# Mathew 18:34,35 - lost in translation or losing salvation?



## Eoghan (Feb 2, 2013)

[BIBLE]Mathew 18:34-35[/BIBLE]

At first glance this looks like a threat to the converted. Or is it a literary device designed to confront us with the truth even if it needs a sledgehammer. In reading through Mathew I am struck by the use of hyperbole - necessarily so, given our stony hearts. 

What do others say? 

Am I reading the "loss of salvation" into the text?


----------



## TylerRay (Feb 2, 2013)

Christ does not say that his hearers have been forgiven their debts--just that they owe forgiveness to their neighbor.

The righteous requirement of the law is pressed by God's benevolence toward men (like the debt forgiven by the master in the parable)--toward the regenerate as well as the unregenerate. This is true of all of his benefits, not just the benefits of redemption.

Does that help?


----------



## ShagVT (Feb 2, 2013)

Ultimately this seems to be pretty similar to the message of Matt 6:14-15. Forgiveness will be a characteristic of a genuinely regenerate heart. I can certainly see where those who want to argue against the security of the believer would point to this parable, but it's worth noting that the first slave ultimately ends up in prison for the full debt he owed, right? Not for new debt.

Perhaps we could look at this as those who deceived themselves with false conversion, but fall away? In this case the lack of willingness to forgive is the evidence of the false conversion, and the man is punished for the original debt? 

To my eyes, this is probably a pretty difficult text for either position because you have to deal with the fact that the debt which seems to have been forgiven is suddenly back on the table. Perhaps this is a case of pressing the details of the parable further than the Lord intended. The parable has a pretty obvious primary message: FORGIVE. Are these secondary details as crucial? I don't know. I mean, you think of the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus -- are people in heaven really having conversations with those in hell across a chasm? Or is that just a detail in the story to help make the primary point of the parable.

I'm interested to hear how others address this.


----------

