Both the Old and the New Testament use the word “Hebrew” in several passages. However, the word has different meanings, depending on the context.

Technically, the first time the word “Hebrew” is used is in Genesis 14:13, where it is applied to Abram, in connection with the defeat of the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah in battle and the captivity of Lot. We read: “Then one who had escaped came and told Abram the Hebrew…”

Commentaries give several explanations for the use of this word in this passage.

The Ryrie Study Bible says:

“Abraham was the first person to be referred as a Hebrew, an ethnic designation that his descendants derived from him. The word comes from the name of his ancestor, Eber (11:10-14). It also had a wider use as a general designation for nomadic people like Abraham, who would have been considered a migrant by the Canaanites, since he came from Ur and Haran.”

The Nelson Study Bible adds the following:

“Here is the first use of the word Hebrew in the Bible. It comes from the name Eber, first mentioned in the table of nations in ch. 10 [compare Genesis 10:21]. The word is related to a verb meaning ‘cross over’ or ‘pass through,’ perhaps reminding us that Abram ‘passed through’ or ‘crossed over’ from another place in order to obey the Lord’s command.”

Friedman, Commentary on the Torah, writes:

“This is an unusual use of the word ‘Hebrew.’ Elsewhere in biblical stories it is used to identify Israelites only when one is speaking among foreigners. It is not the standard term for the people, which is rather ‘Israelite’… Perhaps it is used here because there are not yet any other Israelites around, and Abraham himself is a foreigner.”

This explanation is not entirely correct. First, there were other Israelites around (for instance, Lot and his family); and second, there are incidents where the word “Hebrew” is applied to Israelites when one is NOT speaking among foreigners, even though the use is related (see below in regard to the term, “Hebrew slave”).

A very convincing and comprehensive explanation is given by Rienecker, Lexikon zur Bibel. The commentary points out that the word “Hebrew” is derived from Eber, a descendant of Shem, one of Noah’s sons. One of the descendants of Eber is Abram [Genesis 11:16-26]. It is then explained that the word “Hebrew” can also refer to one “who has passed over” and who ‘”came from beyond’ (the River Euphrates), which applies to Abraham (compare Joshua 24:2, 3).” It continues: “Later, Joseph and his brothers in Egypt are referred to as Hebrews (Genesis 39:14, 17; 41:12; 43:32), and Joseph calls his homeland the land of the Hebrews (Genesis 40:15). The word distinguished the sons of Jacob as belonging to a people which is different from the natives, but we cannot determine exactly how all-encompassing the term Hebrew was at that time.”

It is then pointed out that subsequently, the word is used exclusively for Israelites, and always in opposition to peoples of non-Israelite descent. This applies first to the Egyptians (Exodus 1:15, 16, 19; 2:6, 7,11, 13), and Moses emphasizes in front of Pharaoh that he is acting pursuant to the command of “the LORD God of the Hebrews” (Exodus 3:18; 5:3; [7:16; 9:1; 10:3]); then [the term “Hebrews” applies] at the time of [Samuel and] Saul and the Philistines (1 Samuel 4:6, 9; 14:11; 29:3; [13:7, 19; 14:21] and at the time of Jonah in comparison with the foreign sailors (Jonah 1:9)…”

Rienecker also points out that the word “Hebrew” is applied to Israelite servants or slaves (Exodus 21:2; Deuteronomy 15:12; Jeremiah 34:9, 14). We should note that in Jeremiah, “Hebrew slave” is described as “Jewish brother.” The commentary continues to state that the Hebrew slave is distinguished from non-Israelite slaves and that the life of a Hebrew slave must be viewed in light of the fact that all Israelites had been slaves in Egypt (Deuteronomy 15:15). Friedman adds that “Hebrew slave” had become “a fixed phrase through assonance: the two words ‘slave’ [ebed] and ‘Hebrew’ [ibri] begin with the same two letters” (since there are no vowels, but only consonants, in the Hebrew language).

In the New Testament, the distinction between Hebrews and non-Hebrews was also known, which caused problems in the early Church. We read in Acts 6:1: “Now in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a complaint against the Hebrews by the Hellenists, because their widows were neglected in the daily distribution.” The Hellenists were Greek-speaking Jewish Christians who had adopted Greek culture, or they were Greek “proselytes” who had converted to Judaism (compare our Q&A about the Day of Pentecost); and the “Hebrew” Jews—Hebrew-speaking Jewish Christians—looked down on them and were not willing to treat them with the same respect. The apostles solved this problem by ordaining deacons to look after all the brethren in the congregation.

