And we all know this isn't going to turn out well.
If you've seen my other posts, you know I'm obsessed with the fear of the unpardonable sin. (Mentioned in Matthew 12, Mark 3, and Luke 12 please at least read one of these before replying) Some people think I'm being too legalistic or too harsh in categorising it, but thinking about how other people view my opinion I started to think about the sin. There are some people who say (with varying conclusions) that the blasphemy is very specific. Like it is committed verbally with malicious intent, or some go as far as to say it cannot be committed today because it must be verbal, intentional, and to Jesus' physical face.
But... this doesn't make any sense. I've been doing a bible plan to read through the entire bible, in order. In the Old Testament (I'm in Numbers now if it matters), accidental sins were still sins, they still carried the same consequence if not atoned for, wilful sins made people get cut off or put to death. But an accidental transgression still broke the law.
So an accidental blasphemy would still be blasphemy. Jesus did not put tons of regulations on the blasphemy, He just said "This sin will not be forgiven." With that in mind, the OT seems to have blasphemy defined multiple ways. In Leviticus (24?) someone is guilty of blaspheming the Name (by cursing I think) and is put to death. In other places it talks about people profaning or blaspheming by their actions, such as wilfully violating God's commands, offering bad sacrifices, being unfaithful, etc. So which definition should we draw in the NT?
If you've seen my other posts, you know I'm obsessed with the fear of the unpardonable sin. (Mentioned in Matthew 12, Mark 3, and Luke 12 please at least read one of these before replying) Some people think I'm being too legalistic or too harsh in categorising it, but thinking about how other people view my opinion I started to think about the sin. There are some people who say (with varying conclusions) that the blasphemy is very specific. Like it is committed verbally with malicious intent, or some go as far as to say it cannot be committed today because it must be verbal, intentional, and to Jesus' physical face.
But... this doesn't make any sense. I've been doing a bible plan to read through the entire bible, in order. In the Old Testament (I'm in Numbers now if it matters), accidental sins were still sins, they still carried the same consequence if not atoned for, wilful sins made people get cut off or put to death. But an accidental transgression still broke the law.
So an accidental blasphemy would still be blasphemy. Jesus did not put tons of regulations on the blasphemy, He just said "This sin will not be forgiven." With that in mind, the OT seems to have blasphemy defined multiple ways. In Leviticus (24?) someone is guilty of blaspheming the Name (by cursing I think) and is put to death. In other places it talks about people profaning or blaspheming by their actions, such as wilfully violating God's commands, offering bad sacrifices, being unfaithful, etc. So which definition should we draw in the NT?
