Repeated sins, repeated repentance and repeated forgiveness in Luke 17:3-4

Jesus uses unforgiveness as the prime example of a stumbling block we can place in the way of a fellow believer, bringing judgment. Therefore he warns us that we must be careful to freely forgive those who come to us expressing repentance for harm they have done to us by missing the mark of either our own, or God's, expectations for their behavior.

Jesus’ instructions in Luke 17:3-4 are really quite simple, and are no exception to the general rule that repentance involves a change in behavior:

Be careful. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him. If he repents (metanoēsē), forgive him. If he sins against you seven times in the day, and seven times returns, saying, ‘I repent (metanoō),’ you shall forgive him.

Luke 17:3-4 (WEB)

Repeated sins are to be met with repeated forgiveness. When one of my fellow believers who has sinned against me many times comes to me again, professing to have repented, I am to freely forgive that person again and again. How do I know that they didn’t fully repent the last time they came to me? Because they committed the same sin against me again. But what is to be my expectation when they come to me saying they have repented, again? I am to expect that they will change their behavior this time. Or, at least, I am not supposed to permit my bad past experience with that person to poison my present expectation, so that I will withhold forgiveness in the expectation that he will only do it again. I am to release them (aphēseis) from the debt of the offense.

It is also important to note that Jesus in these verses does not mention sins against God. Sins against God are strictly between the sinner and God, and God offers full forgiveness of them to those who believe and follow him. I have no permission to take up God’s grudges, especially given that he has forgiven them. No, what is in view in this passage is situations in which others “sin against you”–that is, applying the verse to myself, sin against me. The underlying verb for “sin” here–hamartánō–is the most common word for “sin” in the New Testament, and means “to miss the mark” or “transgress or offend by missing the mark.” Usually, it is implied that the “mark” (i.e., archery target) that is “missed” is the requirements of God’s Law or the standard of God’s holiness. But that is not true in this context. God and his Law and standard are not mentioned. In this context, the “mark” that is “missed,” creating a consciousness of having been offended against, is the “mark” of the expectations I hold for the other person’s behavior/performance. These expectations can come from many sources, including not only God’s Law or other biblical principles, but also church traditions, culture and customs; civil law; political affiliations and their expectations; traditions, customs and mores of my national culture and of subcultures of which I am a part; the written or unwritten rules of particular relationships (e.g., employment, marriage, organization membership); the things I have told (or asked) the person to do or not do; and even my own selfish expectations of what others will do for me. Whatever the source of the expectations (“mark”) another person has “missed,” thereby sinning against me, if they come to me repenting, I must forgive.

The preceding two verses provide important context to these verses on personal repentance and forgiveness:

He said to the disciples, “It is impossible that no occasions of stumbling should come, but woe to him through whom they come!  It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, rather than that he should cause one of these little ones to stumble.”

Luke 17:1-2 (WEB)

The warning (“Be careful!,” v.3) about unforgiveness is thus presented in the context of stumbling blocks, indeed as the prime example of a stumbling block. My unforgiveness affects others. At the very least, it becomes a stumbling block to the person I refused to forgive. Further, it places limits on the life of the person I have refused to forgive–placing them in spiritual debtors’ prison, as pictured in the parable of the unforgiving servant, Matthew 18:23-34–imprisonment from which only I can release them through forgiveness. (This is further explained in “Do We Want the Peace and Restoration of Unity and Mutual Forgiveness, or the “Torturers” of Mental Illness?“). Beyond the effects on myself and the person I refuse to forgive, however, my unforgiveness also becomes a stumbling block to others who know about it, and are thereby encouraged in their belief that it is okay for Christians to hold grudges, and may also be tempted to gossip about it. If I shun the offender, withhold fellowship or help from them (Romans 12:17-21), or take other retaliatory action based on my grudge, the scope of the damage increases to include everyone who knows about my behavior, and who may, because of it 1) be directly injured by my shunning or other retaliation (retaliation seldom injures only the person at whom it is directed); 2) judge me and “take sides” with the other person (Proverbs 26:17); 3) judge and/or take action against the person against whom I have the grudge, “taking sides” with me against them; 4) be encouraged to emulate me by holding grudges for their own personal offenses and by “getting even” in the belief that it is okay for Christians to do this; 5) fall into a “them versus us” partisan mentality because they have taken one side or the other in my personal grudge (or a large group of grudges that include mine); or 6) be turned away from faith in Christ because of my behavior. So the scope of injury caused by unforgiveness is really quite broad, many are injured by my unforgiveness, prompting both Jesu’ warning in this passage and the warning in Hebrews: “See to it that no one comes short of the grace of God; that no root of bitterness springing up causes trouble, and by it many become defiled.” Hebrews 12:15 (NASB).

Whether and to what extent I am permitted to take precautions to prevent future injury is not directly in view in this passage–releasing the debt may not necessarily in all instances require me to leave myself vulnerable to repeated injury. My behavior may also need to change, so as not to continue to place stumbling blocks in the penitent’s way, compare Galatians 6:1-5 and Romans 14:12-13. Indeed, I may be sinning against them if I do not start taking precautions to avoid once again placing them in situations in which I know they will be tempted. But I am not to continue to hold the sin against them.

So the main emphasis of this passage is the command to forgive, even repeatedly, when faced with professed repentance–just as God forgives us repeatedly. But the assumption that true repentance should eventually lead to changed behavior certainly underlies the passage.

By contrast, our duty to forgive infinitely, as God does, separated from repentance or any other action on the wrongdoer’s part, and the parallel duty to take the right steps in cooperation with the church to seek the repentance of and collective reconciliation with a fellow believer who sins against us, are at issue in the most parallel passage in Matthew, Matthew 18:1-35, portions of which have been discussed in several previous posts (and which will also be discussed in future posts).

Previous posts that discussed Matthew 18:

Do We Want the Peace and Restoration of Unity and Mutual Forgiveness, or the “Torturers” of Mental Illness?

Unforgiveness, the Breaking of Unity, can also Cause Physical Illness and Death

What About Church Discipline?

NEXT: “Repent and Be Baptized” in Acts 2:38.