The Unpardonable Sin

[netchaplain]

The preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom by John the Baptist and the Messiah laid upon the chosen nation, Israel, the demand for a decision. This demand was openly present in all the early preaching of the Kingdom Gospel. The imperatives were “repent,” “believe,” “receive,” “confess,” and “follow.” No room was left for neutrality: those who heard the message must either be for the Messiah King or against Him (Matt 12:30).

It was the religious leaders of Israel who rejected Jesus’ Messiahship, and they would ultimately lead the nation into the same rejection. The basis of the rejection was demon possession, for the leaders claimed that the source of the Messiah’s power came from “the prince of demons” (12:24).

Rejecting Jesus as the Messiah on the basis of His being demon possessed led to His charge that the leadership of Israel, and by extension the entire nation, was now guilty of the “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (12:31).

Dr. Alva McClain gives a seven-point elaboration of the in his “The Greatness of the Kingdom”: First, the blasphemy committed was definitely related to the Kingdom of God, for that is the concept running through the context. Second, the blasphemy committed involved a question regarding the regal credentials of Christ. Rejecting Him as the Messiah also meant rejecting Him as King, and, therefore, a rejection of the Kingdom offer.

Third, this specific sin was declared a blasphemy against the Spirit of God. Since the miracles of Jesus were by the power of the Holy Spirit and through these miracles the Holy Spirit gave testimony to the Messiahship of Jesus, to ascribe these miracles as resulting from the power of Satan was to speak against the Holy Spirit.

Fourth, this was declared to be an unpardonable sin (12:32). Since God the Father sent the Messiah to be the Savior of men, in the Messiah all sin can be forgiven without limitation. Therefore, the sinful resistance of the Holy Spirit, Who testifies as to Jesus’ Messiahship, puts the rejecter outside the Messiah. Since it is morally impossible for God to forgive sin outside Christ, this rendered the sin unpardonable.

Fifth, the specific ones involved in this sin against the Holy Spirit were the religious leaders of Israel. Sixth, the responsibility for this sin is not limited to the leaders, it also extended to the whole nation of Israel, for they ultimately followed their leaders in the rejection. This corporate responsibility of the people of Israel is clear from the several uses of the term “generation” in the same context (12:39-45).

By the same token, the responsibility for the unpardonable sin is limited to the Jewish generation of Jesus’ day and is not extended to subsequent Jewish generations. Seventh, the specific penalty for this sin was a national judgment, and immediate judgement within the history of that particular generation. For that generation it was the judgment of A.D. 70 when within the time span of a single generation, judgment fell in the destruction of Jerusalem and the world-wide dispersion of the nation.

Nevertheless, while an entire generation has lost its historical opportunity, and with dire results (other than Spirit blasphemy—NC) for many succeeding generations, the nation of Israel itself could not irrecoverably lose those ancient rights (Kingdom promises to subsequent Jews outside the blasphemy sin—NC) which had been guaranteed by the God of Israel.
- Unknown

 

[childeye]

I would just say that when I read this post, the question arises of whether any person can believe and esteem Christ of their own volition apart from any revelation from God. I believe there is a humility that comes from believing that God reveals the Truth that the Christ holds within his Character, rather than every person simply can freely choose to believe. Romans 11:25.

 

[smaller]

When engaging in the judgment of any sin it will always be pointless to see the perp as man only. We know sin is connected to the devil, without exception, from 1 John 3:8.

Will the devil "in man" blaspheme the Holy Spirit? Yeah, probably everytime.

Will the devil be forgiven? Uh, no. We know the devil(s) are not going to escape the finality of the LoF.

No sin is authorized by the Holy Spirit, period. That never happened. When Jesus condemned sin in sinful flesh there are no exceptions or excuses to that condemnation.

Romans 8:3
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

No one escapes this conclusion. No believer gets a free pass to sin. We all die in the flesh because of sin. As believers we are to consider or recon ourselves dead in the flesh because of the reality of indwelling sin.

Romans 8:10
And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

None of us become "sinless" in the flesh after salvation nor is that even presented in the scriptures.

