Matthew 18:21

VI. YOUR HUMILITY AND SENSITIVITY TO OTHERS IS JUDGED BY YOUR READINESS TO FORGIVE OR SHOW MERCY. (18:21-35)
A. PETER'S QUESTION: HOW MANY TIMES FORGIVE? (18:21)

Matthew 18:21 Then came Peter, and said unto him. With the same freedom that John earlier broke into this discourse to ask his question about the isolated miracle-worker (Mark 9:38-41), Peter may have arisen from his seat to confront the Master with what he may have thought was a limitation on something said earlier. There is no need to assume that Matthew glued the following section onto the sermon because of its supposed appropriateness. (See also on Matthew 18:35; Matthew 19:1.) Then came Peter may be nothing but a glimpse into the freedom permitted in Jesus-' class sessions.

Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? until seven times? This question is based on Jesus-' statement in Matthew 18:15. Beyond what Jesus had said there (Matthew 18:15), was there a deeper problem getting to Peter? Had he been personally abused by comments from the sidelines by some of the others, jealous of his apparent promotions and prominence? At Caesarea Philippi Jesus had indeed promised him a key role in the establishing of the Kingdom. Were others, bitter at him because his presumed importance blocked their own hope of glory, casting aspersions on his worthiness? It is not impossible that some personal uncertainty made unlimited forgiveness seem extreme to Peter. There are two sides to his question: mentality and mechanics.

1.

MENTALITY. Since the wronged person who attempts to recover his sinning brother must approach him in the spirit of forgiveness and without any intention to be vindicated, Peter may be wondering whether there should not be some limit to this open-ended long-suffering and forgiveness. The basic fallacy of Peter's question is that it assumes that forgiveness robs us of the right to cease forgiving and start demanding justice at least in certain cases. This is why Jesus-' supporting story (Matthew 18:23-34) must illustrate how God's demand that we forgive does not ask us to surrender a proper right to vengeance. Rather, His demand is based on the fact that, due to our own sin and need for mercy, we never possessed that right in the first place. The very act of asking that justice be waived and mercy granted in our, own case is an implicit justification of mercy in all similar circumstances, like the case of our offending brother. There is just no time when we may claim a right to be vindictive. (Romans 12:19) To cease forgiving and start demanding justice for others is tantamount to asking that justice be demanded in our own case too. But to beg mercy for ourself and justice for others is a hypocrisy that a holy God cannot overlook.

2.

MECHANICS. Since, according to Jesus-' formula, if your brother hear you brings the controversy to an end, Peter, seeing the possibility that some brother might repeat his sin, asks, At what time should I simply stop forgiving my brother and bring the grievance before other witnesses, before taking the question before the assembly? Jesus-' answer will imply that if this be the case, where the offender repents, there need be no second or third step in the reconciliation (cf. Luke 17:3 f) since all procedure would be blocked at the first step in an indefinite cycle of sinning and forgiveness involving only the two original brothers. (Matthew 18:15; Matthew 18:22) The only exception to Jesus-' formula of forgiveness is, If he does not listen.

In fact, delight in repeating sins may be the real sin of which the others are but superficial symptoms and, until this is eradicated by confession and forgiveness, the first step toward true reconciliation has not yet been really made. Jesus is not covering the diabolical desire to repeat the other sins just to see how much that fool brother can take or forgive. No one is asked to be taken for a fool by another Christian under the guise of easy forgiveness, for just as soon as it becomes apparent to the offended brother that the other is stepping on his toes, not merely by excusable accident, but for love of tormenting, then this root problem is the sin with which the offended must deal. If he does not listen at this level, then the question should be aired before witnesses. (Matthew 18:16) The secret to Jesus-' meaning is to get at the right sin the first time.

Until seven times? In later Judaism the Talmudic rule only admitted forgiving one's offender three times, basing its argument on Amos 1:3 and Job 33:29, as if God Himself only forgave so far and no more: Should a mere mortal be more amenable to forgive than the Almighty?! It is not impossible that this same bad exegesis and grudging spirit had roots in thinking and practice in Peter's time too. If so, he had doubled the cautious, calculating scribal scrimping of love and even added one more time of forgiveness for good measurewas this not enough? But what went wrong?

1.

Peter was moving in the true spirit of legalistic formalism, since he sought ANY numerical, outside limit at which mercy and forgiveness must stop. Rather than manifest a godly spirit, this is really a vindictive temper that wants to know how much longer it has to forbear before letting the offender feel the full brunt of its vendetta.

2.

It had not occurred to him that, in the very process of counting wrongs, he had crushed the very spirit of forgiveness. To tally forgiveness can have only two justifications: to pamper one's pride in great magnanimity or to arrive soon to the outside limit when all mercy is withdrawn and vengeance can finally take over! The spirit of mercy recognizes that we only forgive our brother ONCE. Then, however many times he offends us thereafter, each time he repents, we forgive PERIOD, not once more, because we are not counting.

Whatever else may be criticized about Peter's steel-cold question, there is a heart-warming touch of reality in it: this is a real man wrestling with his desire to enter honestly into the spirit of his Master's teaching by offering generously the seven pardons, his desire that the offender learn to stop giving him trouble, and his desire for balance that does not make a mockery of either justice or mercy. Peter does not come to us on the sacred page as a fully perfected Apostle who makes no theological blunders, but as a man who is growing.

See Matthew 18:22-35 for Fact Questions.