CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p.

21
Forgiveness:
Believers Forgiving One Another

Paul Schmidtbleicher *
Chafer Theological Seminary
[*Editors note: Paul Schmidtbleicher earned a Th.B. from William
Tyndale College and Th.M. from Dallas Theological Seminary.
Paul pastors Evergreen Baptist Church in the state of Washington
and is on the National Board of Advisors of Chafer Theological
Seminary.]
Introduction
Forgiveness is a broad term. The Scriptures present two major subdivisions:
the forgiveness of God and the personal forgiveness between individuals.
Although Scripture grounds the forgiveness of one another in the forgiveness of
God, personal forgiveness is the emphasis of this study. There have been volumes
written on and about the forgiveness of God. Unfortunately, writers have given us
much less material about personal forgiveness between believers.
Peoples thinking about forgiveness seems to settle into two extremes. The
first extreme becomes a wide open forgiveness where forgiveness is an
overlooking of sin and sinful behavior based upon stand-alone interpretations of
passages like Matthew 1821-22 and Colossians 3:13.
Then Peter came to Him and said, Lord, how often shall my
brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Up to seven times?
Jesus said to him, I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to
seventy times seven (Matthew 18:2122)
Bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has
a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you
also must do (Colossians 3:13).
The other extreme becomes a half-hearted forgiveness where believers do
speak to one another, but there is no restoration of trust, interchange, or commerce
like what existed before the offense. This, I believe, people base upon a defective
view of forgiveness in which the offending sin of the guilty person has not been
fully addressed.
This study seeks to present a balanced view on forgiveness between believers.
Gods Forgiveness: A Foundation
Gods forgiveness of the believers sins is a marvelous provision of eternal
salvation. A believer receives the forgiveness of God for all past sins at the point
of salvation. Yet, it is much different for God. Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer has
written:
Forgiveness on the part of one person toward another is the
simplest of duties, whereas forgiveness on the part of God toward
man proves the most complicated and costly of undertakings. As
seen in the Bible, there is an analogy between forgiveness and debt
and, in the forgiveness that God exercises, the debt must be
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 22
paidthough it is paid by Himselfbefore forgiveness can be
extended. Thus it is learned that while human forgiveness only
remits a penalty or charge, divine forgiving must require complete
satisfaction for the demands of Gods outraged holiness first of
all.
1
Although Dr. Chafer takes human forgiveness to be rather simple, he clearly
presents the high cost of divine forgiveness. Payment or restitution for sin in the
death of Christ was necessary. Furthermore, one receives divine forgiveness
because of faith in Christfaith alone in Christ alone. Some scriptures call
upon man to repent:
Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted
out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the
Lord (Acts 3:19)
[Paul declared] . . . throughout all the region of Judea, and then to
the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works
befitting repentance (Acts 26:20).
There are two free grace views regarding repentance. The first is that
repentance is not a separate step in securing salvation and the forgiveness of sins,
but a change of mind from unbelief to belief. Repent is the translation of the
Greek word (metanoeo), which means a change of mind. Dr. Robert
Lightner sees this use of repent in salvation not as a separate step, but as included
in believing.

1
Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (Dallas, Texas, 1948), 7:162163.
The word repentance means a change of mind. Because of the confusion,
many make repentance a separate and additional condition of salvation. This is
not true in the Word. There is no question about it: repentance is necessary for
salvation. However, Scripture views repentance as included in believing and not
as an additional and separate condition to faith. All who have trusted in Christ as
Savior have changed their minds regarding Him and their sin. (Of course, it would
be impossible to change ones mind without trusting the Savior.) According to
scriptural usage, repentance is almost synonymous for faith. Paul said he declared
to both the Jews and the Greeks Repentance towards God and faith toward our
Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21).
2
A second free grace view expounded by Zane C. Hodges also does not see
repentance as a separate condition to salvation, or as the other side of the same
coin of faith as does Lightner. Hodges sees repentance as one of several ways
God uses to prepare the sinner to accept the free gift of salvation.
3
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 23
For the believer who sins after salvation, the Scripture makes it clear that the
forgiveness of God is based upon a change of mind (repentance) that confesses
agreement with God that the offense is sin.
[To Simon the magician the apostle says] Repent therefore of this
your wickedness, and pray God if perhaps the thought of your
heart may be forgiven you (Acts 8:22)
If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins
and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9)
Therefore, what is basic to Gods forgiveness of the unbeliever is the
restitution made by Jesus Christ on the Cross (His Atonement) and for the
unbeliever to change his mind about Christ. Where the believer is concerned, he
must change his mind about personal acts of sin and confess them. In both cases,
a basic change of mind as a part of belief or confession plays a part in receiving
forgiveness of sins from God.
On the other hand, it is most important to realize that Gods forgiveness has
never been an overlooking of sins and trespasses. God, as the ultimate victim of
all sin, has received restitution in the death of Christ.
God bases His forgiveness or receipt of His pardon
4
upon the restitution for
sins that Christ voluntarily made for the world. From the earliest mention of

