The content for C. S. Lewis’ book Mere Christianity was taken from a series of wartime broadcasts on the Christian faith from the BBC in which he spoke on the problems of suffering, pain, and evil from 1942-1944. In one broadcast, Lewis spoke on the issue of forgiveness. The book was published ten years later in 1952. During WW2 800,000 Londoners lost their homes by the Nazi ‘blitz’. Night after night hundreds of planes bombed not only London, but many other cities in the UK. Later, jet-propelled rockets turned civilians and their cities into the front lines and was designed to put pressure on the government to surrender.
In one chapter of the book Lewis speaks to the Christian idea of forgiveness.
Everyone says forgiveness is a lovely idea, until they have something to forgive, as we had during the war. And then, to mention the subject at all is to be greeted with howls of anger. …And half of you already want to ask me, ‘I wonder how you’d feel about forgiving the Gestapo if you were a Pole or a Jew?’ So do I. I wonder very much. Just as when Christianity tells me that I must not deny my religion even to save myself from death and torture. I wonder very much what I should do when it comes to that point. I am not trying to tell you in this book what I could do—I can do precious little—I am telling you what Christianity is. I did not invent it. And there, right in the middle of it, I find ‘Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us.’ There is no slightest suggestion that we are offered forgiveness on any other terms. It is made perfectly clear that if we do not forgive we shall not be forgiven.
…we might try to understand exactly what loving your neighbour as yourself means. I have to love him as I love myself. Well, how exactly do I love myself?
…my self-love makes me think myself nice, but thinking myself nice is not why I love myself. …In my most clear-sighted moments not only do I not think myself a nice man, but I know that I am a very nasty one. I can look at some of the things I have done with horror and loathing. So apparently I am allowed to loathe and hate some of the things my enemies do. Now come to think of it, I remember Christian teachers telling me long ago that I must hate a bad man’s actions, but not hate the bad man: or, as they would say, hate the sin but not the sinner. For a long time I used to think this a silly, straw-splitting distinction: how could you hate what a man did and not hate the man? But years later it occurred to me that there was one man to whom I had been doing this all my life– myself.
Consequently, Christianity does not want us to reduce by one atom the hatred we feel for cruelty and treachery. We ought to hate them. Not one word of what we have said about them needs to be unsaid. But it does want us to hate them [sin] in the same way in which we hate things in ourselves: being sorry that the man should have done such things, and hoping, if it is anyway possible, that somehow, sometime, somewhere, he can be cured and made human again.[i]
We are living in a society of moral malaise. Our world is morally sick and getting sicker. Michael Warden points out:
In the last half of the 20th century, the [North] American religious landscape was transformed. Commitment to traditional church structures steadily waned, while at the same time our hunger for spiritual fulfillment inched its way into the forefront of the cultural dialog. For the first time in history, nations have allowed the concept of Truth to lose its status as an independent reality. Instead, Truth became relative, dependent on an individual’s circumstance or perspective.[ii]
Relativism, the idea that truth as no absolute or objective, has become subjective and changing has brought chaos in our world today because those who embrace this idea are rejecting the idea of moral right and wrong.
Anyone you forgive, I also forgive. And what I have forgiven—if there was anything to forgive—I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.[iii]
Notice verse eleven. Paul was addressing the need to forgive, less Satan would deceive us. Paul here mentions that we are not to be unaware of his schemes. The word for schemes is also a word in the Greek language where we get our word, strategies. The enemy has strategies that he employs to defeat people.
One of the reasons why there are so many defeated Christians is a lack of understanding as to the schemes or strategies that the enemy of our soul will use against us. In Paul’s two letters to the Corinthians, he mentions two very devious means that the enemy uses to defeat the believer. They are in reality two opposing or conflicting concepts. These two areas must be guarded against to avoid spiritual bondage and alienation from God and others. In Paul’s two letters to the Corinthians, we find these concepts.
