New Teaching – the “Denial Doctrine”

[AVBunyan]

I’ve been seeing this teaching on many forums lately so I thought I’d give my two cents worth here and then head out and leave all this behind for a while.

I. Just what is this new teaching?  
First of all it is not really new – been around since Gen. 4 when Cain offered up his fruit and vegetable stand without faith.  In a nutshell it means this:

The best I can tell - The person says they have trusted Christ as Saviour and his shed blood but….but… down the road that they can actually deny Christ and turn their back on Christ and fall away because they have a free will.  They don’t call it loosing salvation but denying thus giving up based upon falling away or apostasy.

II. What is it Really?
Answer – the “Gospel of Pure Works”!  No need to give a bunch of scripture references here just simple reasoning will suffice.  If a person says they are trusting Christ but they also say that they can possible deny Christ and fall away then what are the actually trusting on getting them to glory?  They are trusting in themselves. They are counting on them not denying or falling and this is not trusting totally on Christ.  If they believe the “Denial Gospel” then they can stand before God and say:
“I didn’t deny so I have a right to get in.”  
“I didn’t apostatize so I have a right to get in.”
“I didn’t fall away so I have a right to get in.”
“I didn’t use my free will to turn away so I have a right to get in.”

Sure are a lot of “I’s” in there – so where is Christ?  To them Christ opened the door and they wander in and head out on the road to heaven just hoping and praying that they don’t apostatize or deny Christ later on.  This is man trusting in man for one’s salvation – no other way around it.  

So that is why I named the doctrine the “Denial Gospel”.  Their salvation is based upon their lack of denial or not falling away.  Their gospel is not “Christ die for our sins…” – It is “I didn’t deny Christ…” A false gospel if there ever was one

It is either all of Christ or none of Christ.

III. How do they arrive at this?  
Real simple:
1. They go to passages in Paul that have nothing to do with justification.  Example you ask – won’t even waste time on this.
2. They go to passages other than Paul (OT, Gospels, Tribulation) that has nothing to do with justification. Example you ask – won’t even waste time on this.

IV. Why do they do the above (III)?
In my opinion after observing this phenomena for the past 24 years:
1. They still don’t know what took place at Calvary and the true purpose of the cross.
2. They confuse Positional Truth (How God sees the saint) with Practical Truth (how the saint works out their position down here).  They turn the examples of the saint’s walk in the scriptures after salvation and make this the plan of salvation – they got it backwards!  

Here is what is puzzling to me – why would somebody skip the plain verses in Paul (see the thread on “What Saith the Scriptures?”)?
Instead they run to passages that contradict Paul that were meant for another people for another time?  It seems to me that the verses in Paul would take precedent for Paul told us to consider him:
2 Tim 2:7  Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things.

Paul was writing to believing saints in the body of Christ after Calvary for this present age – a safe place to get church age justification doctrine.

Peter, James, John, Luke, Matthew, Jude, etc. were writing primarily to Jews before Calvary or to the Jews during the future great tribulation - a very shaky place to get church age doctrine – unless you are planning on going through the great tribulation and if so then you better become real familiar with them!

Summary – this “Denial Gospel” declares that one is trusting their “lack of denial” to get them to heaven.  Now many folks can’t see this and here lies the tragedy.

What you are really saying is..."Christ's death and the shedding of his precious blood at Calvary was insufficient for my sins."

Flee from your own efforts and then flee from Christ.

Real simple folks – either God runs things or you.

God bless

[nChrist]

AVBunyan,

Brother, I've heard this doctrine given in detail several different ways, but they all are terribly confused and based on works of the individual instead of works by Jesus.

There are also many portions of the Holy Bible that deal with Christian living and Christian testimony before men that are also used to bolster the works doctrine. YES - I've also heard of the "denial doctrine" you speak of. It is very self-centered instead of Christ centered, and it basically is a statement that the person controls their own Salvation. They can pick it up or lay it down any time they wish. The truth is they were probably never Saved to start with. YES - the doctrine is full of "I's" and is very sad.

