Unforgiveable sin.

[MoreCoffee]

Psalms 91 mentioned a phrase used by Jesus "the kingdom of God is upon you". It appears to be part of a discussion that revolves upon the degrees of sin and the existence of unforgiveable sin.

Matthew 12:22 Then some people brought to him a possessed man, who was blind and mute. Jesus healed the man; who was then able to speak and see. 23 All in the crowd were amazed and said, “Could he be the Son of David?” 24 When the Pharisees heard this, they said, “It is by Beelzebul, prince of the devils, that this man drives out devils.”

25 Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said to them, “Every kingdom that is divided against itself is destroyed; and every city, or family, that is divided against itself will not last long. 26 So, if Satan drives out Satan, he is divided: how then can his reign endure? 27 And, if it is by Beelzebul that I drive out devils, by whom do your own people drive them out? For this reason, they will be your judges.

28 But, if it is by the Spirit of God that I drive out devils, then the kingdom of God has already come upon you. 29 How can anyone break into the strong man’s house and make off with his belongings, unless he first ties him up? Only then can he plunder his house.

30 The one who is not with me, is against me; and the one who does not gather with me, scatters.

31 And so, I tell you this: people can be forgiven any sin and any evil thing they say against God, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 The one who speaks against the Son of Man, will be forgiven; but the one who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, neither in this age nor in the age to come.

33 If you have a healthy tree, its fruit will be healthy; if you have a rotten tree, its fruit will be rotten. You can know a tree by its fruit. 34 You brood of vipers, how can you say anything good, when you are so evil? For the mouth speaks what fills the heart. 35 A good person produces good things from his good store, and an evil person produces evil things from his evil store.

36 I tell you this: on the day of judgment, people will have to give an account of any careless word they have spoken. 37 Your own words will declare you either innocent or guilty.”​

It's an interesting passage. Is the evidence of the kingdom's presence the healings that Jesus worked and ought people to expect similar healings as evidence that they are truly Jesus' disciples? Would they not be his disciples without healings happening?

 

[atpollard]

I always thought the unforgivable sin was a settled opposition to Jesus Christ (because there is no other 'way' to forgiveness).
Since visiting Georgia, I am less sure ... it could also be room temperature mayonnaise on hot roast beef (which may be the sin that leads to death.)

 

[MoreCoffee]

I always thought the unforgivable sin was a settled opposition to Jesus Christ (because there is no other 'way' to forgiveness).
Since visiting Georgia, I am less sure ... it could also be room temperature mayonaise on hot roast beef (which may be the sin that leads to death.)

I've never tried mayonnaise on hot roast beef.

The thing that is interesting about the passage in Matthew 12 is that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit appears to be what the Pharisees were engaging in when they said Jesus cast Satan out by the power of Satan - which seems to suggest that they wanted to teach people that Jesus was an agent of hell. I suspect that may be the kind of opposition from which one never manages to get away and that would make it into a settled opposition to Jesus Christ. But then why is it blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Any ideas?

 

[psalms 91]

I've never tried mayonnaise on hot roast beef.

The thing that is interesting about the passage in Matthew 12 is that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit appears to be what the Pharisees were engaging in when they said Jesus cast Satan out by the power of Satan - which seems to suggest that they wanted to teach people that Jesus was an agent of hell. I suspect that may be the kind of opposition from which one never manages to get away and that would make it into a settled opposition to Jesus Christ. But then why is it blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Any ideas?

You have it which is why it is dangerous to come against healing and other things that are of the spirit if you dont know then it is safer to not condemn the practice. God is a big boy and can shut diown anyhting He wishes

 

[atpollard]

But then why is it blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Any ideas?

John 14:17 NLT He is the Holy Spirit, who leads into all truth. The world cannot receive him, because it isn't looking for him and doesn't recognize him. But you know him, because he lives with you now and later will be in you.