We also find that the apostle Paul uses the term “Hebrew” to identify his physical lineage, in defense against those who questioned his appointment as an apostle and minister of God. He says in 2 Corinthians 11:22: “Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I? Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I.”

We see that he uses the terms “Hebrew”, “Israelite” and “seed of Abraham” in the same context, showing his physical heritage (Compare also Romans 11:1).

Paul adds in Philippians 3:5 that he was “circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee…”

Here, he is explaining that he is a descendant of Benjamin, one of the twelve sons of Israel. We know that under Solomon’s son, the house of Judah separated from the house of Israel. The house of Israel consisted of ten tribes, which later became known as the LOST ten tribes, since they never returned to the Promised Land after their Assyrian captivity. The ten tribes of Israel consisted of the tribes of Reuben, Simeon, Issachar, Zebulun, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Ephraim (son of Joseph) and Manasseh (son of Joseph). Note that Joseph—one of the sons of Israel—was divided up into two tribes—Ephraim and Manasseh. We see a similar “division” in Revelation 7:4-8, where Manasseh is mentioned as well as Joseph (referring to Ephraim). The house of Judah consisted of the tribes of Judah, Levi and Benjamin, and they returned to the Promised Land after their Babylonian captivity. Paul is making the point that he is not only an Israelite and a Hebrew, but also a descendant from the tribe of Benjamin; meaning that he belongs to the house of Judah. As the descendants of the house of Judah (Judah, Benjamin and Levi) were identified as “Jews,” Paul referred to himself as a Jew, compare Galatians 2:15.

Throughout the New Testament, distinctions are made between physical Jews and physical Greeks, but we need to understand that “Greeks” is representative for all non-Jewish and non-Israelite “nations” or “Gentiles.” A big controversy existed in the early New Testament Church as to whether or not “Greeks” could become members of the Church, and Peter had to receive God’s instruction in a vision to allow this, without requiring them first to become physically circumcised. The issue was settled during the ministerial conference in Acts 15, but even following this decision, some still wanted to compel the non-Jewish Christians to be circumcised and adopt the traditions of the Jews, as we can see, for example, in Paul’s letter to the Galatians.

At the same time, Paul emphasizes that there is neither Jew nor Greek or Gentile—neither circumcision nor uncircumcision (Romans 3:29-30; 9:24; 10:12; 1 Corinthians 7:19; Galatians 3:28), but that all converted Christians—regardless of their physical heritage—are spiritual children of Abraham and spiritual Jews and Israelites (Romans 2:28-29; Galatians 5:6; 6:16); which means that converted Christians are spiritual Hebrews as well, having become “foreigners” in this world who are waiting for a better world to come, when God will establish His government on this earth. Converted Christians have passed from death to life; they have passed through this world and have left it behind. There is no need for Christians to engage in any of the Jewish traditions or rituals which are not taught in the Bible; or which were superseded by the death of Jesus Christ. In fact, the Bible says that in God’s eyes, only those who are spiritual Israelites or Jews (or Hebrews) and who “are of the faith of Abraham” (Romans 4:16) are of the [spiritual] seed of the patriarch Abraham—the first to be named a “Hebrew” (Romans 9:6-9; compare Galatians 3:29).

In this context, it is important to read how Paul continues his statement in Philippians 3:7, after just having set forth his physical lineage as “a Hebrew of the Hebrews”: “But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Jesus Christ.”

Paul emphasizes the fact that even though he was very much aware of his physical lineage and even though he had a strong desire to see the Jews—his “countrymen according to the flesh”—accept God’s Way of Life (Romans 9:1-5; 10:1), he never allowed this desire to prevent him from preaching the gospel to the Gentiles. He said that he became a Jew to the Jews and a Gentile to the Gentiles so that he might gain some (compare 1 Corinthians 9:19-23).

We need to also understand the purpose for his letter to the Hebrews, which was apparently written at the beginning or the middle of the sixties. The Jews had continued to bring animal sacrifices, and it appears that Jewish Christians might have participated in this practice. And so, Paul explained in his letter to the Hebrews that sacrifices were no longer necessary, since Christ’s death constitutes the ultimate Sacrifice; and that very soon, the temple would be destroyed (in 70 A.D.) so that animal sacrifices were no longer possible (compare Hebrews 9:9-10; 10:8-9, 11, 18). But he comforted them by saying that they should not worry about this, as the need for animal sacrifices ceased anyhow when Christ died.

