Unforgivable sin?

[Walter Kovacs]

That's the strongest claim for what BOTHS is...but I don't think that's what it is. Knowing Jesus and his style of teaching as I do, I believe that was hyperbole. He did it all the time. He was making a point. I do not believe that Jesus meant that that's what BOTHS was. But a case can be made for it. I happen to disagree. Let's not argue this one to death

Allrighty then, let's have at it

My claim is that BOTHS consists in a lifelong rejection of the work of the HS in one's life. If you think about it, it makes sense...every other sin occurs within this life and can be repented of. But a lifelong, conscious, active rejection of the HS ends in death, spiritually.

 

[razeontherock]

Yes I have heard that before and it does make sense. Again, this is not something our OP could have done

Can you show (via Jesus' teaching style) how this understanding is implied from His words? Or maybe I should ask how this is any different than simply rejecting Jesus?

 

[paul becke]

The "unforgivable, because eternal" sin is is known by Catholics as "invincible ignorance". It is not a question of simply not knowing the truth, or of rejecting the faith in terms of conscious belief (although not necessariy in terms of love, at a deeper level), as a result of terrible scandal, but of adamantly rejecting the truth from sheer malice. Would this describe psychopaths, who have no conscience at all, and whose "personality disorder" is said to be incurable, I wonder?

During a bitter altercation, Jesus' accusers claimed that their father was Abraham, but he answered that their father was the devil.

 

[Walter Kovacs]

Yes I have heard that before and it does make sense. Again, this is not something our OP could have done

Can you show (via Jesus' teaching style) how this understanding is implied from His words?

Here's a brief overview of why I think what I do on Jesus's teaching style:

“The fact that he (Jesus) grew up in the Near East and spoke to Near Easterners affected both the matter and manner of his speech. Along with his contemporaries Jesus delighted in sharp contrasts and extreme statements – what the rhetoritician calls hyperbole and exaggeration. His teaching is characterized not by grays and halftones, but by contrasting black and white. Using colorful speech he shows the ridiculous and ludicrous elements in everyday situations.” (“The New Testament: its background, growth and content” Bruce M. Metzger. Abingdon Press. Nashville. 2nd edition. Pp. 136-137)

Or maybe I should ask how this is any different than simply rejecting Jesus?

Well, rejecting Jesus imo is probably the same thing; I don't see how an active conscious lifelong rejection of Jesus would end up any other way.

 

[razeontherock]

Well, rejecting Jesus imo is probably the same thing; I don't see how an active conscious lifelong rejection of Jesus would end up any other way.

So then, our OP has not found a reason to abandon Hope. Instead, he should - -

"From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (Mt 4:17, Mark 3:2)

 

[drich0150]

Jesus definitely isn't being specific in Mark 3:30

Because one must take into context in which verse 30 was written.

Christ identifies the efforts of the "Teachers of the law" in question through their action recorded in verse 22
In Short they ascribed the undeniable works of God/The Holy Spirit to the works of Satan.

So if God is willing to forgive all those sins after I repent, then why have the other bible verses saying that blaspheming the holy spirit isn't forgivable? Isn't it contradictory?

No because as my original quote outlines:

This blasphemy then has to do with accusing Jesus Christ (in person, on earth) of being demon-possessed. There are other ways to blaspheme the Holy Spirit (such as lying to Him, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-10), but the accusation against Jesus was the blasphemy that was unpardonable. This specific unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit cannot be duplicated today.

 

[Asvin]

*shrugs* okay. But it doesn't. There's no verse where Jesus or anyone else says "BOTHS is this specific thing." There's some hinted at ideas here and there, but we just plain old don't know for sure. IMO, the only unforgivable sin is resisting the work of the Holy Spirit in our life until we die...because then it's too late. Anyone who think that simply denying that the HS exists, or using foul language or anything like that is silly. Plenty of people have cursed God and then come to know Him.

Call me crazy for believing it, but the bible is what suggests such a thing! Read the OP and find the verse!

 

[drich0150]

Yeah but what verse claims that blaspheming the holy spirit is only unforgivable in the past when Jesus was on earth? None of the verses "drich0150" presented mentions it

Christ is very clear in identifying what this sin is and when it happened. At no other point when one questioned the works of the holy Spirit did this mentioning of sin even come up. There were a very specific set of circumstances that had to happen in order for these men to be identified with the unforgivable aspect of this sin.

If you are looking for a reason to not believe then know you do not have to do so much work. Simply stand in your defiance and say you will not believe. As it is, it looks like you want to cop out and say it does me no good to believe because what i have done is not forgivable... Perhaps with a different version of God/Allah this is possible, but with this one you will have to come up with something better.

