In your most recent answer to my question about scholars misunderstanding the term forgiveness, can you give an example of a failure of some scholars to understand forgiveness in its “full sense” and a failure of some other scholars to understand forgiveness in “a true sense”?

A failure to understand forgiveness in its full sense, for example, is when a scholar equates forgiveness only with a part of what forgiveness is in its essence.  An example of this is equating forgiveness only with a motivation to forgive.  A motivation to forgive is one component of forgiving, but not the entire essence of it, as I explained in an earlier answer.  A failure to understand forgiveness in its true sense, for example, is when a scholar claims that we can forgive situations, such as when a tornado strikes one’s house.  Because you cannot be good to a tornado, it follows logically that you cannot forgive a tornado or any other non-human entity.  Situations are non-human entities.  Therefore, you cannot forgive situations, despite some scholars’ claim to the contrary.

Please follow and like us:
Categories: Ask Dr. ForgivenessTags: , , , , , ,

Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *