Who wants to remember the magnitude of debt?
Try remembering the magnitude forgiven and what happened afterwards
.
Earlier I asserted the premise forgiveness was simply one part in a much larger process and we run the risk of erring or falling short in the process if we stop at forgiveness. That "process" entails several "steps," which are as follows:
- Confession (or acknowledging one's own wrongdoing).
- Repentance (or purposing to change both the thinking that prompted the action, and the wrongdoing itself).
- Restitution (or making an effort to make amends where possible and where no further harm is caused).
- Penalty (this does not always occur but whenever a relationship is damaged that's a penalty suffered. It must be paid).
- Forgiveness (seeking the cancellation of any debt, or not holding the debt against another when wronged. And this usually entails God, self, and another(s).
- Reconciliation (or repairing the relationship so that is either restored or improved).
In the Old Testament this was codified in many ways but one of the most visible is in the process of bond-service. Israel did not have penitentiaries. Under the Law of Moses, a criminal was either killed or made to work of the debt. There was no warehousing of criminals.
Take, for example, the premise of my borrowing your donkey to plow my field. If I borrowed the donkey and it broke its leg due to my abuse or neglect then I owed you a donkey. A donkey for a donkey. I also owed you five shekels for the loss. If, alternatively, I borrowed your ox and broke your ox, then I owed you an ox plus forty shekels. A donkey for a donkey, an ox for an ox. Restitution. But why must I pay forty shekels in additional penalty for the ox than the five shekels paid for the donkey. The loss is greater, so too is the penalty. An ox can plow much more acreage in a day than a donkey. The ox hide is bigger and more diversely used. The ox can be eaten and feeds more, whereas the donkey was unclean and not good for food.
What happens if I cannot pay you, Arial, for the damage? In ancient times you would take me to the priests and have the loss recorded and I would be either be jailed overnight or taken to the market then (or the next day) where my debt to
you would be purchased. Perhaps some wealthy person needed a ditch dug, or bricks laid, or a house served, in which case my debt would be purchased, and
you would be paid (the priests, the judges, did not get a share). My debt to
you was now transferred to the one who had bought my debt and I was now obligated to work off that debt. The one buying my debt was also obligated to feed me and equip me for whatever work I was assigned. So purchasing another's debt for bond service always entailed additional expense. Whether it took a week, a month, a year or more, once my debt was worked off the person who'd bought my debt would take me back to the priests and announce to them that I had worked off my debt and was now free of the debt. My debt was canceled. My debt was forgiven. Now, not only was my debt canceled but I have learned a new skill a new trade with which I can again become a productive member of society. I've been rehabilitated and restored better than before. This last part would be important for certain crimes like theft. The Jews did not cut off hands for theft or scar faces for adultery or other crimes.* At this point my debt to you has been paid, my bond service to the debt-purchaser is fulfilled, and I am reconciled to myself, the ones wronged, and the community in which I live.
They are to treat me accordingly.
What happens if I liked working for my bond-master? There was a ritual whereby I could voluntarily pledge my life to serve the one who'd paid my debt. I would be taken to the doorway of his house, have my ear pierced, and in it a ring inserted. That was the sign of the servant class. When you went to the market and observed the men with rings in their ear you knew these were men who'd once suffered debt and now pledged their lives in service to another.
There's much more entailed in this summary but I will close with one last important aspect. Earlier I mentioned the priests/judges got no share of the payments. Neither did they have any say in sentencing. The Law stipulated the consequences, and the judge had no authority or power to lessen or increase them. They were not allowed to be lenient or more severe, to show pity or mercy, or in any way lessen the consequences. Only one person was allowed to do that.
The person wronged.
At any time prior to my bond being purchased you, Arial, could grant me mercy and forgive me, cancel the debt. You alone had that authority.
With whom, then, do we have a voluntary love relationship of service committed to the one who has purchased our debt?
And, of course, those who know the richness of the bond-service find it much easier to forgive than those who do not, but once learned the knowledge empowers the power...... because forgiveness is power. Paul understood this. He called himself a bondservant when opening his epistles. When he didn't, he called himself a prisoner. James also called himself a bondservant.
Matthew 20:1-16
For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. When he had agreed with the laborers for a denarius for the day, he sent them into his vineyard. And he went out about the third hour and saw others standing idle in the marketplace; and to those he said, 'You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.' And so they went. Again, he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour and did the same thing. And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing around; and he said to them, 'Why have you been standing here idle all day long?' They said to him, 'Because no one hired us.' He said to them, 'You go into the vineyard too.' When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, 'Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last group to the first.' When those hired about the eleventh hour came, each one received a denarius. "When those hired first came, they thought that they would receive more; but each of them also received a denarius. When they received it, they grumbled at the landowner, saying, 'These last men have worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden and the scorching heat of the day.' But he answered and said to one of them, 'Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go, but I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with what is my own? Or is your eye envious because I am generous?' So the last shall be first, and the first last.
(my regret for the length)
*
There is only one maiming law in the entire Mosaic code as far as I know.
.
. An apology is an except cultural or societal practice so we all accept it when we should not do so if the standards are scripture are our goal. The standards of scripture, the process, if you will, is
. Forgiving a person does not give them a "chance." I'd ask where that notion originated but not sure I care to know. 
. I cannot wait to see what was posted being practiced 
.
. It can be quite inconvenientwhen Whose we are is forgotten.
. Forgiveness (and reconciliation where possible) is an enormously powerful and redemptive aspect of creation that should be embraced.
