Guest shiloh357 Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 2 hours ago, StanJ said: Again you're using your modern, 21st century, Christian understanding of the New Testament to judge what is and isn't a believer and at the time of Jesus the Pharisees were indeed believers. Jesus even commended Gentiles for being believers and having faith and they definitely had not confessed Jesus Christ as Savior. Bottom line is you can't find anywhere in the New Testament that anyone committed blasphemy of the Holy Spirit which is why Jesus warned them and did not indict them. Nonsense. I am using the Bible's definition of a believer and "believer" is a NT concept to describe those who have put their faith in Jesus. That's what a believer is. The Pharisees were hypocrites, they violated the Law of Moses multiple times and created loopholes to excuse their excesses and their sin. Jesus said the Pharisees were not going to enter the Kingdom and they will keep their followers from entering, by making their followers twice as much the sons of hell, as themselves (Matt. 23:15). That's not what you call a believer. And frankly, you don't understand what Pharisaism was. The Pharisees were not godly men who loved God and kept His laws. Jesus proved that. You are trying to foist a definition of "believer" that does not comport with Scripture. Your argument is just pathetic drivel and bereft of any intellectual value. You want to deny what anyone and everyone knows about the Pharisees. As for claiming we can't find one place where anyone committed Blasphemy of the HS... That is just intellectual suicide. Mark 3, Matt 12 and Luke 12 all show us who committed it, and it was the Pharisees, the "sons of Hell." The ONLY warning was to what was their fate for committing it. It was not a warning telling them they were in danger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woundeddog Posted September 14, 2016 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 44 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,370 Content Per Day: 0.25 Reputation: 1,054 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/21/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/18/1868 Share Posted September 14, 2016 3 hours ago, StanJ said: I'm practicing proper biblical hermeneutics. okay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJ Posted September 14, 2016 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 336 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 166 Days Won: 2 Joined: 09/08/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/12/1953 Share Posted September 14, 2016 1 hour ago, shiloh357 said: Nonsense. I am using the Bible's definition of a believer and "believer" is a NT concept to describe those who have put their faith in Jesus. That's what a believer is. The Pharisees were hypocrites, they violated the Law of Moses multiple times and created loopholes to excuse their excesses and their sin. Jesus said the Pharisees were not going to enter the Kingdom and they will keep their followers from entering, by making their followers twice as much the sons of hell, as themselves (Matt. 23:15). That's not what you call a believer. And frankly, you don't understand what Pharisaism was. The Pharisees were not godly men who loved God and kept His laws. Jesus proved that. You are trying to foist a definition of "believer" that does not comport with Scripture. Your argument is just pathetic drivel and bereft of any intellectual value. You want to deny what anyone and everyone knows about the Pharisees. As for claiming we can't find one place where anyone committed Blasphemy of the HS... That is just intellectual suicide. Mark 3, Matt 12 and Luke 12 all show us who committed it, and it was the Pharisees, the "sons of Hell." The ONLY warning was to what was their fate for committing it. It was not a warning telling them they were in danger. So nobody in the Old Testament was a believer? Believers today violate God's laws for them all the time, but that doesn't make them unbelievers. Unless of course you are of the persuasion that believers can't sin? Jesus was not speaking of Pharisees collectively he was speaking of those Pharisees, and again, context. Paul was a Pharisee and Zacchaeus was a faze collector, but they were both believers. I'm finding your comments are getting a little too personal and I think it's best if you reflect on what you're saying before continuing. In the meantime read the following on what a Pharisee was; http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/pharisees/ You're pointing out the same scenario in the synoptic gospels which doesn't mean three times, it means one time that is described in three separate accounts and as such I've already shown that Jesus didn't condemn them he warned them. Again you actually have to be able to exegete it from scripture and not just claim it. So far you have been unsuccessful to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 9 hours ago, StanJ said: So nobody in the Old Testament was a believer? We are talking about the Pharisees, not everyone in the OT. Quote Believers today violate God's laws for them all the time, but that doesn't make them unbelievers. Unless of course you are of the persuasion that believers can't sin? There is a difference between stumbling in a sincere desire to serve the Lord and actively and purposely violating God's commandments. I think we can all make that distinction. Another distinction we can