2
Robert P. Lightner, Sin, the Savior, and Salvation (Nashville, 1991), 167.
3
Zane C. Hodges, Absolutely Free (Grand Rapids, 1989), 167180.
4
The basic meaning of the primary Hebrew word for forgiveness is pardon. The Hebrew uses
salach only of God as the ultimate victim and the one whom sin always affects.
forgiveness, the Lord has never discounted nor overlooked our sins. He forgives
us because Christ made restitution. Though God made the restitution for us, it was
still required to obtain Gods forgiveness. To put it the opposite way: without the
restitution payment of Jesus Christ, there would be no forgiveness!
The Forgiveness of God and the Forgiveness of Man
The Word divides the biblical teaching on forgiveness into two categories: (1)
Religious forgiveness before God, and (2) Civil forgiveness before men. An
example of religious forgiveness is Colossians 1:14; an example of civil
forgiveness is Colossians 3:13.
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the
forgiveness of sins (Colossians 1:14).
Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man
have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do
you (Colossians 3:13).
Religious forgiveness involves maintaining the vertical relationship between
the believer and the Lord. As seen in Colossians 1:14, it is gained
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 24
at salvation through the restitution payment made by Christs death. It is
maintained through the confession of sins by us and the cleansing of sins by God
(1 John 1:9).
Civil forgiveness involves the maintaining of horizontal relationships between
peoplethe real emphasis of this study. Some sins by their very nature involve
other persons and are against people. These offenses offend them! When this is
the case, religious forgiveness must include civil forgiveness. We must reestablish
the horizontal relationship by, in part, maintaining our vertical relationship with
the Lord. As shall be shown, an offender must seek civil forgiveness, once an
offense has occurred, through a change of mind (i.e., metanoia or repentance) and
restitution when required.
Forgiveness from the Viewpoint of the Offender
We will first consider the Offender because we hope that the reader who sins
against another will not allow an offense to lay and fester. Rather, may he seek to
take the correct biblical action to resolve the problem before both God and man.
The Victimless Offense
The victimless offense is actually a misnomer. God Himself is the victim of
all our sin. Examples would be mental attitude sins or sins that never actually
reach out to offend another person. However, all sin does offend God and He
becomes the ultimate victim (Rom 3:23; 8:7).
All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23).
The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the
law of God, nor indeed can be (Romans 8:7).
Because God is victimized by our private and personal sins, we are to confess
our sins to Him and gain His forgiveness (1 John 1:9). Our agreeing with God in
confession involves seeing our sin and acknowledging it as He sees it. This brings
Gods forgiveness. He does not overlook our sin nor simply excuse it, but applies
the restitution payment paid by His Son on the Cross to forgive our sin (1 John
1:7). The result is that the Lord restores the vertical relationship. By definition
(clarification will follow), sin offends no one but God. Therefore, confession
before the Lord ends the matter.
Offenses against Victims
This type of offense is a sin against other persons. Somehow our sin affects
them and we offend them, whether judicially or emotionally. We have
trespassed against both God in our vertical relationship and against others with
whom we share a horizontal relationship in this category of sin. Therefore,
forgiveness must restore the horizontal relationship with persons sinned against
and also the vertical relationship with God. Accordingly, we must seek both civil
and religious forgiveness.
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 25
An Alternate View
At this point, some
5
propose that the believer needs only to confess an offense
to God who then freely forgives, without any need to seek civil forgiveness or to
resolve the offended horizontal relationship.
Some make the claim that the death of Christ brings forgiveness before God
(religious) and before men (civil) without any further resolution or restitution
between men. These proponents argue that for every sin and crime, one needs
only to confess to God for total forgiveness. The victim is then required to forgive
based solely upon the forgiveness that he has personally received in Christ. This
view is proposed from faulty interpretations of the following two passages:
Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, just
as God in Christ forgave you (Ephesians 4:32).

5
Some refer to individuals involved in conversations and debates with the author over the
issues of what God requires for forgiveness. The author is unaware of any written defense of this
position, yet it prevails in many areas of Grace Christianity.
Bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has
a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you
also must do (Colossians 3:13).
If we carry this view to its logical end, the victim must forgive and seek
restoration with the perpetrator solely because of the forgiveness of Christ. Thus:
The thief steals, confesses to God, who supposedly totally forgives him.
Tough luck for the victim who has lost real property!
The slanderer libels, devastates his target, and confesses to God, who
supposedly totally forgives him. Tough luck again for the victim with a ruined
reputation! As should be quickly surmised, this is not biblical.
The basic arguments against this view involve the fact that the death of Christ
made payment or restitution for the sins of men before God, satisfying His
victimization in all sin. Satisfying mans victimization demands pursuing the
issues of civil forgiveness that we have yet to present. The death of Christ
satisfied (propitiated) Gods righteousness and justice so that men can receive
Gods (religious) forgiveness and eternal life.
In addition, the death of Christ covered Gods required restitution as an
included party in the sins of one man against another. However, sins against
society and against one another require civil restitution for forgiveness before
God and men. Thus:
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 26
The thief steals, realizes his sin, and confesses to God and his victim, then
makes restitution, and God forgives him. The divine requirement commands
men to forgive the repentant offender. The death of Christ compensated God.
The perpetrator compensates the victim by restitution.
The slanderer libels and devastates his target, realizes his sin, confesses to
God and the victim, makes restitution, and God forgives him. The Lord
requires men to forgive the repentant man. The death of Christ compensates
God. Restitution compensates the victim.
This is the overview of the basic principle that we must detail from Scripture.
Those who hold that confession to God alone is all that is necessary for
forgiveness remove the basis for criminal law. They also remove the basis of
restitution to victims. Some holding this view include in their logic a faulty
interpretation of Davids prayer of confession in Psalm 51 where he states,
Against You, You only, have I sinned.
6
They see God as the only one to whom one
must confess. In this way they avoid the command of James 5:16 to confess your
faults to one another. To the contrary, we should interpret James 5 following the
normative process of civil forgiveness where the confession of the offenders sin
to the offended party takes place.
7
What an Offender does to Seek Forgiveness
Having outlined what an offender should do when he has sinned against
another, the Scriptures are now set forth.
Since one of the proper uses of the Old Testament is for our example (1
Corinthians 10:11), the foundation for what an offender should do to seek
forgiveness includes the examples of Gods Law. Leviticus 6 presents clear
guidelines about the principles involved when one sins against God and another
person.
And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: If a person sins and
commits a trespass against the Lord by lying to his neighbor about
what was delivered to him for safekeeping, or about a pledge, or
about a robbery, or if he has extorted from his neighbor, or if he
has found what was lost and lies concerning it, and swears
falselyin
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 27
any one of these things that a man may do in which he sins: then it
shall be, because he has sinned and is guilty, that he shall restore
what he has stolen, or the thing which he has extorted, or what was
delivered to him for safekeeping, or the lost thing which he found,
or all that about which he has sworn falsely. He shall restore its full
value, add one-fifth more to it, and give it to whomever it belongs,
on the day of his trespass offering. And he shall bring his trespass
offering to the Lord, a ram without blemish from the flock, with
your valuation, as a trespass offering, to the priest. So the priest
shall make atonement for him before the Lord, and he shall be
forgiven for any one of these things that he may have done in
which he trespasses (Leviticus 6:17).

