Blaspheming the Holy Spirit? I do not think it means what you think it means…

Bible Readings for Sunday, June 10th, 2012
– The Time after Pentecost

*Click on each bible passage to expand the text.

Genesis 3:8-15

Psalm 130

2 Corinthians 4:13—5:1

Mark 3:20-35

“…guilty of an eternal sin.”

Mark 3
28. I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. 29. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin.”

This passage about the “one eternal sin” we can commit has always been my bugaboo. I cannot wrap my head around what this sin “is”!

I do not accept the populist modern Evangelical explanation, which is encapsulated in the following quote:

The Typical Modern Evangelical Attempt at Explanation

“I believe, the only unforgivable sin is the rejection of Jesus Christ’s offer of salvation, His free gift of eternal life, and thus, His forgiveness from sin.”

- Mary Fairchild, Calvary Chapel

“Unforgivable sin”? I do not think it means what you think it means…


The first issue I have with this modern interpretation is that Yeshua’s warning about sinning against the “Holy Spirit” came before he was publicly proclaimed as “divine”, before his resurrection, and before his ascension. Why does it make sense to put a later theology on an earlier story? How can we say this warning is all about “Jesus’ offer of salvation” his “gift of eternal life” and “forgiveness from sin” when none of that had yet been “accomplished”? Remember, Yeshua had to “die on the cross” and “pay” for the price for our sins (according to popular substitutionary atonement theologies of many modern Christians).

Therefore, this popular interpretation makes absolutely no sense.

Calling for Backup…

And because this is exiting my realm of ability to provide adequate commentary, I will now turn to the matchless wisdom of William Barclay, renowned bible commentator:

We must begin by remembering that Jesus could not have used the phrase ‘the Holy Spirit’ in the full Christian sense of the term. The Spirit in all his fullness did not come until Jesus had returned to his glory. It was not until Pentecost that there came to men and women the supreme experience of the Holy Spirit. Jesus must have used the term in the Jewish sense of the term. Now in Jewish thought the Holy Spirit had two great functions. First, he revealed God’s truth; second, he enabled that truth to be recognized. That will give us the key to this passage.

Barclay, William (2010-11-05). The Gospel of Mark (The New Daily Study Bible) (p. 91). Westminster John Knox Press. Kindle Edition.

We must use the term “Holy Spirit” in the Jewish concept: that which revealed God’s truth and enabled that truth to be recognized.

The Holy Spirit enabled men and women to recognize God’s truth when it entered their lives. But if people refuse to exercise any God-given faculty they will in the end lose it.

  • If they live in the dark long enough they will lose the ability to see.
  • If they stay in bed long enough they will lose the power to walk.
  • If they refuse to do any serious study they will lose the power to study.
  • And if people refuse the guidance of God’s Spirit often enough they will become in the end incapable of recognizing that truth when they see it.

In their eyes, evil becomes good and good evil. They can look on the goodness of God and call it the evil of Satan.

Barclay, William (2010-11-05). The Gospel of Mark (The New Daily Study Bible) (pp. 91-92). Westminster John Knox Press. Kindle Edition.

For example:

If we repeatedly and cynically deny the truth of God’s will for charity, we will begin to see charity to the less fortunate as foolish and naive on the part of those doing the giving. If we willfully deny the the dangers of worshiping Mammon, we will begin to view greed and avarice as positive traits, and even as signs of righteousness and riches as a blessing from God. And if we accept God’s free gift of Grace for ourselves and others like us, and yet deny it to others, we will begin to pervert that “free gift” into “a reward that must be earned”, negating Grace.

All these things are “eternal sins”.

But why are these things “eternal sins”?

There is only one condition of forgiveness and that is penitence. As long as people see loveliness in Christ, as long as they hate sin even if they cannot leave it, even if they are in the mud and the mire, they can still be forgiven. But if people, by repeated refusals of God’s guidance, have lost the ability to recognize goodness when they see it, if they have got their moral values inverted until evil to them is good and good to them is evil, then, even when they are confronted by Jesus, they are conscious of no sin; they cannot repent and therefore they can never be forgiven. That is the sin against the Holy Spirit.

Barclay, William (2010-11-05). The Gospel of Mark (The New Daily Study Bible) (p. 93). Westminster John Knox Press. Kindle Edition.

The reason that these sins are “eternal” is because true healing from sin requires us to become aware of it in the first place!

  • The greedy man will never be healed because he refuses to see himself as sick with greed.
  • The callous cynic will never be healed because they view themselves as “more enlightened” and “won’t be made a fool anymore”.
  • And the “us vs. them” religious types will never be healed because they think divisions and barriers are what God actually wants!

We choose to make these sins “eternal” and “unforgivable”, and as long as we are blind to them, we are blind to God and the difference between good and evil.

It is not God who denies forgiveness and healing, it is we who deny it to ourselves:

One of the Lucifer legends tells how one day a priest noticed in his congregation a magnificently handsome young man. After the service, the young man stayed for confession. He confessed so many and such terrible sins that the priest’s hair stood on end. ‘You must have lived long to have done all that,’ the priest said. ‘My name is Lucifer and I fell from heaven at the beginning of time,’ said the young man. ‘Even so,’ said the priest, ‘say that you are sorry, say that you repent and even you can be forgiven.’ The young man looked at the priest for a moment and then turned and strode away. He would not and could not say it; and therefore he had to go on still desolate and still damned.