Salvation is full of JESUS, not "I", and it is based on the finished work of JESUS, not the pitiful work of man. I give thanks every day for the finished work of JESUS. It is only because of the finished work of JESUS that we are Saved. Our trust and hope is in HIM, not a man or ourselves. We are left with one simple truth that "JESUS PAID IT ALL, AND ALL TO HIM I OWE", just like the beautiful old hymn.

Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable GIFT, Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour Forever!

Love In Christ,
Tom

John 14:1-3  Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

[AVBunyan]

I give thanks every day for the finished work of JESUS. It is only because of the finished work of JESUS that we are Saved. Our trust and hope is in HIM, not a man or ourselves. We are left with one simple truth that "JESUS PAID IT ALL, AND ALL TO HIM I OWE", just like the beautiful old hymn.
Love In Christ,
Tom

Nice post brother - thanks for lifting up our Lord Jesus Christ.

God bless

[Audax]

AVBunyan (Tom),

Respectfully, what then do you do with 2Tim 2:11-13?  

"It is a trustworthy statement: For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him;  If we endure, we will also reign with Him; If we deny Him, He also will deny us;  If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself."

Your post presented your personal opinion.  It was merely a representation of the systematic theology you hold to and how another view contradicts with it.  I'd like you to prove your position from Scripture if you have the time.  It is obvious from your post that your systematic theology makes your imaginary opponent's position absurd.  But will you please show me how Scripture is just as clear?    

Your logic seems to be largely directed at attacking a straw man.  Do the just live by faith or not?

Rom. 1:17  "For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith."

Eph. 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, {it is} the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast."

You seem to say that we are saved by grace without faith?  Or else you are redefining "faith," as "works."  Isn't a denial of what one once believed, a lack of faith rather than a lack of works anyway?  Or do you believe faith is a work??  

Summary – this “Denial Gospel” declares that one is trusting their “lack of denial” to get them to heaven.  Now many folks can’t see this and here lies the tragedy.

To trust in the "lack" of something, for salvation, is to trust in nothing.  So if that's what they are actually doing, then you have a point.  But I find it difficult to believe that any serious student of the Bible really holds to that position.  I think it's a straw man.  Nothing is no-thing.  It is nothing, and nothing doesn't save something, or anything, or anyone.  Nobody would believe that nothing saves them.  Well I guess nonreligious people believe nothing saves them....  And therefore nothing does.  

I may sound like I'm just goofing around.  I am.  But I'm also trying to show how easy it is to twist language around and obscure meaning.  

So, rather than saying that your opponents are trusting their "lack of denial," perhaps it would be better for you to say that these folks trust in faith in God's grace as a means of salvation?  Because faith is intrinsically a lack of denial, though it is much more than that.  But do you notice the extra term in my sentence there?  

Trust in -> trust in -> God's grace = salvation.  

The sentence was written as an explanation of a theological perspective and that means taking a step back.  In actual practice, they don't trust in their faith, but rather they simply trust in God's grace.  Their trust in God's grace assumes their trust that trust in God's grace is the way of salvation.  The trust isn't trusted in, it's God's grace that is the object of trust.  "Through faith." as Eph. 2 states.  

I trust that it's correct to say:  

Trust in -> God's grace = salvation.

How is this perspective different than yours?  It is orthodox.  Is not faith instrinsically a lack of denial?  So isn't anyone who obtains salvation by grace, through faith in God, involving himself in this lack of denial?

Matt. 10:32   "Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven.  But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven."  See also Luke 12:8-9

Confessing Christ is opposite of denying Christ in the above passage.  

It seems to me that Scripture is pretty clear that we are denied, if we deny Him.  Therefore if we deny Him, we are denied.  Therefore those who believe that if they deny Him they are denied, seem to have Scriptural support.  

I don't see how this is a "gospel of pure works," as you say?  