Romans 8:1-8 NLT
1 So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. 2 And because you belong to him, the power of the life-giving Spirit has freed you from the power of sin that leads to death. 3 The law of Moses was unable to save us because of the weakness of our sinful nature. So God did what the law could not do. He sent his own Son in a body like the bodies we sinners have. And in that body God declared an end to sin’s control over us by giving his Son as a sacrifice for our sins. 4 He did this so that the just requirement of the law would be fully satisfied for us, who no longer follow our sinful nature but instead follow the Spirit.
5 Those who are dominated by the sinful nature think about sinful things, but those who are controlled by the Holy Spirit think about things that please the Spirit. 6 So letting your sinful nature control your mind leads to death. But letting the Spirit control your mind leads to life and peace. 7 For the sinful nature is always hostile to God. It never did obey God’s laws, and it never will. 8 That’s why those who are still under the control of their sinful nature can never please God.

It seems to me that the job of the Holy Spirit is to empower people to be free from the control of their sinful nature. Therefore, without the help of the Holy Spirit, our NATURE will not allow us to come to Christ.
Jesus didn't actually say that the Pharisees had committed the unforgivable sin, but that they were coming dangerously close to doing so. We know that no one comes to Jesus unless he is drawn by the Father (John 6:44), but what is the ultimate means that God uses to draw the fallen heart of men to Christ if not the power of His Holy Spirit ... "For God is working in you, giving you the desire and the power to do what pleases him." (Philippians 2:13 NLT).

 

[MoreCoffee]

John 14:17 NLT He is the Holy Spirit, who leads into all truth. The world cannot receive him, because it isn't looking for him and doesn't recognize him. But you know him, because he lives with you now and later will be in you.

Romans 8:1-8 NLT
1 So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. 2 And because you belong to him, the power of the life-giving Spirit has freed you from the power of sin that leads to death. 3 The law of Moses was unable to save us because of the weakness of our sinful nature. So God did what the law could not do. He sent his own Son in a body like the bodies we sinners have. And in that body God declared an end to sin’s control over us by giving his Son as a sacrifice for our sins. 4 He did this so that the just requirement of the law would be fully satisfied for us, who no longer follow our sinful nature but instead follow the Spirit.
5 Those who are dominated by the sinful nature think about sinful things, but those who are controlled by the Holy Spirit think about things that please the Spirit. 6 So letting your sinful nature control your mind leads to death. But letting the Spirit control your mind leads to life and peace. 7 For the sinful nature is always hostile to God. It never did obey God’s laws, and it never will. 8 That’s why those who are still under the control of their sinful nature can never please God.

It seems to me that the job of the Holy Spirit is to empower people to be free from the control of their sinful nature. Therefore, without the help of the Holy Spirit, our NATURE will not allow us to come to Christ.
Jesus didn't actually say that the Pharisees had committed the unforgivable sin, but that they were coming dangerously close to doing so. We know that no one comes to Jesus unless he is drawn by the Father (John 6:44), but what is the ultimate means that God uses to draw the fallen heart of men to Christ if not the power of His Holy Spirit ... "For God is working in you, giving you the desire and the power to do what pleases him." (Philippians 2:13 NLT).

While I agree with most of what you wrote I am left wondering how you answer the question why is it blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Any ideas? In the context of Matthew 12.

 

[MennoSota]

I always thought the unforgivable sin was banning beer. (Pretty sure the Lutherans and Catolicks will give a hearty amen...)

 

[hedrick]

The theme of the passage quoted in the OP is what power is behind Jesus' actions. Some claim it's Satan. Jesus argues that that's self-contradictory. It is in fact the Holy Spirit.

He then says that rejecting him can be forgiven, but not rejecting the power that's behind him, the Holy Spirit. This is consistent with his general teaching that his message and the Kingdom he brings is more important than him personally.

 

[popsthebuilder]

I've never tried mayonnaise on hot roast beef.

The thing that is interesting about the passage in Matthew 12 is that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit appears to be what the Pharisees were engaging in when they said Jesus cast Satan out by the power of Satan - which seems to suggest that they wanted to teach people that Jesus was an agent of hell. I suspect that may be the kind of opposition from which one never manages to get away and that would make it into a settled opposition to Jesus Christ. But then why is it blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Any ideas?

Because it is the Holy Spirit of GOD that was working within Jesus.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MoreCoffee]

The theme of the passage quoted in the OP is what power is behind Jesus' actions. Some claim it's Satan. Jesus argues that that's self-contradictory. It is in fact the Holy Spirit.

He then says that rejecting him can be forgiven, but not rejecting the power that's behind him, the Holy Spirit. This is consistent with his general teaching that his message and the Kingdom he brings is more important than him personally.

Holy has a few meanings in English one of which is "good" - as in morally good almost inexpressibly good from a moral perspective - I haven't checked how "holy" is used in Hebrew and Greek and Aramaic - the language that Jesus and the apostles would have spoken most of the time - but I wonder if maybe in those languages or at least in Greek "holy" also means "good" like it does in some uses in English. Have you checked that out?

 

[hedrick]

Holy has a few meanings in English one of which is "good" - as in morally good almost inexpressibly good from a moral perspective - I haven't checked how "holy" is used in Hebrew and Greek and Aramaic - the language that Jesus and the apostles would have spoken most of the time - but I wonder if maybe in those languages or at least in Greek "holy" also means "good" like it does in some uses in English. Have you checked that out?

I'm not sure I understand the question. The passage refers to the Spirit in three ways: Spirit of God, Spirt, and Holy Spirit. Luke's version says "the finger of God." As far as I know, Holy Spirit is simply a common term for the Spirit of God. I don't think looking deeply at the definition of holy is relevant.

According to TDNT, in the OT holy is basically a ritual term for what is set aside for God, though it developed over time, taking on an ethical meaning. In Philo it was used in speculative philosophical contexts. In the NT it tends to refer to the person of God. Hence the few times Jesus is referred to as holy connects him with God. NT usage of Holy Spirit is grounded on the OT term. But TDNT believes it connects the Spirit with Christ. It is his Spirit. I'm summarizing an article that is almost book length.

In this particular passage, however, Jesus distinguishes between himself and the Spirit. He is describing the Spirit as God who is the source of his power. Note the parallel in Luke "finger of God." (The difference in wording should make us a bit wary of assuming just what wording Jesus actually used, but "finger of God" is more likely to be the original.)

 

[popsthebuilder]

Actually; looking into the roots of the word; I find it quite relevant and descriptive of the Spirit and the way it affects the believer.

It is interesting to say the least.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MoreCoffee]

I'm not sure I understand the question. The passage refers to the Spirit in three ways: Spirit of God, Spirt, and Holy Spirit. Luke's version says "the finger of God." As far as I know, Holy Spirit is simply a common term for the Spirit of God. I don't think looking deeply at the definition of holy is relevant.

According to TDNT, in the OT holy is basically a ritual term for what is set aside for God, though it developed over time, taking on an ethical meaning. In Philo it was used in speculative philosophical contexts. In the NT it tends to refer to the person of God. Hence the few times Jesus is referred to as holy connects him with God. NT usage of Holy Spirit is grounded on the OT term. But TDNT believes it connects the Spirit with Christ. It is his Spirit. I'm summarizing an article that is almost book length.

In this particular passage, however, Jesus distinguishes between himself and the Spirit. He is describing the Spirit as God who is the source of his power. Note the parallel in Luke "finger of God." (The difference in wording should make us a bit wary of assuming just what wording Jesus actually used, but "finger of God" is more likely to be the original.)

The author/authors and editor/editors of the gospel according to saint Matthew appear to have a plan and a purpose for the arrangement of material in their book and it may be that the incident and explanations of it in Matthew twelve are deliberate both in wording and in arrangement. That is worth considering when examining the meaning of "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit". Luke's gospel has its own plan and purpose which is not identical to Matthew's. So while Luke has a parallel account the choices about wording and arrangement is likely story line driven in the overall purpose of Luke's writers and their story line is not the same as Matthew's. I would advise caution about defining meaning in Matthew based on what is written in Luke.