# (Q) On Matthew 18:21-25



## DeoOpt (Aug 1, 2008)

A question I've been pondering. I Matthew 18:21-25
Some say that the man was forgiven but not saved some interpret as saying the man was forgiven but lost his salvation, and some have put it the man was saved but received the chastisement of his Father. In your findings what would be the proper exegesis and hermeneutics of this scripture? Thanks God bless..


----------



## Davidius (Aug 1, 2008)

According to option #1, what would be the difference between "forgiven" and "saved"? 

This is a wonderfully interesting passage, and I look forward to seeing what others have to say.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Aug 1, 2008)

I think the vital thing is to get the principal spiritual truth from the parable. Trying to figure out if the man represents a "saved" or "lost" person is unhelpful. We are just supposed to "identify" with him as a man who could be us--as unforgiving wastrels who have ourselves (ostensibly) been forgiven much, yea much much more than the petty insults against us.

He's like the person who plays the hypocrite in church; but (for instance) at home he shows emotional cruelty to his wife. She breaks his toy when he's at work, and he grudges her for a day, a week, a month. Perhaps he isn't saved at all. Certainly if he is, then he is hopelessly confused, and must also be a snare to his children.

But (gasp) the truth is that WE act like this a lot, at least more than we usually admit.

The point of the king's action at the end is to underscore *what punishment that kind of sin truly deserves*. I would compare this to other warnings that Jesus gave, e.g. cf. Mk. 9:37, 42 (I recently preached it).


----------



## Davidius (Aug 1, 2008)

I think that, since he lost his forgiveness, he was never actually forgiven in the first place.


----------



## DeoOpt (Aug 13, 2008)

Thanks for the comments


----------

