What is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit? (Matthew 12:31-32; Mark 3:28-30)

[greyhawk.444]

1 John 1:9 - If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Ezekiel 18:21 - “But if a wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

Ezekiel 18:22 - None of the transgressions which he has committed shall be remembered against him; because of the righteousness which he has done, he shall live.


Now, the above passage is not standalone, but must be balanced against other passages which are relevant and seem to contradict the aforementioned - So blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is an eternal sin, and due to its seriousness (or consistency) the offender is said to be irredeemable:-


Matthew 12:31 - “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men.

Matthew 12:32 - Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.

Mark 3:28 - "Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter;

Mark 3:29 - but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation”— 30 because they said, “He has an unclean spirit.”


Thus, Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30 would tend to cancel out 1 John 1:9 - So that the latter would no longer be true once having committed blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

Since God is not bound to keep any pledge which he didn't promise and 1 John 1:9 would no longer be true once having committed blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

Now, by definition Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-30 must take priority over 1 John 1:9 and Ezekiel 18:21-22 - Since blasphemy is an eternal sin which cannot be forgiven,

Since we know that,

{Matthew 12:31-32; Mark 3:28-30} > {1 John 1:9; Ezekiel 18:21-22}

Discuss.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

sinning against divine knowledge

Hebrews 10:26-29

 

[friend of]

• In Matthew 12:31 Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees who were fully aware that He was the prophesied Messiah on account of all the prophecies Jesus was fulfilling at the time. Even illiterate commoners, who were reliant on religious leaders like the Pharisees to interpret scripture for them, were able to come to the realization that Jesus was fulfilling these prophecies and hence, was/is the Messiah; thus Pharisees had zero excuse for accusing Jesus of being possessed by Beezlebub or anyone other than who He claimed to be. Regardless, they attacked Him because they loved wealth, prestige and power more than the God they purported to serve and more than their very souls.
• Another common understanding is that this sin is committed when someone rejects unto death Christ's sacrifice on the cross; never surrenders to Jesus in this life. Hebrews 10:29
• It is almost unanimous in scholarly circles that if a Christian becomes overtly concerned over the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, that their conscience toward Jesus is in good standing, otherwise they would remain unconcerned due to a hardened heart and/or slumbering faith.

 

[greyhawk.444]

sinning against divine knowledge

Hebrews 10:26-29

Which is what I have said, so I hope we are both agreed on this point.

 

[greyhawk.444]

• In Matthew 12:31 Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees who were fully aware that He was the prophesied Messiah on account of all the prophecies Jesus was fulfilling at the time. Even illiterate commoners, who were reliant on religious leaders like the Pharisees to interpret scripture for them, were able to come to the realization that Jesus was fulfilling these prophecies and hence, was/is the Messiah; thus Pharisees had zero excuse for accusing Jesus of being possessed by Beezlebub or anyone other than who He claimed to be. Regardless, they attacked Him because they loved wealth, prestige and power more than the God they purported to serve and more than their very souls.
• Another common understanding is that this sin is committed when someone rejects unto death Christ's sacrifice on the cross; never surrenders to Jesus in this life. Hebrews 10:29
• It is almost unanimous in scholarly circles that if a Christian becomes overtly concerned over the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, that their conscience toward Jesus is in good standing, otherwise they would remain unconcerned due to a hardened heart and/or slumbering faith.

Yes, it's not difficult to decipher what you have said - I agree entirely and appreciate your comment.

 

[DeaconDean]

deleted to keep the peace

 

[jax5434]

To reject the witness of the Holy Spirit and die an unrepentant sinner.
God Bless
Jax

 

[DeaconDean]

deleted to keep the peace

 

[greyhawk.444]

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit has to do with accusing Jesus Christ of being demon-possessed instead of Spirit-filled. This particular type of blasphemy cannot be duplicated today.

False.

Accusing Jesus of being demon-possessed instead of Spirit-filled was simply one *example* which the writer has used to *illustrate* the nature of blasphemy, both in a wider and universal context. This particular type of blasphemy CAN still be duplicated today since this is a universal law, which is applicable to any time, place or society:-

(1) To attribute Jesus' miracles to Beezlebub instead of the Holy Spirit is *falsehood*, which also implies falsehood in any time, place or society - A universal law which is still applicable today as it was during the 1st century Roman Empire.

(2) Falsehood which by definition is defamatory, grievous, injurious or slanderous.

(3) The extent of defamation or injury caused is considered serious enough not to be forgiven ever at all.

Since the Bible is mostly concerned with the dissemination (or exposition) of universal rules which are applicable to any time, place or society - Otherwise, this particular account of the Life of Christ would be strictly confined to the 1st century Roman Empire with no relevance whatsoever to our Modern society - Which by definition is a useless appendix in the Bible - By definition, such a 'rule' is not a useful rule at all, since it has no relevance to our time, place or society.