6
By the time David finished with his sin of victimizing Uriah by adultery with his wife, and then
murdering the original victim (Uriah), God was the only party left as victim of this offense. See a
more complete discussion in the Appendix of this article.
7
I do not see any problem with James 5:16 when interpreted with a view to offenders seeking
civil forgiveness from victims by acknowledging their sin to the victims. This is not public
confession for the sake of some right to know. The confession is as public as need be
depending upon the number of victims involved, affected, or hurt by the sin of an offending
sinner.
The situation involves a sin against the Lord that is also a sin against another
person. There are victims involved. God is first set forth as the ultimate victim of
all sin. This scenario also includes persons who are victims. The pattern for
forgiveness set forth includes the offender seeking religious forgiveness with God
to restore the vertical relationship through the required trespass offering. It also
includes seeking civil forgiveness and restoring the horizontal relationship
through a change of mind (metanoia), that is, repentance, confession, and
restitution.
The offenses mentioned include lying, false swearing (6:23), lessor
categories (any of these things, 6:3), to robbery (6:2) and extortion (6:2).
The requirement is that the offender who is guilty of the sin (a) come before
the Lord (6:6), (b) acknowledge the sin by a mind changing repentance and
confess it
8
(6:67), (c) make restitution (6:5), and then (d) receive final
forgiveness from God (6:7).
The text does not view the offense as outright criminal activity. If it were, the
restitution would be at least double according to Exodus 22:14, rather than here
where restitution involved restoration plus an added payment of twenty percent
(Leviticus 6:5). Under this formula, God granted forgiveness and so must the
victim.
Forgiveness means to discharge, dismiss, acquit, let loose from; to remit a
debt or sin, to pardon.
9
Forgiveness does not mean that the victim will forget the
offense. Jay Adams explains further what is involved:
Forgiveness means no longer continuing to dwell on the sin that
was forgiven. Forgiveness is the promise not to
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 28
raise the issue again to the offender, to others or to himself.
Brooding is a violation of the promise made in granting
forgiveness.
10
Furthermore, as one follows the principles of forgiveness, there is
the establishment of a new relationship between the offender and
God and between the offender and the offended party (parties) . . .
enmity and alienation are replaced by peace and fellowship.
11

8
Confession is both to God by means of the trespass offering as well as to the victim who will
receive the restitution payment. We assume that receipt of the restitution payment is proof of the
confession to the individual.
9
W. Graham Scroggie, A Guide to the Gospels (London, 1948), 564.
10
Jay E. Adams, The Christian Counselors Manual (Phillipsburg, New Jersey, 1973), 65.
The victim forgives the offender. They restore the estranged relationship and
peace prevails. The grace of God not only forgives the former offender, but the
guilty party takes the required action to seek to make restitution to the victim.
We should note that where tangible property is involved, the principle is
straightforward as in the above example. However, in intangible areas where one
has damaged anothers reputation, violated a confidence or trust, or the sin has
driven a wedge between believers, the restitution may be an apology. Possibly,
restitution could be requiring the offender to retrieve the maligning or gossip
before all involved. In the latter case, this should be sufficient. In the former case,
the offender can only make restitution by exhibiting fruits worthy of repentance
(Matthew 3:8) over a period of time. On the other hand, the victim must forgive
the offender before God and leave things in His hands while seeking
reconciliation.
12
A second Old Testament passage that addresses what an offender should do to
obtain forgiveness occurs in Leviticus 5.
If a person commits a trespass, and sins unintentionally in regard to
the holy things of the Lord, then he shall bring to the Lord as his
trespass offering a ram without blemish from the flocks, with your
valuation in shekels of silver according to the shekel of the
sanctuary, as a trespass offering. And he shall make restitution for
the harm that he has done in regard to the holy thing, and shall add
one-fifth to it and give it to the priest. So the priest shall make
atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering, and it
shall be forgiven him (Leviticus 5:1516).
At issue is unintentional sin against the holy things of the Lord. These
things we may see as the properties of the Lord. When this happened, the Lord
Himself required both the trespass offering to resolve the vertical estrangement
that the sin had caused between himself and God and a restitution
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 29
payment in restoring the holy thing plus twenty percent. The restoration and
additional compensation resolved the horizontal estrangement of the offender
from the priest who was the Lords personal representative in the matter.
Based upon (1) the confession of the sin, (2) the offering representing the
atonement of Messiah to come, and (3) the restitution payment, one was to grant
forgiveness with all the ramifications discussed above.