all make is the difference between sinning on occasion and living in full on, habitual sin, living in the consistent daily practice of sin. Quote Jesus was not speaking of Pharisees collectively he was speaking of those Pharisees, and again, context. Paul was a Pharisee and Zacchaeus was a faze collector, but they were both believers. They were believers AFTER they had a personal encounter with Jesus. That's how a NT believer is denoted. They are believers in Jesus as Messiah and Savior. Quote I'm finding your comments are getting a little too personal and I think it's best if you reflect on what you're saying before continuing. In the meantime read the following on what a Pharisee was; http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/pharisees/ I know who the Pharisees were. I don't need any instruction from you on that. Furthermore, my comments about your argument is accurate. Your argument is simply about trying to grasp at an artificial definition of "believer" to prop up your already losing argument. My view of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is based on what the Bible says and not some sloppy, made-up argument that has no intellectual credibility, if that's too much honesty to face up to, you are free to bow out of the conversation. Quote You're pointing out the same scenario in the synoptic gospels which doesn't mean three times, it means one time that is described in three separate accounts and as such I've already shown that Jesus didn't condemn them he warned them. I didn't say it happened three times. I simply pointed out the three Gospels in which it is mentioned as having happened. Jesus warned them, yes. But what he did not warn them that they were in danger of committing the sin. Even the narrator of the text says they committed with the sin. (which torpedoes your claim). He warned them about what they would face as a result of the sin they committed. Quote Again you actually have to be able to exegete it from scripture and not just claim it. So far you have been unsuccessful to do that. I have exegeted it. I exegeted this issue in my initial post two days ago or so. I dealt with the context and why no New Testament believer can commit that sin. You are the one drumming up sloppy exegesis trying to paint nonbelievers as believers, since you cannot bring yourself to admit that you got it wrong. That's called pride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Robert Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 One thing I'm wondering is why StanJ is trying so hard to make the "unforgivable sin" one that only a Christian can commit. That's putting believers on a "highwire" that is not only unbiblical, but puts the entire onus of salvation on the believer. Meantime, Jesus' entire discourse in Matthew chapter 23 on the Pharisees, combined with the teaching in James chapter 2 about one's works being a proof of salvation (which the Pharisees' "works" were summarized by Jesus as being anything but) and 1 John chapter 5's teaching that if We love God, we love Jesus and follow God's commands (the Pharisees did neither) show that the Pharisees were NOT saved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJ Posted September 15, 2016 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 336 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 166 Days Won: 2 Joined: 09/08/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/12/1953 Share Posted September 15, 2016 1 hour ago, RobertS said: One thing I'm wondering is why StanJ is trying so hard to make the "unforgivable sin" one that only a Christian can commit. That's putting believers on a "highwire" that is not only unbiblical, but puts the entire onus of salvation on the believer. Meantime, Jesus' entire discourse in Matthew chapter 23 on the Pharisees, combined with the teaching in James chapter 2 about one's works being a proof of salvation (which the Pharisees' "works" were summarized by Jesus as being anything but) and 1 John chapter 5's teaching that if We love God, we love Jesus and follow God's commands (the Pharisees did neither) show that the Pharisees were NOT saved. Because only Believers can know the Holy Spirit which is why Jesus said you can speak against the son of man but not against the Holy Spirit. It's rather simple. Matthew 23 and James 2 have nothing to do with one another.... they are about two completely different issues. 1 John 5:16 also teaches about the unforgivable sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJ Posted September 15, 2016 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 336 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 166 Days Won: 2 Joined: 09/08/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/12/1953 Share Posted September 15, 2016 (edited) 21 hours ago, shiloh357 said: Quote We are talking about the Pharisees, not everyone in the OT. That's right, so please answer the question. Quote There is a difference between stumbling in a sincere desire to serve the Lord and actively and purposely violating God's commandments. I think we can all make that distinction. Another distinction we can all make is the difference between sinning on occasion and living in full on, habitual sin, living in the consistent daily practice of sin. Again you're using your twenty-first-century perspective and New Covenant perspective on what made a believer in the old Covenant. Just as Believers send today believers in Jesus's day also sinned. Quote They