Forgiveness

Drew Flores3 said:So, Matthew heard it from someone who heard it from a third party... and it’s all just one big chain of hearsay. But hey, nothing in this life happens by accident, right? I actually stumbled upon some info on this myself recently. It turns out that none of the Gospel writers actually saw Jesus in the flesh. Just a little food for thought while you're sipping your coffee!
Those bold numbers—13, 15, and 23—are mainly pointing toward the various branches of the church, both throughout history and as they stand today.
Jah Rastafari!

The BabylonRastas assert that Zion—specifically Africa, and Ethiopia in particular—is the sacred land Jah promised to them. Because of this belief, they turn their backs on modern Western society, labeling it "Babylon." To them, it’s just a system built on corruption. They actually believe "Babylon" has been in open rebellion against Earth's Rightful Ruler since the era of the Biblical King Nimrod. It reminds me a bit of those old stories my grandfather used to tell about folks rejecting the hustle and bustle of big cities to find peace in the countryside. Just looking for something pure, I guess.

The Rastafari believe they are the true Children of Israel. They’re always looking for ways to prove that deep connection between Ethiopia and Israel, especially by using the title Lion of Judah. Their whole heart is set on returning to Mount Zion—which means heading back to Africa. You can really hear this in the music, too. Rast reggae is peppered with references to Zion; among the best-known examples are the Bob Marley songs "Zion Train" and "Iron Lion Zion." It’s all about finding that way home.

darkjackal7 said:Does forgiveness actually require forgetting? It sounds poetic, but let’s be real: it’s impossible in practice, unless we’re talking about trivial nonsense. There is a massive difference between forgiving someone because they failed to pay you back twenty bucks—which, let’s face it, is a stretch anyway since you’ll definitely remember it the next time they ask for a loan $33—and something far more grave. Forgiving someone like Ratko Mercer while simultaneously "forgetting" his atrocities is a different beast entirely. To forgive and forget implies acting as if the offense never even occurred. Our entire legal system is built on the exact opposite principle. If we operated under that logic, no one would ever face justice for any crime, let alone a massacre. We would simply shrug, forgive, and move on. And we all know that's a lie; true forgetting is an impossibility.

Susan Price30 said:that's how many people think 😁- but after that (after the release), something else always follows, and bit by bit, we reach the end of science and knowledge. 🙂
there is a specific action that follows, self-protection, learning lessons from the experience, etc., etc.

otherwise, you could say Christians are just doormats used to wipe the floor with (some people actually think that's what they are 🤣) -but neither was Jesus like that, nor was His teaching. By the way, Jesus had an incredibly authoritative presence and demeanor; He wasn't some teenage kid or an exhausted, anemic 'guru' floating in mid-air (all respect to the gurus who actually do that, lol).
Jesus was charismatic, physically striking, possessed incredible energy, etc., etc.

I doubt she would act that way (and who would?). They would be fighting to reclaim their home. That involves legal avenues and people like judges, prosecutors, and veterans...

Susan Price30 said:

I doubt she would act that way (and who would?). They would be fighting to reclaim their home. That involves legal avenues and people like judges, prosecutors, and veterans...

That is what I wrote above—being released doesn't preclude (any kind of) action—fighting for justice or whatever else is necessary...

We are discussing spiritual insights and perspectives here, aren't we? We aren't talking about medical terms or the earthly trivialization and "explanation" of spiritual law from a "misguided perspective," so to speak.

So just forget it—the spiritual concept of forgiveness does not mean literal amnesia or some similar medical condition.

It means that for spiritual people, unwritten spiritual laws stand above written, secular ones (though it isn't a coincidence that the two often overlap, even if they don't always). Spiritually aware individuals keep their eyes on the big picture and the complete vision. Or at least—they should... that is the point.

Look, it’s obvious—that’s exactly the point. Where the fight for justice begins, forgiveness isn't even part of the conversation. If you're actually willing to just overlook an atrocity or an injustice, then you don't need any kind of restitution or settlement in the first place. So, when does this "forgiveness" supposedly kick in? Let's look at a practical example: say someone walks off with $1,000 of your money.
Option one: you forgive him and move on—immediately.
Here’s my take on a second option: you offer him forgiveness—you play the "hey, we all make mistakes" card to smooth things over—but you demand he pays you back. It’s a way of saying, "I'm moving past this, but don't think for a second I've forgotten what you owe me."

How can anyone claim to forgive someone while simultaneously fighting for justice? It sounds like a total contradiction. Doesn't one action effectively cancel out the other? If they don't, then how exactly does that work in practice?

And what happened to that whole "turn the other cheek" philosophy? How exactly is that supposed to be interpreted when things get this heavy?

Look, we are here to discuss spiritual insights and deep perceptions, aren't we? This isn't some clinical seminar where we take a profound spiritual law and strip its power away by trying to "explain" it through medical jargon or earthly trivialities. To view these truths through such a narrow, materialistic lens is, quite frankly, a misguided perspective.

