Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for May 27th, 2009


INTRODUCTION

To begin with, it is this author’s perspective that when wronged by others, Christian must forgive the other person in light of Christ work on the cross.  That is, when presented with a situation where a believer has been violated, the individual in this case must no longer hold PERSONALLY the wrong against the wrong doer.  It must be clarified that holding this position does NOT mean the wrong doer has gotten off “scotch free” so to speak.  God in the end is the ultimate Judge (cf. Revelation 20:11-12).

CONDITIONAL VERSE PROOF TEXT

A verse that is used for conditions not to forgive is Luke 17:3:

“If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. (Luke 17:3)

The main hinge being the portion “If he repents, forgive him”. The form of this claim being:

IF A, THEN B.

A: HE REPENTS

B: FORGIVE HIM

And the argument goes on with if he does not repent, do not forgive him. The logical form being:

IF A, THEN B.

NOT A.

THEREFORE, NOT B.

A: HE REPENTS

B: FORGIVE HIM

The question this author wants to note is: what form of argument is being built from Luke 17:3 for conditional forgiveness?  And more importantly, is this form of argument valid?

The above logic form of argument of course commits a logical fallacy of denying the antecedent.  It is invalid.

The only two valid form would be as follows (the INDIRECT AND DIRECT FORM) but it would not support conditional forgiveness:

IF A, THEN B.

NOT B.

THEREFORE, NOT A.

And

IF A, THEN B.

A.

THEREFORE, B.

A: HE REPENTS

B: FORGIVE HIM

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 735 other followers