Also, you seem to forget that Jesus will be your Judge on the day of judgement. By definition, only a Judge has any right or privilege to interpret the Law of Scripture as Jesus would do on the day of judgement - But a layman such as yourself has no right whatsoever to interpret the Law of Scripture - At least not in any sense which is meaningful that would have devastating *impact* on the millions (or billions) of people's lives on the Great day of judgement.

Since the definition of blasphemy is still open to doubt or interpretation it means that your exegesis is just as good as anybody else's - Or no better than my own interpretation - Which means that Jesus can still legitimately carry out his Judgement according to his own interpretation of the Law, but Not according to anybody else's interpretation.

So I remind you that God is not bound to keep any pledge which he did not promise in the first place - Since there is no specific mention in Mark or Matthew that such a 'rule' is only applicable to the 1st century Roman Empire.

So I resolutely reject your interpretation of Mark 3:28-30 and Matthew 12:31-32, but will carry out My judgement as I see fit, but Not according to your interpretation (John 5:23; 5:30; 10:30; Matthew 28:18; Acts 10:42).

 

[greyhawk.444]

While I do not agree fully with the following article, it defines "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit" the same as what I said:

From gotquestions.org:

"Question: "What is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?"

Answer: The concept of “blasphemy against the Spirit” is mentioned in Mark 3:22–30 and Matthew 12:22–32. Jesus has just performed a miracle. A demon-possessed man was brought to Jesus, and the Lord cast the demon out, healing the man of blindness and muteness. The eyewitnesses to this exorcism began to wonder if Jesus was indeed the Messiah they had been waiting for. A group of Pharisees, hearing the talk of the Messiah, quickly quashed any budding faith in the crowd: “It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons,” they said (Matthew 12:24).

Jesus rebuts the Pharisees with some logical arguments for why He is not casting out demons in the power of Satan (Matthew 12:25–29). Then He speaks of the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit: “I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (verses 31–32).

The term blasphemy may be generally defined as “defiant irreverence.” The term can be applied to such sins as cursing God or willfully degrading things relating to God. Blasphemy is also attributing some evil to God or denying Him some good that we should attribute to Him. This particular case of blasphemy, however, is called “the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” in Matthew 12:31. The Pharisees, having witnessed irrefutable proof that Jesus was working miracles in the power of the Holy Spirit, claimed instead that the Lord was possessed by a demon (Matthew 12:24). Notice in Mark 3:30 Jesus is very specific about what the Pharisees did to commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit: “He said this because they were saying, ‘He has an impure spirit.’”

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit has to do with accusing Jesus Christ of being demon-possessed instead of Spirit-filled. This particular type of blasphemy cannot be duplicated today. The Pharisees were in a unique moment in history: they had the Law and the Prophets, they had the Holy Spirit stirring their hearts, they had the Son of God Himself standing right in front of them, and they saw with their own eyes the miracles He did. Never before in the history of the world (and never since) had so much divine light been granted to men; if anyone should have recognized Jesus for who He was, it was the Pharisees. Yet they chose defiance. They purposely attributed the work of the Spirit to the devil, even though they knew the truth and had the proof. Jesus declared their willful blindness to be unpardonable. Their blasphemy against the Holy Spirit was their final rejection of God’s grace. They had set their course, and God was going to let them sail into perdition unhindered.

Jesus told the crowd that the Pharisees’ blasphemy against the Holy Spirit “will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Matthew 12:32). This is another way of saying that their sin would never be forgiven, ever. Not now, not in eternity. As Mark 3:29 puts it, “They are guilty of an eternal sin.”

The immediate result of the Pharisees’ public rejection of Christ (and God’s rejection of them) is seen in the next chapter. Jesus, for the first time, “told them many things in parables” (Matthew 13:3; cf. Mark 4:2). The disciples were puzzled at Jesus’ change of teaching method, and Jesus explained His use of parables: “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. . . . Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand” (Matthew 13:11, 13). Jesus began to veil the truth with parables and metaphors as a direct result of the Jewish leaders’ official denunciation of Him.

Again, the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit cannot be repeated today, although some people try. Jesus Christ is not on earth—He is seated at the right hand of God. No one can personally witness Jesus performing a miracle and then attribute that power to Satan instead of the Spirit.

The unpardonable sin today is the state of continued unbelief. The Spirit currently convicts the unsaved world of sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8). To resist that conviction and willfully remain unrepentant is to “blaspheme” the Spirit. There is no pardon, either in this age or in the age to come, for a person who rejects the Spirit’s promptings to trust in Jesus Christ and then dies in unbelief. The love of God is evident: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). And the choice is clear: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him” (John 3:36)."