Soteriological issues are of utmost importance.  It is so important that we don't believe we are saved by works.  It is just as important that we don't believe we are saved apart from faith.  

Eph. 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, {it is} the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast."

God bless,  Benjamin
 



 

[nChrist]

Audax,

Brother Benjamin, I can't speak for AVBunyan, but I'm not interested in another debate right now, especially one of semantics. In fact, I don't do debates in semantics.

Ephesians 2:8-10  For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Ephesians 2:8-10 has always been one of my favorites, and it describes my stance about Salvation and works well. I said nothing that is contrary to this portion of Scripture and neither did AVBunyan.

Our discussion related to the thoughts of some people who state that they can pick up or lay down their Salvation, basically that they are in charge instead of God.

Peter denied Jesus three times just before the crucifixion, so is Peter lost?

I've already stated my very plain and simple beliefs in this thread. I love, trust, and have total faith in Jesus Christ as the Lord over my life. I was baptized by the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit lives in my heart, and my heart is sealed WITH the Holy Spirit - setting me apart as a purchased possession of Jesus forever. No power in the universe can pluck me from the Mighty Hands of JESUS, nor can any power break the SEAL of the Holy Spirit on my heart.

The rest is already posted above, but I'll repeat part of it. My trust and faith is in JESUS and His finished work on the Cross. I don't trust in my work for Salvation because the works of man don't save anyone. I do good works for JESUS and yield to HIM because I love HIM and want to, not because I think that works will save me. JESUS has already saved me the minute I confessed and asked HIM to be LORD over my life. I'm already saved, so I'm not hoping that I'm good enough or work hard enough to be saved. WHY? - My trust and faith is in JESUS, not myself.

If I have a stroke, go into a coma, lose my mind, or die, I already have 100% assurance of Salvation. I've already been given the promises of GOD, and the promises of GOD will be kept. Bottom line - I've already been delivered to JESUS, and I belong to HIM. This is NOT because of any work that I've done or will do in the future, rather the completed work of JESUS on the CROSS. This is the plain and simple Gospel of the Grace of God, not just my opinion.

Love In Christ,
Tom

II Timothy 4:8  Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

[Audax]

Tom,

I mistakenly addressed my message to you in my first post.  I thought AVBunyan's personal name was Tom, for some reason.  My mistake.  I was intentionally addressing my post directly AVBunyan and no one else.  Of course you agreed with him so you're more than welcome to reply- I just wanted to clarify that for you.  Semantics right?!!!  Apparently they're important.  

AVBunyan does not equal Tom.  
In the same sense as:
Faith does not equal works.  

I agree with you that we are saved by grace through faith.  That's the clear teaching of Scripture and not just anyone's opinion.  

I feel that AVBunyan set up a straw man through his semantics, and that's why I wished to bring out that point in my first post.  The meanings of words gives words their importance.  Without the meaning, there is no meaning.    

God bless,  Benjamin  

[nChrist]

Audax,

Brother Benjamin, you did have me somewhat confused. I really don't know what AVBunyan's name is. I do know that he is a strong Christian and appears to be a really nice guy. He didn't elaborate on how long his break would be, nor do I know what his other commitments are. Many people use the forum on and off, seasonal, while they are out of school, etc., etc.

I really don't know what you're talking about when you refer to his straw man argument. I've read many debates that relate to his post, even recently. There might even be a like discussion on Christians Unite already. The gist of what I understood it to be is like a person saying, "I can choose to be saved today and reject Salvation tomorrow." In the end, the discussion usually leads to someone saying that the person wasn't saved to start with. Maybe I over-simplify it by saying that some people think they are in charge of their Salvation instead of God. It also usually involves "God's Love, Grace, and GIFT versus my works - Which one saves?" Some even take it so far to debate whether faith is works. I trust the simplicity of Ephesians 2:8-10 and the finished work of JESUS on the Cross.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Psalms 143:8  Cause me to hear thy lovingkindness in the morning; for in thee do I trust: cause me to know the way wherein I should walk; for I lift up my soul unto thee.