Forgiveness of sin applies only to "man." That doesn't mean that the devil or his messengers are ever going to be let off the hook for sin. Final judgement remains on the table for these perps.

Did Peter commit blasphemy when denying Christ 3 times? Or was it the deception of Satan in the flesh of Peter that did so? We know for a fact that Satan spoke from Peter's lips prior.

Is it conceivable to anyone that Peter was forgiven and Satan not? Get everybody on the table of accurate judgments for these matters and things might clear up considerably. If not, obviously the dissections are not even remotely accurate to the scriptures.

Matthew 12:31
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.

Believers who wish to "judge" this matter accurately may want to examine the present construct of "man" closer, as in what is really going on inside with such. IF they see as Jesus saw, they should see a captive and a captor in the FLESH.

This is how Jesus saw. This is also how the Apostles saw.

And Jesus still sees this way.

 

[netchaplain]

Spirit blasphemy was a sin peculiar to the Jewish leaders which also affected many of the people, but it was a particular sin (declaring the Spirit of God as of the devil - Mat 12:24 - which was the offense), by a particular people (Jews), at a particular time (during when the Lord Jesus and the Spirit of God began the healing ministry).

I do not think this sin has been repeated, esp. at that level of magnitude since the time of that "generation."

 

[childeye]

Spirit blasphemy was a sin peculiar to the Jewish leaders which also affected many of the people, but it was a particular sin (declaring the Spirit of God as of the devil - Mat 12:24 - which was the offense), by a particular people (Jews), at a particular time (during when the Lord Jesus and the Spirit of God began the healing ministry).

I do not think this sin has been repeated, esp. at that level of magnitude since the time of that "generation."

I'm not so sure. What about the inquisition? What about Islamic rule under sharia law?

 

[netchaplain]

I'm not so sure. What about the inquisition? What about Islamic rule under sharia law?

I know what you mean, but don't forget we're discussing a particular sin, which I would not think others would knowingly commit.

 

[smaller]

Spirit blasphemy was a sin peculiar to the Jewish leaders which also affected many of the people, but it was a particular sin (declaring the Spirit of God as of the devil - Mat 12:24 - which was the offense), by a particular people (Jews), at a particular time (during when the Lord Jesus and the Spirit of God began the healing ministry).

I do not think this sin has been repeated, esp. at that level of magnitude since the time of that "generation."

I have a hard time seeing just men in those equations quite honestly. We should be able to perceive that the temple leaders were in fact occupied and co-opted, internally:

John 8:
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

What we have to or should face in the above is this: Are people, those men, devils?

If the answer is no, as it should be, then we must look at the other party if we have any spiritual sense about it.

 

[childeye]

I know what you mean, but don't forget we're discussing a particular sin, which I would not think others would knowingly commit.

You probably know that I am forced to agree. Nonetheless, the Christ who came in the Name of God, submitted to a cross put upon him by those who rejected him as evil, and yet he forgave them. These "others", without any mercy, in the name of god, killed and tortured all those who rejected them as evil. These are stark and contrary images of God/god. And of course it is towards God's Name that blasphemy is referring. Hence I am not sure whether someone ever knowingly commits this sin.

 

[netchaplain]

I have a hard time seeing just men in those equations quite honestly. We should be able to perceive that the temple leaders were in fact occupied and co-opted, internally:

John 8:
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

What we have to or should face in the above is this: Are people, those men, devils?

If the answer is no, as it should be, then we must look at the other party if we have any spiritual sense about it.

I believe the above passage relates to all men in their old man, without the Spirit's guidance (Gal 5:17). The phrase "you are of your father the devil" doesn't mean men's nature is from the devil in substance, but of the devil in imitation and doing what he moves one to do who is without God.

The sinful nature of mankind is condemnable as the devil's nature.

 

[netchaplain]

Hence I am not sure whether someone ever knowingly commits this sin.

I believe the offenders were so self-centered that they didn't care who Jesus was, nor by what power He worked, and to attempt to show they were righteous, they rendered Him and the Spirit as evil.

