The unpardonable sin

[Believer1997]

Yes, Butero - I agree with that logic. I think Shiloh's post was the answer to a prayer for me - I've already shown it to her and she's very comforted by it.

[Guest Butero]

Yes, Butero - I agree with that logic. I think Shiloh's post was the answer to a prayer for me - I've already shown it to her and she's very comforted by it.

I am happy to hear she is at peace. Sometime back, I went to a tent revival where a famous evangelist was preaching. He told the story of a man who came into the tent and wanted to speak. What he told everyone was that for a long time, God's Spirit had been convicting him to get saved, and he refused. Over time, he said he got hard, and God quit dealing with him. In his mind, he had committed the unpardonable sin, because though he wanted to get saved now, he couldn't feel God anymore, so it was too late.

What saddened me about that story was the way the evangelist let this man go on believing this lie in order to scare others into running to the alter that night. It did cause a lot of people to get saved, and that is great, but God cares about that man's soul as well. He clearly had not committed the unpardonable sin. He hadn't attributed the works of the Spirit to the devil, and he hadn't spoken a word against God's Spirit. In addition to that, he wanted to get saved, which proves to me God was still dealing with him.

For all I know, the evangelist may have believed the man committed the unpardonable sin, and he may have been sincere in allowing that deception to continue, but I would have liked to have had an opportunity to try to tell that poor soul that God loved him and would save his soul if he would make a committment to Christ right now.

As I said, my belief on the blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is quite differen't than Shiloh's. I do believe it is possible to commit that sin today, and don't see any reason why the Apostles would have had to give further warnings on top of what Jesus had already done. In addition, Jesus went so far as to say that if we speak a word against the Holy Ghost, it wouldn't be forgiven. Of course someone could do that. Even so, I don't know of anyone personally that has committed that sin, though Satan loves to make people think they have. The main thing with your friend is that she have peace. I doubt she would be one that would commit that sin anyhow.

[elizabetht]

Mat 12:31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

Mat 12:32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

I am not trying to be contraversal here at all. It is just that I am trying to study the above verses in relation to the unpardonable sin and would value and input into the subject.

Blessings

Fez, this is a subject that should not be controversial at all, however, sadly, it is controversial even among believers. The following is an excerpt from an explanation of that particular sin which i believe to be accurate. Hope it helps! (there is more on this subject that you may want to look at, if you are interested contact me and I will give you the source.)

blessings,

Liz

"The unforgivable sin of speaking against the Holy Spirit has been interpreted in various ways, but the true meaning cannot contradict other Scripture. It is unequivocally clear that the one unforgivable sin is permanently rejecting Christ (John 3:18; 3:36). Thus, speaking against the Holy Spirit is equivalent to rejecting Christ with such finality that no future repentance is possible. 'My spirit shall not always strive with man,' God said long ago (Genesis 6:3).

[Guest shiloh357]

As I said, my belief on the blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is quite differen't than Shiloh's. I do believe it is possible to commit that sin today, and don't see any reason why the Apostles would have had to give further warnings on top of what Jesus had already done.

Because the gospels were not the first writings to be made in the New Testament cannon. There would have been no way to to take for granted that EVERYONE had read the Matthew Mark and Luke. You simply could not take that chance on an issue that could affect salvation for eternity. So if it were something a Christian could commit, we would see repeated warnings in all the epistles. We would see teachings about what EXACTLY this is sin is in order to avoid it completely. Nothing would be left to chance since this is a sin that could permanently bar from salvation forever. Something of that degree of importance, would be a major teaching all over the New Testament.

I do believe it is possible to commit that sin today,

No, because the context won't allow for it. The simple matter is you cannot make a case from the Bible that true Christians can commit that sin. Secondly, the sin was only committed by unbelievers who were trying discredit Jesus' ministry and His obvious role as Messiah.

The degree of rebellion that would have to occur in the heart of a person to openly blaspheme the Holy Spirit precludes them from being a Christian in the first place.

[Guest shiloh357]

It is attributing the work of the Spirit to the devil. If God were to perform a miraculous healing for instance, and someone were to claim that it was not by the power of the Spirit, but by the power of the devil that man or woman was healed, that would be blasphemy against the Spirit.

That is not the biblical definition of the sin. That is the modern pentacostal definition, but is usually leveled at people by those seeking to control others and intimidate them into silence.

Any time a spiritual manifestation is seen it needs to be questioned and challenged. Not every healing comes from God. Not every miracle is sign from or testimony of God.

[Shiloh62]

Mat 12:31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

Mat 12:32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

I am not trying to be contraversal here at all. It is just that I am trying to study the above verses in relation to the unpardonable sin and would value and input into the subject.

Blessings

My pastor explained it to me like this, because I was scared to death I had committed it" If you are afraid you have committed it, then you havent committed it".

[Shiloh62]

Mat 12:31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

Mat 12:32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

I am not trying to be contraversal here at all. It is just that I am trying to study the above verses in relation to the unpardonable sin and would value and input into the subject.

Blessings

Well, if you look at the passage in Mark, there seems to be two ingredients. Namely, that Jesus was casting out demons in the power of the beelzebub AND that Jesus was indwelt by beelzebub.

Let me tell you what it is NOT. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is NOT the act of questioning the actions and teachings of those who claim to operate in the supernatural. Some people who claim to operate in healing or deliverance ministries like to intimidate other Christians by claiming that if we question or challenge their activities that we are committing the unpardonable sin. That way they can continue to plant false doctrine without opposition.

God welcomes our skepticism and we are commanded to test every spirit. God is not offended if we test what we see in order to know if it is Him or not. He wants to prove Himself and welcomes the opportunity to be tested for in that He is glorified.

