# “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”



## Michael

Please share your thoughts on this passage (Luke 23:34). Christ asks for sins to be forgiven, seemingly because of the ignorance of the sinner. Perhaps the magnitude of the offense is chiefly at hand here? Others suggest that the text is only speaking of the criminals at his side. 

Lastly, is his petition granted?


----------



## dr_parsley

Michael Turner said:


> Please share your thoughts on this passage (Luke 23:34). Christ asks for sins to be forgiven, seemingly because of the ignorance of the sinner. Perhaps the magnitude of the offense is chiefly at hand here? Others suggest that the text is only speaking of the criminals at his side.
> 
> Lastly, is his petition granted?



They think they're just humiliating and horribly killing someone and they have no idea of the magnitude of their crime, so Jesus asks for their forgiveness. If God forgives them it will surely be through them being clothed with the resurrected Lord. What a thought! The man who drove in the nails on his knees in repentance and shame; being lifted up to an equal degree of grace!

It might have been that they were forgiven this particular act, but not the rest of their sin filled lives. Who knows? I don't know if God the father should necessarily grant every request of Jesus; A father does not grant every request of his son (I know I don't). But I see no importance to the question of whether these particular people were saved, because it does not bear on whether someone can be forgiven apart from the cross of Christ.


----------



## Whitefield

dr_parsley said:


> I don't know, however, if God the father would necessarily grant this request; A father does not grant every request of his son (I know I don't).



If the Son makes a bona fide request that this sin be forgiven his executors, and the Father rejects that request ... then how certain can we be that the intersession of the Son on our behalf is effective?


----------



## R Harris

The thing that still baffles me to this day is reconciling Luke 23:34 with Psalm 69:22-25, where Christ is also calling down a curse upon these same people.

James Adams in _War Psalms of the Prince of Peace_ tries to do it, but does not do a good job in my opinion. His answer was not satisfactory for me.

If anyone else has a good article or commentary making the reconciliation, I would love to see it.


----------



## dr_parsley

Whitefield said:


> dr_parsley said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know, however, if God the father would necessarily grant this request; A father does not grant every request of his son (I know I don't).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the Son makes a bona fide request that this sin be forgiven his executors, and the Father rejects that request ... then how certain can we be that the intersession of the Son on our behalf is effective?
Click to expand...


I think you might be right. I retract my statement. Not only for the reason you gave "then how...", but simply because of the situation and the Father's love for Christ. Although every request of a son might not be granted, I'd be willing to bet that every paternal request made by sons hanging on a cross has been granted.


----------



## a mere housewife

Was not His petition granted at Pentecost? (Acts 2:23, Peter explains to them what they did?)


----------



## Zenas

Weren't some of those who crucified him also those who later came to faith?


----------



## R Harris

I guess it all boils down to who were the "them" in the petition. Obviously not all present at the cross repented, and wanted Him gone. Yet there were some who did repent. (When the centurion responded "truly this was the Son of God," had he become a believer and had repented?)


----------



## lynnie

Gee, you never saw " The Robe" ?


----------



## dr_parsley

R Harris said:


> I guess it all boils down to who were the "them" in the petition. Obviously not all present at the cross repented, and wanted Him gone.



How do you know that?


----------



## Jake

R Harris said:


> I guess it all boils down to who were the "them" in the petition. Obviously not all present at the cross repented, and wanted Him gone. Yet there were some who did repent. (When the centurion responded "truly this was the Son of God," had he become a believer and had repented?)



I've thought that statement to be ironic, but that does make sense.


----------



## Spinningplates2

Many people fear being called racist so they exclude the Jews from being responsible for Christ death. Even though many parables point to the fact that it was the Jews who had Christ killed. This feeling reached it's apex when Mel Gibson put out his ode to Rome, The Passion. Leaders in the mainstream had to all toe the line and say, "the Jews did not kill Christ! It was ALL of our sins who killed Christ." We all sinned but only the Jews and Jewish leaders at the time of Christ were the ones who had Christ blood on their hands. 

The Jews today need no special forgiveness, they need only answer the call of Christ. As King David paid a heavy price for his sin with Uriah's wife, so did all the Jews of that day pay a price for their sin in 70ad destruction. 

I am still learning but I think that those who think he was only talking to the Roman guards have a lot of explaining to do about why Christ was not specific as to thier future.


----------



## Michael

What is interesting to me is that there seems to be no indication in the text that Christ is speaking of those who were repenting (at least at that time). In some not so certain terms it actually appears as if he is praying for those who were _not_ repenting, hence the "they know not what they do."


----------



## BertMulder

This prayer was heard, just as certainly as His prayer "if possible, let this cup pass from me. Yet, not my, but Thy will be done."

The scope of the prayer, and did any repent? We cannot tell with certainty. Seems like the centurion certainly confessed His Name...

There may well have been others.

Let us rest in the fact, that His will is done.


----------

