The Anatomy of Forgiveness and Reconciliation       1. What 3 ideas from your most recent course readings help to explain the forgiveness and reconciliation expressed in this moment? Explain your selection of ideas. According to Warmke (2017), there are two major approaches to divine forgiveness, including the view that God forgives by undergoing certain emotional change like eliminating resentment, and that God forgives by forbearing punishment. The Forgiveness Reconciliation model developed by Balkin et al. (2014) emphasizes a process of collaborative exploration and decision-making based on a concept of forgiveness derived from Judaism. Hence, forgiveness and reconciliation are interlinked, and reconciliation cannot occur without forgiveness, while forgiveness requires reconciliation to be complete. For humans, reconciliation consists of reestablishing friendly communications, affirming mutual trust and goodwill, giving gifts or tokens expressing care and concern, and giving assurance that we can go on together, among other things (Warmke, 2017). However, it is a collaborative process in that it requires both parties to be interested in coming together for reconciliation to truly occur. As Warmke (2017) says, even if someone desires reconciliation, they cannot achieve it if the other party does not desire the same. In this way, it can be understood that the sort of forgiveness offered by God is also dependent on the person who is the target of forgiveness actually seeking to be reconciled with God. God forgives by being open to reconciling with us, in which case it implies that God has already done God's part in reconciliation by allowing us to repent and reconcile where we seek to do so. 2.  What biblical truth / scripture reference helps us to understand what we’re seeing? Explain your choice. Matthew 18:15-17 says that if our brother sins against us, we should go and tell him our issue privately, and if he listens to us, then we have "gained our brother"; but if he does not listen, then we are compelled to bring others to witness his refusal, at which point, if such refusal persists, we are to let him be to us "as a Gentile and a tax collector." That is, we must be open to the idea of reconciling with one who has wronged us, and willing to forgive him by accepting that he has understood the error of his ways. At the same time, the offender must himself be open to the idea of being reconciled with us. If he has no interest in admitting his wrongdoing or even listening to our complaints, then we should take steps to afford him more opportunities to do so. However, we cannot force him to be reconciled, and at some point we must decide that there is no way for us to further encourage his seeking of reconciliation; we must simply allow him the opportunity, and hope that he comes around. 3. How did this moment impact you? This impacts me by helping me recognize that I am the weaker link in my relationship with God, as well as emphasizing how ...

1. The Anatomy of Forgiveness and Reconciliation
1. What 3 ideas from your most recent course readings help to
explain the forgiveness and reconciliation expressed in this
moment? Explain your selection of ideas.
According to Warmke (2017), there are two major approaches to
divine forgiveness, including the view that God forgives by
undergoing certain emotional change like eliminating
resentment, and that God forgives by forbearing punishment.
The Forgiveness Reconciliation model developed by Balkin et
al. (2014) emphasizes a process of collaborative exploration and
decision-making based on a concept of forgiveness derived from
Judaism. Hence, forgiveness and reconciliation are interlinked,
and reconciliation cannot occur without forgiveness, while
forgiveness requires reconciliation to be complete. For humans,
reconciliation consists of reestablishing friendly
communications, affirming mutual trust and goodwill, giving
gifts or tokens expressing care and concern, and giving
assurance that we can go on together, among other things
(Warmke, 2017). However, it is a collaborative process in that it
requires both parties to be interested in coming together for
reconciliation to truly occur. As Warmke (2017) says, even if
someone desires reconciliation, they cannot achieve it if the
other party does not desire the same. In this way, it can be
understood that the sort of forgiveness offered by God is also
dependent on the person who is the target of forgiveness
actually seeking to be reconciled with God. God forgives by
being open to reconciling with us, in which case it implies that
God has already done God's part in reconciliation by allowing
us to repent and reconcile where we seek to do so.
2. What biblical truth / scripture reference helps us to
understand what we’re seeing? Explain your choice.
Matthew 18:15-17 says that if our brother sins against us, we
should go and tell him our issue privately, and if he listens to

2. us, then we have "gained our brother"; but if he does not listen,
then we are compelled to bring others to witness his refusal, at
which point, if such refusal persists, we are to let him be to us
"as a Gentile and a tax collector." That is, we must be open to
the idea of reconciling with one who has wronged us, and
willing to forgive him by accepting that he has understood the
error of his ways. At the same time, the offender must himself
be open to the idea of being reconciled with us. If he has no
interest in admitting his wrongdoing or even listening to our
complaints, then we should take steps to afford him more
opportunities to do so. However, we cannot force him to be
reconciled, and at some point we must decide that there is no
way for us to further encourage his seeking of reconciliation;
we must simply allow him the opportunity, and hope that he
comes around.
3. How did this moment impact you?
This impacts me by helping me recognize that I am the weaker
link in my relationship with God, as well as emphasizing how I
may also be the weaker link in my relationship with others,
particularly when it comes to forgiveness and reconciliation. I
must be open to others' perspectives to be reconciled with them
if I have committed some sought of wrong doing. In addition,
though, others must be open to being reconciled with me as
well. I cannot force another to seek forgiveness if it's not in
their heart. But if I truly want reconciliation, I must be willing
to offer it openly, so that it is available to them in the case that
they should decide they want to pursue it.
References
Balkin, R. S., Harris, N. A., Freeman, S. J., & Huntington, S.
(2014). The forgiveness reconciliation inventory. Measurement
and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 47(1), 3-
13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175613497037
Warmke, B. (2017). Divine forgiveness II: Reconciliation and
debt-cancellation theories. Philosophy Compass, 12(9),
e12439. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12439