 

[smaller]

I believe the above passage relates to all men in their old man,

And I don't. Jesus brought the devil into the equations. Not their "old man," by specific statement of/to the children of same devil. Jesus really did address devils in those men's hearts.

How did they get there?

Mark 4:15
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.

When we see the vehemence of Jesus against temple leaders, He was in fact emphasizing the fact above. The temple is where the Word was handled. So, they were in fact internally invaded. Co-opted. Blinded. Enslaved. Not any differently than what Paul directs us to see in Acts 26:18, 2 Cor. 3:14-15 or 2 Cor. 4:4, among many other similar scriptural sights.

The reasons we are also bent on seeing "just men" in these equations stems from the identical problem. It's blindness imposed by the other parties that are not man.

without the Spirit's guidance (Gal 5:17). The phrase "you are of your father the devil" doesn't mean men's nature is from the devil in substance, but of the devil in imitation and doing what he moves one to do who is without God.

The sinful nature of mankind is condemnable as the devil's nature.

The statement is pretty clear that Jesus addressed children of the devil, them being "of same." So again, what we should look at is this: Are those men devils? The answer should be no.

And if it is no, then we must look at the fact that "in those men" there are other parties to view that are not them.

John 8:
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

There is, in short, a captive and a captor involved in these equations.

Jesus came to set the captives free, and to expose and to DAMN the captors, which He did.

 

[netchaplain]

The statement is pretty clear that Jesus addressed children of the devil, them being "of same."

Myself, I believe Satan's nature is worse that man's, but both are condemnable.

 

[smaller]

Myself, I believe Satan's nature is worse that man's, but both are condemnable.

And I will see a captive and a captor, as scripture directs us to observe as a fact.

Jesus came to set captives FREE. Being a captive demands that there is also a captor.

It is no different of a fact than Paul laid upon his own flesh in 2 Cor. 12:7.

There are TWO parties to view in these equations. Not just "man."

 

[netchaplain]

There are TWO parties to view in these equations. Not just "man."

I agree; man's sinful nature, and Satan's. I believe Satan uses man's nature against himself (in those without God) as much as God will allow.

 

[smaller]

It is no different of a "real" phenomena today, when we witness the Gospel, and hear someone blaspheme the Holy Spirit, which should be happening with every believer when they are witnessing, from time to time.

2 Corinthians 4:
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Above we see two separate parties.

Which one blasphemes?

The answer should be quite obvious. And the reactions that are adverse to the Gospel should be expected from that party trying to secure their captive.

 

[smaller]

I agree; man's sinful nature, and Satan's. I believe Satan uses man's nature against himself (in those without God) as much as God will allow.

I don't practice blaming blinded captives when there are obviously other things going on.

Jesus went for the jugular vein of His opposers, not the captives. People who try to reason with the captor will soon be out foxed.

John 12:47
And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

Jesus demands us to love the captive, hate the captor.

We often miss the point of the exercises.

 

[childeye]

I believe the offenders were so self-centered that they didn't care who Jesus was, nor by what power He worked, and to attempt to show they were righteous, they rendered Him and the Spirit as evil.

I think your description of the offenders is quite accurate. So thinking they were righteous, they were blind hypocrites. But had they known Jesus was the Christ, they would not have crucified him. 1 Corinthians 2:8.

 

[netchaplain]

Smaller - I also believe that the Spirit of God uses the new man (nature created after Christ's divine nature - Col 3:10) in the believer to walk after the Spirit (Gal 5:16, 25), in the life of Christ (Col 3:4)--all which "abounds" (Rom 5:20) over our self (the old man), society (unbelieving individuals) and Satan.

 

[netchaplain]

had they known Jesus was the Christ, they would not have crucified him.

Amen, same as the majority of the world chooses not to know Him!

 

[childeye]

Amen, same as the majority of the world chooses not to know Him!

I like to say the following because I believe it is a self evident Truth and worthy to base my reasoning upon in full conviction: True worship is drawn out by the object of worship. Can you find any fault with this?