11
Ibid., 63.
12
Forgiveness from the victims point of view we will discuss later.
An Interesting Application
If a wrong that victimizes others included restitution, that is, a restoration of
the thing plus twenty percent, then it would cause many to think twice before
sinning against another believer. On the other end, for the victim, seeing
restitution plus twenty percent would go a long way toward motivating one to
forgive seventy times seven.
A believer who borrowed your car and returned it dented would do better to
return it restored and add some credit for a few tanks of gasoline. He would have
gone the extra mile (seen in the above examples) and you would have little
trouble forgivingreally forgivingand even letting him borrow the car again!
Jesus Teaching on Forgiveness for the Offender
One passage stands out in the Lords teaching on forgiveness according to the
offender:
Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember
that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there
before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your
brother, and then come and offer your gift (Matthew 5:2324).
Here, Christ pictures the offender as attempting to worship and serve the Lord.
However, there is a sin, an offense, that stands between himself and another.
Because of the order of procedure, the logical assumption is to assume that the
offense also stands between the offender and God. In other words, sin violated the
vertical relationship as well as the horizontal relationship. The guilty party needs
to seek both civil as well as religious forgiveness.
Bringing a gift to the altar assumes the desire by the offender to worship and
enjoy reconciliation with the Lord. In terms of Romans 6:13, the offender has
decided to yield his members as instruments of righteousness to God. He has
acknowledged his sin to the Lord wanting the Lords forgiveness.
Yet, the Lord instructs the offender to first be reconciled to your brother and
then come and offer your gift. The obvious conclusion is that as in the Old
Testament example of Leviticus 6:17, one must seek civil forgiveness as a part
of Gods religious forgiveness. Both the horizontal estrangement with
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 30
the person offended he must address as well as the vertical estrangement
(unresolved sin) with the Lord.
Biblical Examples of Offenders Seeking Forgiveness
Except for those seeking eternal forgiveness there are few examples of
offenders seeking forgiveness. We shall set forth two examples in the Old
Testament and two from the New Testament of an offender seeking forgiveness.
(1) Pharaoh: The first example is the Pharaoh of Egypt who when faced with
the plague of locusts asked forgiveness of both the Lord and of Moses in Exodus
10. Because of Pharaohs refusal to let Israel go, God sent the locust plague. In
the severity of the plague, Pharaoh quickly realized his trespass. He approached
Moses for forgiveness.
Then Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron in haste, and said, I
have sinned against the Lord your God and against you. Now
therefore, please forgive my sin only this once, and entreat the
Lord your God, that He may take away from me this death only
(Exodus 10:1617).
Pharaoh, as an unbeliever, recognized that the trespass was against both God
and man. He confessed his sin to Moses asking for his forgiveness and for Moses
to entreat God for His forgiveness.
It is obvious that the restitution offered to the Lord and Moses was a
reconsideration of letting Israel leave Egypt. Moses and the Lord forgave,
removing the plague. However, Pharaoh later refused the restitution and would
become subject to more plagues.
So he went out from Pharaoh and entreated the Lord. And the Lord
turned a very strong west wind, which took the locusts away and
blew them into the Red Sea. There remained not one locust in all
the territory of Egypt. But the Lord hardened Pharaohs heart, and
he did not let the children of Israel go (Exodus 10:1820).
(2) Abigail: The second example is a woman who sought to take the blame for
the evil of her husband, Nabal, who had railed upon David. As David would
angrily seek to take vengeance, Abigail came to David in the name of the
offender, Nabal, asking forgiveness with gifts of restitution.
Then Abigail made haste and took two hundred loaves of bread,
two skins of wine, five sheep already dressed, five seahs of roasted
grain, one hundred clusters of raisins, and two hundred cakes of
figs, and loaded them on donkeys (1 Samuel 25:18).
And now this present which your maidservant has brought to my
lord, let it be given to the young men who follow my lord. Please
forgive the trespass of your maidservant. For the Lord will
certainly make for my
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 31
lord an enduring house, because my lord fights the battles of the
Lord, and evil is not found in you throughout your days (1 Samuel
25:2728).
Although the text says nothing of confession to the Lord, certainly the text
addresses the estranged horizontal relationship with (1) confession, (2) seeking
forgiveness, and (3) restitution.
(3) The Prodigal Son: The major New Testament example of forgiveness is
that of the prodigal son (Luke 15:1132). This familiar parable begins with the
younger son obtaining and wasting his inheritance on riotous living (15:13) and
on prostitutes (15:30). As he runs out of money and reaps the results of the
terrible decisions he has made, he realizes he has sinned. He has a metanoia, or
mind changing repentance, realizing that he has sinned against God and also
against his father.
I will arise and go to my father, and will say to him, Father, I have
sinned against heaven and before you, and I am no longer worthy
to be called your son. Make me like one of your hired servants
(Luke 15:1819).
The son realizes his sin has vertical (man to God) and also horizontal (man to
man) consequences. We assume that at the moment of repentance he confessed
his sins to God and determined to return to his father with the offer of a minimal
restitution, returning to his father to become as a hired servant.
In this example, the fathera picture of our Heavenly Fatherwho was a
victim in this offense, accepts the repentance, but refuses the restitution. He fully
restores his son solely based upon the repentance and the offer of restitution he
made.
And the son said to him, Father, I have sinned against heaven and
in your sight, and am no longer worthy to be called your son. But
the father said to his servants, Bring out the best robe and put it
on him, and put a ring on his hand and sandals on his feet (Luke
15:2122).
(4) The Attitude of Zacchaeus: Another New Testament example is that of
the attitude portrayed by Zacchaeus in Luke 19:110. As Jesus comes to Jericho,
this short, rich tax collector climbed a tree to see the Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus,
seeing the desire and faith of Zacchaeus, chose to stay in his house. Zacchaeus
was overjoyed though others criticized the Lord for being a guest in the house of a
sinner.
Evidently, Zacchaeus heard the simple message of the gospel that is faith
alone in Christ alone. His great joy in having fellowship with Jesus may very
well speak of his salvation. As the complainers label Zacchaeus a
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 32
sinner, Zacchaeus proposes what he would do to show forth the fruits of his
salvation.
13
Then Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, Look, Lord, I give
half of my goods to the poor; and if I have taken anything from
anyone by false accusation, I restore fourfold. And Jesus said to
him, Today salvation has come to this house, because he also is a
son of Abraham (Luke 19:89).
The attitude portrayed by Zacchaeus was that if he had been an offender in
any of his tax collecting activities, he desired to seek forgiveness. He sought
forgiveness based upon (1) seeing that he had made a false accusation
[repentance], (2) acknowledging it [confession], and (3) seeking forgiveness with
a fourfold restitution.
Conclusions for Offenders Seeking Forgiveness
In a victimless offense, God is still the victim of all sin and forgiveness. By
confession, one needs to seek His forgiveness (1 John 1:9).
In an offense where one victimizes another, the offender must realize that both
vertical estrangement with God and horizontal estrangement with the offended
person has occurred. He must seek both religious and civil forgiveness. Scripture
seems to precondition religious forgiveness upon seeking (even if not received)
civil forgiveness (cp. Leviticus 6:17; Matthew 5:2324).
The offender seeking forgiveness should confess the offense to all involved
starting with God, then seek to make restitution with an added additional amount
to the persons involved (cp. Leviticus 5:1516; 6:17; 1 Samuel 25:2728).
Forgiveness from the Viewpoint of the Victim
Most of the Scriptures that deal with the topic of forgiveness address it from
the standpoint of a believer whom one has wronged or victimized. If the offender
would follow the biblical guidelines and do what is right before the Lord, he
would quickly remove estrangement, restoring peace and fellowship. However,

13
We cannot consider the works that Zacchaeus proposes as the basis of eternal salvation. They
are the fruit of one just saved and overjoyed that he will not only see Jesus, but that Jesus will be
a guest in his home. The salvation of Zacchaeus, like ours, God secures by faith alone in Christ
alone. In answer to His critics, Jesus would comment on Zacchaeus being one for whom He
came to seek and to save (Luke 19:10).
because of continued sin, offenders often fail to do what is right until the Lord
brings various pressures to bear.
Just as the offenders sin has ramifications with God and the victim, the
granting of forgiveness involves both God and the offender. A survey of New
Testament passages that deal with person to person forgiveness reveals that
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 33
the Word commands believers to be forgiving and to forgive. The remainder of
this study will seek to glean some details.
Granting Religious Forgiveness: Forgiving an Offender Before God
Whenever we are the victims of an offense, whether small or large, our
immediate step before God is to forgive the offender. Though the Lord did not
cause our victimizationsin did!God chooses to use it somehow in our lives.
In keeping with the realization that in Gods all-encompassing plan, all things
work together for good (Romans 8:28) and in everything give thanks (1
Thessalonians 5:18), we begin by granting forgiveness. In fact, God demands that
we release the offender to Him by a prayer of forgiveness.
And whenever you stand praying, if you have anything against
anyone, forgive him, that your Father in heaven may also forgive
you your trespasses. But if you do not forgive, neither will your
Father in heaven forgive your trespasses (Mark 11:2526; cp.
Romans 12:19).
As the victim of an offense, we can either react or turn it over to the Lord. The
Lord commands us to forgive, releasing the offense and the offender to Him. The
forgiveness spoken of here is before the Lord in prayer. In context, the Lord
teaches on prayer. One aspect of being the victim of an offense is the immediate
retaliatory sins
14
that pop into the mindmental attitude sinstoward the
offender. We must biblically handle these sins. The Lord commands us to forgive.
This forgiveness involves releasing the offender, the offense, and our
victimization into the hands of the Lord. We may further couple this idea with
Romans 12:19.
Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath;
for it is written, Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, says the Lord.
The offender and the offense we must release to the Lord for Him to handle.
We must rely upon Him to repay out of His own plan for the offender and His

