Is Universal Forgiveness a Form of Pride?

[Purple Knight]

Question for debate: Is universal forgiveness a form of pride?

As a short disclaimer, I don't think pride is bad. It can be, but in the same way a kitchen knife can be bad when it's used to kill someone. But I am asking, when I ask if this is pride, if it is specifically a "bad use" for pride - even if it can be such a bad use.

The reason for the question is that it seems like the universal forgiver sees himself as better than the non-forgiver, even though he isn't. The non-forgiver who did not forgive the murderer, thinks the murderer is irredeemable. But the universal forgiver thinks the non-forgiver is irredeemable! So he's not somehow better because to him everyone is redeemable - they aren't. He, too, has someone he considers irredeemable, it's just the non-forgiver, and not the murderer. And you know, the non-forgiver isn't hurting anybody in any real, physical sense, but the murderer is. So an argument can be made that the non-forgiver has the moral high ground.

Now I admit I'm seeing this through a lens of atheism and people using, "them's the rules, God makes 'em and not me," as a proxy for their bias toward their own perspective. But I have to be fair to myself too, and if God is making unfair rules then he should be opposed, and that's why I'm an atheist. So we ought to at least consider whether this is fair in any case, which is the point of this topic, and that means considering whether people adopting universal forgiveness for everyone except non-forgivers, in a vacuum, is righteous. Even if it isn't the end-all and be-all of the basic question.

As another question related to the first: Is it possible to lie when you say you forgive someone? To still hate, to still resent, just as much as the non-forgiver, and put on a great big fake halo, smile, and say all is forgiven when it really isn't?

I've heard it both ways. In the tale of the unforgiving slave, the forgiveness was real, because the debt owed was real, and thus the forgiveness is real because it really means you do not expect real repayment. That is very simple and easy. I have also heard forgiveness being used to mean you don't harbour resentment, and a trick Christians sometimes seem to pull is, "Well, of course I forgive you, but you still have to [pay me back] [go to jail] [be kicked out of my house] [insert any other consequences]." To me this makes forgiveness meaningless. The meaning is, what then? I don't resent you? Well of-bloody-course you don't resent him now because he made you whole and probably then some.

And it comes to a point where not being able to judge others is ruinous because, before we can assess whether we need to imitate this behaviour, we need to judge whether their great big halos are real or disingenuous. We don't live in a moral vacuum. Other people are real and if they're good examples, we should follow them and if bad, we should not. We need them either way. We need to be able to judge whether people who do this are being [bad] prideful.

[1213]

...But I have to be fair to myself too, and if God is making unfair rules then he should be opposed, and that's why I'm an atheist. So we ought to at least consider whether this is fair in any case, which is the point of this topic, and that means considering whether people adopting universal forgiveness for everyone except non-forgivers...

Where do you get this rule? I don't think that is a Biblical rule.

[Purple Knight]

...But I have to be fair to myself too, and if God is making unfair rules then he should be opposed, and that's why I'm an atheist. So we ought to at least consider whether this is fair in any case, which is the point of this topic, and that means considering whether people adopting universal forgiveness for everyone except non-forgivers...

Where do you get this rule? I don't think that is a Biblical rule.

I think it can be derived. People must be expected to know fairness and take a stand for it, otherwise they could not stand against evil. For all evil would have to do is say, "I am God, so what I say goes, even if it is unfair," and then evil would have to be obeyed.

[1213]

...But I have to be fair to myself too, and if God is making unfair rules then he should be opposed, and that's why I'm an atheist. So we ought to at least consider whether this is fair in any case, which is the point of this topic, and that means considering whether people adopting universal forgiveness for everyone except non-forgivers...

Where do you get this rule? I don't think that is a Biblical rule.

I think it can be derived. People must be expected to know fairness and take a stand for it, otherwise they could not stand against evil. For all evil would have to do is say, "I am God, so what I say goes, even if it is unfair," and then evil would have to be obeyed.

Ok, but do you think God has made some unfair rule?

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #1]

The universal forgiver won't exclude the non-forgiver from forgiveness, and therefore doesn't regard the non-forgiver as irredeemable.

Sure, it's possible for a display of forgiveness to be insincere, as Michael Corleone pretended to forgive Fredo and still had him bumped off, but it's unfair to simply assume that an expression of forgiveness is insincere.

[Purple Knight]

Ok, but do you think God has made some unfair rule?

I do, however, even if I didn't, what I said is that it's important to consider whether a rule is unfair or not. If you don't consider you'll end up obeying evil.

We probably disagree about whether God has made unfair rules. I think it's unfair if the murderer floats up to Heaven and the person who won't forgive him burns in Hell. I think it's unfair that every single human is judged unworthy and needs to grovel - if everyone you see isn't good enough you need to lower the bar. I think it's the epitome of unfairness that one person suffer punishment in place of another. It's not like a debt. You can gift me $5 to pay a $5 debt I owe. But you can't serve my prison sentence because when someone deserves punishment, it is because they have done something wrong and they need to suffer for it, not someone else. Not their child. Not a goat. Them.

But let's forget about that. We disagree on whether God is fair. That's why you believe in him and I don't. (Him not existing doesn't bother me very much. This is why we have stories.)

The point is you have to use your own judgment and consider whether God is fair or not, otherwise you'd obey the first superbeing you came across and that would probably be Satan.

Anyway, if someone thinks murder is forgivable, but non-forgiveness is unforgivable, are they prideful? Like, in a bad way? He thinks he's better than the non-forgiver, but arguably he isn't, since he, also, thinks somebody is irredeemable (just the non-forgiver, and not the murderer).

The universal forgiver won't exclude the non-forgiver from forgiveness, and therefore doesn't regard the non-forgiver as irredeemable.

If he does, he's not inconsistent.

[1213]

We probably disagree about whether God has made unfair rules. I think it's unfair if the murderer floats up to Heaven and the person who won't forgive him burns in Hell.

Bible tells about murderers:

...murderers, ...and all the lying ones, their part will be in the Lake burning with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.
Rev. 21:8
But outside are ... the murderers, and the idolaters, and everyone loving a lie, and making it.
Rev. 22:15
Everyone hating the brother is a murderer, and you know that every murderer does not have everlasting life abiding in him.
1 John 3:15

I believe it is possible that there happens a change in person so that he is not anymore a murderer, and then it is possible that the person gets the eternal life, that is promised only for righteous.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Matt. 25:46
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23

But let's forget about that. We disagree on whether God is fair. That's why you believe in him and I don't.

Yes, I think God is extremely fair.

The point is you have to use your own judgment and consider whether God is fair or not, otherwise you'd obey the first superbeing you came across and that would probably be Satan.

I agree with that, we should not believe automatically everything that is said.

Beloved, don't believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God, because many false prophets have gone out in-to the world.
1 John 4:1
Test all things, and hold firmly that which is good. Abstain from every form of evil.
1 Thess. 5:21-22
Now the natural man doesn't receive the things of God's Spirit, for they are foolishness to him, and he can't know them, be-cause they are spiritually discerned. But he who is spiritual dis-cerns all things, and he himself is judged by no one.
1 Cor. 2:14-15

Anyway, if someone thinks murder is forgivable, but non-forgiveness is unforgivable, are they prideful?

I think there is only one thing that is not forgivable, and it is not that person has been non-forgiving.

[bjs1]

Question for debate: Is universal forgiveness a form of pride?

Any virtue can become a source of pride. A person could become arrogant about how humble he is. However, no virtue (including forgiveness) is inherently prideful.

A forgiving person could see the non-forgiver as irredeemable. That would be pride.

A forgiving person could see the non-forgiver as someone in need of compassion who can be redeemed. That would not be prideful, and I believe this should be the Christian’s goal.

As another question related to the first: Is it possible to lie when you say you forgive someone? To still hate, to still resent, just as much as the non-forgiver, and put on a great big fake halo, smile, and say all is forgiven when it really isn't?

Of course a person can lie about forgiveness.

Forgiveness can get complicated. For instance, if you murder someone I care about then I could genuinely forgive you, but that would not release you from the legal penalties of murder.

We could have a lengthy discussion about the nature of forgiveness, but the short answer is that sincere forgiveness always comes with a cost and that it is possible to have insincere forgiveness.