Barclay, William (2010-11-05). The Gospel of Mark (The New Daily Study Bible) (p. 93). Westminster John Knox Press. Kindle Edition.

 

Trig Bundgaard About Trig Bundgaard

Thanks for reading. I would love to hear your feedback, thoughts and ideas about what I've written. Especially if it's contrary to my views!

If you liked what you read, please share it. If you didn't like what you read, please share it.

Grace and peace to you!

Romans 5
"18. Therefore just as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all.
19. For just as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous."

Comments

  1. Out of all the posts I’ve read here over the last year or so, I do believe this is my favorite.

    Thanks for enlightening my Sunday morning. God Bless.

  2. Well yeah. If the Holy Spirit is the spirit of truth, wisdom, then being willfully ignorant to truth and wisdom is a self-inflicted damnation upon yourself. Amen on your post by the way. I love it.

  3. Funnily enough I ended up giving today’s sermon in the absence of our pastor (Congregationalist) on this passage from Mk. The title I chose was “He has gone out of his mind.” My takeaway on this particular verse was in the context of the overall episode:

    We already know that Jesus preached that forgiveness was something that can be obtained based solely on one’s faith. However, for him to say that even blasphemy is forgivable unless it is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit seems somewhat confusing. To help us understand this proposition, I’d like to repeat the passage from the Gospel of Matthew that I quoted earlier on (Mt 5:22):

    “I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.”

    To my mind this sounds very much like a paraphrase of the line of thought we hear in Mark–particularly if we juxtapose the accusation of being insane with the accusation of being possessed by an unclean spirit, as we heard earlier in today’s Gospel.

    Transposing the words of Jesus into our own day, where we may not believe in a hell of fire, what I take away from today’s Gospel is the warning that if we deny the possibility that someone who challenges our most fundamental beliefs may indeed be speaking the truth, we condemn ourselves to the hell that results from ossification, from repeating the mistakes of the past.

    What a wake-up call that is! Instead of holding fast to what we have always believed, we must constantly be on the lookout, and even seek to be challenged in our beliefs.

  4. Excellent post. Not surprisingly, I have not heard this interpretation before (as it relates to blasphemy of the Holy Spirit).
    It’s amazing how much light there is when one steps out from inside the walls of organized religion. True freedom in God is to think and explore for yourself.
    Hmmm, to not use one’s God given ability to think for oneself, could this too be blasphemy of the Holy Spirit?

    • “I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”
      — Galileo Galilei

      Galileo and I would agree, David.

  5. Hey Trig,

    Great post. I don’t know if you still keep up with the subreddit r/ChristianUniversalism, but I posted a sermon by 19th century universalist George MacDonald. It’s here in case you haven’t heard of it (forgive the awful background): http://afirstnewssource.net/sermons/MacDonald/ItShallNotBeForgiven.htm. It has a lot of ideas similar to your post, so I thought you’d be interested.

    Best

    • I love George MacDonald, Phil. thank you for posting, I haven’t read that before.

      I am not still keeping track of Christian Universalism. I need to get back on the horse.

  6. Wow, what a bleak outlook. We’re all screwed then. I doubt I’ve ever met a person who is aware of all the sins she commits. Whether it’s meat-eaters who’ve lost the ability to see the brutality and hubris piled onto their dinner plate, Westerners who think nothing of locking away their riches in banks while two-thirds of the world struggles, or people who who’ve convinced themselves it’s ok to consume more than their fair share of resources (ie. all of us), we all have sin entrenched in our lives in God only knows how many ways.

    Some sins might come to the surface, but many will not. Some sins will remain buried by psychorepression, others by helplessness, while others by culture. Still others will remain hidden simply because we live in the wrong time. Slavery was off the moral radar and unquestionably acceptable for most people 2000 years ago; as was colonisation, repression of women and capital punishment 200 years ago; as was animal slavery until relatively recently. There are undoubtedly many things that aren’t on our radar which, in 500 years, will seem like abominations (property ownership? fossil fuel use? air travel? use of money? patriotism? Perhaps, and probably many other things).

    If God is “offering guidance” for us to realise these sins, then she is sure taking her sweet time about it, which leaves most of us in the dark, and doomed to be unforgiven. I know Yeshua was fond of dropping bad news on people, but this gem is especially depressing.

  7. Jason L. says:

    Though persisting in sin knowingly to the point where one becomes coarsened and desensitized to it, is indeed problematic as you and Mr.Barclay explain, the more plausible explanation as to what the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is , would be the unspeakably wicked act of someone intentionally saying , or writing something that is directly derogatory about the Third Person of the Trinity Itself . For example, when some of the pharisees in the gospel account that you referenced claimed that when Jesus healed the people of whatever condition was then referred to as being possessed by devils , the pharisees claimed that such an obviously benevolent process up helping people to get in their right mind , to be healed and NO l.onger subjected to such demonic influence, was somehow a demonic influence, a preposterous claim which those pharisees made when they saw the obviously good , virtuous result of the process at work when Jesus healed the person.

    Jesus himself used a kind of Socratic method to point out to the pharisees and other people present in the crowd(s) that it was absurd to maintain that the act of casting out devils would itself be done by devils , for it makes no sense to suppose , from a strategic standpoint that the Devil would accomplish the evil agenda , if he were to allow his own kingdom to be divided against itself…with its own members intrinsically fighting against one another . Hence the arguments which used such statements as ‘a house divided cannot stand ‘ , and the references to how the strong man would not allow his house to be broken up unless a stronger man bound him and so on .

Speak Your Mind

*