With Genuine Repentance Comes Pardon: John Calvin on How to Seek and Grant Forgiveness

Then Peter came up and said to him,
“Lord, how often will my brother sin against me,
and I forgive him? As many as seven times?”
Jesus said to him, “I do not say to you seven times,
but seventy-seven times.
– Matthew 18:21–22 –

What happens when someone asks for forgiveness, but all outward signs indicate anything but a willing spirit? Is the offended party obligated to grant forgiveness the moment the offender says, “Will you forgive me,” or does it depend? If forgiveness depends on repentance, as Jesus says in Luke 17:3, just how much fruit is requisite for such repentance to be deemed genuine?

To put it into actual situations: Does the offended child whose sibling is forced to say “I’m sorry” have to mechanically say, “I forgive you”? Or to take it one step further, does the parent need to discipline the hesitating child for not offering forgiveness immediately?

What about the Christian family of a victim of violent crime, do they need to automatically grant forgiveness when the judge forces the criminal to issue an apology? Or are they permitted to consider the sincerity of the apology? Equally, should Christians forgive terrorists, who go to their deaths spewing hatred against their victims?

Or more basically, when pastors mediate conflict in the church, what is the proper response to a church member whose longstanding self-justification is suddenly reversed? Does the offended party need to issue an immediate grant of forgiveness? Or does the newfound repentance need time to settle? Equally, if the member will not forgive when repentance is genuine, what must be done then?

Fortunately, we are not the first generation to wrestle through such questions. And most recently, I came across an incredibly illuminating passage from John Calvin on Jesus’s teachings on forgiveness and repentance. Ever pastoral, Calvin provides some important qualifications for offering forgiveness, granting forgiveness, and even withholding forgiveness until repentance is deemed genuine.

Strikingly, Calvin does not suffer from our modern captivity to making others feel affirmed. Instead, he affirms the need to offer forgiveness to any and all who ask. But wisely, he also cautions Christians from mistakenly granting forgiveness prematurely. In his comments on Jesus’s teaching on forgiveness, he rightly urges Christians to extend grace in the same way they received grace. But also, he holds the line on repentance, stressing the importance of making sure repentance is genuine.

Having recently thought quite a bit about this very point, I offer six reflections on Calvin’s views on forgiveness, repentance, and reconciliation. I have added his full comment at the bottom.

The Hill of Eden: Seeing the Topography of Genesis 2–4

In recent weeks, my sermons on Genesis 3–4 have made much of the fact that the Garden of Eden is found on a mountain. In recounting the drama of Adam, Eve, the Serpent, and the Lord (Genesis 3), as well as Cain and Abel (Genesis 4), I have argued that the topography of Eden plays an important role. For example, when Cain’s face was downcast (Gen. 4:5), I have argued that he is looking down the mountain and away from God. Equally, when God told Cain to look for the sin offering, lying at the door of the Garden, he was calling him to look up the mountain from where his help would come (cf. Psalm 121).

Long story short, the theme of mountains in the Bible cannot be underestimated. Just this morning, I was pondering the way mountains play a role in Matthew (cp. Matt. 4:8; 17:1; 28:16). Maybe I’ll write something on that soon. For now, however I want to help studious Bible readers to see how Genesis 2–4 should be read with topography in mind.

So, in nine strokes, I will attempt to demonstrate why I believe Scripture presents Eden as a mountain sanctuary, and also why this matters for understanding the events of Genesis 2–4 and beyond.

First, the Bible explicitly calls Eden the Mountain of God.

In Ezekiel 28, the Lord addresses the King of Tyre, and in his oracle of judgment, the Lord identifies the wicked king with Adam in priestly garments. In vv. 13–14 he writes,

You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, sardius, topaz, and diamond, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle; and crafted in gold were your settings and your engravings. On the day that you were created they were prepared. ¹⁴ You were an anointed guardian cherub. I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire you walked. . . .

He continues in verse 16, saying, “so I cast you as a profane thing from the mountain of God, and I destroyed you, O guardian cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.”

Now, there is debate about who this figure is. Who did God cast down from the mountain? Is it a reference to Adam or to one of the guardian cherubs? That’s a good question, and I generally follow the line of thinking offered by the NET translation.[1] But for now, that question is not the point.

The point at issue is that Ezekiel makes it unmistakable: the Garden of Eden resides on a mountain. And the Prophet of Israel understood it this way because Genesis 2 makes it evident that the Garden stands below the spring of living water (at the top of the mountain) and above the fields, which enjoy the water of four rivers.

What Happened on Holy Saturday? A Few Reflections on Matthew 27:52–53

The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised,
and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many.
— Matthew 27:52–53 —

What happened on Holy Saturday, the day situated between Good Friday and Resurrection Sunday? That is a good question that my fellow elder, Jared Bridges, has answered at the Washington Stand. And in his article, he takes a “topside” view—what was happening in Jerusalem on the day between Jesus’s cross and resurrection.

But there is another answer that needs to be considered, an answer that takes us below the surface, if you will. On Holy Saturday, while Jesus’s body rested in the grave, Jesus’s soul pronounced his victory over the spirits in prison (1 Pet. 3:19). That is to say, that when Jesus died, his body and soul were torn asunder, just like the temple veil (see Luke 23:44–46). As his body hung lifeless on the cross, soon to be buried, his soul, like all human souls, departed and went to realm of the dead, the place known as sheol in Hebrew or hades in Greek.

Importantly, sheol (or hades in Greek) is not the same thing as Hell (Gehenna), the place of eternal torment for the damned. Indicating their difference, hades gave up the dead to the lake of fire (i.e., hell) in Revelation 20:14. This means, Jesus did not go to “hell” after he died. But he did go to sheol, the realm of the dead. Often, we miss this fact, and missing what Jesus did in sheol, we miss the impact of Christ’s cross on the cosmos.

Jesus is Prophet, Priest, and King: A Good Friday Meditation

On this Good Friday, I want to share a meditation from Alexander Watson (1815?–1865) related to the cross of Christ and the way Jesus’s death brought to fulfillment his triple office of prophet, priest, and king. But first, a little background.

Seven Sayings and Seven Sermons

For the last six years (beginning in 2018), I have preached a Good Friday sermon that has focused on one of Jesus’s words from the cross. In all, there are seven statements found across the four gospels. Here they are in order.

1. Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do. (Luke 23:34)
2. Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise. (Luke 23:43)
3. Woman, behold your son . . . Son, behold your mother. (John 19:26–27)
4. My God, My God, why have you forsaken me? (Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:43)
5. I thirst. (John 19:28)
6. It is finished. (John 19:30)
7. Father, into your hands I commit my spirit (Luke 23:46)

You can also listen to these songs in Andrew Peterson’s Tenebrae.

For the last six years, I have preached six sermons. And you can find them here.

1. Father, Forgive Them (2018)
2. Today, You Will Be With Me In Paradise (2019, no audio)
3. Woman, Behold Your Son (2020, Covid year)
4. My God, My God, Why Have You Forsaken Me? (2021)
5. I Thirst (2022)
6. It is Finished (2023)
7. Father, Into Your Hands I Commit My Spirit (2024)

Along the way, I have found great help in preparing these messages and thinking about the cross of Christ by reading Alexander Watson, The Seven Sayings on the Cross; Or, The Dying Christ Our Prophet, Priest, and King.

A Primer on Elder-Led Congregationalism

Sometime in seminary, my ecclesiology class was tasked with defining a biblical view of church polity. Here is that paper, refined and updated. It argues for an unmistakably Baptist reading of the Bible, as it conjoins congregational authority with elder leadership.

*******

Should the church be congregational or should it be led by a plurality of elders?

This oft-debated question finds its difficulty in the fact that both approaches find substantial biblical support. So the question, “What does the Bible say,” does not sufficiently lead to a one-sided resolution. To answer this question, the first thing that must be seen is the asymmetry implicit in the question. Congregationalism pertains to authority. Plurality of elders concerns leadership. Together, it is vital to recognize that authority and leadership are not synonymous, and that, in fact, God has wisely designed authority and leadership to be distributed through the church, even as the church recognizes and submits to appointed elders.

Therefore, even though many Baptist churches elevate congregationalism over, and at the expense of, elder leadership (i.e., congregational democracies) and other Presbyterian churches elevate elders over the congregation (i.e., elder ruled), it is best to have congregational authority and elder leadership, or so I will argue.

The First Day of the Lord (Genesis 3): Seven Reasons the Fall Occurred on the Seventh Day

A few weeks ago, in a sermon on Genesis 3:8–13, I made the case that the events of Genesis 3 took place on the seventh day of the creation week, not some undefined time after the creation week. Instead of seeing Adam and Eve having days or weeks of communion with God in the Garden of Eden, I argued that Adam and Eve sinned against God on their very first day.

Just as Genesis 2 expounds the events of Day 6 (Gen. 1:24–31) in the creation week, so Genesis 3 develops the events of Day 7 (Gen. 2:1–3). At the end of the seventh day, God came down from heaven onto his mountain in order to rest on his holy hill. Yet, because he found two unclean sinners hiding in the garden, and a serpent standing there triumphant, God’s response was one of covenantal judgment, with an eschatological promise of salvation.

Genesis 3:14–19 is the centerpiece of the chapter, where God issues a curse on the serpent and on creation. And as a result, the first week of creation ends with the need of a new creation. Indeed, just as the eighth day, which is the first day of the week, will become in redemptive history the day of new creation, so Genesis 3 ends looking for this new creation. Or, at least, that is the implication of reading Genesis 3 as the seventh day of the creation week.

Yet, it may take some convincing to prove that Genesis 3 is the seventh day. After all, many commentators imagine a backstory to Genesis 3, which includes a series of “daily chats” occurring in the Garden before the Serpent arrives. Yet, such a backstory cannot be found in the text of Genesis 1–3.

Instead, what is found is the immediate entrance of the Serpent in Genesis 3:1. There is no “intertestamental period” between the union of man and woman (Genesis 2:24–25) and the arrival of the Serpent (3:1). And to create such an apocryphal tale is to go beyond the text. Nevertheless, the absence of backstory doesn’t automatically prove that Genesis 3 is the seventh day, unless there are others evidences in the text. And that is what I aim to argue in the seven points below.

Today, I will argue that Genesis 3 occurs on the seventh day of the creation week. And next week, I will return for at least four more reasons related to understanding the “Spirit of the Day” for proving the same point.

A Consolation in the Curse: Reading Genesis 3:16b as Good News

Somewhere below the rim of the Grand Canyon, at some time during the week I spent rafting there last summer, I heard an interpretation of Genesis 3:16 that didn’t sound right. Sitting down each evening to discuss the age of the earth, the creation of all things, and the text Genesis, Bill Barrick (professor emeritus at Master’s Seminary) made the off-hand comment at some point that “The curse upon the woman in Genesis 3:16 was good, actually.” What?!?

If you are like me, the idea of calling a curse ‘good’ is on par with calling the blessing of marriage ‘evil.’ In our modern world, defining marriage as being between one man and woman has been called evil, because it is hateful to the LGBT+ community and anyone else who doesn’t feel committed to a Christian view of sexuality. For years now, we who live in America have been in a struggle to define good and evil. Proclaiming themselves to be wise, the world has become enslaved to one folly after another. And so, as Christians, we are on guard for any interpretation that might confuse the categories of good and evil. And rightly so!

Hearing this new interpretation of a familiar passage (Genesis 3:16), therefore, was confusing and not a little shocking! And yet, the more that I have looked at this verse, the more I am convinced that Dr. Barrick is correct: Genesis 3:16b is a gracious consolation granted to the woman. Instead of reading this verse as one that enjoins opposition, competition, or even enmity at the heart of marriage, it seems better to see God’s word to the woman as a genuine kindness. Marriage is not a common curse, but a common grace.

This is what I argued in my sermon on Sunday, and in what follows, I want to show from Scripture why Genesis 3:16b is best rendered positively, not negatively. That is to say, while most interpreters offer a negative reading of the verse—either stating that God subordinated the woman to the man at this point (egalitarianism) or that he exacerbated the fallen condition of men and women (complementarianism)—I will be arguing from a generally complementarian position that this verse should be read positively as God granting protection to the woman, even after she rejected and ignored the protection of the man when she encountered the serpent (Gen. 3:1–6).[1]

My position does not deny the way that men can abuse their authority and use their strength to harm those under their charge; nor will it deny that women can refuse to submit to their husbands or embrace the all-wise autonomy offered by the serpent. Both of those realities threaten marriage today. Nevertheless, as I will attempt to show, the nature of marriage after the fall is a place of consolation, protection, and natural goodness. Instead of being a place of natural conflict, should be seen as a place of natural comfort. Yes, sin still destroys the world and every marriage it ensnares, but importantly the nature of marriage is one of common grace. And that is what is at stake in this question of interpretation.

To maintain the goodness of marriage as an institution requires seeing the woman’s desire for her husband as an intrinsic good, as well as the man’s responsibility to rule over her. Today, such a reading is difficult to accept—not only because it flies in the face of a century of feminist ideology, but also because translations like the ESV suggest a negative reading of Genesis 3:16. Put differently, if we are going to rightly understand the consolation of God’s word to the woman in this verse, we must go back to the passage and to see what is there. And in particular, we need to see how a proper reading of Genesis 3:16 depends upon a proper interpretation of Genesis 4:7.

In what follows, then, my aim is to demonstrate why a positive reading of Genesis 3:16 is the best option, based on a comparison of Genesis 3:16 and Genesis 4:7. As multiple authors have attested, how one reads Genesis 4:7 will be determinative for our reading of Genesis 3:16. Knowing that, I will spend a great deal of time addressing the latter text, showing why “desire” (tesuqah) and “rule” (mashal), the two overlapping words, are best seen positively in Genesis 4:7, not negatively. From there, we can see how the dominoes fall. If Genesis 4:7 is positive not negative, then it follows that Genesis 3:16b is also positive, which best corresponds to the literary structure of Genesis 3:14–19 and the emerging theology of marriage as an institution of common grace.

So, that’s my argument, and it will proceed in four parts.

1. I will show three common positions related to Genesis 3:16b.[2]
2. I will consider how Genesis 4:7 should be read as a “sin offering” provided by God not some personification of “sin” crouching at the door waiting. From this, I will show how the words “desire” and “rule” are good in Genesis 4:7.
3. I will introduce two authors who provide a positive reading.
4. I will outline the text itself and attempt to provide a better reading.
5. I will explain the cash value of this reading.

A Dangerous Calling (pt. 4): Embracing Obscurity and Seeking a Received Ministry

So far, in this practical exposition of 1 Kings 1–2, I have made four points concerning seeking the kingdom of God righteously and serving the Lord wisely. Those four points include

1. We should not seek positions in ministry; we should seek the righteousness to receive such a place of service. Instead, . . .
2. We should abide by the word, and wait for an invitation to serve.
3. When kingdom-seekers exalt themselves, their ambition follows a discernible pattern.
4. When you see false ‘kings’ exalting themselves, humble yourself and seek the true King.

And now, I want to consider a fifth point, namely, that

5. Until the Lord calls us to serve him, we should embrace obscurity and wait upon the Lord.

More completely, we should serve the Lord where he plants us and beware of pining for something larger, greater, or more visible. Instead, we should master the imperatives of the Bible, be mastered by the truths of the Bible, and grow in a knowledge of our Master, the Lord Jesus Christ. Indeed, there is no better way to prepare for ministry than humbly submitting to the Lord and learning to wait on him. This is something we all must learn, as the Lord matures us in Christ and prepares us for ministry.

The Test of Wisdom: Which Path Will You Take?

⁶ Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise.
⁷ Without having any chief, officer, or ruler,
⁸ she prepares her bread in summer and gathers her food in harvest. 

In Proverbs 6, the Word of God tells us to go to the ant and find wisdom. In the ant, we learn principles of initiative, preparation, and hard work. Indeed, by looking at this little creature, an insect found everywhere and anywhere, we are told to look and learn her ways.

In fact, Proverbs 6 is one of many places where we find wisdom from the animals. In Proverbs 30, we find four animals in direct order: there is the ant, the rock badger, the locust, and the lizard. And from each we can gain insight into the way we ought to live.[1]

If we go further, the whole Bible teaches us to gain wisdom from nature. From the sparrows who fall from the sky, to the sheep who follow their shepherd, and from the lions who prowl the hills, to the Leviathan who roams the sea, all of these animals were created by God to give us wisdom.

And in Genesis, we have already seen the way that animals are used to teach Adam. For in Genesis 2:19 we find this report, ^“Now out of the ground the Lord God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.”

God tasked the man with naming the animals, but he also tasked these animals to teach the man that no suitable helper would be found for him among their ranks, as verse 20 indicates. Indeed, the man would need God to make a helper suitable for him, and that is what the rest of Genesis 2 reveals—the glorious formation of the woman and the establishment of the first marriage.

As Genesis 2:24–25 concludes the chapter, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.”

Of Weddings and Witnessing: The Evangelistic Pressure to Stay Positive in a Negative World

For even if I made you grieve with my letter, I do not regret it—though I did regret it, for I see that that letter grieved you, though only for a while. As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting. For you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us.

– 2 Corinthians 7:8–9 –

In a world without sin, sermons on marriage would not be needed.

In fact, without sin, pastors might not be needed either. Or at least, they would not be needed to condemn sin, preach repentance, or offer grace. They might be needed to organize the worship of God in Christ—for God, the almighty, good, and glorious Creator would still be praised. Or, they might be needed to study the history of God’s world and to report their findings.

But, in a world without sin, heralds of the gospel would not be called to preach Christ crucified for wicked sinners, for there would be no sin. Nor would such pastors have the task of identifying idols and destroying every false idea that stands against Christ. Instead, they could just be unswervingly cheerful.

Tragically, in a world overrun with sin, many preachers have taken this path. Famously, when Larry King asked Joel Osteen about the eternal condition of Jews, Muslims, and other unbelievers, Osteen said he didn’t like to talk about sin, only about love and what the Bible says about Jesus.

Yet, what does the Bible say about Jesus? And what does Jesus say about sin? Quite a bit, actually.

The whole reason the Son of God became man was to climb the hill of Calvary and put an end to sin and death. Jesus’s whole ministry consisted of preaching about the kingdom of God and calling sinners to repent (Mark 1:14–15). Thus, it is a misnomer to speak of Christ’s love without addressing man’s sin (cf. 1 John 4:10). Unless we address the wrath of God, we cannot understand his grace or preach his gospel.