14
I mean sins like That dirty so and so! or, Ill show them! (revenge). Others may include
anger, bitterness, resentment, and moments of real hatred towards the offender. We cannot receive
what God has planned as the benefits of this incident if we harbor such sins of attitude. This is
true even if we take no retaliatory action.
vengeance. Our attitude before the Lord is to forgive and release the offense. In
the words of Jay Adams, previously cited:
Forgiveness means no longer continuing to dwell on the sin that
was forgiven. Forgiveness is the promise not to raise the issue
again [here complaining to God], to others or to himself. Brooding
is a violation of the promise made in granting forgiveness.
15
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 34
In releasing the offense and the offender to God by this act of vertical
forgiveness, or our granting religious forgiveness, the Lord can then forgive our
sins. I take this as Gods forgiveness of our immediate or lingering reactionary
sins toward the offense and the offender. We may say the same for similar
contexts in which God bases His forgiveness of us upon our forgiving others
(Matthew 6:12, 1415; 18:35; Mark 11:2526; Luke 6:37; 11:4)
Though the Lord links His temporal forgiveness of us to how we forgive
others, He does not condition our eternal forgiveness upon being forgiving. Louis
Barbieri has said:
Though Gods forgiveness of sin is not based on ones forgiving
others, a Christians forgiveness is based on realizing he has been
forgiven (cf. Eph 4:32). Personal fellowship with God is in view in
these verses (not salvation from sin). One cannot walk in
fellowship with God if he refuses to forgive others.
16
Therefore, to summarize, the first step in granting forgiveness is the granting
of religious forgiveness before God by forgiving the offense and the offender
through turning the whole matter over to the Lord for His action and vengeance.
One of the best examples of this happening was with David and Nabal in 1
Samuel 25. Nabal offended David. David reacted and sought to take revenge.
Abigail, wife of Nabal, interceded for her husband and convinced David to turn
the offense and the offender over to the Lord. Because Nabal continued
unrepentant, the Lord finally struck Nabal dead in divine judgment.
17
Religious forgiveness is often the only type of forgiveness that we can grant
toward unbelievers. The victim forgives them before the Lord and leaves them in
His hands as those whom God loves and for whom Christ died. We deal with

15
Adams, op. cit., 65. The author added the bracketed material.
16
Louis A. Barbieri, Jr., The Bible Knowledge Commentary, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B.
Zuck (Wheaton, 1983), Matthew, 32.
17
In the limited experience of the author, the Lords vengeance is real and the principles work. A
number of unrepentant offenders have seen their businesses, ministries, and lives disintegrate
before the vengeance of the Lord. The alternative for the victim is the self-destruction that takes
place when attitudes of religious unforgiveness, revenge, and bitterness control his life.
unbelievers who victimize us with the same desire to see their salvation as we
would deal with any other unbelievers at various levels of communication and
commerce.
18
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 35
Granting Civil Forgiveness: Personally Forgiving an Offender
The process of granting civil forgiveness comes next. The Lord commands us
as believers to forgive one another as we have received the forgiveness of our sins
in Christ.
Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, just
as God in Christ forgave you (Ephesians 4:32).
Bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has
a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you
also must do (Colossians 3:13).
The granting of civil forgiveness is not simply an overlooking of the sin of the
offender, but is to follow a clearly laid out process that we find in both Matthew
18:1517 and Luke 17:34. The account of Luke seems to summarize
19
best the
process.
Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke
him; and if he repents, forgive him. And if he sins against you
seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you,
saying, I repent, you shall forgive him (Luke 17:34).
Luke 17:3 sets forth the process of civil forgiveness in four steps: (1) the
offense, (2) the rebuke, (3) the opportunity to repent, and (4) forgiveness (civil).
Lets examine each of these four steps.
(1) The Offense: An offender commits a trespass against another and sins
against him. Because Luke deals with forgiveness from the perspective of the
victim, he assumes that the offender has not realized his sin, or opted not to deal
with his sin biblically toward the victim. Therefore, an estrangementa wall as it
werenow stands between believers. The Lord desires us to be at peace with one
another (Hebrews 12:14), or to be reconciled to one another (Matthew 5:24).
Accordingly, Christians cannot overlook or allow the offense to stand
unchallenged because the result is an ongoing non-biblical estrangement.

18
If a non-Christian car salesman sells you a lemon, you forgive him, gently seek to recover the
loss, pray for and desire his salvation, but be wise in doing future business with him.
19
J. Carl Laney, The Biblical Practice of Church Discipline, Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. No. 143
(October, 1986), 359. Laney sees Luke 17:34 as a summary of Matthew 18:1517 and the
process of seeking to resolve an offense and grant civil forgiveness.
(2) The Rebuke: If the offender does not seek to resolve the matter, it falls
upon the victim to take the next step. Scripture says, Rebuke Him. Rebuke in
the original is epitimao () and is a command. It is a summary statement
of the three-stage process of Matthew 18:1517 that says go and tell him and
includes the word elencho () meaning to reprove.
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 36
Reprove (elencho) is a strong word that may mean to bring to light,
expose, convict, or convince someone of something.
20
In Matthews context, it
speaks of showing the offender his fault. The most biblical and loving thing one
can do for a sinning brother is to rebuke him by confronting him with the truth of
his sin and the solution for his sinful conduct.
21
Proverbs 27:56 says, Open
rebuke is better than love carefully concealed. Faithful are the wounds of a
friend, but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.
Rebuke (epitimao), in Luke 17, is also a strong term meaning to rebuke,
reprove, censure, and also to speak seriously, warn to prevent an action or bring
one to an end.
22
Thus, it shows that the process of civil forgiveness demands a confrontation
[non-combative] in love with the offender. This is not optional, but required.
Matthew 18:1517 spells out the details and stages of such a confrontation.
Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault
between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your
brother. But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that
by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be
established. And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church.
But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a
heathen and a tax collector (Matthew 18:1517).
Here the Lord establishes three stages for working toward the goal of
repentance, forgiveness, and restoration. The first stage is a rebuke in private,
which one may attempt a second time as Titus 3:10 suggests. If the offender does
not respond with hearing you (repentance), then a rebuke before witnesses is the
second stage. Stage one is totally private; stage two is semi-private.
23
If the

