Forgiveness—Do We Get Him?
“That Day” ad from the “He Gets Us” ad campaign.
Print version: pdf
“He Gets Us” is the title of a well-funded ad campaign recently launched at the 2023 Super Bowl. The ads present a human Jesus in contemporary situations. Images in the ads most often show Jesus as an African American or Latino man. The ad campaign expresses worthy intentions. Yet each ad offers opportunities to consider teachings about Jesus more deeply. We not only ask the question about whether Jesus “gets us” but also, “Do we get him?” We can ask, too, whether the message about him is helpful.
Who Is Paying for These Ads?
Eyebrows have been raised by the massive funding being devoted to these ads, originally launched as a $100 million campaign but now aiming for a $1 billion effort over three years. Concerns arise, too, about the funders behind these ads. The website describes the funders as “a diverse group of individuals and entities with a common goal of sharing Jesus’ story authentically.” Most of the funders are anonymous. The website says this is “because the story isn’t about them, and they don’t want the credit.”
Yet some of the funders are well known. Their other activities cause concern. The sponsoring funder is Signatry, also known as the Servant Foundation, a nonprofit that also donates to conservative Christian organizations that oppose abortion and LGBTQ rights. Billionaire Hobby Lobby co-founder David Green acknowledged his funding role in an interview. He is known for several scandals and for support for elements of a right-wing social agenda. Other supporters are anonymous “like-minded families.”
What Is the Purpose of These Ads?
The “He Gets Us” website describes a worthy purpose for the ad campaign. “It’s about Jesus, who created a love movement that is still inspiring many people thousands of years later.”
In a time when forms of Christianity that are associated with white supremacy are growing, these ads do not portray Jesus as white. No flags are waved. No guns are displayed. They do not show Jesus as a divine ruler. Using evocative images, they instead place Jesus in present-day situations similar to his original historical context among poor and marginalized people. Some conservative Christian groups have criticized the ad campaign for not portraying Jesus as divine.
The ads depict views of a historical Jesus that are worth considering more deeply, however.
What Day?
One example shows a view of forgiveness assumed in many of the ads. It is titled “That Day.” The ad translates the day of Jesus’ death to contemporary images of a man unjustly convicted and executed by the criminal justice system. Voices of people involved in the failure of the justice system echo the figures in the biblical narrative with the implication that all share in the guilt for the miscarriage of justice that causes Jesus to be executed.
The ad presents Jesus as forgiving them. His mother declares his innocence, speaking in a Spanish-speaker’s accent. As an image appears of an outstretched hand clamped at the wrist for execution, she reports his final words as “Forgive them.” Then the ad projects a closing statement, “Jesus rejected resentment on the cross.” The tags for the series follow: “He Gets Us. All of us. Jesus.”
Is Forgiveness Required? Who Benefits from Forgiveness?
We can ask whether Jesus’ response is presented as a model for how to respond to present-day miscarriages of justice. Assuming Jesus as the model often imposes an expectation that those unjustly victimized must forgive rather than confront the injustice.
People who assist women escaping domestic violence, for example, report that some Christian religious leaders have often counseled that they return to their abusers. They urge the women to be like Jesus and be forgiving. Other religious leaders see this as a twisted view of the message of Jesus that perpetuates violence he opposed.
The ad opens a discussion, then, of what this portrayal of Jesus forgiving means. Does the ad imply that people who suffer due to systemic injustices should not confront those injustices? Is it saying that those who follow Jesus must forgive injustice and continue to suffer? What is the ad implying about confronting unjust systems?
Is Forgiveness about No Resentment?
The ad also equates the statement attributed to Jesus in Luke 23:34 with an absence of resentment. Many ancient manuscripts omit this statement, so it may be a later addition to Luke’s gospel. In context, it says, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” (NRSV).
Is this a blanket forgiveness? Does Jesus ask forgiveness only for people who are unaware of their role in creating harm? What about people who do know what they are doing?
Is forgiveness primarily about not harboring resentment? Letting go of resentment is currently an important emphasis for mental health. The process of releasing resentment can certainly bring personal well-being. Holding resentment when we have been harmed can be a continuation of the harm. Yet forgiveness in the world of the early Jesus movement involved more.
The ad raises many questions by focusing on resentment. Consider the people who acknowledge their complicity in a miscarriage of justice. Should their major concern be whether the man they have caused to be unjustly executed resents their actions? Does knowing he did not harbor resentment do anything to confront the situation? Do we see forgiveness as being primarily about relieving feelings of guilt? Is it about helping guilty people feel better? Maybe some other understandings of forgiveness would be more helpful.
Let’s consider some of the words used in biblical texts.
What Does Forgiveness Mean in Terms from the Bible?
In the verse from Luke and in most of the New Testament, the Greek word most often translated as “forgiveness” is aphíēmi. In most ancient Greek usage, however, this word did not mean to forgive. It expressed notions of sending forth, discharging, sending away, setting free, leaving something alone, or letting it pass. Another word (sunggignṓskō) was usually used for notions of forgiveness. This word carries the notions of sharing the error, acknowledging and confessing the error, and having a feeling of companionship with another that makes allowances. The use of aphíēmi in biblical texts to mean “forgiveness” is unusual.
Aphíēmi was the Greek word that ancient translators chose for Hebrew terms for forgiveness when they translated Hebrew scriptures into Greek in a collection of seventy books known as the Septuagint (LXX). They usually translated the Hebrew word for forgiveness, nāśā, as the Greek aphíēmi.
The Hebrew concept included two major metaphors. The earlier one saw sin as a substance that either burdened or stained a person. Forgiveness carried the burden or the punishment or removed the stain. Later an Aramaic monetary concept was added. Sin was seen as a debt, and forgiveness was canceling or paying the debt. The notions of sending the burdening or staining substance or the debt away make sense of the use of aphíēmi.
Concepts of forgiveness in the early Jesus groups also posed challenges to hierarchical patterns of relationships and traditional views of honor and revenge.
What about Other Notions of Forgiveness?
Seeing forgiveness as addressing harm rather than relieving people of guilt may be a more helpful view, too. We are left with important questions. The people in the ad voice their complicity in a miscarriage of justice that causes an innocent man to be executed. How could they respond differently? How can we respond differently as onlookers? Does the forgiving response of the one who has been harmed relieve guilt or does it empower action for change?
Rate the Ad “That Day” As a Representation of Forgiveness
The ad credibly adapts the gospel narratives of the day of Jesus’ death to the present day. The focus on forgiveness as the absence of resentment is incomplete, however. The ad can too easily be interpreted to require that people who suffer harm be forgiving while the harm continues. The need to address the causes of miscarriages of justice is ignored. A position on the meter between “Not Really” and “Somewhat” would perhaps be more appropriate.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:
Roitto, Rikard, ed. Moral Infringement and Repair in Antiquity: Supplement 3: Forgiveness. Enskilda Högskolan Stockholm, 2022, pp. 14–19.
Bible Translation:
NRSV – New Revised Standard Version Bible: Anglicized Edition, copyright © 1989, 1995 National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.
