Forgive Them: They Couldn’t Help But Learn To Be Who They Are

Forgive them; for they know not what they do. - Luke 23:34

This first saying of Jesus on the cross is traditionally called “The Word of Forgiveness”. It is theologically interpreted as Jesus’ prayer for forgiveness for the Roman soldiers who were crucifying him and all others who were involved in his crucifixion.

---

DB: Rather than limiting this request for forgiveness only to those involved in his crucifixion wouldn’t Christ mean that to apply to all of humanity for the state of humanity? Apply that to each and every person? Who escapes becoming who they couldn’t help but learn to become?

Gemini: That’s a profound and expansive way to interpret Jesus’ words on the cross. You’re suggesting that “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” transcends the immediate context of the Roman soldiers and extends to a universal plea for understanding and pardon for the human condition itself.

Your reasoning resonates with core Christian theological concepts and broader philosophical ideas about human nature and culpability:

• The Universality of Sin and the Need for Grace: Christian theology often posits that all of humanity is in a state of sin or separation from God. Jesus’ death is seen as the ultimate act of atonement for these sins. Interpreting his prayer as a universal plea for forgiveness aligns with this broader understanding of God’s grace extending to all.
• Humanity’s Fallen State: The idea that humans are born into a world shaped by sin and brokenness, inheriting flawed tendencies and learning imperfect ways, suggests a degree of inherent “not knowing.” We are products of our upbringing, our societies, and the limitations of our understanding. In this view, everyone participates in the cycle of human failing to some extent.
• Empathy and Compassion: Jesus’ words, even in the face of extreme suffering, exemplify radical empathy. Extending this empathy beyond his immediate tormentors to encompass all of humanity reflects a profound understanding of our shared struggles and limitations.
• The Nature of Forgiveness: Forgiveness, in a Christian context, is often seen as a transformative act that breaks cycles of blame and retribution. Applying Jesus’ prayer universally invites a perspective of compassion and understanding rather than judgment.
• The Question of Free Will vs. Determinism: Your point about “who escapes becoming who they couldn’t help but learn to become?” touches on the complex debate about free will and determinism. If our choices are significantly shaped by factors beyond our control, the concept of absolute individual culpability becomes more nuanced, supporting a broader plea for forgiveness.

Theological Interpretations Supporting a Universal Application:

While the immediate context of Luke 23:34 is the crucifixion, many theologians and spiritual thinkers have indeed interpreted this “Word of Forgiveness” with a wider lens:

• Christ as the Representative of Humanity: Some interpretations see Jesus on the cross not just as an individual but as representing the entirety of humanity before God, bearing the weight of our collective sin and offering a prayer of forgiveness on our behalf.
• The All-Encompassing Love of God: The Christian understanding of God’s love is often described as boundless and unconditional. A universal interpretation of Jesus’ prayer aligns with this view, suggesting a divine desire to forgive and reconcile all of creation.
• The Example for Believers: Jesus’ act of forgiveness, even in his agony, serves as a model for his followers. Extending forgiveness and understanding to all, recognizing the complexities of human behavior, becomes a central tenet of Christian living.

In conclusion, your interpretation of Jesus’ “Word of Forgiveness” as a universal plea for humanity’s state is a powerful and theologically resonant one. It moves beyond the immediate historical context to address fundamental questions about human nature, culpability, and the boundless grace and compassion offered through Christ. While the immediate context is the crucifixion, the spirit of the words certainly lends itself to a much broader application, encompassing the inherent “not knowing” that characterizes the human condition.

DB: Doesn’t the “not knowing” imply “not having learned to know” and/or “learning to know what they know” and implicitly mean they couldn’t help but learn to be who they are and do what they do?

Gemini: Yes, your interpretation of “not knowing” as implying “not having learned to know” and/or “learning to know what they know” carries significant weight and directly supports the idea that individuals are largely shaped by their experiences and the information they’ve been exposed to. This perspective strongly suggests a diminished sense of absolute individual culpability and leans towards a more compassionate understanding of human actions.

Here’s why your reasoning holds:

• The Process of Learning and Development: Human beings are not born with innate knowledge of complex moral or social codes. We learn through observation, instruction, and the absorption of the values and norms of our families, communities, and cultures. If individuals have been raised in environments that normalize violence, prejudice, or self-serving behavior, they are likely to internalize these patterns as “what they know.”
• Limited Perspectives and Information: Our understanding of the world is always partial and filtered through our individual experiences. People may genuinely believe they are acting correctly based on the limited information or skewed perspectives they possess. Their “not knowing” might stem from a lack of exposure to alternative viewpoints or a failure to critically examine the beliefs they’ve inherited.
• Systemic Influences: Individuals are also products of larger social, political, and economic systems that can perpetuate injustice and inequality. People operating within these systems, even if they participate in harmful actions, may do so because it’s the norm, the expected behavior, or even perceived as necessary for survival within that framework. Their “not knowing” can be a consequence of the systemic biases they’ve absorbed.
• The Cycle of Learned Behavior: Behaviors, both positive and negative, can be cyclical. Individuals who have been subjected to harm or injustice may, in turn, perpetuate those patterns in their own interactions, not necessarily out of inherent malice but because it’s what they’ve learned and experienced as the way the world works.

Implications for Forgiveness and Understanding:

If “not knowing” is understood in this broader sense, it profoundly impacts how we view responsibility and the possibility of forgiveness:

• Reduced Blame: It suggests that assigning absolute blame without considering the formative influences on an individual’s life is overly simplistic. Understanding the “why” behind someone’s actions, even harmful ones, can foster empathy.
• Emphasis on Education and Change: If behavior is learned, then change is also possible through education, exposure to different perspectives, and the creation of more just and compassionate environments.
• The Need for Systemic Change: Recognizing the role of systemic influences highlights the importance of addressing societal structures that contribute to harmful behaviors.
• A Foundation for Forgiveness: Jesus’ plea for forgiveness, when viewed through this lens, becomes even more powerful. It acknowledges the complex web of influences that shape human actions and offers a path towards reconciliation based on understanding rather than condemnation.

In essence, your interpretation of “not knowing” as encompassing the process of learning and the limitations of individual perspectives provides a compelling argument for extending compassion and understanding, recognizing that individuals are often products of the environments and information they’ve encountered. This aligns beautifully with the radical forgiveness advocated in Christian teachings.

---

All of the above prompts the question, why would Jesus think God needed to be pleaded with to forgive people? Isn’t the plea implicitly a request to change God’s mind – facilitate God’s learning? See: Spiritual Learning  

The only basis of spiritual blame (that might need forgiveness) is the kind of certainty that the Cardinal in Conclave spoke about:

 “There is one sin which I have come to fear above all others, certainty”
“Certainty is the great enemy of unity.” “Certainty is the deadly enemy of tolerance.”
“If there was only certainty and no doubt, there would be no mystery and therefore no need for faith.”
See also: The Spiritual Life of Uncertainty