God Bless

Till all are one.

Sorry, but I don't buy into your interpretation of what blasphemy entails - Since your opinion is no better than mine, and it's ridiculous to suggest that such a rule is now a useless appendix, which is no longer relevant to our time, place or society.

Good try, but there is no way that you will ever convert me to your cause.

 

[greyhawk.444]

Blaspheming the Holy Spirit, or, it would be the same as ascribing the works of the Holy Spirit to Satan.

"Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come." -Mt. 12:31-32 (KJV)

The Pharisees were guilty of this sin because they said:

"But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils." -Mt. 12:24 (KJV)

God Bless

Till all are one.

Sorry, but I don't buy into your interpretation of what blasphemy entails - Since your *opinion* is no better than mine, and it's ridiculous to suggest that such a rule is now a "useless appendix", which is no longer relevant to our time, place or society.

Remember, it's the person with the Stick hand who has any say at all on the day of judgement Not you nor anybody else.

The person who has the most say is usually the one who's got the weapon Not those on the receiving end who are simply trying to detract my focus from the real target.

 

[DeaconDean]

deleted to keep the peace

 

[greyhawk.444]

Like I said, my first explanation about attributing works of the Spirit to the devil is a valid one.

Second, I supplied an article to back it up with the proviso that I did not fully agree with it.



It is very possible today for people to still commit this sin. Unless you do not believe in the "gifts of the Spirit".

It is possible that somebody could see a certain gift being exercised and attribute it to something other than what it actually is.

And then there is the doctrine of "reprobation". The "flip" side of the doctrine of "election".

St. Augustine believed in it in the early 5th century.

And then, even today, in this area, there are some who would put you back under the Law even though Jesus fulfilled it.

Now you are free to disagree with me.

Now, as an licesened minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, an ordained Deacon and Elder, and a Christian of over 40 years, if you don't think I have something to say, just say so.

Take issue with the post, not the poster.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Your explanation may well be valid, but the article itself is not reliable 'evidence' to support what you have claimed - Due to the possibility of human error, but in any case the article is based on somebody else's opinion - Which cannot be subject to the method of falsification (or verification).

That such *opinion* is the established paradigm in hermeneutics doesn't lend credence to it whatsoever - No more so than the earth being "flat" or the alleged "centre of the universe" prior to Columbus and Galileo, respectively.

Also, attributing works of the Spirit to Satan is only a case in point, which was meant to illustrate a universal law - A specific case in point, which is meant to provide a universal definition of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit - As I have already explained to you (See above).

Whereas, you seem to suggest that this is only valid in a specific context I have maintained that there are general rules - Which can be inferred by the method of induction - Which would be universally valid in any time, place or society.

Also, you have more or less missed the Real point about my argument - Which is that God doesn't have to accept your argument at all in regards to the long term end results of the Great Judgement (Revelation 20:11-15) - Namely, *who* should live or not (Revelation 20:9), and *who* should be saved or not (Revelation 20:11-15) - Since your argument is nothing but your own *opinion* - However, God will carry out judgement according to his own criteria, but Not according to your so called 'rules' on the day of judgement.

Lastly, your skills, background, and qualifications is an argument from authority, which is Non sequitur and a fallacy of logic - That you have such and such a background it thereby doesn't follow that your argument is 'correct'.

Such a long-winded, pointless, and superfluous argument, but the time, effort or attention you have invested are completely fruitless.

 

[DeaconDean]

Your explanation may well be valid, but the article itself is not reliable 'evidence' to support what you have claimed - Due to the possibility of human error, but in any case the article is based on somebody else's opinion - Which cannot be subject to the method of falsification (or verification).

That such *opinion* is the established paradigm in hermeneutics doesn't lend credence to it whatsoever - No more so than the earth being "flat" or the alleged "centre of the universe" prior to Columbus and Galileo, respectively.

Also, attributing works of the Spirit to Satan is only a case in point, which was meant to illustrate a universal law - A specific case in point, which is meant to provide a universal definition of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit - As I have already explained to you (See above).

Whereas, you seem to suggest that this is only valid in a specific context I have maintained that there are general rules - Which can be inferred by the method of induction - Which would be universally valid in any time, place or society.

Also, you have more or less missed the Real point about my argument - Which is that God doesn't have to accept your argument at all in regards to the long term end results of the Great Judgement (Revelation 20:11-15) - Namely, *who* should live or not (Revelation 20:9), and *who* should be saved or not (Revelation 20:11-15) - Since your argument is nothing but your own *opinion* - However, God will carry out judgement according to his own criteria, but Not according to your so called 'rules' on the day of judgement.

Lastly, your skills, background, and qualifications is an argument from authority, which is Non sequitur and a fallacy of logic - That you have such and such a background it thereby doesn't follow that your argument is 'correct'.