Forget about it—it’s a spiritual concept. Forgiveness. It’s a heavy word, isn't it? Most people toss it around like it's some cheap trinket, but in reality, it’s one of the most difficult psychological hurdles a human being can face. It isn't about letting someone off the hook or pretending that what they did didn't happen—it's about refusing to let their mistakes continue to poison your own life. Think of it like carrying a hot coal with the intention of throwing it at someone else; you're the one getting burned while they just walk away. True forgiveness is dropping the coal. It's an act of self-preservation, plain and simple. We aren't talking about literal amnesia or some kind of clinical medical condition here.

Look, we’re discussing spiritual perspectives here, yet she insists on tethering everything to these mundane, earthly trivialities. It’s absurd. You know the principle: "as it is in heaven, so it is on earth." If there isn't a direct correlation between the two, then you aren't talking about theology anymore—you're drifting straight into the realm of science fiction. At least, that's how it looks to me.

So, what you’re saying is that for spiritual people, those unwritten divine laws carry more weight than any codified, secular legislation? It’s not a coincidence that the two often align, though they certainly don't always walk hand in hand. Those who are truly spiritually awakened keep their eyes fixed on the big picture—the entire landscape at once. Or at least, they ought to be. That is the heart of the matter.

Listen to this: spiritual types end up in courtrooms all the time. I honestly don't get how they claim their "spiritual laws" hold more weight than the actual legal system. If that were true, they’d be living by those higher principles instead of playing the secular game. It doesn't add up. How can someone claim to follow a divine code in theory, but then switch to a narrow, frog-eye perspective the second they have to actually act? They preach one thing and practice the exact opposite. How do you even make sense of that level of hypocrisy?

Susan Price30 said:that's how many people think 😁- but after that (after the release), something else always follows, and bit by bit, we reach the end of science and knowledge. 🙂
there is a specific action that follows, self-protection, learning lessons from the experience, etc., etc.

otherwise, you could say Christians are just doormats used to wipe the floor with (some people actually think that's what they are 🤣) -but neither was Jesus like that, nor was His teaching. By the way, Jesus had an incredibly authoritative presence and demeanor; He wasn't some teenage kid or an exhausted, anemic 'guru' floating in mid-air (all respect to the gurus who actually do that, lol).
Jesus was charismatic, physically striking, possessed incredible energy, etc., etc.

Jerry King11 said:if we're blaming ourselves for some evil done to us when we aren't actually at fault, then we need to deal with that "imposed" guilt through logic, rather than relying on some imaginary act of forgiving the other person (which is supposed to forgive ourselves in the process)😲

First, you have to realize for yourself that you aren't guilty; after that, if someone wants to forgive the other person, they can do whatever they want—forgive or let go, it doesn't matter much

that bolded part above is honestly pathetic, and I'm trying to keep my language civil here, but it's just a desperate attempt to equate the victim with the perpetrator

anyway, where did that post go? 🤷

Susan Price30 said:

What was written above in bold is pathetic—to put it mildly. It’s an attempt to equate the victim with the perpetrator.

It certainly doesn't equate them; rather, it states exactly what is written—by forgiving (releasing) others, we forgive (release) ourselves as well.

(Of course, there are different situations, but generally speaking this holds true.)

And often, this also applies: someone who finds it difficult to forgive themselves will find it just as difficult to forgive others.

It's often true that someone who struggles to forgive themselves will struggle to forgive anyone else.

darkjackal7 said:Does forgiveness actually require forgetting? It sounds poetic, but let’s be real: it’s impossible in practice, unless we’re talking about trivial nonsense. There is a massive difference between forgiving someone because they failed to pay you back twenty bucks—which, let’s face it, is a stretch anyway since you’ll definitely remember it the next time they ask for a loan $33—and something far more grave. Forgiving someone like Ratko Mercer while simultaneously "forgetting" his atrocities is a different beast entirely. To forgive and forget implies acting as if the offense never even occurred. Our entire legal system is built on the exact opposite principle. If we operated under that logic, no one would ever face justice for any crime, let alone a massacre. We would simply shrug, forgive, and move on. And we all know that's a lie; true forgetting is an impossibility.

darkjackal7 said:Look, it’s obvious—that’s exactly the point. Where the fight for justice begins, forgiveness isn't even part of the conversation. If you're actually willing to just overlook an atrocity or an injustice, then you don't need any kind of restitution or settlement in the first place. So, when does this "forgiveness" supposedly kick in? Let's look at a practical example: say someone walks off with $1,000 of your money.
Option one: you forgive him and move on—immediately.
Here’s my take on a second option: you offer him forgiveness—you play the "hey, we all make mistakes" card to smooth things over—but you demand he pays you back. It’s a way of saying, "I'm moving past this, but don't think for a second I've forgotten what you owe me."

How can anyone claim to forgive someone while simultaneously fighting for justice? It sounds like a total contradiction. Doesn't one action effectively cancel out the other? If they don't, then how exactly does that work in practice?

And what happened to that whole "turn the other cheek" philosophy? How exactly is that supposed to be interpreted when things get this heavy?