[Audax]

Tom,

Hey sorry.  I'm not meaning to confuse you.  I was confused because when I read your post addressed to AVBunyan, I saw, "AVBunyan" at the top, and then it was signed by Tom.  So I equated your name with him and didn't realize my mistake until after you replied to me.  Anyway 'sall good now.    

As far as my issue with AVBunyan's post?  Since I am affirming an orthodox position and he is also orthodox what is my issue?  I'll try to clarify that.

Well he's criticizing an opposing position unfairly by misrepresenting it as "Denial Doctrine" which he believes is a works oriented soteriology.  He thus seems to directly imply that one can actually deny Christ and still go to heaven.  That's absurd according to Scripture.  It's also unfair to characterize his opponents as being works oriented when they are not.  That's a serious accusation in the evangelical world and I feel his opponents don't deserve it.  Not all of them anyway.

The trend I've seen a lot, and it's a problem, is that many popular theological positions are not based on the clear teachings of Scripture, but on logical inductions that are made from certain Scriptures, while ignoring other Scriptures that contradict the logical inductions that have been made.  Deductions are valid, inductions are just theory and need to conform to the rest of Scripture inorder to be even theoretically accepted.  Ultimately we are looking to have a systematic theology that lifts out of Scripture naturally without being a system we impose upon it.  Perhaps systematic theology itself is only an ultimate goal because it seems necessary inorder to confront the other systems that exist out there.  Ideally I wish I could just quote a passage and everyone and their uncle would see it's clear meaning and believe it.  Scripture itself ought to be our creed.  Systematic theology is often just theory.    

An example of this for illustration:  

Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism.  Both are grid like frameworks that are used to interpret Scripture.  They are known as opposing viewpoints in the theological world, and divide between denominations.    

Depending on your view, either one, or the other, or neither of those logical systems should be imposed upon Scripture as a means of clarifying how to interpret it.  

Whatever one you choose, your perception of Scripture is thereafter inherently altered by your choice of which framework you'll be working with.  This directly affects many, many issues, including infant baptism and the contention that Reformed Baptists are a logically contradictory breed of cat.  It is also directly related to the relationship between the church and Israel.  It creates a massive rift between various eschatalogical positions.  Hope I spelled eschatalogical right?  

I feel that whenever we impose a system on the Scriptures, we must do so very humbly to see if it fits or not.  I've followed a lot of traditions within theology myself over the years, and come to realize how easy it was for me to quote the viewpoints of my own theological heros rather than Scripture itself.  This is very blinding because we can't see past the "experts" we trust in.  Their blindspots are our blindspots.  Often we have our peers to back us up, but let's face it, this is part of what's caused the lack of unity in the body of Christ.  Our peers go to our church.  Someone else's peers go to their church.  There is division not unity.  We follow Paul, but they follow Apollos.  Others follow Cephas.  1Cor. 3:1-9.  This isn't right.  We need to be like the Bereans who tested Paul out.  So we should test our theological heros, not blindly follow them after some substandard study on our own.  

Systems are contradictory to eachother, so because of the strength and pervasiveness of a person's system of thought, he may find himself unable to view some passages of Scripture for what they actually say, because it would lead to major logical contradiction on so many levels in his system that he can't account for it.  He is so convinced of his system that he thus reinterprets the Bible passages that don't fit well, inorder to make them fit aswell as possible.  Suddenly those passages unconsciously loose their life for him and have a little mystery to them, yet he cannot admit his system is wrong because he has no replacement system which has more explanitory power than the one he has.  

The alternative is for one to learn to read Scripture for what it clearly says, thus allowing unresolved tension to occur between passages that seem to contradict.  Over time with continued study and humility, the tension can then find its resolution in a logical synthesis.  

