring obedience and not sacrifice clearly means that God prefers righteousness first (initial obedience) rather than righteousness restored (initial disobedience followed by sacrifice). I think you're trying to let each passage have its own say, as if that perspective is somehow unlinked from the perspectives of the other passages. Read them ALL together and it should become clearer. – mbm29414 May 29 '15 at 11:51
-2

The first thing to note here is that Jesus is God and has the power to forgive sin which is what he wanted to show to the Jews Secondly he was showing the connection between sin and sickness

The death of Jesus fulfills this but by this time Jesus had not died so their believing in Him could not deliver the full package, remember Roman 10:10,'with the heart man believe unto righteousness(so you believe and your heart(spirit) is made right with God), 'but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation", so benefits of salvation is obtained by the declaration of the mouth.

  • This answer has nothing to do with the previous sacrificial system, nor is substantiated from the text. – elika kohen May 26 '15 at 23:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy