Matthew 6:14-15
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
14 For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; 15 but if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
At least on a superficial interpersonal level the above scripture requires the victim to forgive the offender in order to be forgiven in turn. From a purely ethical standpoint this is scandalous, is it not? Extortion and coercion usually invalidate the very nature of choice.
What is your opinion?
Wouldn't it be more ethical for God to say, "if you don't forgive the one who tresspassed against you I won't forgive them either?"
Why is the injured party--the victim--leveraged thusly by God?
Under the law of our land a court addresses injury to person or property by seeking to RESTORE to wholeness. In a car accident the damaged car, if repairable, will be repaired and the person who caused the damage must pay. Most often it is the agent (insurance company) who does the actual paying and the driver who caused the harm is penalized by higher rates and a bad driving record.
In a theft, the court orders the return of the stolen item or restitution by paying a fine or orders the punishment of the thief (which is counted as "paying a debt to society".)
The victim is damaged and the court views Justice as restoring to wholeness.
What about the Garden of Eden?
Was Jehovah the injured party? IF SO, WOULDN'T THE SAME STANDARD APPLY?