20
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans.
William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, 4th rev ed., 248.
21
Keith Megillian, The Ministry of Rebuking, Journal of Pastoral Practice 5 (1981), 2223,
Quoted by Laney, op. cit., 358.
22
A Greek-English Lexicon, 303.
23
I personally see the witnesses of stage two being objective and not tied to one side nor the other
so that, if the victim is wrong and over reacting about a supposed offense, they can help with
reconciliation, or if the offender is wrong and will not hear, they can give testimony at the third
stage of this process.
offender still refuses to hear them (repent), then it goes to the third stage that is,
tell it to the church.
24
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 37
At any of the stages of Matthew 18, repentance is the desired result. If the
offender repents, the final step of forgiveness must be forthcoming as presented in
Luke 17:3. On the other hand, if the offender refuses to hear even the church,
Jesus requires us to take biblical sanctions for the benefit of both the church body
and the unrepentant offender. Let us assume repentance first.
(3) The Repentance: Repentance is metanoeo that carries the fundamental
idea of a change of mind and attitude. Repentance involves a change of attitude
toward sin followed by a corresponding change of action.
25
Civil forgiveness
goes hand-in-hand with repentance including the offer of restitution. For the
offender genuinely to repent, he will couple verbal repentance with an offer of
restitution, which does not depend upon fruits, completing restitution, or anything
else.
26
Therefore, at the most basic level a true change of mind (metanoeo) is the
desired result of the rebuke. The offender truly hears his sin and sees it as both
God and the victim see the sin. When he confesses his change of mind to the
victim in the spirit of James 5:16, confess your faults one to another,
27
the victim
must forgive him.
(4) Civil Forgiveness: At this stage of the summary procedure found in Luke
17:34, religious forgiveness (the vertical) is already accomplished. It happened
as the victim released the offense and the offender to the Lord and turned any
vengeance over to Him. The forgiveness step is an effort to reestablish the
horizontal relationship of person-to-person to allow for restoration, peace, and
fellowship.

24
Some see this as limited to church leadership; I do not. The leadership view is an effort to try to
preserve privacy, but the word is ekklesia and normally has reference to the entire body of
believers. Gods Word Itself does not protect the sins of the sinning Old Testament saints, but
presents them as warnings to all believers regardless of maturity levels. Moreover, church
leadership could already have been involved as witnesses in stage two. If there is still a refusal
to hear (lack of repentance), the whole church will have to know anyway to carry out the biblical
sanctions.
25
Laney, op. cit., 359.
26
There is strong debate over whether the offender must produce fruits of repentance before the
victim forgives him. This does not negate in any way the fact that Scripture sets forth proper
fruits, including seeking restitution for the offender. The actual relationship of when repentance
secures forgiveness will by taken up under (4) Forgiveness.
27
We take this as the confession of sinning offenders to those who have been personally
victimized by the offenders sin. It is only as public as need be.
Thus, based upon repentance, the victim must grant civil forgiveness to the
offender.
28
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 38
Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke
him; and if he repents, forgive him. And if he sins against you
seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you,
saying, I repent, you shall forgive him (Luke 17:34).
If he repents, forgive him. Jesus clarifies what the normal result of the
repentance of the offender should be, requiring the victim to forgive the offender,
leaving any fruits, suggested restitution, or whatever may follow in the Lords
hands. Jay Adams rightly observes that this may be the hardest step, even beyond
the confrontation, for the victim.
29
The Lords disciples also had a very hard time
with what Jesus taught.
Jesus continues with His teaching by saying that if the offender sins seven
times a day and returns to the victim with a mind changing repentance, the victim
must forgive (Luke 17:4). The Lord does not mention fruit, or that anything else
has to precede the victim granting civil forgiveness to the offender. The
responsibilities of fruit, restitution, and the like, the victim must leave between
the Lord and the offender to carry out. Christ does not call upon the victim to
police the actions of the offender after repentance.
That the disciples had a hard time with this we observe in the discourse that
follows:
The apostles said to the Lord, Increase our faith (Luke 17:5).
The Lord goes on to explain that it does not take much faith. It takes simple
obedience to do what He commands about forgiveness.
So the Lord said, If you have faith as a mustard seed, you can say
to this mulberry tree, Be pulled up by the roots and be planted in
the sea, and it would obey you (Luke 17:6).

28
Legal Offenses and Personal Offenses: Scripture upholds at all times a strong sense of law. If
the offense is a crime having criminal consequences, one can still forgive in a civil way the
offender, yet see the offender face the legal consequences of their sin. This serves to uphold
Gods just standards governing humanity, as a deterrent to others, and as some of the required
restitution to the victim. The Lord treats us in the very same way. Upon confession, He forgives
our sin, but we still face its temporal consequences in time. On the other hand, personal offenses
may end with repentance. If the offender seeks to do what God demands, fruits of repentance
including restitution should normally follow the change of mind.
29
Adams, op. cit., 68.
In other words, it does not take great faith. If you had the grain of a mustard
seed, you could move trees and mountains. Jesus would then go on to illustrate
this point with a parable, the Parable of the Unprofitable Servant.
And which of you, having a servant plowing or tending sheep, will
say to him when he has come in from the field, Come at once and
sit down to eat? But will he not rather say to him, Prepare
something for my sup-
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 39
per, and gird yourself and serve me till I have eaten and drunk, and
afterward you will eat and drink? Does he thank that servant
because he did the things that were commanded him? I think not.
So likewise you, when you have done all those things which you
are commanded, say, We are unprofitable servants. We have done
what was our duty to do (Luke 17:710).
The point of Jesus parable is that though a servant has worked all day
obeying his master and comes in to dinner, he has not completed his duties until
he prepares dinner for his master. His master will not invite him to eat
immediately, but require him to fulfill his duty to prepare the masters dinner. The
servant will do his duty, prepare the masters dinner, and then sit to eat. The
servant does not receive special thanks for doing what his master commands. He
does what is his duty.
In the same way, Jesus says that it does not take faith; it does not take feeling,
or any other thing, but simply to obey and do what God commands. He commands
that if an offender verbally exhibits repentance, our duty is to forgive him. If we
only do what is our duty, we remain unprofitable servants. If we take steps
beyond our duty, perhaps like the father of the prodigal son, then we become
more profitable servants.
30
The fact that makes this view of how a victim should grant forgiveness so
hard is that we want justicejustice as we see it! We want the offender to pay!
Even to suffer! What we forget is that the offender also has responsibilities for
obtaining forgiveness as shown in the earlier examples. The victim must place the
offenders responsibilities in the hands of the Lord and to His timing for just
vengeance. In personal situations, except for criminal law, the Lord promises to
handle offenders who do not fulfill their side of the forgiveness principles.
Victims must leave these things in His good hands.
31
Joseph: A Biblical Example of a Victims Forgiveness