THE FIRST AREA OF ATTACK IN DIMINISHING OUR LIVES IS THE TOLERATION OF EVIL, PARTICULARLY IN OUR OWN LIVES
We are not only speaking about the toleration of evil within our own lives, but also in the life of the church and society. Too often we have misunderstood the nature of God’s love. Paul in defining God’s love states in 1 Corinthians 13:6, “Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.” Evil has a way of bringing great destruction into the lives of people. It affects people individually and collectively.
In his brilliant book, Nicholas and Alexandra, Robert K. Massie tells how the czar and empress of Russia were misled by a miracle and thus brought their great empire down to dust. After many years of anxiously waiting for an heir to the Russian throne, Czar Nicholas II and his German wife, Alexandra, were blessed with a son. However, their hopes for the future were cruelly crushed six weeks later when doctors discovered the infant had hemophilia, an incurable blood disease that could kill at any moment. All of his short life was to be lived in the shadow of terror, with death stalking every footstep. This tragedy introduced into the royal family one of the most evil men who ever lived.
Several times the youngster slipped close to death. Seeing him writhe in excruciating pain, his tormented parents would beg doctors to do something, but they were helpless. In those moments they turned to Gregory Rasputin, a religious mystic of questionable credentials, later known as the Mad Monk of Russia. Invariably, he would pray for the boy and there would be a marked improvement. Even today doctors are at a loss to explain how these healings took place, but history testifies to them. Always, Rasputin would warn the parents the boy would only live as long as they listened to him.
Rasputin’s power over the royal family became so great he could, with a word, obtain the appointment or dismissal of any government official. He had men appointed or dismissed on the basis of their attitudes toward him rather than their abilities. Consequently, the whole Russian government reeled under the unwise counsel of this evil man. Seeds of revolution were planted and watered with discontent. It erupted into the murder of the royal family, internal war, and the Communist takeover.
Alexander Kerensky, a key government figure during those trying times, later reflected, ‘Without Rasputin, there could have been no Lenin!’[iv]
If we can allow sin to grow unchecked within our lives, the results will be the same. The wages of sin is death (separation from God and people). The problem with evil is that it’s within each of our lives.
If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?[v]
Church historian Earle Cairns relates:
Because Christian character follows commitment to Christ, revival has always been followed by moral living. Common sins of swearing, drunkenness, gambling, cheating, and domestic fighting were avoided. Jonathan Edwards testified how the Northampton revival stopped drinking and frivolous lives in the town. Camp meeting revivals in Kentucky changed fighters, who had been known to gouge out their opponent’s eyes or bite off an ear, into peaceful citizens. The temperance movement was a direct result of revival. Many taverns in Wales were shut down for lack of business from the various revivals over the years. There were fewer cases in the courts. Sexual sins, such as prostitution, were less numerous after the 1859 revival in England. Family life was improved in numerous cases. People who were revived or saved became more generous in meeting the needs of others.[vi]
M. O. Owens, Jr., in a study on the effects of the Wesleyan Revival in Great Britain, records: ‘With the upsurge of the Gospel and the decrease in the consumption of liquor, crime also began to diminish. It became safe to walk the streets of the cities again. Bribery and corruption in business and government lessened. Conversation modulated toward the chaste and decent. The theatre became once again the place for art and true entertainment rather than the vulgar and bawdy. The gambling craze almost disappeared, and cruel sports were outlawed.’[vii]
We cannot understand Paul’s comments in 2 Corinthians 2, without understanding that he wrote a letter speaking to the issues that needed to be corrected in their lives.
I wrote as I did so that when I came I should not be distressed by those who ought to make me rejoice. I had confidence in all of you, that you would all share my joy. For I wrote you out of great distress and anguish of heart and with many tears, not to grieve you but to let you know the depth of my love for you.[viii]
Linda Belleville explains:
Love, which stands in an emphatic position in the clause, is the primary reason he gives for writing. It is all too easy to allow personal feelings to get in the way of ministry. But this was not the case with Paul. He could have used this letter to vent his anger and disappointment with his spiritual children. Instead, he saw past his own pain to what was needful from the pastoral standpoint.[ix]
I need to add; we need to address issues correctly as well. Sometimes in our desire to deal with evil, we approach it incorrectly and create even greater problems. We should always start with the individuals responsible. Many times, we can correct things at this level. This principle is communicated to us by Jesus.
