Old Tom: In fact, Christ taught the opposite. The parable of the 10,000 talents, the king freely forgave.

R: In the parable of Matt. 18:23-35 the king represents not God, but Christ (COL 244), and he himself pays the price of forgiveness, since the money was his; besides, when the servant proves to be unworthy of the forgiveness he received, he has his debt credited back to him and has to pay entirely for it.

T: What difference does is make if the king is the Father or Christ? When we've seen Christ, we've seen the Father.

Christ pays the money to Himself? That would mean the status quo is unchanged. If I have $10,000 in my account, and you owe me $1,000, and I take $1,000 of my account to pay it back, I wind up with $10,000, just like when I started. There's no difference between this an my simply forgiving the debt. In either case, I'm out $1,000 and you're $1,000 better off.

Old Tom:There's no hint anywhere in Christ's ministry that any payment was necessary for forgiveness to take place.

R: There are not hints, but a plain teaching that the sinner has a debt with God. The parable of Matt. 18, the parable Christ presented to Simon in Luke 7:41, 42, and the parable of the prodigal son, all show that there is a debt and that the king/creditor/father himself absorbs the loss, so in essence he pays it. There is no free lunch; somebody did have to pay the debt.

T: There's no inciation on the part of Christ that there's "no free lunch" or that somebody had to pay the debt in order for God to forgive. I don't have a problem with the idea that we are in debt to God. There's no question about that. Apart from the gracious gift of His Son, we would be dead. So we are infiniately in debt to Him. However, there's no hint that Christ died a debt in order for God to be able to forgive us.

If you want to say that the Father absorbs the loss, that's fine, because that well describes God's gracious character. He absorbs the loss. But in the parable of the prodigal son, there's no payment suggested in order for the father to be able to forgive. When the son started his speech to make a payment, the father cut him off. There was no payment necessary. He was just glad to have his son back.

Old Tom: This seems to be a crucial distinction in how we see things. Is sin benign, or is it deadly?

R: Of course it is not benign, but it is not sin that puts an end to itself; it is God who puts an end to sin. It is probable that if God let things run their course, man would end up destroying himself. But God deliberately chose not to do this; He commands the universe and He will put an end to sin.

T: Then sin is somewhat deadly. But God is very deadly, because His actions to bring about destruction much more quickly than sin would.

Doesn't God bring an end to sin simply by revealing His glory? And His glory is simply His goodness, correct? So God brings about an end to sin simply by being Himself. This means that for sin to exist at all, God must hold back from revealing His glory, doesn't it? When God ceases to hold back from revealing His glory, then sin is destroyed.

Sin only exists artificially, because God holds His goodness in check, so that it's principles can be seen. Once they've been seen for what they are, God allows sin to come to its rightful end, because He can to so without there being doubt that sin has come to an end not arbitrarily, but due to its own inherent deficiencies. It cannot stand up to God's glory; that's how it's deficient.

Tom,

Absorbing the loss is a form of paying the debt yourself and letting the other person go free. You see that in the parable of Matt. 18, when the servant proves to be unworthy of the forgiveness he received, he has his debt credited back to him and has to pay entirely for it. The same will happen to those who refuse Christ’s sacrifice - they will pay their own debt with God.

quote:

---

Doesn't God bring an end to sin simply by revealing His glory? And His glory is simply His goodness, correct? So God brings about an end to sin simply by being Himself. This means that for sin to exist at all, God must hold back from revealing His glory, doesn't it? When God ceases to hold back from revealing His glory, then sin is destroyed.

---

So sin does not put an end to itself. God puts an end to sin and to sinners in the moment He deems appropriate.


John,

Who presents the charge against the wicked? Certainly it’s not them themselves.

“The whole wicked world stand arraigned at the bar of God on the charge of high treason against the government of heaven. They have none to plead their cause; they are without excuse; and the sentence of eternal death is pronounced against them.” {GC 668.2}


Ikan,

The text is correct. God is not waiting to punish the sinner; He would like the sinner to turn from his way and live. The sinner, by his choices, brings the punishment upon himself, and the punishment is to be exposed to God’s wrath against sin. However, God deliberately manifests His wrath at the moment He deems appropriate, and He knows that by so doing He will cause the death of the sinner.

R: Absorbing the loss is a form of paying the debt yourself and letting the other person go free. You see that in the parable of Matt. 18, when the servant proves to be unworthy of the forgiveness he received, he has his debt credited back to him and has to pay entirely for it. The same will happen to those who refuse Christ’s sacrifice - they will pay their own debt with God.

T: The parable ends with this:

quote:

---

So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses. (Matt. 18:35)

---

This is included in explanations of this question:

quote:

---

21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? 22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven. (Matt. 18:21, 22)

---

Christ was explaining the principle of forgiveness. Peter kind of grasped it, and asked if he should forgive seven times (a big improvement over the 3 which the legal tradition required), and Christ explained that God's forgiveness is unlimited. He then explained the principle that if we do not receive God's forgiveness into our hearts, we will be lost. Just before the Peter episode, Christ explained the principle of God's graciously seeking and saving the lost. If we cherish a nigardly spirit (i.e. grudging, petter, meanly small), then God cannot heal us. This is how I understand Christ's teaching.

If you interpret it legalistically, then you are led to the conclusion that God cannot forgive us unless we forgive others. That is, God will kill us if we do not forgive those who are in debt to us. This is salvation by works, and doesn't speak well of God.

Our forgiving others is a natural result of the forgiving love of God flowing in our heart, which happens when we are reconciled to God by faith, which is due to the goodness of God leading us to repentance. The sequence is God's goodness => repentance => faith => we forgive others. It's not we forgive => God forgives or we forgive => God agrees not to kill us.

Old Tom:Doesn't God bring an end to sin simply by revealing His glory? And His glory is simply His goodness, correct? So God brings about an end to sin simply by being Himself. This means that for sin to exist at all, God must hold back from revealing His glory, doesn't it? When God ceases to hold back from revealing His glory, then sin is destroyed.

R: So sin does not put an end to itself. God puts an end to sin and to sinners in the moment He deems appropriate.

T: To say "as He deems appropriate" smacks of arbitrariness. But the death of the wicked is *not* arbitrary. It's not due to an act of power on God's behalf, but is the inevitable result of sin. God ends the arificial environment which is the only way that sin can exist. Sin ends in death, which is what it is supposed to do. Not because of any arbitrary action on the part of God, but because of the nature of sin itself.

The salvation of the wicked? Well, since all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, the salvation of the wicked includes every human being ever born, right? There is none righteous, no, not one. But, by the time Jesus arrives to redeem us, it is the righteous that He takes with Him - not the wicked. So, somewhere along the way the wicked become righteous.

God justifies the ungodly by faith.

Jude
1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
1:15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

I vote for salvation by faith.