Look, we are here to discuss spiritual insights and deep perceptions, aren't we? This isn't some clinical seminar where we take a profound spiritual law and strip its power away by trying to "explain" it through medical jargon or earthly trivialities. To view these truths through such a narrow, materialistic lens is, quite frankly, a misguided perspective.

Forget about it—it’s a spiritual concept. Forgiveness. It’s a heavy word, isn't it? Most people toss it around like it's some cheap trinket, but in reality, it’s one of the most difficult psychological hurdles a human being can face. It isn't about letting someone off the hook or pretending that what they did didn't happen—it's about refusing to let their mistakes continue to poison your own life. Think of it like carrying a hot coal with the intention of throwing it at someone else; you're the one getting burned while they just walk away. True forgiveness is dropping the coal. It's an act of self-preservation, plain and simple. We aren't talking about literal amnesia or some kind of clinical medical condition here.

Look, we’re discussing spiritual perspectives here, yet she insists on tethering everything to these mundane, earthly trivialities. It’s absurd. You know the principle: "as it is in heaven, so it is on earth." If there isn't a direct correlation between the two, then you aren't talking about theology anymore—you're drifting straight into the realm of science fiction. At least, that's how it looks to me.

So, what you’re saying is that for spiritual people, those unwritten divine laws carry more weight than any codified, secular legislation? It’s not a coincidence that the two often align, though they certainly don't always walk hand in hand. Those who are truly spiritually awakened keep their eyes fixed on the big picture—the entire landscape at once. Or at least, they ought to be. That is the heart of the matter.

Listen to this: spiritual types end up in courtrooms all the time. I honestly don't get how they claim their "spiritual laws" hold more weight than the actual legal system. If that were true, they’d be living by those higher principles instead of playing the secular game. It doesn't add up. How can someone claim to follow a divine code in theory, but then switch to a narrow, frog-eye perspective the second they have to actually act? They preach one thing and practice the exact opposite. How do you even make sense of that level of hypocrisy?

Sandra Parker3 said:So the point is that when supporting a victim, we shouldn't try to manufacture guilt by saying things like "forgive yourself."

Nathan Cook4 said:

wearyhawk83 said:Forgiveness and forgetting are not the same thing, nor is forgetting a prerequisite for forgiveness. To forgive means to release negative emotions—to stop assigning blame, to let go of anger, and to find acceptance. Forgetting implies an absence of memory. Therefore, they are not mutually exclusive.

Precisely. Generally speaking, it is quite difficult to support a victim without inadvertently triggering more self-pity or amplifying their feelings of shame, fear, guilt, or anger.

Jerry King11 said:"We need to understand our history, but we have to view it through the lens of the Gospel to remember without losing ourselves to resentment."

Father Edward Peric

"Memory is necessary, but forgiveness is vital; if I cling to a grudge, I’m only destroying myself. That doesn't mean forgetting—Christianity isn't about being oblivious. The goal is never vengeance. Those who committed atrocities during the American Civil War didn't truly grasp the sheer scale of the evil they were unleashing; if they had understood the consequences, they never would have done it. Most injustices are committed under the guise of righteousness."

Father Edward Peric

Honesty is what sets you free.

@ Susan Price30, what’s your take on this?

Could you expand a bit on how you see it?

Donna Lopez4 said:Forgetting is just plain inefficient. It teaches nothing; it’s just turning a blind eye to a messy reality. Honestly, what a waste of opportunities to build something better, to rearrange the pieces, or to gain actual insight if you just let it slip away. Maybe the "solution" is simply to let go—to live with the knowledge but remain powerless to actually control your own life or anyone else's. By trying to diminish its significance, the importance starts to fade away... 🙂

My deepest apologies for the unchecked sarcasm, but can you back up those claims with some quotes from the Bible?😁

Susan Price30 said:This is interesting, 😁 though the tricky part is—how do you remember without harboring resentment? How do you actually separate the two? It’s incredibly difficult.

In my view, as long as we remember, we haven't truly forgiven. We might say the right things or mean well, but unless we forgive from the depths of our soul as Jesus taught, we haven't achieved it.

The true sign is when we stop dwelling on it—when there is no longer an active memory of the sin inflicted upon us. Only then have we found peace with ourselves and everyone else.

Susan Price30 said:This is interesting, 😁 though the tricky part is—how do you remember without harboring resentment? How do you actually separate the two? It’s incredibly difficult.

In my view, as long as we remember, we haven't truly forgiven. We might say the right things or mean well, but unless we forgive from the depths of our soul as Jesus taught, we haven't achieved it.

The true sign is when we stop dwelling on it—when there is no longer an active memory of the sin inflicted upon us. Only then have we found peace with ourselves and everyone else.

the real sign that we've made it is when we stop ruminating—when we no longer have that (active) mental loop of the offense. Only then have we truly found peace with ourselves and everyone else.

Sean Cruz said:Based on this, the only effective recipes for lasting happiness involve amnesia or a lobotomy.