were believers AFTER they had a personal encounter with Jesus. That's how a NT believer is denoted. They are believers in Jesus as Messiah and Savior. They were Believers before and after. Quote I know who the Pharisees were. I don't need any instruction from you on that. Furthermore, my comments about your argument is accurate. Your argument is simply about trying to grasp at an artificial definition of "believer" to prop up your already losing argument. My view of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is based on what the Bible says and not some sloppy, made-up argument that has no intellectual credibility, if that's too much honesty to face up to, you are free to bow out of the conversation. Will so far based on your comments you don't know who the Pharisees were. With a mindset like yours how would you ever know if you need instruction or not because you're not willing to accept any? I'm pretty sure intellectual credibility does not involve ad hominem regardless as to whether this is a Christian site or not. What is in question is your view of what blasphemy of the holy spirit is. Have you ever in fact received the infilling and baptism of the Holy Spirit? Quote I didn't say it happened three times. I simply pointed out the three Gospels in which it is mentioned as having happened. Jesus warned them, yes. But what he did not warn them that they were in danger of committing the sin. Even the narrator of the text says they committed with the sin. (which torpedoes your claim). He warned them about what they would face as a result of the sin they committed. That's exactly what he did, he warned them about the sin of blasphemy and you said this a few times that the narrator says it but you never pointed out where exactly the narrator says they committed this sin? Jesus sure didn't say it so why would the narrator say it? Quote I have exegeted it. I exegeted this issue in my initial post two days ago or so. I dealt with the context and why no New Testament believer can commit that sin. You are the one drumming up sloppy exegesis trying to paint nonbelievers as believers, since you cannot bring yourself to admit that you got it wrong. That's called pride. No actually you haven't. You've only made claims but not claims based on proper hermeneutical exegesis. What you do seem to be doing is attacking me personally instead of dealing with the scripture and I've asked you to stop doing that. One more time and I will report you. The only pride I'm seeing here is somebody who's incapable of looking at the scripture without eisegeting it. Please don't take my newness in here to be a sign that I'm new to the scriptures. I have been studying them for over 45 years. Edited September 15, 2016 by StanJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 19 hours ago, StanJ said: That's right, so please answer the question. I answered it the only way it deserves to be answered. We are not talking about everyone in the OT. The issue is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. It was the Pharisees who committed and you trying to paint them as believers, when everything in the NT says about them says the opposite. The Pharisees were hopelessly corrupt and hated Jesus. If they were believers, they would not hated Jesus. It's really really simple. The problem is that those facts just don't fit your agenda. Quote Will so far based on your comments you don't know who the Pharisees were. With a mindset like yours how would you ever know if you need instruction or not because you're not willing to accept any? I'm pretty sure intellectual credibility does not involve ad hominem regardless as to whether this is a Christian site or not. What is in question is your view of what blasphemy of the holy spirit is. Have you ever in fact received the infilling and baptism of the Holy Spirit? I have studied who the Pharisees were as a religious group. We are talking about the Pharisees in the NT that were Jesus' antagonists, and who were not believers by measurable standard. I am not attacking you, but the emptiness of your argument and the futile attempt to prove that haters of Jesus were believers and followers of God. If they truly followed God and believed His word, they would have recognized and received Jesus as their Messiah. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the slander of the Holy of Spirit. And the ONLY place it occurs is in the Gospels in the earthly ministry of Jesus. Quote That's exactly what he did, he warned them about the sin of blasphemy and you said this a few times that the narrator says it but you never pointed out where exactly the narrator says they committed this sin? Jesus sure didn't say it so why would the narrator say it? No he warned them about their fate for having blasphemed the Holy Spirit. The narrator of Mark says they committed the sin in Mark 3:22, 30. And Matt. 12:24 Jesus' response to them indicates they said it, or He would not have brought it up. Quote No actually you haven't. You've only made claims but not claims based on proper hermeneutical exegesis. What you do seem to be doing is attacking me personally instead of dealing with the scripture and I've asked you to stop doing that. One more time and I will report you. I exegeted it according to its immediate context in my initial response, that you replied to. I am not going to repost it. Go back and read it. Quote Please don't take my newness in here to be a sign that I'm new to the scriptures. I have been studying them for over 45 years. Quality is more important than quantity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Robert Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 21 hours ago, StanJ said: Because only Believers can know the Holy Spirit which is why Jesus said you can speak against the son of man but not against the Holy Spirit. It's rather simple. Matthew 23 and James 2 have nothing to do with one another.... they are about two completely different issues. 