 

[Walter Kovacs]

Call me crazy for believing it, but the bible is what suggests such a thing! Read the OP and find the verse!

Yup. The only verse that really makes that argument is the Matthew one, which I'll look into. But as of now, I stand with Calvin:

I say, therefore, that he sins against the Holy Spirit who, while so constrained by the power of divine truth that he cannot plead ignorance, yet deliberately resists, and that merely for the sake of resisting

 

[Asvin]

Christ is very clear in identifying what this sin is and when it happened. At no other point when one questioned the works of the holy Spirit did this mentioning of sin even come up. There were a very specific set of circumstances that had to happen in order for these men to be identified with the unforgivable aspect of this sin.

If you are looking for a reason to not believe then know you do not have to do so much work. Simply stand in your defiance and say you will not believe. As it is, it looks like you want to cop out and say it does me no good to believe because what i have done is not forgivable... Perhaps with a different version of God/Allah this is possible, but with this one you will have to come up with something better.

Actually I am looking for a reason to believe and posts like this are what makes me question the bible even more.. What was your purpose in writing the second paragraph? Thanks for mocking me!

 

[Walter Kovacs]

With regard to the verse in Matthew, here's what I've come up with, taken from a friend of mines commentary on the subject:

Most of those are unfortunate additional interpretations that I don't think are grounded in the context of what Jesus was saying when He brought it up (and they tend to be emphasized mostly in evangelical circles).

Mark 3: 22 - 29
22And the teachers of the law who came down from Jerusalem said, "He is possessed by Beelzebub! By the prince of demons he is driving out demons."

23So Jesus called them and spoke to them in parables: "How can Satan drive out Satan? 24If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26And if Satan opposes himself and is divided, he cannot stand; his end has come. 27In fact, no one can enter a strong man's house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can rob his house. 28I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. 29But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin."

Jesus is responding to the "teachers of the law" who claim Jesus is driving out demons by the power of the "prince of demons," Beelzebub. This attribution of the Holy Spirit's power and work through Jesus to the adversary is the reason Jesus responds with the illustration of the house divided against itself. This attribution of the Holy Spirit's power and work to "Satan" is the reason Jesus pronounces this an eternal sin, for which there is no forgiveness. The teachers of the law, in their rejection of Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah, look to discredit His obvious work as Messiah by claiming His power comes from someone other than God. It's a blasphemy that Jesus elevates to a level that no other blasphemy can reach...one that will not be forgiven. To lie about the Holy Spirit is the ultimate rejection of Jesus, from people who know better. I think the pronouncement that this is an eternal sin is reserved basically for these "teachers of the law." I'm not sure it's possible to commit this sin at present, despite the idiots who post YouTube videos in The Blasphemy Challenge. Surely anyone who actually worries they may have committed this particular sin are not nearly so hopeless as they fear.

The "teachers of the law" whom Jesus addresses with His comments about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit KNEW that what Jesus was doing was the work of the Messiah, and they knew it was by the power of the Holy Spirit. To attribute the power by which Jesus did his work to Beelzebub, in their case, meant outright lying about Who was responsible for it.

Comments or musings made in ignorance today aren't of the same caliber of offense (if we may rightly call such an "offense") as what the "teachers of the law" did in the days of Jesus' ministry, because the "teachers of the law" knew too much to say what they

And also, just for food for though, the brilliant Dostoevsky:

"There is no sin, and there can be no sin on all the earth, which the Lord will not forgive to the truly repentant. Man cannot commit a sin so great as to exhaust the infinite love of God. Can there be a sin which can exceed the love of God? Think only of repentance, continual repentance, but dismiss fear altogether. Believe that God loves you as you cannot conceive: that he loves you with your sin, in your sin. It has been said of old that over one repentant sinner there is more joy in heaven than over ten righteous men. Go and fear not. Be not bitter against men. Be not angry if you are wronged. Forgive the dead man in your heart what wrong he did you. Be reconciled with him in truth. And if you love you are of God. If I a sinner, even as you are, am tender with you and have pity on you, how much more will God." -Elder Zossima, in Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, to a distraught penitent woman who had murdered her husband three years before.

 

[razeontherock]

Actually I am looking for a reason to believe

Good to hear! I look forward to your response to post #31 ...

 

[drich0150]

Actually I am looking for a reason to believe and posts like this are what makes me question the bible even more.. What was your purpose in writing the second paragraph? Thanks for mocking me!

To discern your intentions. If you are looking for a reason not to believe then I will not play this game with you. If you are sincere then I will give all that i have to help. Your responses determine my involvement.

Thus far your responses point to all the pointless effort you would expend in believing in Christ because you claim you have committed a sin you can not or at least have not defined yourself, or given an example of. you have systematically taken apart every argument by simply alluding to our own understanding of this sin, and have not yet spoken from your actions or understanding of this sin. Since your efforts strongly placate the art of conversation and argument over that of a desperate man looking for a reprieve, i would call into question the sincerity of your post and your intentions. Thus a need to push you into a situation where a direct answer is required. Now the question is irrelevant, it can be a simple observation. One that underscores your primary concern of your efforts to this point. Meaning what do you hold most dear in this conversation to this point will be called into question. you will forced to make a choice. you will have to preserve the original line of questioning you started in your OP or you will be made to defend the illusion of concern you have created.
Your answer does not underscore any of your original concerns you started with in your OP, nor does it address any of the follow up concerns you had in any of the subsequent post. What it does do is address the persona you have worked so hard to build and maintain. You do this by holding what faith you claim to have hostage, and threaten to snuff it out if I do not accept the illusion you have constructed.

If you are so desperate to hold or to build your faith why would you be so willing to give it up when someone questions your sincerity? After all who am I to question you, unless you are not what you are claiming to be?

We are told not to through our pearls of wisdom to swine. As I have few true pearls to give, I am trying to practice biblical based discernment.

If I am wrong I offer my most humbly apologies and wish to continue by asking you to state the meaning of blaspheme of the Holy Spirit, where you have constructed this definition (book Chapter and Verse) and how you believe you committed this sin. And feel free to mock my paranoid response.

 

[elman]

Actually I am looking for a reason to believe and posts like this are what makes me question the bible even more.. What was your purpose in writing the second paragraph? Thanks for mocking me!

God's existence and His love does not disappear if the Bible has errors in it.

 

[elman]

Denying the holy spirit, not loving others, whatever it may be... it is considered the unforgivable sin right?

If one never repents and dies in that condition, yes. It seems to me First John is saying that is the sin that leads to death. All other sins do not.

 

[MattRose]

With regard to the verse in Matthew, here's what I've come up with, taken from a friend of mines commentary on the subject:



This attribution of the Holy Spirit's power and work to "Satan" is the reason Jesus pronounces this an eternal sin, for which there is no forgiveness. The teachers of the law, in their rejection of Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah, look to discredit His obvious work as Messiah by claiming His power comes from someone other than God. It's a blasphemy that Jesus elevates to a level that no other blasphemy can reach...one that will not be forgiven. To lie about the Holy Spirit is the ultimate rejection of Jesus, from people who know better. I think the pronouncement that this is an eternal sin is reserved basically for these "teachers of the law."

Of course I wasn't there (I stepped out briefly as we had run out of tahini), but can the Pharisees be blamed for not knowing whether it was God or Satan's power that cast out the demons? They were educated men of course, but if they believed that Jesus was the son of God they wouldn't have challenged him. They were obviously ignorant of that "fact" and assumed the worst. Should they be condemned for eternity?

 

[elman]

Of course I wasn't there (I stepped out briefly as we had run out of tahini), but can the Pharisees be blamed for not knowing whether it was God or Satan's power that cast out the demons? They were educated men of course, but if they believed that Jesus was the son of God they wouldn't have challenged him. They were obviously ignorant of that "fact" and assumed the worst. Should they be condemned for eternity?

I think they were not acting out of ignorance but out of a desire to maintain their power and only if they continue to serve evil and unloving positions until they died, would they have been condemed for eternity.

 

[JoeyArnold]

EDIT: I already found an answer to my question.. MODS, feel free to close or delete this thread! Thank you!

What's the answer, then? Which sins are not forgiven, forsaken, or dealt with? Are there any sins that are not forgiven? Are the sins that are forgaved (past-tense on forgiven) the same sins that Christ died for on the cross? People shouldn't just believe whatever. They shouldn't just listen to their pastor blindly. Go back to the Bible. Look it up. Pray about it. I find these kind of questions to be very fundamental or crucial to how we live our lives, whether we are saved or not. If you're reading this, regardless of who you are, I would only ask you to connect the dots in your own life. I only ask you to think about what you believe & try keeping track of that, of why you believe what you believe. Questions about salvation must first address what we are being saved from or for, first. These are excellent questions. I will write more later. Please keep these kinds of threads active.