The following are some important facts based on the information provided in the Bible.

1. It only pertains to the casting out of demons. It cannot be broadened to include any other manifestation like healing or whatever. The context of the sin ONLY occurrs when Jesus was casting out demons, not when He was healing or performing some other miracle.

2. It only pertains the earthly ministry of Jesus. We do not find the sin occurring outside of that context. The accusation was leveled at Jesus in order to discredit His activities pertaining to deliverance from demonic oppression/possession.

3. This sin was only committed by unbelievers who were Jesus' enemies. There is no record in the Bible of a Christian committing that sin, nor do any of the apostles warn the churches about committing this sin in any epistle.

4. Blasphemy cannot be committed on accident. Blasphemy is (like all other sins) a conscious act. You KNOW when you are committing. Blasphemy is open rebellion in the face of the truth. It is committed with both eyes open and is a conscious, intentional act whereby a person attempts to slander and injure God's reputation and integrity.

Some people worry if they have committed blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and are no longer Christians. First of all, if you have to ask, you didn't. Secondly, if you were not a Christian, you would not care.

I think that I need to print this out, Shiloh,and post it on my wall, or at least keep it close to my heart because I've dealt with this fear my whole life, to the point that at one time, scrupulosity ruled my life for my deathly fear of commiting this sin.I now realize that our God is a merciful God, and Satan will use every trick in the book to crush our desire to be a witness for Jesus Christ,and the only way to defeat him is by our never ceasing trust in our Lord Jesus, and by letting God do what God does rather than trying to d"fix"things by trying to do it for Him.

[yesult]

I agree except for point I. - If you read Matt 12:22 It says that thy brought to him a demoniac who was blind and mute; and he cured him so that the one who had been mute could speak and see.

That's healing. Doesn't matter what the source of the actual illness was.

No, that is deliverance. It is not the same type of situation such as healing blind Bartamaeus, or the man with the withered hand whom Jesus healed on the Sabbath

Actually, if someone is healed. They are healed. Healing and deliverence are not always two completly seperate things. I said healing and deliverence and this is healing and deliverence. It is not only deliverence. The man was physically healed. That means he was HEALED.

The only time the blasphemy occurrs in a clear connection to demonic activity. The reason why is that authority over demons was what the talmud taught would be a sign of the Messiah. It was the one of the fiew miracles that the magicians of that day could not perform, thus reserving it solely as a Messianic sign.

Actually if someone is cured of being blind and mute - that means healing. Regardless of the source of the illnes, as I said. And the 'magicians' (there were any?) of the day could perform deliverence. Hence the sons of Sceva who had a DEVLIVERENCE ministry. Acts 19:14 They were obviously casting out demons with success before trying to use the name of Jesus or they wouldn't have had a deliverence ministry to start with.

And I disagree on points 2&3 as well - in that it only applies to Jesus. I disagree. Examples of sin (including everything the pharasees did) are there for a reason. It's so we can learn from it. God doesn't judge people differently. And the statement he makes is an open statement - not one just directed to the pharisees.

v32 Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. In this age or in the age to come.

The problem with that is context. You cannot find it in Scripture occurring in the life or ministry of any of the apostles. You are trying to broaden the context without biblical authority to do so. The Bible presents a very limited context of the sin, and we cannot expand it beyond that.

Actually you are just ignoring the biblical authority on the subject to prove your own part. IN THIS AGE OR IN THE AGE TO COME means exactly that.

They knew Jesus was the Messiah and they knew He was operating in the power of the Holy Spirit, and they hated Him all the more for it. That is why it is blasphemy.

Yes. I agree. The whole passage makes that very clear.

[yesult]

It is attributing the work of the Spirit to the devil. If God were to perform a miraculous healing for instance, and someone were to claim that it was not by the power of the Spirit, but by the power of the devil that man or woman was healed, that would be blasphemy against the Spirit.

That is not the biblical definition of the sin.

Actually it is and the whole passage proves it.

That is the modern pentacostal definition, but is usually leveled at people by those seeking to control others and intimidate them into silence.

No it is the biblical definition and you are trying to twist it to attack people actually using the gifts of the holy spirit.

Any time a spiritual manifestation is seen it needs to be questioned and challenged. Not every healing comes from God. Not every miracle is sign from or testimony of God.

Yes. But when something is through the power of the holy spirit and it has been tested to be so - deliberatly saying that it is from the power of the devil when you know better is the unforgiveable sin that the pharisees were commiting.

[Guest Butero]

Mat 12:31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

Mat 12:32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

I am not trying to be contraversal here at all. It is just that I am trying to study the above verses in relation to the unpardonable sin and would value and input into the subject.

Blessings

Fez, this is a subject that should not be controversial at all, however, sadly, it is controversial even among believers. The following is an excerpt from an explanation of that particular sin which i believe to be accurate. Hope it helps! (there is more on this subject that you may want to look at, if you are interested contact me and I will give you the source.)

blessings,

Liz

"The unforgivable sin of speaking against the Holy Spirit has been interpreted in various ways, but the true meaning cannot contradict other Scripture. It is unequivocally clear that the one unforgivable sin is permanently rejecting Christ (John 3:18; 3:36). Thus, speaking against the Holy Spirit is equivalent to rejecting Christ with such finality that no future repentance is possible. 'My spirit shall not always strive with man,' God said long ago (Genesis 6:3).

The problem with this explaination is, this is not clearly the meaning. I have heard this explaination given before and it doesn't fit the context and it doesn't explain the part about not speaking a word against the Holy Spirit.