30
Jay Adams has an excellent presentation of this context and passage, op. cit., 6370.
31
Again, although personal experience is never the source of our faith, it has born out the truths
of God handling offenders who abuse His grace by verbal repentance alone and go no farther as
required.
If ever there was a man whose family wronged him, it was Joseph. His
brothers hated him, almost murdered him, and finally sold him into slavery. In all
this, Joseph did not hate his brothers. When he finally met them, in his position as
second to Pharaoh, he would test them to see if they had a change of mind about
what they had done to him. Joseph used his younger brother, Benjamin, Jacobs
new favorite, to test the brothers who sold him into slavery. Upon seeing their
concern for Benjamin, Joseph would treat them as family. After Jacob died,
messengers told Joseph the wish of his father that he forgive his brothers.
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 40
So they sent messengers to Joseph, saying, Before your father
died he commanded, saying, Thus you shall say to Joseph: I beg
you, please forgive the trespass of your brothers and their sin; for
they did evil to you. Now, please, forgive the trespass of the
servants of the God of your father. And Joseph wept when they
spoke to him (Genesis 50:1617).
Joseph rebuked his brothers (Genesis 50:20), they repented and offered
themselves as the servants of Josephan act of restitution (Genesis 50:18). Based
upon their words (not their servitude), Joseph would forgive his brothers (Genesis
50:1921).
Then his brothers also went and fell down before his face, and they
said, Behold, we are your servants. Joseph said to them, Do not
be afraid, for am I in the place of God? But as for you, you meant
evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it
about as it is this day, to save many people alive. Now therefore,
do not be afraid; I will provide for you and your little ones. And
he comforted them and spoke kindly to them (Genesis 50:1821).
In approaching his brothers Joseph offered a strong rebuke when he told them,
you meant evil against me (Genesis 50:20). Yet, in the plan of God, the Lord used
this evil for the ultimate benefit of Joseph, Israel, and even Egypt.
Furthermore, the brothers gave solid indication of their change of mind
(repentance), even offering themselves as servants in restitution. Finally, Joseph
forgave them based upon their response to his rebuke and what they said. He left
the details of their future actions in the hands of the Lord.
When the Offender Does Not Repent
What does a victim do about forgiveness when the offender rejects the rebuke
and will not change his mind and repenteven all the way to the third stage of
Matthew 18:1517?
The victim has followed the principles on forgiveness before the Lord,
releasing the offender and the offense to the Lord. He thus achieves (or
perpetuates) forgiveness in his vertical relationship with God. Still the horizontal
relationship remains unresolved.
At this point Jesus states, But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be
to you like a heathen and a tax collector (Matthew 18:17). The victim now
considers the unrepentant offender as a nonbeliever. A separation needs to take
place in obedience to Scripture and for the benefit of the unrepentant offender.
The victim treats the offender as a nonbeliever because he is not walking as a
believer. The victim loves him in the same way Jesus loves sinners and publicans,
but he no longer relates to the unrepentant
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 41
offender as a member of the body of Christ. This is not mere shunning, but a
separation from Christian fellowship.
32
Now the status of forgiveness is that before the Lord the victim has forgiven
(vertically) the offender. The offender, however, has thrown up a wall of
separation by refusal to repent, thus blocking horizontal forgiveness. We must
stress that it is not the victim who is unforgiving, but the offender who is at fault.
This parallels the situation that God finds Himself in when we sin and do not
confess and we thus stand in a state of unforgiveness. Is this Gods fault?
Absolutely not! It is the fault of the offender. The victim must understand this and
continue to urge repentance to the offender.
Paul and the Corinthian Church
A congregational member in Corinth was living in gross immorality and did
not correct the situation (repent). At the urging of the Lord through Paul, the
church separated from, and put him out of the assembly. He stood as unforgiven
until he would repent (1 Corinthians 5:1, 5, 13):
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you,
and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the
Gentilesthat a man has his fathers wife (1 Corinthians 5:1)!
Deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his
spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Corinthians
5:5).
But those who are outside God judges. Therefore put away from
yourselves the evil person (1 Corinthians 5:13).