3. In “Let the Devil Sleep,” a wise Tutsi survivor advises that
when one asks for forgiveness, they are humbled. The goal is to
rebuild the country, and the people recognize that this purpose
cannot be fulfilled while living in the past with such hatred. In
order to rebuild the country, the people of Rwanda had to
reconcile and come together in unity. The three ideas from the
most recent course readings that most help to explain this
situation are first to pursue peace with God, understanding
relational and situational peace, and the three steps for human
beings to please God, repent, and love.
Jones begins by explaining, “The proper starting place to think
biblically about pursuing peace is God [...] And what has this
God done? He has made peace with us, he pours out his peace
on us and into us, and he calls and enables us to pursue peace
with others” (Jones 19). Jones also talks about relational peace
and situational peace in heaven. While we are living in a secular
world, we can nonetheless as Christians accept the peace that
God gives with grace and allow the spirit to go through us in
order to promote peace to His other children. Jones also asks ,
“What does God see when He sees conflict? What does he want
us to see?” (30) This is important to ask when events such as
the Rwanda genocide take place.
When human beings experience tradgedies such as this
genocide, it takes a toll on the spirit of man. Jones advises us to
realize that conflicts are normal and inevitable, but most
importantly opportunities to seize for the glory of God (Jones
37). In this situation, it is most helpful to recognize that even
horrific conflicts can give us the opportunity to love and
minister to others as the Lord has done for us (Jones 41).
Perhaps the most relevant wisdom from Jones is preventative:
please God, repent, and love the person (45). If we aim to
please God in the first place, our actions will be actions of love
before and during conflict. With a humble attitude of
repentance, we will be more self-aware and will be more self
aware before outwardly blaming others. In this goal of

4. prevention, we must be aware of heart sins, which are the
beliefs and motives which cause behavior sins in words and
actions.
Jones uses Matthew 7:3-5 to exemplify the importance of self-
evaluation before throwing stones, so to speak. Jesus says,
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye
and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you
say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’
when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You
hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you
will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye”
(Holy Bible).
This moment affected me because I realize how evil and
terrifying the world in which we live is for some people. This
video made me feel as if in this great country, we were all
living in some grand delusion of grandeur. Just because we are
not met with such terrible evil every day doesn’t mean that it
doesn’t exist. It also seems unfair that some of us are so blessed
to live in safety that we are too ignorant to fully appreciate.
My conclusion is that conflict is bound to happen in this
imperfect world, however it happens based on actions of
selfishness which are not of God. Therefore by aiming to please
God and not ourselves, our motivation will be pure of spirit. As
one of the Rwanda perpetrators says, the guilty party has to
seek forgiveness and place themselves in the hands of God. The
most important part of this process, according to the
perpetrators, appeared to be to tell the whole story with no lies.
The perpetrator said, “It was difficult for me to face the truth.”
However, by facing the truth, the citizens of Rwanda are able to
look toward the future with hope, which is one of God’s many
blessings and will keep the devil at bay.
References
The Holy Bible: King James Version: A Word-for-Word Reprint
of the First Edition of The Authorized Version, Presented in
Roman Letters for Easy Reading and Comparison with
Subsequent Editions. Thomas Nelson, 1993.

5. Let the Devil Sleep : Rwanda 20 Years after Genocide.
Jones, Robert D. Pursuing Peace: A Christian Guide to Handling
Our Conflicts. Crossway, 2012.
Criteria Ratings Points
Thread – Key
Components
9 to >8.0 pts
Advanced
All key components
of the Discussion
prompt are
answered in the
thread.
8 to >7.0 pts
Proficient
Most key
components of the
Discussion prompt
are answered in the
thread.
7 to >0.0 pts
Developing

6. Some key
components of the
Discussion prompt
are answered in the
thread.
0 pts
Not Present
No key components
of the Discussion
prompt are
answered in the
thread.
9 pts
Thread – Major
Point Support
20 to >17.0 pts
Advanced
Major points are
supported by all of
the following:
• Learn materials.
• Pertinent
examples
(conceptual and/or
personal).
• Thoughtful
analysis
(considering

