Forgiveness: A Holocaust Analysis

649 Words2 Pages

Based on religious texts, expert opinions, and contextual evidence, I would’ve stayed silent to Karl because it serves justice for the despicable crimes done by Karl and the Nazis. I, nor Simon, have the right to forgive Karl for all his heinous crimes on behalf of the Jewish community. Karl didn’t truly repent for his crimes, which is essential in order to achieve forgiveness. Although some people believe otherwise, staying silent was the most neutral position between losing morality, by condemning Karl, and dishonoring the victims, by forgiving Karl. Karl did not truly forgive and sincerely repent for the crimes he committed. According to the Quran, repentance is important to gain forgiveness (Surah 5:39). Karl, a former Catholic, participated in the mass execution of Jews in Dnepropetrovsk, breaking the sixth commandment of Christianity, which states,“You shall not murder,” (Bible NIV, Exodus 20:13). To achieve forgiveness, Karl needed to pray to God and repent, defined as, “to feel or show that you are sorry for something bad or wrong that you did and that you want to do what is right,”(Merriam-Webster). Karl asked for forgiveness on his deathbed, implying that he wasn’t truly remorseful. There were other times when he could’ve attempted to gain forgiveness, but …show more content…

Forgiving Karl would’ve been a dishonor to all the victims, because he would be acting without their consent. If I was a Jew like Simon, I would face additional criticism by other Jews because I would’ve forgave a Nazi. Karl should have moral responsibility for doing such unspeakable acts of violence. However, that does not mean we should lambaste Karl. One must show compassion instead of hatred to those who’ve sinned. The Bible (NIV) states, “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned.” (Luke 6:37). Berating Karl would only place more burden and create more physiological pain in the

Open Document