I have heard many speculations.From the most radical to the most metaphorical one.Whats your opinion on the matter?What exactly is implied os the blasmphemy against the Holy Spirit .Do people who blasmpheme against it are unforgiven?Personally i think know.But i have yet to know what it is.God bless
I get it from the context of the passage Matthew 12:22-32 which speaks of this. This is when you call what is good evil. That is what the Pharisees were doing when Jesus said this to them. It is a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit because you are speaking evil against the true source of inspiration for those actions.
Of course I believe that sins are self-destructive habits not rule breaking or rebellion. I think the latter definitions have more to do with making religion a tool of power. I also don’t believe God has such a hard time forgiving people that he needs some super spell in order to accomplish it. So I don’t think salvation is about forgiveness or acquiring a get-of-jail-free card, but about changing our habits from the things which are self-destruct to those which build us up.
So the original or first sin in the Biblical narrative is A&E playing this blame game when God confronts them about breaking the commandment. We learn from making mistakes but how can we learn from our mistakes if we refuse to acknowledge them. What can we say then to this willingness on the part of the Pharisees to use rhetoric to label good things as evil? How can anything be more self-destructive than destroying your own moral compass in such a manner – repudiating the dictates of your own conscience. This is definitely a step in the wrong direction from the sin of A&E, not simply failing to acknowledge your mistakes but refusing to even see what is good and evil at all.
I don’t think this is so much about some black and white rule as about there being a point of no return in the transition from good to evil. If we start lying about what is good and evil, warping our own conscience by telling ourselves that those doing good are evil and that evil things are good, then I fear we lose what tenuous connection we have with God altogether and there is no coming back from that.
That’s essentially how I see it as well. The context is very clear.
Jesus was preforming miracles right before the Jews. The Jews realized he was preforming miracles. There is no stronger proof. He was raising the dead, healing the sick, and casting out demons. They knew he was not guilty of any sins. All the evidence was there.
Yet in the face of that evidence, they rejected it and said that all this goodness and righteousness he was doing was not from God but from the devil.
They said Gods power was the devils power. If you don’t believe the truth in the face of it at its strongest then you won’t ever believe it.
It would be like if a man walked in on his wife cheating. He saw them having sex, saw them naked, and everything. Then they stopped and said oh I feel down and our clothes feel off and he landed on top of me and we were trying to get apart but got stuck and it was complicated. If a guy saw that and believed it, then you will never convince him his wife cheats because he saw perfect evidence of it and denied it.
To sin against the Holy Spirit is to fully knowingly reject the truth of our actions, while fully comprehending that the source of truth is clearly showing us that our actions are evil. The current phrase that I would use is pathologically and irreversibly conditioned to evil.
It’s hyperbole at best and ignorance at worst, showing the Church’s (Q’s) human limitations and possibly even Jesus’ Himself. Nothing to worry about.
Can you explain further about the human limitations? So our limitations are unforgivable?
Our limitations from 2000 years ago made us come up with this extremely exaggerated figure of speech and believe it. If there is a God He’s competent and good.
So God is competent and good but Jesus comes up with extremely exaggerated figures of speech and believes them, promoting ignorance and showing the extent of human fallibility. Hmmmmm…
considering that you can only ask to be forgiven a sin if you recognise it as such and by someone you recognise as the authority that can forgive you, so if you declare that sin not to be a sin, how can you ask for forgiveness about it. It becomes an unforgivable sin by default.
Letus take an example that you declare that sex for purely recreational purposes is okay, despite what you are told in the bible. So how am I going to ask for forgiveness for my conduct if I deny it to be wrong against the spirit?
Those are your words and that’s your conclusion. Your polarized, either/or false dichotomy. Jesus had no intention of promoting ignorance. That’s the unintended collateral of His dazzling enlightenment in His time. That’s normal in cultural development.
No i dpnt think thats true. For example some same sex couples dont consider homosexuality a sin. Are they unforgiven then? I doubt that.
From the passage, it appears to me that the sin is attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan.
Sorry, but that is the logical consequence as itf you distort the logos and claim it to be righteous you loose the ability to repent thus you cannot be forgiven as you are unable ask for forgiveness about it and repent, particularly if you deny the existence of God, why would you ask someone for forgiveness? I would have burnt up / out in reentry if I would not have been able to find such thankfulness and love on that way out of here. If you lost the ability to talk to the spirit you are having to deal with yourself on your own, anl let me assure you that those minutes to those on this side of the great divide can be an eternity in hell on the other side.
So you’re OK then? And you’re assuring me of Hell because regardless of the Spirit it feels like I’m having to deal with myself on my own?
if you deny the spirit you made your choice. The whole point is that the spirit can not force you to accept him as that would be incoherent. If you make a mockery out of the spirit you lost it.
Right, so my not encountering the Spirit beyond ineffably, under the surface, unlike lucky old you (in what way I wonder?), is all my fault; I only have myself to blame for being damned. Fine, I’ll be in most excellent company and will avoid the pious, thank God.
The rest of scripture is unambiguous that there is no unpardonable sin, other than the sin of disbelief, which not what I think the gospel writers had in mind. Personally I agree with other who say it was hyperbole meant to shame those who were attributing the works of the Spirit to the devil.
Your question is an important one, but it one that is that is tainted by dogma. The gravest sins are against the spirit, period. The first two sins that Yahweh gave to Moses are sins against the spirit. They were listed first because they are the most vial of all sins.
The first commandment - This is a sin against God and God is spirit.
The second commandment - God does not want his creation to be denigrated and how could a human represent anything divine without denigrating it? This has to do with the inability of man to comprehend the beauty of God’s Heavenly creation. By creating an imperfect image, we are sinning against the spirit.
Sins against a person’s spirit - The worst of these sins are committed by preachers who lead and entire congregation into spiritual lies or dogma. Getting people to believe something that is not true is worse than killing them because you have damaged their eternal soul. Any form of indoctrination is a sin against the spirit.
These sins are not forgiven by Jesus’ act of redemption. They have to paid back in full. (Matt 5:21-26).
Best wishes, Shawn
You really are a piece of work.