Anna was a well-dressed professional woman sitting across from me in my church office. She had recently separated from her husband and had requested a session to discuss the moral propriety of her decision. Her therapist suggested she contact a pastor for theological and biblical insight into the marital struggles she was dealing with.
I began our session by asking questions about what she was experiencing in her marriage. As I listened, her situation had a decidedly ugly twist. As I probed deeper, she impassively acknowledged that her abusive husband had given her numerous sexually transmitted diseases over the course of several years, and that he was persisting in his promiscuous behavior. She recounted that her husband’s infidelity was a matter of public record but he did not want to divorce her. He simply wanted the freedom to live as he pleased. He fiercely bullied his wife to drop her demands for him to change his behavior. Repeatedly he hurled what he knew to be the ultimate barb at her: if she was really a Christian, she was obligated to forgive him and take him back, since Jesus said we must forgive seventy times seven (Matthew 18:21–22).
She felt trapped because of her understanding of Scripture and her deep desire to please God. She agonized over knowing what Christian love and forgiveness really demanded of her. Did it mean she had to simply pray for her husband and overlook his immorality? Did it mean she had to lovingly welcome him back, even at the risk of contracting another potentially life-threatening disease? That she had no right to create serious boundaries and consequences for his destructive sexual sin? Further complicating matters, this woman’s own family and church friends sided with the immoral husband.
In subsequent years, I’ve heard countless similar stories of Christians who have experienced the life shattering effects of financial fraud by “Christian” business partners, spousal infidelity, or childhood sexual abuse, only to be told that to be obedient to Scripture they must essentially forgive and forget.
Does biblical forgiveness preclude consequences for destructive sin?
What Matthew 18 Really Says About Forgiveness
This very real and very tragic opening story begs us to clarify what biblical forgiveness specifically means. Does biblical forgiveness preclude serious consequences? Will God refuse to forgive those who refuse to reconcile with an unrepentant, dangerous person?
Matthew 18 actually teaches the opposite, but if you only look at v. 23-35 (the story of the unforgiving servant) you might terribly misconstrue Jesus’ words. The forgiveness teaching of Matthew 18 does not begin in v. 21 but in the preceding paragraph (v. 15-20), where Jesus discusses what to do when “your brother [or sister] sins against you” (ESV). You are to go to them and “point out their fault” (bring to light, expose, rebuke). If they listen, you have “won them over” from their destructive, hell-bent path (v. 15).
The word “listen” (akouō) used here means “give careful attention to, heed.” Commentators agree that “hear” in this text describes not just hearing words but a decisive, life-altering response, i.e., repentance. If the one in sin doesn’t listen, you are to take another with you and confront him/her again. If they still don’t repent, you are to take them to the church and if they refuse to listen to the church they are to be excommunicated from the body and treated as a Gentile or a tax collector (that is, as an outsider alienated from the community).
In other words, those who sin against us should be confronted and given an opportunity to turn from their destructive sin. If the sinner doesn’t repent, then he or she forfeits being in relationship with others in the community. Failing to repent prohibits reconciliation.
This is reiterated in Luke 17:3: “If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them” (NIV).
Anna’s husband and family had completely ignored and violated this portion of Matthew 18 and incorrectly deduced that biblical forgiveness simply means letting go of all consequences for another person’s destructive sin. This is a grave distortion of biblical teaching.
‘Lord, How Many Times Shall I Forgive?’
What does the next section of Matthew 18 teach us about forgiveness (v. 21-35)? It begins with Peter, after hearing Jesus discuss what to do when a brother sins against you, ask how often we must forgive. Peter suggests a limit of seven times. This is actually a very generous suggestion, since ancient Rabbis said three was the maximum number of times you might (but didn’t have to) forgive someone.
But Jesus corrects Peter and says to forgive seventy-seven times, in other words, in an unlimited manner. As often as they repent you forgive them. To clarify this principle, Jesus tells a story of servant who is forgiven a huge unsurmountable debt by his master, but in turn refuses to forgive a fellow servant who owes him a lesser debt. He has no pity on this fellow servant but abuses him and throws him in prison.
This is the context of Jesus’ summary words in v. 35, affirming that God will not forgive us if we, after being forgiven by God, arrogantly refuse to forgive others. This point is simply that forgiven people forgive others. If we (like this cruel, merciless servant) are characterized by a hard heart that refuses to forgive others, it may indicate that we have not truly experienced God’s forgiveness.