If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.[x]
What is interesting is that there is no clear-cut agreement among biblical scholars as to the issue that Paul is speaking of here in 2 Corinthians. We know from his first letter that there was indifference toward a case of immorality within the church and obviously they were tolerant of that sin.
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife. And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning and have put out of your fellowship the man who has been doing this? For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this. So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.[xi]
Paul was calling for the church to address this sin issue in the life of the congregation. This is a call for church discipline.
However, though we are acquainted with this issue, Paul may have been dealing with the issue of those who had challenged his leadership and challenged his ministry and message among the Corinthians. Anthony Thiselton wonders as do most NT scholars what the issue was. “Is it perhaps a tribute to Paul’s pastoral wisdom and sensitivity that we cannot clearly identify the offender?”[xii]
We recall from Matthew’s gospel that Jesus talked about the need to discipline those who refused to acknowledge sin. So, why do we fail to acknowledge our sin? It is the very nature of sin to be blind toward it within ourselves. Sin is deceptive by nature.
See to it, brothers and sisters, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called “Today,” so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness.[xiii]
Paul acknowledges in his second letter that it was a difficult thing to do, to address evil. It was painful, it could easily be misunderstood. He did it with tears in his eyes and with heart brokenness. This is not a holier than thou attitude, but a genuine prayerful concerned over the destruction that he knew would be forthcoming to this congregation if they did not address the issue. We need to understand that the nature of discipline is with the goal to restore the offender.
THE SECOND AREA OF ATTACK IN DIMINISHING OUR LIVES IS THE UNFORGIVING ATTITUDE TOWARD THOSE WHO HAVE SINNED AGAINST US AND OTHERS
Regardless, whether they repent or not, forgiveness is critical for our state of wellbeing. One of the things I explain to people who have been deeply wounded in life is that there is a difference between forgiving a person and trusting a person. Trust is something that must be restored which can only happen if there is a genuine change of behavior. Forgiveness needs to be given, as it affects our relationship not only with that individual, but God. Our need for forgiveness as expressed in the Lord’s prayer is conditioned upon our forgiving others.
Undue severity towards repentant individuals causes destruction in the body of Christ. Paul is addressing the need for forgiveness. It is interesting that the first message that Jesus preached in the New Testament was one of repentance. Repentance was also the message that John, the Baptist preached. It was the message that the apostles preached. Why? Because there is no reception of God’s forgiveness apart from repentance, which means we must change our minds. God forgives freely, but without our acceptance of God’s gift of forgiveness, we remain trapped in our sin.
Notice that the first word from the cross was the message of forgiveness. When we finally come to our senses, we discover a journey of restoration in our lives. The goal of loving discipline is to bring about restoration. At the end of conviction of sin, which leads to repentance, there comes from God the warmth of genuine forgiveness. We, like God, need to reflect the same attitude.
God does exactly what He expects us to do. He forgives first. The issue is whether we will receive that gift. There is a need to not only receive forgiveness for us but also extend that forgiveness toward others. C. S. Lewis reminds us, “We all agree that forgiveness is a beautiful idea until we have to practice it.”[xiv]
Paul is rejoicing that the church at Corinth had followed his instructions. Whatever the issue that Paul was dealing with, being the immorality issue or the lack of support and criticism directed at Paul and his team, in their zeal they had gone overboard. Paul now writes for them to forgive the repentant brother.
If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you to some extent—not to put it too severely. The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him. Another reason I wrote you was to see if you would stand the test and be obedient in everything. Anyone you forgive, I also forgive. And what I have forgiven—if there was anything to forgive—I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.[xv]
Just like a little child, after discipline, there is a need for reassurance. After repentance, there needs to be restoration. Church discipline is not revenge, but rather a loving action with a specific goal in mind. The restoration of a fallen believer.
Linda Belleville explains the challenges of church discipline.