The fact is Scripture is quite clear that we cannot ultimately deny Christ, or else we will be antichrists.  I for one, don't go around trusting in my lack of denial inorder to make it to heaven.   But I know that if I ultimately did deny Him I wouldn't make it to heaven.  I believe this simply because it's what Scripture teaches.    

1Jn.2:18-24  "Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.  They went out from us, but they were not {really} of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but {they went out,} so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.  But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know.  I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it, and because no lie is of the truth.  Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.  Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.  As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father."

Having debated some atheistic Extians ("ExChristians") before, I know that it is quite possible to follow Christ for a time and then in the end deny Him even through tears.  The hardness and perversion that's developed in some cases is sickening.  I'm not getting into the question of whether they were ever saved or not.  I know many feel that's theoretical.  I'm just saying that it is absurd according to Scripture that any antichrist will go to heaven.  I was hoping that continued discussion would develop from there but if AVBunyan isn't around then I guess it won't.  I didn't know he was still gone, since it was two weeks ago he first posted.

As for your question about Peter's denial.  In turn I ask, what about Judas?  I don't know any who think he made it to heaven.  As for Peter:

Luke 22:31-34  "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded {permission} to sift you like wheat; but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers."  But he said to Him, "Lord, with You I am ready to go both to prison and to death!"  And He said, "I say to you, Peter, the rooster will not crow today until you have denied three times that you know Me."

It's a beautiful answer.  Our LORD's grace is abundant, and His mercies are new every morning.  I heard recently the story of a Chinese Pastor who was thrown into prison for years where he was tortured so badly that they were able to induce him to deny Christ.  As a result they released him only to find him wailing in the streets, "I am Peter, I have denied my LORD!!  I am Peter, I have denied my LORD!!"  They locked him up again, where he was happier to be in prison tortured for His LORD, than on the streets in the agony of having betrayed Him.  Others have been tortured beyond the point of insanity.  Christ is more than abundant for all of this, having lead the way through suffering for us Himself.  His mercy and love for those who suffer for Him, is ineffable.  

I feel that each of us must have the same passion for Him.

Benjamin    
 

   

[nChrist]

Brother Benjamin,

Varying opinions that Christians enjoy debating really don't bother me. The key word is "Christians", so I wouldn't be talking about assaults against God and the Gospel. However, I do many times grow weary of endless hypotheticals, listing of Scriptures falsely labeled as contradictory, and many discussions that turn into wars. That's why I have mixed emotions about debates and many times try to avoid them. I many times think about avoiding them completely, but a moderator can't always do that on a Christian forum.

I do many times wonder what would happen if all Christians who spend considerable time arguing would redirect their efforts to sharing the plain and simple Gospel of God's Grace. However, that might not draw very large crowds because people do like to engage in or watch wars. On the other side of the coin, reasonable discussions about differences can benefit everyone, but reasonable discussions also don't draw large crowds.

I think you will find AVBunyan's thoughts and posts to be quite reasonable. Yes, we have had discussions here with people claiming that they used to be Christians. I guess their purpose was to come here and rescue us from JESUS. I would subscribe to the view that they were never Christians to start with. Many people think they are Christians simply because they sit in a church pew one hour per week or otherwise go through the motions of being a Christian. I would go further and state that many go through the motions of being a Christian most of their lives and never become a born-again Christian.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Romans 3:28  Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

[Audax]

Tom,

I appreciate your reasonable and kind replies.  It shows that we can discuss issues as Christians without getting inflammitory.  I respect your wish to not want a debate, and since nobody else has picked up this thread either, then there's not much point in continuing.  Let me then make a summation and conclusion, and if you feel that there's anything you want to reply to or add, then you're welcome.  We can take it or leave it from there.  

