Was it hyperbole or did he mean it? Was he just making up something that sounded good or did he want us and Peter to take this literally? Was he just scolding his disciple Peter by giving him unrealistic instruction or was he really telling Peter what to do? Forgive, not just seven times, but seventy times seven, says Jesus. This is a kind of forgiveness that no one knows and no one practices. It means that none of us would ever hold anything against one another. We would always seek and resolve our every quarrel. Every thoughtless unkindness would never be remembered and those who hurt any of us would never face retribution beyond forgiveness.

It sounds impossible and it is unrealistic and it in no way reflects the lives we lead. That is why I have to wonder if Jesus really said it. And I have a hunch that the gospel writer of Matthew didn’t really think that Jesus said it or meant it in the way it sounds. It probably sounded as far out to him or her as it does to us. That is why the gospel writer presents this reading and the following story the way he or she does.

We know that the gospel writers had at their disposal many stories about Jesus. It was up to them to compile these stories in a way that made the most sense to them. So what we have in this reading is the juxtaposition of two stories that seem to inform each other but really they don’t because one actually contradicts the other. So I am wondering if the writer of the gospel is actually arguing with Jesus over what he has said about forgiveness. Let me tell you what I mean.

In the first part of this reading Jesus makes the statement that we should forgive those who sin against us four hundred and ninety times. That is always and forever, really. But the story that is then included after this saying that should illuminate what Jesus said does not illuminate it at all it contradicts it.

The story that follows the saying about endless forgiveness is not about the length and breadth of forgiveness it is about the end of forgiveness. It does not offer any insight into how we might always be forgiving, or how we might forgive some four hundred times, rather it is about when we can stop forgiving. Again, it actually contradicts what Jesus is saying.

This is the story that the gospel writer uses to tone down or argue with or even contradict what Jesus has said. The story goes that there was a king who called in his accounts. This is actually a terrible thing to do to anyone. I don’t know how things were done at that time but usually when anyone borrows money there must be some reasonable assurance that the borrower can recover that money and pay it back. And so a schedule is set up. Maybe it was a farmer who needed seed and when the crop came in he would pay back what he owes. It could have been any number of a thousand different reasons but I am sure that there was some mutually agreeable pay back plan other wise there would be no loan. But the king for whatever reason calls in the loan when he wants it. And the servant doesn’t have the money. The king threatens him but the man pleads with the king and at some time the king relents, the king even, out of pity forgives the debt. The story seems to turn out well. The king repents and forgiveness triumphs!

That is until the servant who was forgiven the debt demands payment from someone else who owes him money. Now in his defense he has just come through a rather harrowing experience and maybe just maybe he thinks it is a good idea to call in all his debts so if the king changes his mind he will at least have something to give to the king. So the one who has been forgiven is harsh to the debtor and puts him in prison because he cannot pay. However, this unkindness is noted by some of the other servants, there are a few busy bodies around who report back to the king what this servant had done. Even though the forgiven servant had been forgiven a very sizable debt he calls in a much smaller debt from someone else. He has not acted in kind and for that he kindles the king’s ire. And the king condemns him for not showing mercy like the king had. The unforgiving servant is then thrown in prison until his whole amount is paid back.

Now let me see Jesus said that we should forgive seventy times seven and yet in this story though there are many opportunities to forgive only one person forgives one other person once and then that is it. The king does not forgive the unforgiving servant after he messes up. The unforgiving servant does not forgive the man who owes money. The fellow servants do not forgive the unforgiving servant for doing what he has done against his debtor. They tell on him. This story is not about the demands of forgiveness it is rather about the lack of forgiveness.

And it ends with a threat. “So also my heavenly father will do to everyone of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.” (Matthew 18:35) What happened to that seventy times seven thing? Shouldn’t the king in the story or someone in the story be doing that which Jesus asked Peter to do? Wouldn’t it make sense, if Jesus really meant for us to be forgiving, for him to tell a story where forgiveness not judgment is the key? This story is not about forgiveness it is about judgment. And it contradicts the very thing that Jesus has said.

So we have to decide. Which is it? Does Jesus want us to forgive each other endlessly or should we take the example of the king in the story and forgive only as long as those we are forgiving act correctly or deserve our forgiveness or act the way we want them to?

I think the answer is obvious. Forgiveness is the mandate regardless of circumstance. It is an unconditional demand no matter how any of us want to water it down. And that makes it one of the hardest sayings. In every situation we are to work toward forgiveness.

I once had a Bible Professor who told us that if you wanted to understand the depth of Jesus’ demand to forgive then take any of his stories of forgiveness and play it out over another year or so and imagine that no one in the story acts any better. Imagine the Prodigal son who took his father’s inheritance and squandered it like a foolish young man. Imagine after he is remarkably restored to his family by his forgiving father he goes and does the same thing the very next year. And then the next year. Seventy times seven. Imagine the tax collector who falls on his face in his own sinfulness and cries out to God for mercy in the same way week after week. He doesn’t improve; he doesn’t make amends he just returns each week to beg for forgiveness. Is he still justified as Jesus claims four hundred and ninety times?

No our response after the second time or so would be something like, what is the use forgiveness isn’t helping these people at all. You see our human idea of forgiveness has something to do with improving the one we forgive. We expect as the story in Matthew quite clearly indicates that a person forgiven should be a better person and act like a better person or else! As if forgiveness will have some incredible effect and impact on them. That may happen, it may be true but it is not the reason to forgive anyone. Forgiveness is not a manipulation to get people to act the way we want them to. In fact I think Jesus might even be suggesting that if we forgive someone just to get them to behave better that might not really be forgiveness.