Converted Christians are spiritual Israelites, Jews and Hebrews. They are, in God’s eyes, the true descendants from the spiritual seed of Abraham. They are to reflect in their lives the faith and obedience of Abraham (James 2:21-24), and they can do so, as Jesus Christ, their High Priest, lives in them through the Holy Spirit (Galatians 2:20).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

In Matthew 19:16-26, Mark 10:17-27 and Luke 18:18-27, we are introduced to a young rich ruler who came to Christ and asked Him what he must do to inherit eternal life. Christ told him that he had to keep the commandments and He added the need for him to sell what he had, and to follow Him. However, the rich man was unwilling to depart from his riches. We discuss Christ’s “invitation” to the rich man to become one of His disciples in previous Q&As, including whether God hears the prayers of sinners, and whether Christ offered the rich ruler a ministerial position. In that last Q&A, we said the following:

“Some commentaries agree that Christ offered the rich ruler a ministerial position. They point out that Christ’s command to the rich ruler to sell everything that he had  was specifically given to that ruler because Christ saw that one thing was lacking in his qualification to become a minister, and that one thing was his love for money and his trust in riches … it appears that He was indeed willing to call him into the ministry, but sadly, the ruler loved money more than God and he rejected this unique opportunity to follow Christ as a minister and to perhaps later become even one of His apostles. In refusing to accept his ministerial calling, Christ pointed out that it will be very difficult for a rich person to even enter the kingdom of God (Luke 18:25-26; Mark 10:23-25).”

Christ did not say that it was impossible for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God, but that it would be very difficult. We know that Abraham was very rich, and so was David, and both will be in God’s Kingdom. But it is true that riches CAN prevent us from fully turning to God.

In our Q&A on 1 Timothy 6:10, discussing the love of money as the or a root of all evil, we said the following:

“Christ warned us that we cannot serve two masters—God and mammon. He explained that we must not lay up for ourselves treasures on earth (living a way of life which is manifested by our love of money, riches and physical possessions), but that we are to lay up spiritual treasures in heaven. He continued: ‘For where your treasure is, there your HEART will be also. No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon’ (Matthew 6:19-21, 24).

“Christ makes the same point that Paul is making [in 1 Timothy 6:10]: Either we love God and His way of life with all our heart, including our desire to be spiritually rich before God, or we love foremost mammon or material possessions, including our desire to be physically rich in this world. Christ continued to explain the incongruity between both ways in Matthew 6:25-34, when He compared the physical worries in this life with what must be our main priority: ‘But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness’ (verse 33).

“As Paul said in 1 Timothy 6:11, we must ‘flee’ the physical desires to be rich, which are so important in this world, and rather ‘pursue righteousness.’ John explained that the love of God is not in us when we love the world or the things in the world (1 John 2:15-17)…

“There are reasons why Christ warned us that it would be very difficult for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God (Matthew 19:23-24). The main problem is that a rich person may love his riches too much, and he may be unwilling to give them up, if necessary, in order to follow Christ without reservation…

“Again and again, the Bible tells us not to give in to the love of ‘money’ or materialism, and not to work for, as our main focus, the physical riches or possessions in this life… In the parable of the rich fool, Christ warned all of us: ‘Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses’ (Luke 12:15). After telling the rich fool who had heaped up treasures for himself that he would die that very night, He concluded, ‘So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God’ (verse 21).

“And so, Paul admonishes us today—and especially those who are rich in this world—to get our priorities straight: ‘Command those who are rich in this present age not to be haughty, nor TRUST in UNCERTAIN riches but in the living GOD, who gives us richly all things to enjoy. Let them do GOOD, that they be rich in good works, READY TO GIVE, WILLING TO SHARE, storing up for themselves a good foundation for the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life’ (1 Timothy 6:17-19).”

It is with this background that we must understand Christ’s warning that “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God” (Matthew 19:24; compare Mark 10:25 and Luke 18:25). Christ was pointing out here that it is HUMANLY impossible that a camel would go through the eye of a needle. Some commentaries try to “soften” Christ’s statement by saying that He was referring to a small gate in Jerusalem, and that a camel had great difficulties to get through it, if at all. Or that Christ was really speaking about a rope or a cable instead of a camel. But this was not the point which Christ was making. Rather, He clearly used in this parable or comparison a humanly impossible picture—a camel cannot go through a literal eye of a needle.

The Pulpit Commentary explains:

“The disciples,… Mark notes, ‘were astonished at his words,’ so he proceeds to state the startling proposition more unreservedly and energetically. It is easier for a camel, etc. This is a proverbial expression for an impossibility… From taking a too literal view of the passage, some commentators have invented a gate at Jerusalem, low and narrow, designed only for foot passengers, which was called ‘the needle’s eye.’ Others have remedied the supposed absurdity by [replacing the word for ‘needle’ with] ‘rope,’ as if we were to say cable instead of camel. But there is no difficulty in the expression… (comp. Matthew 23:24).”

The Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers agrees, stating:

“Two explanations have been given… It has been conjectured that the Evangelists wrote not… a camel… but… a cable. Not a single MS., however, gives that reading, and the latter word, which is not found in any classical Greek author, is supposed by the best scholars… to have been invented for the sake of explaining this passage…

“The fact that in some modern Syrian cities the narrow gate for foot-passengers, at the side of the larger gate, by which wagons, camels, and other beasts of burden enter the city, is known as the ‘needle’s eye,’ has been assumed to have come down from a remote antiquity, and our Lord’s words are explained as alluding to it… It is not, however, necessary. The Talmud gives the parallel phrase of an elephant passing through a needle’s eye. The Koran reproduces the very words of the Gospel. There is no reason to think that the comparison… would present the slightest difficulty to the minds of the disciples. Like all such comparisons, it states… the hindrance which wealth presents to the higher growths… and leaves out of sight the limits and modifications with which it has to be received…”

To emphasize the point even more, Christ said that it was EASIER for such an impossibility to occur (a camel going through the eye of a needle) than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God. He introduced His parable by saying: “It is HARD for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 19:23; compare Mark 10:23 and Luke 18:24). But Mark 10:24 adds an important point, quoting Christ as elaborating: “Children, how hard it is for those WHO TRUST IN RICHES to enter the kingdom of God.”

The disciples recognized the humanly impossible situation, as presented by Christ, and so they asked: “Who then can be saved?” (Matthew 19:25; compare Mark 10:26 and Luke 18:26). Jesus’ answer makes His teaching very clear: “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26). Mark 10:27 quotes Jesus in this way: “With man it is impossible but not with God; for with God all things are possible.” And Luke 18:27 states: “The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.” (Compare also Luke 1:37; Mark 14:36; Jeremiah 32:17, 27; Genesis 18:14.)

Returning to the question in this Q&A, whether it is impossible for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God, the answer is: No, it is not impossible, but it requires a miracle from God. This is true for all of us. It is God who must call us and open our minds to His truth; it is God who must offer us repentance and faith in Him and His Son’s  Sacrifice and the Gospel of the Kingdom of God; it is God who must offer us His gift of righteousness and, upon repentance, belief and baptism, the gift of the Holy Spirit—but we need to respond. The rich man was offered an opportunity to qualify for the Kingdom of God at that time, but he did not respond properly, because he did not want to give up his riches. Others may have other excuses with which they may want to justify their refusal to accept God’s calling (compare Luke 14:15-24).

It is impossible for every person – not just a rich person – to come to God, UNLESS the Father draws him and brings him to Christ (John 6:44, 65). But once we accept our calling, we must change—our old man must die and be buried (Romans 6:1-6), and we must become a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17). Especially rich people will have to come to the realization that they must not trust in their riches, but that they must be willing to give up their riches, if need be, and to share their riches with others. For most rich people, this is VERY hard to do. But God can change man’s heart and mind; so it is NOT impossible for Him to convert even a rich person, IF that person wants to be converted.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

When we are God Beings, will we remember our own past sins and the sins of others, including the sins of our close friends and family members?

The Bible teaches that we will enter the Family of God and become God Beings at the time of the return of Jesus Christ, when we have God’s Holy Spirit within us at the time of our death or of our change. As God Beings, we will think and behave like God the Father and Jesus Christ. How then does God look at the sins of others?

First of all, let us quickly review the question whether we are even going to remember our close friends, family members or mates in the resurrection. We addressed this question in our Q&A about Isaiah 65:17 (“For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind.”).

Answering the question whether we will still retain memories of human beings of this time, including our relationships with family and friends, we said:

“It will depend on whether or not they are righteous or evil (compare Psalm 34:15-16). Simply stated, those who are in God’s Kingdom will know one-another, but those who rebel will cease to exist or be remembered.”