I guess the issue of "Christians" as you put it, is partly where I'm coming from.  To put my position out, I am not of the camp that believes a true saint can loose his salvation.  I also don't believe a true saint can deny Christ.  But I respect the position of those who believe that true saints can loose their salvation.  I respect their position a lot more than many do, because I feel it has quite strong Biblical warrant.  I am protective of not seeing those sincere believers labeled as being a group who believe in salvation by works, because they clearly are not of that belief at all.  That is accusing them of heresy, when traditionally and Biblically this is clearly an in house debate.    

I also see the position that AVBunyan lays out as being just as dangerous as salvation by works itself.  That may sound like an exaggeration but I really mean it.  His position is as contrary to my own, as it is to those who don't believe in "eternal security."  Because Scripture is very clear that the unrighteous don't enter heaven.  See Eph 4, Gal 6.  If we become too abstract with our reasonings from accomplished justification, we end up giving our pew sitters a false sense of security where they should not have it.  Those who deny Christ either verbally or through an unrighteous life, ultimately are not going to find themselves in heaven nomatter what they thought about justification.  If Scripture clearly teaches it I don't feel it's at all wise to attack it.  We need to be honest with Scripture instead of imposing our own categories of thought upon it.  What does it say?  1 Cor. 6 for instance.  

To say it's either God, or us who we are relying on for salvation, is a false dilemma in this situation.  

We all believe salvation is of God, not of us.  To believe that unrighteous people don't enter heaven has nothing to do with salvation by works.  It is entirely based upon the idea that a truly saved person has been changed from the inside by the God we all rely on.

The following passage sums it up perfectly.  

1 Peter 1:1-9  Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.  Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to {obtain} an inheritance {which is} imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.  In this you greatly rejoice, even though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been distressed by various trials, so that the proof of your faith, {being} more precious than gold which is perishable, even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ; and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, obtaining as the outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls.

Anyway that's what I was driving at and if anyone wants to continue the discussion you're welcome, otherwise I'm finished.  

Benjamin

God bless!

[nChrist]

Brother Benjamin,

I've seen a post from AVBunyan today, so maybe he will wish to discuss this further. I understand many points of view and so does he. I think that the three of us are pretty much on the same sheet of music on Salvation.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Romans 8:28  And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

[Audax]

Tom,

I saw his post aswell and then went to his homepage.  I enjoyed some of the quotes he had on "assurance of salvation" there.  If that's what he believes then I very largely agree with him.  God bless you both.

Ben  

[cris]

Would someone care to explain Matt:18:21-35 in light of my following assumption?

Suppose that God is the King and the slave is you.  I'm assuming you (the slave) are saved because I don't think God forgives the unsaved, or, does He?

Thanks
Grace & Peace
cris

[Audax]

Cris,

  Great question!  I want to put the passage in here, and then I will comment on it.  

_{Mat 18:21   Then Peter came and said to Him, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?"
Mat 18:22   Jesus *said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.
Mat 18:23   "For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves.
Mat 18:24   "When he had begun to settle {them,} one who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him.
Mat 18:25   "But since he did not have {the means} to repay, his lord commanded him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, and repayment to be made.
Mat 18:26   "So the slave fell {to the ground} and prostrated himself before him, saying, 'Have patience with me and I will repay you everything.'
Mat 18:27   "And the lord of that slave felt compassion and released him and forgave him the debt.
Mat 18:28   "But that slave went out and found one of his fellow slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and he seized him and {began} to choke {him,} saying, 'Pay back what you owe.'
Mat 18:29   "So his fellow slave fell {to the ground} and {began} to plead with him, saying, 'Have patience with me and I will repay you.'
Mat 18:30   "But he was unwilling and went and threw him in prison until he should pay back what was owed.
Mat 18:31   "So when his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were deeply grieved and came and reported to their lord all that had happened.
Mat 18:32   "Then summoning him, his lord *said to him, 'You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me.
Mat 18:33   'Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?'
Mat 18:34   "And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him.
Mat 18:35   "My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart."}

As you stated in your post, you are assuming that God is the King and the slave is me or you.  You must assume the slave is saved because otherwise you have God forgiving the unsaved, and that doesn't fit with the rest of Scripture.  That seems to be reasonable at first glance doesn't it?  