32
Laney, op. cit., 362.
The design of this principle is to pressure an offender into seeking
restoration by repentance. The incestuous church member, treated in this manner,
must have repented and acknowledged his sin to the Lord and those involved. The
evidence is that later Paul urged the congregation to forgive and accept him back
into the congregation:
This punishment which was inflicted by the majority is sufficient
for such a man, so that, on the contrary, you ought rather to forgive
and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with too
much sorrow. Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love to him (2
Corinthians 2:68).
The foundation upon which the victim builds forgiveness to the offender is the
latters change of mind.
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 42
Conclusion
In summarizing the conclusions on personal forgiveness, separate principles
apply to an Offender and to a Victim.
The Offender is (1) to acknowledge his sin to the Lord, (2) go to the victim
and acknowledge his sin, his change of mind, and propose restitution, and (3) an
offender who follows these guidelines the Lord forgives and the victim should
forgive also. If the victim refuses to forgive, he is now living in disobedience to
the Lord.
The Victim is (1) to forgive before the Lord and release the offender and the
offense to the Lord. (2) He is to go to the offender with the purpose of confronting
him with his sin (rebuke), assuming the offender does not first come to him. (3) If
the offender changes his mind and says so in repentance, the victim must forgive
him. (4) If the offender does not repent through all three stages of Matthew
18:1517 (in private, before witnesses, and before the church), the church should
exclude him from its fellowship. Moreover, the unrepentant offender remains
unforgiven because of his own actions (like we are before God when we do not
confess sin). Finally, (5) if and when the offender repents, the victim must forgive
him.
Final Note
Forgiveness is basic, restoring fellowship among believers. Forgiveness does
not necessarily restore positions. Under the Mosaic Law, one could forgive a
murderer or an adulterer and still see the offender executed as the temporal
consequence of capital crime. The same is true for positions of spiritual leadership
as seen with Moses (Numbers 20:1112), Aaron (Numbers 20:2328), and the
apostate Levites (Ezekiel 44:1016) who, as spiritual leaders, must have repented
of their sin, yet lost their positions. Forgiveness is a first step to restore
fellowship. We need to bring other biblical factors to bear on restoration to
various positions of leadership.
33
Appendix
Against You, You Only Have I Sinned (King David)
When David committed adultery with Bathsheba and then had her husband,
Uriah, murdered, his sin was obvious. Yet, he did not remain unrepentant. The
Holy Spirit reveals his confession in two Psalms (Psalm 32 and Psalm 51). In
Psalm 51, David prays against You (God), You only, have I sinned (51:4). A
shallow reading and superficial application of this verse has led to an unbiblical
attitude toward sin. Based upon a supposed loophole, some conclude that
believers need only to confess a victimizing sin to the Lord alone. Consequently,
they say, the Lord forgives and the victim, without any perceived change in the
offender, or restitution, is to forgive as the Lord has supposedly forgiven.
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 43
If the Bible student carries this through to its logical conclusion, believers
could steal from one another, confess it to God, and that would be it. Believers
could malign and slander one another, confess it to God, and that would be it.
Believers could victimize one another in many ways, confess it to God, and that
would be it. Does this sound familiar? It is an absolutely wrong interpretation!
Explanation of Psalm 51:4 in its historical-legal context.
The Lord reveals Davids double sin (adultery and murder) in 2 Samuel 11:1
12:14. A proper interpretation of the passage demands at least an outline of the
specific historical details with their legal implications before God and men.
First: David stayed behind as the armies of Israel went to war. In the midst of
his idleness he saw Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, and committed adultery with
her. Uriah was off to war and none the wiser (2 Samuel 11:14).
Now what was Davids status before Gods word? Legally, at this point David
and Bathsheba were both guilty of adultery. The punishment for adultery was
death. The victim of the adultery was Uriah, the husband of Bathsheba. According
to the Law, Uriah would have to press charges, if there were no eyewitnesses,
leading to a Trial of Jealousy before the priest (Numbers 5:1119). If the trial
established her adultery, the priest cursed her and she presumably died (Numbers
5:2031). The penalty for a capital crime, established by a minimum of two
witnesses, was death (Leviticus 20:10; cp. Deuteronomy 19:1521).
With Uriah gone, secrecy protected both David and Bathsheba from the
external consequences of their sin.

33
Examples are provided in a paper entitled: Disqualification from Spiritual Leadership before
the Lord, Paul R. Schmidtbleicher, Th.M., 1995.
Second: Bathsheba conceived a child of the illicit union that complicated the
issue for David. If Uriah finds out, as the victim, he can press charges and have
both David and Bathsheba put to death (2 Samuel 11:5). Now what was Davids
status before Gods word? Legally, because of adultery, both faced the death
penalty as the consequence of their sin.
Third: Davids first plan of action was to cover his sin. He tried to get Uriah
together with his wife Bathsheba so that people would think the child to be born
was Uriahs child. This did not work as David hoped (2 Samuel 11:613). Now
legally before God David and Bathsheba seek to cover-up their sin and thus
escape the restitution penalties.
Fourth: Because Davids plan for Uriah to spend a night with his wife did not
happen, David determined to eliminate Uriah. Thus, he planned a murder by
sending Uriah to the hottest battle where the troops would abandon him. There
Uriah was slain in battle. Uriah, as a good soldier, died in the glory of battle. For
David and others in the plot, it was murder. The Lord was displeased (2 Samuel
11:1425).
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 44
Now what was Davids status before the Lord? Legally the king is guilty of
both adultery and murder; the penalty for both is death. Uriah, as the victim of the
adultery, would have seen restitution. Murder, however, eliminated the victim of
adultery. Whom did David sin against in the adultery? Uriah! He was eliminated.
In the murder, David sins against God. Bathsheba was not the victim, for her
husband could have required her death also. God is the victim and it is He who
requires the restitution of life for life.
The penalty for premeditated murder is capital punishment (Exodus 21:12).
God is the receiver of restitution where there is murder. From the beginning,
murder defiled the earth and the Lord requires restitution. The life of the murderer
is restitution to the Lord.
Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand
of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the
hand of every mans brother I will require the life of man.
Whoever sheds mans blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For
in the image of God He made man (Genesis 9:56).
God requires the blood of the murdering beast and the murdering man. He
also delegates the authority of execution to mankind. Capital punishment is not
restitution to society, but to God. The Scriptures emphasize that murder pollutes
the land before God. Gods requirement for cleansing the land of its pollution is
the life of the murderercapital punishment.
Whoever kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the
testimony of witnesses; but one witness is not sufficient testimony
against a person for the death penalty. Moreover you shall take no
ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he
shall surely be put to death. And you shall take no ransom for him
who has fled to his city of refuge, that he may return to dwell in the
land before the death of the priest. So you shall not pollute the land
where you are; for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be
made for the land, for the blood that is shed on it, except by the
blood of him who shed it (Numbers 35:3033).
In murder, God is the victim and execution makes restitution to God. God
demands the capital punishment of the murderer, which cleanses the blood from
the land.
Let us summarize, putting together the essential factors.
Who was victim of the adultery between David and Bathsheba? Who was to
receive restitution? Uriah! With Uriahs murder, David removed the victim of
this sin.
CTSJ 4:2 (April 1998) p. 45
Who was victim of the murder to receive restitution? God, and God alone.
Not Bathsheba for she was also guilty of the capital offense of adultery.
Thus, David, in finally confessing his sin, could only make restitution to God
for He was the only one left against whom David had specifically sinned:
Against You, You only, have I sinned (Psalm 51:4).
Fifth: Nathan the prophet confronted David with his sin. The king repented
and expected to make restitution with his very life. God, as the ultimate victim of
this crime, modified the normal restitution. David in his confession, recorded in
Psalm 51, only makes note of God as the ultimate victim of this murder. It is not a
model, therefore, we should apply to our sins that victimize others (2 Samuel
12:114).
When we victimize another by our sin, we must not view it as against God
and God only (cp. 1 Corinthians 8:12). Religious forgiveness requires civil
forgiveness. The application of sinning against God only from Psalm 51:4 is a
wrongheaded practice. There is no loophole in the Lords principles requiring
forgiveness that bypass repentance and restitution to the victims of sin.