We do not believe in an ever-burning hell fire which will torture the wicked for all eternity, while those “saved in heaven” will continually hear their cries. At the same time, it would be difficult to imagine that we will constantly remember loved ones or close friends who turned away from God and committed the unpardonable sin. Generally speaking, we will put the memories of those out of our minds; it will be as if they had never existed (Obadiah 16). [However, in the case of King Saul who apparently committed the unpardonable sin, his deeds of rebellion and his consultation of a witch and his encounter with a demon, pretending to be Samuel, have been recorded in the Bible, for everyone to read.]

This leads us to the next question as to whether we will remember our own sins which we repented of, or the sins of others who received forgiveness from God because of their repentance.

We discussed aspects of this question in our Q&A on 1 Kings 15:5 (“David did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, and had not turned aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life, except in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.”)

We said the following:

“The account of David’s transgressions ‘in the matter of Uriah the Hittite’ can be found in 2 Samuel, chapters 11 and 12. First, David committed adultery with Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba; then, he tried to cover up his sin in different ways; failing that, he had Uriah murdered in war, so that he could take Bathsheba to become his wife. We read that ‘the thing that David had done displeased [or better: ‘was evil in the sight of’] the LORD’ (2 Samuel 11:27)…

“David’s conduct ‘in the matter of Uriah’ constituted a great sin. This does not mean, however, that this was the only sin that David ever committed. The passage in 1 Kings 15:5, quoted above, must be read in context with all the other Scriptures on this subject. For instance, note the following statement in 1 Kings 14:8, ‘… yet you have not been as My servant David, who kept My commandments and who followed Me with all his heart, to do ONLY what was right in My eyes.’ Taken all by itself, this Scripture would say that David did not sin at all – not even in the ‘matter of Uriah.’…

“The truth is, of course, that David sinned in many different ways… The Bible makes it very clear that everyone sins – even after conversion – and that there is no human being [with the only exception of Jesus Christ, when He was here on earth] who does not sin (compare 1 Kings 8:46)…

“We are also told in Scripture that God forgives us our sins and even forgets about them, once we confess our sins to God (1 John 1:9). In that case, God cleanses us from all unrighteousness (same verse). He will remember our sins no more (compare Jeremiah 31:34).

“David had a loyal heart. When he sinned, he repented and asked God for forgiveness. He did not try to hide his sins, but he was truly heart-broken. He desired earnestly to be forgiven… When God forgave David, He removed his sins – not to be remembered anymore… That is why God could say, ‘David has kept My commandments. He followed Me with all his heart, to do ONLY what was right in My eyes.’ (Compare, again, 1 Kings 14:8.)

“We also understand, of course, that God forgave David his sins ‘in the matter of Uriah.’ Still, in the one passage, in 1 Kings 15:5, God brings this matter one more time to our attention. Not, because God had not forgiven David, but because this was a sin that belonged to a slightly different category. It was not the unpardonable sin, to be sure, since David will be in the Kingdom of God (compare Jeremiah 30:9; Hosea 3:5). However, it was not a sin that was committed ‘in ignorance’ – because of a temporary, passing weakness that had ‘snuck up’ on David. This was a planned, premeditated, carefully designed sin. David thought through very diligently how to cover up his sin with Bathseba, until he resorted to the murder of Uriah. God brings up the ‘matter with Uriah’ one more time, because He was terribly grieved that David would have acted in such a way – and He wanted to impress on the reader the awful consequences of that sin for David and his entire household.

“When we sin and subsequently confess our sin to God, God is faithful to forgive us… Upon forgiveness (compare Romans 11:27), God will remember our sins no more (compare Hebrews 8:12). This should show us that we must strive to do the same. When we forgive, we must also forget. David sinned in many different ways – as we all do – but he obtained complete forgiveness from God, as his heart was right. In God’s eyes, David kept God’s commandments; following God with all his heart, to do ONLY what was right in God’s eyes.”

What, exactly, is meant by the phrase that God will remember our sins no more?

Please realize that God saw to it that certain sins of David were recorded, for everyone to read. In addition to David’s sin in the matter of Uriah, some of his other sins were recorded as well, such as his fighting in war and numbering his army. Furthermore, sins of other righteous men and women were recorded: Moses’s sin of murder and his later outburst before Israel, which prevented him from entering the Promised Land; Aaron and Miriam’s murmuring against Moses; Abraham and Isaac’s lies; Abraham and Sarah’s adultery because of lack of faith; Jacob’s deceit towards his father Isaac; Rachel’s theft of her father’s idol; Peter’s sin of lying and denying Christ three times, and his hypocrisy towards Gentile Christians; and Paul’s persecution of Christians when he was still known as Saul. The list could go on and on. We also believe that Solomon came to repentance at the end of his life, but his prior terrible sins were included in the Bible.

How do we understand and explain this in light of the fact that God forgives and forgets sins once they are repented of? The sins of those were forgiven (all of those men and women listed above will be in the Kingdom of God as God Beings), but their prior sins were not erased from the written Word of God—the Bible—and we are told that they were recorded as an example for our benefit today (1 Corinthians 10:11), and that ALL Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction and for instruction in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16).

In addition, we do not believe that Adam and Eve or Judas Iscariot have committed the unpardonable sin, since they never had God’s Holy Spirit, which means, that they will be given their opportunity to accept God’s Way of Life in the Second Resurrection; still, everyone knows and will know about [some of] their sins which they committed, as they are recorded in God’s Word. Jesus even said about Judas that it would have been better if he had not been born. We do not believe that these statements will ever be removed from the Bible. But Adam, Eve and Judas will come back to life, and will be offered true repentance, which they will hopefully accept. But again, their sins are recorded in the Bible, and the books of the Bible will be opened to the understanding of all who will be in the Great White Throne Judgment period (Revelation 20:12).

When we sin and do not repent, then our sins will stand against us. God will not forgive and forget them. The same is true for our friends and relatives. If they sin in this life, without repenting, God (and we as God Beings in the Kingdom) will not forgive and forget those sins prior to their repentance, but we will offer them repentance in the Great White Throne Judgment period so that their sins can be forgiven.

But what about sins which have been repented of? As we saw, generally, God (and we as God Beings) will forget those sins, by totally erasing them from our minds, but there are exceptions.

Clearly, one exception are the sins which are recorded in the Bible. Even though God has forgiven those upon repentance, He has not totally erased those from memory, but they were recorded for our benefit so that we can learn from the mistakes of others and do not make them ourselves. But in every case, God casts all repented sins behind His back and into the depths of the sea, so that when they are sought for, they shall not be found IN THE SENSE that God will never charge us with them. He does not retain them in His mind in the sense that He will not revisit what has passed.

When God says in Jeremiah 31:34 and in Isaiah 43:25 that He will “remember” their sins no more and that He will blot out their transgressions, He draws also a comparison between animal sacrifices in the Old Testament which had to be given continuously and which could never forgive sins, but were just a reminder or “remembrance” of sins (Hebrews 10:3), and Christ’s Sacrifice which brings about total and complete forgiveness and freedom from eternal death, so that God will “blot out” the sins and “remember” them no more (compare Acts 3:19). German Bibles translate Jeremiah 31:34 as, “I will not think of [or: about] their sins anymore.” The New Jerusalem Bible and the Revised English Bible say that God will never more “call” their sin “to mind.”

Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible adds this comment in regard to Isaiah 43:25: “God will not remember the sins of his people against them; having forgiven them, he will never punish them for them, which is meant by remembering them; see Jeremiah 14:10.”

The Jamieson Fausset and Brown commentary agrees, stating: “When God forgives, He forgets; that is, treats the sinner as if He had forgotten his sins.”

Under the New Covenant, God will “take away” our sins (Romans 11:27)—He will not hold them against us, if we repent of them. Jeremiah 50:20 tells us that “… The iniquity of Israel shall be sought, but there shall be none; And the sins of Judah, but they shall not be found; For I will pardon those whom I preserve.”

In God’s mind, forgiven sins have never been committed. The wall of separation between God and us, which was erected due to sin (Isaiah 59:1-2), is broken down when we repent, and access to God is again unhindered. In most cases, God will completely wipe out from His mind any memory of repented sins, but as we saw, in some cases, sins were recorded to teach us a lesson. But in all cases, no repented sin will ever be “remembered” so that man would be charged with it. As we have the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:16), we must also strive to forgive and forget sins of others who repent… and this includes our own sins of which we repent and for which we have received forgiveness. But even if we may not be able to achieve in this life total lack of memory regarding past sins, we must always truly forgive others who repent, without ever holding grudges or bringing charges against them.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link