Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Forgiveness of What? | Acts 13:38 | Makarios | 23558 | ||
Greetings Sir Pent! Excellent question! When dealing with people, it is important that one's interpersonal relationship with an offender is restored after repentance and forgiveness. An offender should be forgiven, yes! However, that doesn't even begin to cover whether or not the offender still has a "weakness" in the area in which he has so blatantly failed in the past.. In every instance, it is encouraged to lead an offender into a changed or 'reformed' way of life after forgiveness has occurred. It is just as important to help an individual heal as it is to confront them with and acknowledge their sin. With this in mind, they can begin to "rebuild" and start fresh and anew, with a 'clean' slate amongst their brothers and sisters in Christ. However, I believe that despite this forgiveness, a level of accountability must be present at least for a small period of time following the infraction. If it has ever been proven that a person has 'shown much difficulty' or has wrestled with the same sin or emotion in the time following the infraction, then I believe that this must also be acknowledged, and that stricter methods of accountability should be investigated. And if these behaviors continue, where a person has a 'weakness' in a certain area, then yes, we must continue to forgive them! However, we would only be doing the church, society, and the "offender" harm by letting them ascend to positions that would help to compromise their 'weakness', if in fact, they proved that they continued to show signs of weakness in a particular area. There is a difference between a "first time offender" and a "hibitual offender". I believe that a first time offender needs accountability, but not to the same extent as a habitual offender. So would I let a 'first time offender' ascend to positions of responsibility that may compromise their aforementioned 'weakness'? Perhaps, if I felt that the 'offender' was the best qualified candidate by examining all aspects of the situation. For a 'habitual offender', do I believe that it would be benefitial for them to ascend to positions that may compromise their weakness? Absolutely not! I pray that I'm still on topic here, my friend! Blessings to you, Nolan |
||||||
2 | Forgiveness of What? | Acts 13:38 | Sir Pent | 23569 | ||
Clarification ................................. Dear Nolan, Yes you are most definately "on topic". This is exactly what I am wanting to explore. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the long-term punishment (ability to get a particular job) would vary depending on the number of times that a particular sin was committed. So let's say that a certain person was a Christian, and they became an drug addict. Although it is theoretically possible that this could happen after only experimenting once, that is almost unheard of. It would be a safe assumption that this was the result of a large number of bad choices. Then let's say the person repented and asked for forgiveness. Would you then after say 1 year of being "drug-free" hire them to run a Pharmacy that you own? This would be a case where they were not a repeat offender after repentance, but were one while claiming to be a Christian before repentance for that sin. |
||||||
3 | Forgiveness of What? | Acts 13:38 | Makarios | 23573 | ||
Hello my friend! I must go to work! (I work Second Shift.) But I will answer your reply as soon as I return! Your Brother in Christ, Nolan |
||||||