The responsible exercise of discipline was something that Paul had great difficulty instilling in his churches—especially a church like Corinth. It is the corporate responsibility of the church to punish wrongdoing (2 Cor 2:6; 10:6), to excommunicate in the case of persistent sin (1 Cor 5:2, 10–13) and to reinstate the repentant (2 Cor 2:7–8). Paul had to rebuke the Corinthians initially for not disciplining the individual in question (v. 9). Now the church has gone too far in the other direction (v. 6). Paul’s counsel to them is threefold. First, the punishment by the majority is sufficient (v. 6). Mention of the man’s sorrow (v. 7) shows that the punishment had its intended effect; the person has repented of his action. Reference to the majority points to the presence of a dissenting minority, who thought that the discipline was either too lenient or, more probably, too severe.
The Corinthians are instructed, second, to forgive and comfort the man rather than continue the discipline (v. 7). Instead of aphiēmi, the customary word in the Gospels for forgiveness, Paul uses charizomai, which means to “give freely” and so to forgive on the basis of one’s gracious attitude toward a person (Louw and Nida 1988–1989:40.10). God’s gracious attitude toward us in the person of his Son is surely in the background here.[xvi]
The other side of the road which leads people astray is developing a censoring, critical, and judgmental attitude. We can become self-righteous and develop a holier than thou attitude. To address sin is to bring life back into the situation. The goal is always restoration and reconciliation.
Let me close with a great approach to the issue. Robert Capon writes:
While you and I may be worried about seeming to give permission, Jesus apparently wasn’t. He wasn’t afraid of giving the prodigal son a kiss instead of a lecture, a party instead of probation; and he proved that by bringing in the elder brother at the end of the story and having him raise pretty much the same objections. The elder brother was angry about the party. He complained that his father lowered the standard and—ignored virtue that music, dancing, and a fattened calf are, in effect, just so many permissions to break the law. And to that, Jesus has the father say only one thing: ‘Cut that out! We’re not playing good boys and bad boys anymore. Your brother was dead and he’s alive again. The name of the game from now on is resurrection, not bookkeeping.’[xvii]
The questions we need to ask ourselves is what side of the road do I gravitate toward: tolerance of sin or a critical and judgmental attitude? How can we lovingly address sin, practice discipline, and work toward restoration of the fallen?
https://cdn.pixabay.com/photo/2016/04/08/04/45/hug-1315552_1280.jpg
[i] C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, (Harper San Francisco, 2003), 115-17.
[ii] Michael D. Warden, the Missional Church: Being the Church in Today’s World. Next Magazine, Volume 6, 2nd Quarter 2000, p. 1 (paraphrased).
[iii] 2 Corinthians 2:10-11, The New International Version of the Bible, Zondervan, 2011.
[iv] James S. Hewett, Rasputin. Illustrations Unlimited, (Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc, 1988), 307.
[v] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Good and Evil in Every Heart. Leadership Journal, Vol. 4, no. 1.
[vi] Earle E. Cairns. An Endless Line of Splendor: Revivals And Their Leaders From The Great Awakening To The Present, (Wheaton, Il: Tyndale House Publishers, 1986.), 270.
[vii] M. O. Owens, Jr., as quoted in Stephen F. Olford. Lord, Open The Heavens: A Heart-Cry for Revival. (Wheaton, Il: Harold Shaw Publishers,1962), 39.
[viii] 2 Corinthians 2:3-4.
[ix] Linda Belleville, 2 Corinthians, Vol. 8, The InterVarsity New Testament Commentary Series, (InterVarsity Academic, 1996), 2 Cor. 1:23-2:4.
[x] Matthew 18:15-17.
[xi] 1 Corinthians 5:1-5.
[xii] Anthony Thiselton, 2 Corinthians: A Short Exegetical and Pastoral Commentary, (Cascade Books, 2019), 37.
[xiii] Hebrews 3:12-13.
[xiv] C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, 115.
[xv] 2 Corinthians 2:5-11.
[xvi] Linda Belleville, 2 Corinthians, 2 Cor. 2:5-11, Logos Electronic Edition.
[xvii] Robert Farrar Capon, “Resurrection, not Bookkeeping”, Between Noon and Three, Christianity Today, Vol. 30, no. 7 (paraphrased).