1 John 5:16 also teaches about the unforgivable sin. Sorry, but it's already been proven that that is not the case. You do not have to "know" someone to speak against them: people do it all the time. As for your second comment, they have everything to do with one another; works are a evidence of salvation, and the Pharisees' works demonstrated they were not. James did not teach his own "doctrine" in a vacuum, but what he learned at the Lord's feet and through the Holy Spirit. Lastly: if it were possible for Christians to commit the "unforgivable sin", then all Satan would have to do is push a believer to do so and make them lose their salvation. In that case, Satan could make every single believer crack with the right stress and defeat all of God's plans. And if you say "Well, God could simply preserve them", then why would God not do so with regular sin? Sorry, but your arguments do not hold any water, nor are they congruent with a proper hermeneutical reading of Scripture. I think Shiloh357 has the situation pegged correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanJ Posted September 15, 2016 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 336 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 166 Days Won: 2 Joined: 09/08/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/12/1953 Share Posted September 15, 2016 16 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Quote I answered it the only way it deserves to be answered. We are not talking about everyone in the OT. The issue is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. It was the Pharisees who committed and you trying to paint them as believers, when everything in the NT says about them says the opposite. The Pharisees were hopelessly corrupt and hated Jesus. If they were believers, they would not hated Jesus. It's really really simple. The problem is that those facts just don't fit your agenda. Despite your condescending response here, you didn't answer it, you deflected. What exactly in the New Testament says that they weren't believers? You haven't presented one yet that shows they were not believers. Not all Pharisees were corrupted or power hungry and not all Pharisees hated Jesus. John 3:1-2; Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.” This is a pretty clear indication that what you're asserting is wrong. Quote I have studied who the Pharisees were as a religious group. We are talking about the Pharisees in the NT that were Jesus' antagonists, and who were not believers by measurable standard. I am not attacking you, but the emptiness of your argument and the futile attempt to prove that haters of Jesus were believers and followers of God. If they truly followed God and believed His word, they would have recognized and received Jesus as their Messiah. But they obviously weren't Believers by your measure or standard but then again you're not the measure or standard by which believers are categorized. I'm pretty sure I posted the following link already, but please read it and educate yourself; http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/pharisees/ Quote Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the slander of the Holy of Spirit. And the ONLY place it occurs is in the Gospels in the earthly ministry of Jesus. What Jesus said was a warning and there is nowhere else and all of the New Testament the that identifies anyone as having committed the unpardonable sin. You yourself have not been able to show it despite your insistence that it's there. And so 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. Quote No he warned them about their fate for having blasphemed the Holy Spirit. The narrator of Mark says they committed the sin in Mark 3:22, 30. And Matt. 12:24 Jesus was talking to the crowd and to the Pharisees in Matthew 12 and he was warning everyone, quoted above, as to what would happen if anyone's did blaspheme the Holy Spirit. He never said YOU will not be forgiven he said anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit WILL not, and as they had not spoken against the Holy Spirit but only spoken against what Jesus had done in a reactive manner and really didn't know that it was the Holy Spirit, they couldn't possibly have blasphemed the Holy Spirit. Quote Jesus' response to them indicates they said it, or He would not have brought it up. There are many many warnings in the Bible that are not a direct result of people having just sinned. You're putting. 1 and 2 together and coming up with 2 Quote I exegeted it according to its immediate context in my initial response, that you replied to. I am not going to repost it. Go back and read it. I won't bother continuing to debate this with you as it is obvious you can't be honest about what you did do or didn't do for that matter. Quote Quality is more important than quantity. That is absolutely right and being able to rightly divide the word of Truth is the most important thing of all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts