Blasphemy against holyspirit
- Thread starter Naveen949134
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A friend (in real life) recently quipped in answered to a dig directed at him saying, "I'm just going to behave nonchalant," which perfectly illustrated his reception of the slight to his person (although it was funny because it also happened to illustrate a characteristic of the actual dig). And another friend (in unreal life, that is, here) expressed what seemed to be a novel idea to me, I've never heard it even suggested before anyway, that each heart can have characteristic of each of these soils at one time or another. But, even though I was inclined to run with this idea, I just proceeded on the side of caution and looked to either prove or disprove this possibility, and your links provided me the perfect and most convenient opportunity. In Jesus' explanation of the good soil, He mentions a "good" heart. One might even say a twice good heart considering two different words, kale and (kai; And, even, also, namely) agathe, are both used, and both, essentially, mean "good." Interestingly, of the first, "kalos," The Strong's Lexicon's Corresponding Greek/Hebrew Entries has "The Hebrew equivalent often associated with "kalos" is "tov...This word is used to describe God's creation,..." and Usage: submits, "In the New Testament, "kalos" is frequently used to describe...and the inherent goodness of God's creation..." And of the second word, agathos' Meaning: "intrinsically good, good in nature, good whether it is seen to be so or not, the widest and most colorless of all words with this meaning."
So, the first chance I get, the next time I happen to see my real life friend showing any sign of concern, I intend to make sure I don't miss the opportunity to tell him that, "I've noticed you seem a bit chalant today."
So, the first chance I get, the next time I happen to see my real life friend showing any sign of concern, I intend to make sure I don't miss the opportunity to tell him that, "I've noticed you seem a bit chalant today."
31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 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.
(Matthew 12:31-32)
These verses say emphatically that blashemy against the Holy against the Holy Spirit is NOT FORGIVEABLE either in this AGE or the world to come. Rather than trying to understand what Jesus was talking about you dismiss Jesus warning altogether saying "Fortunately for us all, the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is forgivable. but that it cant be while "we are knowingly persist in doing it." This is not what the verse says. Jesus said this sin will will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. Until you take Jesus at His word you will not understand this verse
(Matthew 12:31-32)
These verses say emphatically that blashemy against the Holy against the Holy Spirit is NOT FORGIVEABLE either in this AGE or the world to come. Rather than trying to understand what Jesus was talking about you dismiss Jesus warning altogether saying "Fortunately for us all, the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is forgivable. but that it cant be while "we are knowingly persist in doing it." This is not what the verse says. Jesus said this sin will will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. Until you take Jesus at His word you will not understand this verse
Where is the word "unforgivable" in Matt.12:31-32
31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 And whoever is speaking a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever is speaking against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
(Matthew 12:31-32)
31 Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. 32 And whoever is speaking a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever is speaking against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
(Matthew 12:31-32)
Jesus said that all sin is forgivable except blasphemy against the HS (MT 12:31), which in context seems to mean attributing evil to God (MT 12:24-32).
Paul indicated (in HB 6:4-6) that apostasy is also unforgiveable, because the person who commits that sin will never repent (cf. HB 12:17).
Such blasphemy is akin to calling good evil and evil good (IS 5:20, cf. HB 5:14). Such a person is completely corrupt or demonized and self-condemned (TIT 3:11, JN 3:19-20, cf. RM 14:22).
IOW, the crucial choice is between belief and blasphemy (attributing unrighteous hate to God). Much of GW teaches that God is omniloving (1TM2:3-4, JN 3:16, etc.), and Jesus, Paul and John define divine righteousness most succinctly as love for all (MT 5:44&48, 22:37-40, 1TM 2:3-4, 1JN 4:8), but souls may be hateful and reject rather than reflect God’s love/grace, although they ought to want (be biased toward) oneness or spiritual unity by way of answering the prayer of Jesus in JN 17:20-23.