Such a long-winded, pointless, and superfluous argument, but the time, effort or attention you have invested are completely fruitless.

You know what, no matter what I could supply, whether it be commentary, research from theologians, etc, according to you it would be incorrect for no other reason than because I posted it.

So to avoid any further arguments, I will delete all my statements, add you to my ignore list, and avoid you.

Deleting and unsubscribing.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[greyhawk.444]

You know what, no matter what I could supply, whether it be commentary, research from theologians, etc, according to you it would be incorrect for no other reason than because I posted it.

So to avoid any further arguments, I will delete all my statements, add you to my ignore list, and avoid you.

Deleting and unsubscribing.

God Bless

Till all are one.

No, I have never said that you are wrong since there are no 'right' or 'wrong' answers as far as theology goes - No amount of research will prove your point since we are not discussing empirical or scientific data - Since religion is essentially a matter of faith as opposed to factual knowledge your guess is as good as mine - As long as we can both provide sufficient grounds to support our viewpoint.

However, you don't seem to realise that case laws are ruled by Judges who will have differing opinions, but it's only the Judge who presides over the case who has any authority at all in regards to the ruling - As only the Presiding Judge would have the Law or power of the State behind him - No other Judge has the Authority, right or privilege to make that decision.

So your explanation of blasphemy may well be valid, but that's not to say that it's the only valid explanation - As I have said, your viewpoint may well be different from Jesus' viewpoint on this subject, but it's no less valid than His viewpoint - However, your viewpoint won't matter at all on the day of judgement since only Christ would have the Authority of Angels (Matthew 13:40-42; 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9) who will be "inflicting vengeance and everlasting destruction" for His sake - As only Christ would have God's power and authority to carry out executions on the day of judgement - Thus, the end result of Judgement - As regarding who should live or not, and who should be saved or not - would be *solely* decided according to Jesus' viewpoint Not your views nor anybody else's.

Ultimately, God would probably show mercy to far *fewer* people than you yourself if it was up to you to make that choice - Since God's definition of blasphemy is clearly Not the same as your definition.

 

[greyhawk.444]

You know what, no matter what I could supply, whether it be commentary, research from theologians, etc, according to you it would be incorrect for no other reason than because I posted it.

So to avoid any further arguments, I will delete all my statements, add you to my ignore list, and avoid you.

Deleting and unsubscribing.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Clearly, your business is saving lives and to save as many people as possible; but instead, my purpose is mostly to do with revenge and to kill as many people as possible - So, here lies the differences of opinion, since your interest is not my interest at all.

 

[black.hawk]

You know what, no matter what I could supply, whether it be commentary, research from theologians, etc, according to you it would be incorrect for no other reason than because I posted it.

So to avoid any further arguments, I will delete all my statements, add you to my ignore list, and avoid you.

Deleting and unsubscribing.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Hebrews 6

4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.

Regardless of WHO is correct here, the Rule of Hebrews 6:4-6 would still make it IMPOSSIBLE for a Christian to be redeemed ONCE they have abandoned (or rejected) the Covenant of Salvation ( = Luke 10:27, 28, John 11:25, 26, Romans 10:9).

The "double jeopardy" rule means that ONCE the Covenant is null and void it cannot be renewed for whoever has abandoned (or rejected) the same.

This rule is independent of Mark 3:28-30 and Matthew 12:31-32.

 

[DeaconDean]

Hebrews 6

4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.

Regardless of WHO is correct here, the Rule of Hebrews 6:4-6 would still make it IMPOSSIBLE for a Christian to be redeemed ONCE they have abandoned (or rejected) the Covenant of Salvation ( = Luke 10:27, 28, John 11:25, 26, Romans 10:9).

The "double jeopardy" rule means that ONCE the Covenant is null and void it cannot be renewed for whoever has abandoned (or rejected) the same.

This rule is independent of Mark 3:28-30 and Matthew 12:31-32.

One of the best commentaries on the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by Arthur W. Pink.

You should try reading it.

I love it, when people take an Epistle written specifically to "Jewish Christians" and apply it to Gentiles.

Considering when it was written, Hebrews 6 was written to address the persecution the Jews were undergoing not only by Romans, but by Jews also who saw them (Jewish Christians) who had given up on Judaism.

The real fear was Jewish Christians reverting back to "ritual Judaism". Once they had come to faith in Christ, they simply could not go back to Judaism. They couldn't run back to the temple (yes, it was still standing when this was written) and revert back to "sacrificing" (There remaineth no sacrifice for sin). Once they reverted back to "ritual Judaism", there would no renewing them back to Christian faith.

You should read what A.W. Pink wrote on Hebrews 6.

God Bless

Till all are one.