Christ said we are supposed to forgive others from our heart (Mat 18:35). Forgiving is one of the few moral concepts that corrupted persons are concerned about. They say they want others to forgive them, but what they really mean is, one: they want their sin to be supported instead of opposed; and two: they don't want to pay a price. So what is forgiving?

First, supporting sin is not forgiving. Victims pay a price for support of sin. If opposition to sin does not look forgiving enough, it doesn't have to look forgiving.

The opposite of forgiving is vengeance or revenge. It occurs separately from an attack upon sin. In fact, vengeful persons are corrupt, and they do not attack sin. So it is not the same persons who attack sin and who extract revenge.

One of the primary difference is whether the method is through force or truth. Force is the basis of sin; it does not end sin. Truth ends sin. So persons who are opposed to sin use truth rather than force as the means.

To evaluate forgiving, there are two locations to consider—the person doing the forgiving, and the person being forgiven. Christ was advising the persons who are supposed to be doing the forgiving, so they would not corrupt themselves. What happens to the persons who are supposed to be forgiven is God's business, not man's, though ministers do some of God's work.

A central concern is to avoid vengeance. One of the obvious facts, which even secular authorities recognize, is that if a person does not forgive, he eats himself up inside. A person has to let go of his obsessions for vengeance in order to free his mind from a consuming turmoil.

Another concern is to not extract a price from opponents, even if they are guilty. Extracting a price can never correct wrongs, and it creates more difficulties. The person who extracts a price can only be another source of injustice creating an endless cycle of conflicts.

These two concerns end the cycles of reprisals and minimize the damage done when problems develop. The purpose is not to solve the world's problems, which could not occur, but to overcome the forces of sin inside the persons.

Going beyond these two concerns and attempting to define forgiveness is a quagmire which should be avoided. Is truth or criticism too unforgiving? That's what corrupted persons are really trying to say when they harp on forgiveness. They want less truth, not less sin.

Is an attempt to prevent sin or protect victims being too unforgiving? One should not even try to define forgiveness in such a context, because victims need to be protected, and sin needs to be prevented regardless of how forgiveness is defined.

Truth is the primary means by which sin is ended, but it is slow at being developed. Therefore, sometimes victims need to be protected through more direct means, which involves limited use of force as police powers.

The net effect of these moral principles is that forgiveness is a secondary concern after attempting to end sin and protect the victims. Forgiveness means not carrying concerns beyond the necessary control of sin and into the more distant realms of extracting a price as vengeance.

The concept of punishment complicates the subject somewhat. Punishment might be needed as a method of communicating concerns, since corrupt persons tend to not see or hear realities but respond to forces only. Punishment communicates through the force medium that something is not acceptable.