Loving and forgiving are a huge component of Jesus' message to his disciples.
In answer to the question as to HOW MANY TIMES forgiveness should be offered to an offender, Jesus gave the reply, "Seventy (times) seven." (variously interpreted as either 77 times or a multiple of 70 times 7).
An example is given of a man who owed a considerable sum of money whose debt was forgiven. This man failed to forgive a much smaller debt owed to him. He was identified as a scoundrel for failing to pass on the spirit of forgiveness to the one indebted to him.
Jesus ministry is presented in scripture as a ministry which brings about forgiveness for the human race alienated from God.
In view of the above---how can a Christian Witness of Jehovah allow an organization to make the decision ON HIS BEHALF as to who may or may not be forgiven?
Further, is not the act of shunning a personal decision for a personal affront? How can another party (or group) decide this for you?
These are the two questions I'd like to raise.
Jesus was chided by members of his own religion (Judaism) for healing on the Sabbath in clear violation of the letter of the Law. Jesus pointed out that the purpose of the law was not to bring death and judgement, rather, mercy and forgiveness.
If this were true in Jesus' own words---how can a body, group, organization condemn your friend, brother, wife, son, daughter ON YOUR BEHALF and order you to NOT forgive them?
Where would this agency or proxy acquire the authority to do so?
Either Christianity is a religion of mercy, grace, forgiveness and long-suffering or it is a religion like Judaism fretting over rules, regulations and infractions.
Where is the merit in Christ's sacrifice if it fails to include stray sheep from the flock of God?
Jesus gave an example of the shepherd who leaves the 99 sheep who are doing just fine in order to GO AFTER AND BRING BACK the stray sheep who wanders off (electively on his own.)
If disfellowshipping and shunning were God's intention---why would the Good Shepherd not stay with the 99 and say "Good riddance" to the one stray? What is the basis for saving the stray if it is not the intention of God to save the ENTIRE flock no matter the straying tendency of the "one" who disconnects?
Not praying for somebody because you are instructed thus by religious leaders seems to be a violation of the purpose of Christianity.
Declaring a Christian unforgiven and unforgiveable is unadulterated HUBRIS.
When the crowd was about to stone the feckless woman for adultry (according to the Law) Jesus stepped in and raised an important issue for consideration BEFORE carrying out condemnation. IS THE EXACTING OF JUSTICE worthy of the one exacting it---when that same person is guilty before god of ANY sin himself?
This would tend to indicate only a SINLESS person should EXACT JUDGMENT.
What is your view?