Paul indicated (in HB 6:4-6) that apostasy is also unforgiveable, because the person who commits that sin will never repent (cf. HB 12:17).
Such blasphemy is akin to calling good evil and evil good (IS 5:20, cf. HB 5:14). Such a person is completely corrupt or demonized and self-condemned (TIT 3:11, JN 3:19-20, cf. RM 14:22).
IOW, the crucial choice is between belief and blasphemy (attributing unrighteous hate to God). Much of GW teaches that God is omniloving (1TM2:3-4, JN 3:16, etc.), and Jesus, Paul and John define divine righteousness most succinctly as love for all (MT 5:44&48, 22:37-40, 1TM 2:3-4, 1JN 4:8), but souls may be hateful and reject rather than reflect God’s love/grace, although they ought to want (be biased toward) oneness or spiritual unity by way of answering the prayer of Jesus in JN 17:20-23.
The word forgivable does not occur in Matt.12:24-32.
The word unforgivable does not appear in Heb. 6:4-6.
The Bible does not say fully demonised people are unforgivable. Poor "Legion" was not forgivable?
Quoting scriptures which do not say what you are asserting, but pretending they do, does not demonstrate that the scriptures say what you are asserting they claim.
The word unforgivable is not in the Bible. The concept of unforgivable is not in the Bible. The only Bible version that has the word unforgivable in it is the AMP (Amplified Bible?), which has it twice.
I don't understand why you are so determined to foist a word into the Bible that isn't there, just to justify an unnecessary doctrine you happen to have picked up from somewhere and then built an elaborate theological mythology around.
The crucial choice is between speaking what you realise is true, and deliberately lying. Outside are all those who love and make lies.
The word unforgivable does not appear in Heb. 6:4-6.
The Bible does not say fully demonised people are unforgivable. Poor "Legion" was not forgivable?
Quoting scriptures which do not say what you are asserting, but pretending they do, does not demonstrate that the scriptures say what you are asserting they claim.
The word unforgivable is not in the Bible. The concept of unforgivable is not in the Bible. The only Bible version that has the word unforgivable in it is the AMP (Amplified Bible?), which has it twice.
I don't understand why you are so determined to foist a word into the Bible that isn't there, just to justify an unnecessary doctrine you happen to have picked up from somewhere and then built an elaborate theological mythology around.
The crucial choice is between speaking what you realise is true, and deliberately lying. Outside are all those who love and make lies.
Again you exemplify the need for interpretation of meaning as well as for translation of words.
We illustrate that interpretations can disagree. Hence the need to emphasize unity regarding the
Gospel kerygma while striving for agreement regarding secondary didachaic details.
Striving for agreement is aided by quoting what disputed and citing relevant Scripture, please.
I am open to amending my opinion if yours seems better/truer.
Apparently your first point is that "will not be forgiven" does not mean "unforgiveable".
I disagree and will not amend my understanding of English semantics regarding this point.
Next point?
We illustrate that interpretations can disagree. Hence the need to emphasize unity regarding the
Gospel kerygma while striving for agreement regarding secondary didachaic details.
Striving for agreement is aided by quoting what disputed and citing relevant Scripture, please.
I am open to amending my opinion if yours seems better/truer.
Apparently your first point is that "will not be forgiven" does not mean "unforgiveable".
I disagree and will not amend my understanding of English semantics regarding this point.
Next point?
So, if I say,
"A student being disrespectful to their teacher will never be forgiven," and one student is being disrespectful to their teacher and refuses to repent and continues to act disrespectfully, while a second student is being disrespectful to their teacher but upon challenge repents and begins to show respect, would you say that the edict means neither student will ever be forgiven, whether they repent or not?
"A student being disrespectful to their teacher will never be forgiven," and one student is being disrespectful to their teacher and refuses to repent and continues to act disrespectfully, while a second student is being disrespectful to their teacher but upon challenge repents and begins to show respect, would you say that the edict means neither student will ever be forgiven, whether they repent or not?