We must not make more out of this text than is here. For instance, just because in this parable forgiveness is described as letting go of a debt, we must not press this beyond the point of the parable, as if “letting go of a debt” is a formal definition of forgiveness. It isn’t.
The Positive and Negative Aspects of Forgiveness
One of the biggest challenges with understanding biblical forgiveness is that Scripture describes but doesn’t strictly define it. For instance, the most common Greek word used in the New Testament for forgiveness (aphiemi) means “to let go.” But what is the one destructively sinned against to let go of? Boundaries? Consequences? Revenge?
The story of the unmerciful servant in Matthew 18 gives us important insights about the positive and negative aspects of forgiveness.
- Negative Aspect: We see that forgiveness involves letting go of hatred and attempts to get revenge on others for hurting us (cp. Romans 12:17-21; Ephesians 4:31). In this parable the unmerciful servant beat, choked, and threw into prison the man who owed him money. He sought revenge against one who had financially harmed him.
- Positive Aspect: Forgiveness also involves extending grace or mercy to others. Mercy is what the unforgiving servant didn’t possess. He had no concern whatsoever for the other servant’s plight or wellbeing.
Matthew 18 also teaches that mercy does not preclude boundaries and it does not require reconciliation with a dangerous person. Matthew 18:15-20 makes this crystal clear with the guidelines for church discipline of an unrepentant member, and Luke 17:3 reiterates the principle of reconciliation being contingent on repentance. Forgiveness in this verse refers narrowly to relational forgiveness reflected in a restored relationship.
Even Repentance Does Not Preclude Consequences
Even when a destructive sinner does repent, this does not preclude serious consequences. For instance, after King David’s sexual abuse of Bathsheba, murder of her husband Uriah, and murder of Jewish soldiers innocently caught in David’s cover-up scheme, David truly repented, stating without qualification or blame-shifting, “I have sinned against the Lord” (2 Samuel 12:13 NIV). Immediately Nathan the prophet declared, “The Lord has taken away your sin” (v. 13).
Yet Nathan goes on to say, “But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the Lord, the son born to you will die” (v. 14).
Similarly, in Numbers 14, after the Israelites rebelled, refused to go into the promised land, and prepared to stone Moses to death (v. 1-10), they apparently repented, because God announced that he had pardoned them (v. 20). Yet he pronounced grave consequences for their rebellion and attempted abuse: “I have forgiven them… Nevertheless, as surely as I live… not one of them will ever see the land I promised on oath to their ancestors. No one who has treated me with contempt will ever see it” (v. 20-21, 23 NIV).
Later in this same chapter some of the Israelites mistakenly assumed that since they had confessed their sin and been forgiven by God, their consequences had been lifted. They presumptuously tried to enter the land but were utterly routed in battle (v. 40-45).
Genuine repentance does not eliminate all consequences, particularly for highly destructive sins such as marital infidelity or abuse.
Conclusion: Biblical Forgiveness Is Essential — But Complex
In summary, forgiveness is an essential but complex biblical doctrine. It involves letting go of our attempts at revenge and extending appropriate grace to the one who hurt us. But it does not eliminate all consequences for the offender. May God give us the grace and wisdom to offer truly biblical forgiveness to others.
To Heal or Harm: Scripture’s Use as Poison or Medicine for Abuse Survivors empowers survivors to interpret Scripture in healing ways while unlearning harmful biblical perspectives.
Scripture plays an unique and profound role in the lives of many abuse survivors. It can be a powerful instrument for healing. Unfortunately, it is often wielded against survivors as a weapon, causing great and long-lasting harm. With compassion and deep insight, Steven R. Tracy will show you how key biblical texts have been typically misused, and explains what those texts do and do not mean.
Steven R. Tracy (PhD, University of Sheffield, England), is the president and international director for Mending the Soul Ministries, and retired professor of theology and ethics at Phoenix Seminary. He and his wife Celestia co-founded and co-lead Mending the Soul, a global mission dedicated to resourcing and equipping community and faith leaders in informed and compassionate responses to those impacted by abuse. Steve and Celestia bring over 40 years of pastoral, classroom, and clinical experience to their work. Their sustainable trauma care models and resources are now being implemented successfully around the world.
