In Mark 3 it's the Scribes, in Matt 12 it's the Pharisees. I think that Mark is very clear on the issue: 30 for they were saying, He has an unclean spirit.
Agreed, that's what Mark 3:30 is about. And so I can come back to the reason why I started this thread. It practically means for someone who blasphemed the Holy Spirit and regrets it later, truly seek forgiveness, repents, leads a Christian life, trust God etc. he won't be forgiven. The question is then, does God not want to forgive this man or does He can't any longer and if the latter is the case (which I tend to believe considering His loving character) then what is the reason for that.
Exactly. 29 but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin- 30 for they were saying, He has an unclean spirit. Fact or not ?
Depends on your specific definition of “blasphemy.” It actually means various things. To “speak irreverently of God” is one meaning. I believe equating a holy and righteous God to an evil and unclean Devil, which the Pharisees did, is fairly “irreverent,” don’t you?
Oh? I’ve seen Jesus called “Son of Man” many times in scripture. If Christ is not the “Son of Man” in this passage, who is He referring to, as I’ve never seen anybody else in scripture referred to as “Son of Man?”
I see two things here: 1. The individual who blasphemed the Holy Spirit in the sense that the Pharisees did is in such a condition of unbelief/rejection that he will never be stirred to saving faith, as he was an eyewitness to the Spirit's manifestation and still blasphemed. He is unsavable. 2. "Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do..." Lk 23:34a Jesus' appeal to the Father was for forgiveness related to the passion, not a blanket salvation for all those involved. No such forgiveness is offered to those witnesses and subsequent blasphemers of the Spirit. The individual never will respond to the Gospel call because he is that hardened against it.
He's referring to his human personhood. God addressed Ezekiel as "son of man" all the time. To paraphrase: "You people seek to attack me personally as a man, but I'm not a man possessed by the devil as you claim; I'm driving out demons by the power of God. You're therefore guilty of blasphemy. And blasphemy cannot be forgiven because it's a sin leading to death according to the Law of Moses." Let's please keep in mind that blasphemy carried the death sentence (stoning) according to Jewish Law. So if you blasphemed, you were condemned to death. That is why it's "unforgivable" -- in the current age, and the age to come, for as long as the Law was in effect. There was no pardon available for blasphemy. Because no human agent had the power to override God's decree. If you blasphemed, you were put to death. The end. Somehow ... and I have no idea how and by whom ... this got all warped into "if you blaspheme, you go to hell forever". Which it does.not.mean.at.all. It's the same thing where John says that there is "sin leading to death". You can pray all you want to if you commit such sin, but your death is inevitable because of God's decree. If the sin is not leading to death (i.e. by law decree worthy of stoning), then you can be pardoned, make restitution or whatever and you're free to go. We have to remember that these people were Jews, abiding by Jewish Law. There were sins that resulted in stoning if you committed them. Blasphemy was one of those sins. Jesus was ultimately crucified for being accused of blasphemy. Let's not forget that. Leviticus 24:13 Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, "Bring out of the camp the one who cursed, and let all who heard him lay their hands on his head, and let all the congregation stone him. 15 And speak to the people of Israel, saying, Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin. 16 Whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death."
But that's an assumption or you must have some passage in mind to support such a theoretical impossibility.
"But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:" Mk 12:39 It is impossible to be saved and yet unforgiven for such error.
It seems we have a communication error. In post #82 I theorized a person may regret he blasphemed the Holy Spirit, truly seek forgiveness, repents, leads a Christian life, trust God etc. thus responding to the Gospel. And yet won't be forgiven. In reply you said - The individual never will respond to the Gospel call because he is that hardened against it. Meaning you reject my above theorized scenario as a theoretical impossibility?
That's exactly my struggle with this topic. And one of us is wrong. My current thoughts are that maybe I have a wrong understanding of the third Person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit. God is the Father (clear), Jeus the Son (clear), but Who is the Holy Spirit? Scripture reveals a lot about God and Jesus but not much about the Holy Spirit. Seems essential to me in this discussion.
That's because He calls (and is called) the 'Son of Man', which is a significant title in itself. If we simply tack 'Christ' onto it - as we're prone to do - we lose the nuance of what it means. In this case, Jesus, as the 'Son of Man', is telling the Pharisees that they're free to argue with him all they want, as hard as they want, and as deceptively as they want (an offer they take him up on). He's come to offer salvation, not get offended and judge those who lack understanding, and who don't fully realize what they're doing (for example, Paul). He didn't expect those around Him to believe that He was the 'Son of God', i.e. God, and in fact, knew that they wouldn't, so of course He's happy to 'get into it' with them if required - He gives them that grace due to their ignorance. On the other hand, if they blaspheme the Holy Spirit, which is to fail to recognise who God is, and otherwise lack faith, then they will be guilty of 'eternal sin', which is unbelief, or disbelief at worst.
But you could not offer Scripture hence I called it an assumption. Not I think you can be right. It's something in the order of Hitler becoming a Christian before he killed himself.
Why couldn't hitler have repented? Being irreverent or slanderous is just not blasphemy. Context, folks. Context demands that blasphemy mean a refusal to acknowledge who God is.
First instance of blasphemy in the OT is in Numbers 15. In Num 15, there is a huge distinction between intentional and unintentional sin. Num 15 is clear that deliberate sin is blasphemy. You can't accidentally blaspheme. The evil of blasphemy if you follow it through both the old and new testaments is that the offense is action that causes those that don't believe inTod tomhequate him to being no different than other he so called Tods. And God is not one among many.