So at first glance one may just take a passage like this and think, it is apparent that truly forgiven and saved people can loose their salvation if they later on, won't also forgive others.  This is frankly a major view of this passage and I respect it.  Though I don't hold to this view myself, I believe its practical emphasis to be right on.  It is quite easy to see how some have come to reject the idea of eternal security, in view of passages such as this one.

This idea of loosing salvation seems to conflict with passages that do teach eternal security.  How do we make a theological synthesis here?  

As you read this parable or any parable, keep in mind what you're reading.  Jesus is using this story as an analogy, an illustration to help us understand one of the dynamics of our own relationship with God.  The story isn't meant to have theological precision or to mirror reality in all its aspects.  Rather it is meant to illustrate a main point very forcefully through allusion to the natural order of human existence.  I believe the only really clear theological truth one can draw from this parable is summed up in the final verse.      

Vs. 35 "My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart."

God is not the King and we are not the slave.  The King is the King and the slave is the slave.  Yet it is true that God approximates the King and we approximate the slave.  So just as the King did not forgive the slave who did not forgive, so if we too do not forgive, God will not forgive us.  

The important thing to keep in mind when studying parables or really any passage of Scripture, is that Scripture is not written so much systematically as it is written practically.  To put that again in a different way:  Scripture is written practically, not abstractly.  Our modern temptation is to not listen to the main point of a passage, but instead induce abstract ideas from it that don't necessarily follow from it.  While one can say that this parable allows for the idea that a true believer can loose his salvation, it does not necessarily teach that.

So what is the praxis of this passage?  How does it apply to us nomatter what our theological persuasion about when justifcation happened or how fast it happened, or whether we can loose our salvation, etc...?  I believe the praxis is this:  

I don't care who you are or what dealings you think you've had with God.  I don't care if you have been on your knees in tears of repentence for your sins and have felt that you are forgiven.  If you will not forgive your brother from the heart, you will find yourself unforgiven in the end.  This is the practical issue at stake here.  It is the same with the passages that teach that if we deny Christ we will be denied.  

The systematic theological ideas work in the realm of theory, the Biblical writers wrote in the realm of practice and direct truth or fact.  While Scripture contains no contradictions and the theology of Scripture can be systematized as a result- the concern of the writers of Scripture and of God seems not to be systematic theology but practical application in life.  The praxis:  Forgive or you will not be forgiven.  This praxis is the same whatever your theological views about other things that seem to relate.  If anyone allows his theological views to obscure or deny this practical fact, then his theology is wrong and he is in danger of ending up just like the slave.  I feel many have done this or are doing it to others.

The question is not, "When did justification occur?"  It's "How do I know I am justified?"  

That's my view, but if yours is that the slave "lost his salvation," I couldn't disagree with you from this passage alone, nor do I have much issue with this position.  Why?  Because our praxis is just the same in the end.  And that's what Scripture is aiming at anyway.    

One view I do have issue with is the view that "once we're justified" we can do whatever sin and evil afterwards without repentance, and still go to heaven because we are "saved," and it's all of God and not of us.  That's a hypothetical deduction made from one truth, that actually doesn't work in reality because of another.  Hypotheticals are not necessarily actuals.  Before I beat it to death..., or have I already?  I'd better go.    

Great point, and great question Cris.  

Benjamin

God bless.    

[cris]

Audax,

Thank you for your detailed response.  I have another question for you.

If I am saved and do not forgive my brother from my heart, where do you think I will go when I die?  (Parables are "like"
and we are made in the "likeness" of God).  IMO, the parables (words of Jesus) are very clear.  Yes, I know they are stories, analogies, but nonetheless, clear.

That's one question in reference to the parable but I have another.  I'll let it go until after you answer the one above, though.

Respectfully and thank you,
Grace and peace,
cris