After viewing the incredible forgiveness of the Amish during the crisis in their community, Diana Bulter posited that we should practice this kind of forgiveness to the perpetrators of 9/11. I can't believe anyone would be that naive, but in fact, that is exactly the kind of nonsense that passes for "Christian thought" these days. You can click here for her blog site, if you must. http://www.beliefnet.com/blogs/godspolitics/2006/10/diana-butler-bass-what-if-amish-were.html
Forgiveness is a powerful tool of God that can change lives and eternal destinies. It is amazing in its ability to set people free from crushing guilt and shame (as in the case of Marie Roberts). But is it bilbical to practice forgiveness toward the unrepentant. I would like to posit three reasons why it is not. 1) Forgiveness can only be offered to someone who accepts responsibility for their actions. It is granted upon repentance. 2) Since God forgives us when we repent- if we forgive all who sin against us without demanding repentance- aren't we practicing a higher form of forgiveness than God? Why don't we officially forgive the whole world of its offenses and then they can go to heaven without personally repenting for their evil deeds? 3) What passes for forgiveness is less than altruistic. Therapeutic forgiveness is really selfish at its core. I am forgiving your so that I can get on with my life and cut my life free from the residue of your evil works.
Honestly, I think that there is a terrible oversimplification that Christians perform when they speak of forgiveness. It is hard work to forgive even the penitent. Why do we burden ourselves with unbiblical ideals on forgiveness? Did Jesus call us to let murderers go free in our society? Did he call us to ignore justice? Did he call us to ignore pedophilia in the name of forgiveness?
Seems to me that this is a diabolicaly twisting of a Biblical concept. What do you think?