7. assumptions,
analyzing
implications, and co
mparing/contrasting
concepts). • At least
2 peer-reviewed
source citations, in
addition to the
course textbook, in
current APA format;
and • Integration of
at least 1 biblical
principle.
17 to >16.0 pts
Proficient
Major points are
supported by most
of the following:
• Learn materials.
• Pertinent
examples
(conceptual and/or
personal).
• Thoughtful
analysis
(considering
assumptions,
analyzing
implications, and co
mparing/contrasting
concepts). • At least
2 peer-reviewed
source citations, in

8. addition to the
course textbook, in
current APA format;
and • Integration of
at least 1 biblical
principle.
16 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Major points are
supported by some
of the following:
• Learn materials.
• Pertinent
examples
(conceptual and/or
personal).
• Thoughtful
analysis
(considering
assumptions,
analyzing
implications, and co
mparing/contrasting
concepts). • At least
2 peer-reviewed
source citations, in
addition to the
course textbook, in
current APA format;
and • Integration of
at least 1 biblical
principle.

9. 0 pts
Not Present
Major points are
supported by none
of the following:
• Learn materials.
• Pertinent
examples
(conceptual and/or
personal).
• Thoughtful
analysis
(considering
assumptions,
analyzing
implications, and co
mparing/contrasting
concepts). • At least
2 peer-reviewed
source citations, in
addition to the
course textbook, in
current APA format;
and • Integration of
at least 1 biblical
principle.
20 pts
Replies – Key
Components
10 to >9.0 pts

10. Advanced
Contribution made
to discussion with
each reply (2)
expounding on the
thread.
9 to >7.0 pts
Proficient
Marginal
contribution made to
discussion with each
reply (2) marginally
expounding on the
thread.
7 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Minimal contribution
(2 minimal or only 1
reply) made to
discussion with each
reply minimally
expounding on the
thread.
0 pts
Not Present
No contribution

11. made to discussion.
10 pts
Discussion Grading Rubric | COMS560_C01_202140
Criteria Ratings Points
Replies – Major
Point Support
10 to >9.0 pts
Advanced
Major points are
supported by all of
the following:
• Learn materials.
• Pertinent
examples
(conceptual and/or
personal).
• Thoughtful
analysis
(considering
assumptions,
analyzing
implications, and co
mparing/contrasting
concepts); and • At
least 2
peer-reviewed
source citations, in

12. addition to the
course textbook, in
current APA format.
9 to >7.0 pts
Proficient
Major points are
supported by most
of the following:
• Learn materials.
• Pertinent
examples
(conceptual and/or
personal).
• Thoughtful
analysis
(considering
assumptions,
analyzing
implications, and co
mparing/contrasting
concepts); and • At
least 2
peer-reviewed
source citations, in
addition to the
course textbook, in
current APA format.
7 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Major points are

13. supported by some
of the following:
• Learn materials.
• Pertinent
examples
(conceptual and/or
personal).
• Thoughtful
analysis
(considering
assumptions,
analyzing
implications, and co
mparing/contrasting
concepts); and • At
least 2
peer-reviewed
source citations, in
addition to the
course textbook, in
current APA format.
0 pts
Not Present
Major points are
supported by none
of the following:
• Learn materials.
• Pertinent
examples
(conceptual and/or
personal).
• Thoughtful
analysis

14. (considering
assumptions,
analyzing
implications, and co
mparing/contrasting
concepts); and • At
least 2
peer-reviewed
source citations, in
addition to the
course textbook, in
current APA format.
10 pts
Thread –
Grammar/Spelling
5 to >4.0 pts
Advanced
Proper spelling and
grammar are used.
4 to >3.0 pts
Proficient
Between 1–2
spelling, and
grammar errors are
present.
3 to >0.0 pts

15. Developing
Between 3–4
spelling and
grammar errors are
present.
0 pts
Not Present
More than 4 spelling
and grammar errors
are present.
5 pts
Thread – Word
Count
5 to >4.0 pts
Advanced
The thread is at
least 400 words.
4 to >3.0 pts
Proficient
The thread is
399–300 words.
3 to >0.0 pts

16. Developing
The thread is
299–200 words.
0 pts
Not Present
The thread is less
than 199 words.
5 pts
Replies –
Grammar/
Spelling
5 to >4.0 pts
Advanced
Proper spelling and
grammar are used.
4 to >3.0 pts
Proficient
Between 1 to 2
spelling and
grammar errors are
present.
3 to >0.0 pts

17. Developing
Between 3 to 4
spelling and
grammar errors are
present.
0 pts
Not Present
More than 4 spelling
and grammar errors
are present.
5 pts
Discussion Grading Rubric | COMS560_C01_202140
Criteria Ratings Points
Replies – Word
Count
6 to >5.0 pts
Advanced
Each reply is at
least 250 words.
5 to >4.0 pts
Proficient

18. Each reply is
249-200 words.
4 to >0.0 pts
Developing
Each reply is
199–100 words.
0 pts
Not Present
Each reply is less
than 100 words.
6 pts
Total Points: 70
Discussion Grading Rubric | COMS560_C01_202140