[Tiresias]

What is the Unforgivable Sin?

I'd be really interested to hear everyone's views, Christians and non Christians. You don't have to be a believer to offer one because this is really a question of theology and interpreting scripture. I'm agnostic.

“Truly I say unto you, All their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter: but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin: because they say, ‘He has an unclean spirit’.”

—Book of Mark 3:28-29

What does it mean to blaspheme the Holy Spirit?

This has troubled me since I was a kid. My Sunday school teacher said that even if I think the words I will go to hell.

Several restless nights ensued.

But I see it differently now.

Here's my humble opinion:

Personally, I don't think it is just to say certain naughty words. I think the meaning here is figurative. To blaspheme the Holy Spirit as I see it is to, firstly, be aware that something is highly sacred, and then to abuse and defile it anyway.

This has some paradoxical implications.

For example, a man who is ignorant, or mentally ill, or acting under coercion cannot commit the Eternal Sin even if he murders or is responsible for a genocide. But a man who is spiritually enlightened, on the other hand, a man who is touched by the divine, commits Eternal Sin when he embezzles church proceeds.

Child abuse, murder, rape, intentional cruelty, prolonged mental abuse of a spouse, and, yes, cursing the Holy Spirit—all of these sins may qualify as Unpardonable Sins but if and only if Christ's words, "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do," do not apply to the person who is committing them.

Anyway, what do you think?

[dcmacdaddy]

• from a cultural taboo standpoint: cannibalism

  [you don't **** where you eat and you don't eat one of your own]
  

• from a social/evolutionary standpoint: child molestation/incest

  [Sex with your own children (molestation)/sex with other members of the immediate family (incest)]
  

• from a religious viewpoint: rejection/renunciation of chosen deity

  [renouncing/denying existence of the Abrahamic god for the Judeo-Chris-lamic religion tradition; willful embrace of desire/want in Buddhist religious tradition]
  

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Tiresias 

What is the Unforgivable Sin?

I'd be really interested to hear everyone's views, Christians and non Christians. You don't have to be a believer to offer one because this is really a question of theology and interpreting scripture. I'm agnostic.

This is actually a very good question and IMO, is much simpler than many claim.

What does it mean to blaspheme the Holy Spirit?

This has troubled me since I was a kid. My Sunday school teacher said that even if I think the words I will go to hell.

Several restless nights ensued.

On behalf of Christian tutorials and tutors throughout all of history, I apologize for the rampant confusion some of us instill. I'd be willing to bet if you're concerned about blaspheming the Holy Spirit, you've not done it. Even as an agnostic, you seem to have a healthy respect for the Spirit.

Here's my humble opinion:

Personally, I don't think it is just to say certain naughty words. I think the meaning here is figurative. To blaspheme the Holy Spirit as I see it is to, firstly, be aware that something is highly sacred, and then to abuse and defile it anyway.

This has some paradoxical implications.

For example, a man who is ignorant, or mentally ill, or acting under coercion cannot commit the Eternal Sin even if he murders or is responsible for a genocide. But a man who is spiritually enlightened, on the other hand, a man who is touched by the divine, commits Eternal Sin when he embezzles church proceeds.

This would suggest that a man who has committed his life to Christ, yet still battles the "flesh" (i.e. greed, sexual immorality, etc...) is damnable. There is no Scriptural foundation for this notion, but I'll explain what I mean here in a sec...

Child abuse, murder, rape, intentional cruelty, prolonged mental abuse of a spouse, and, yes, cursing the Holy Spirit—all of these sins may qualify as Unpardonable Sins but if and only if Christ's words, "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do," do not apply to the person who is committing them.

Blasphemy is not necessarily the commission of sin as a believer. In fact, the most prominent understanding of "blasphemy" is verbal in nature, but in general shows a mindset of total denial of the power of the Holy Spirit. Worse, this mindset readily grants Satan power while denying the power of the Holy Spirit. Let me see if I can clarify;

Peter; having walked and talked with Jesus, and faced with fear of his life denied Christ repeatedly. Surely this is the sin of a man who knew the power of the Holy Spirit more than most. Peter should certainly have been damned. If a man whom the people knew walked with God would not admit to the power of God, this would be denying the power of the Holy Spirit. The difference is, Peter was not acting as an adversary to God, he was acting in self-preservation and self-service. Your interpretation of this Scripture suggests that a man who has accepted Jesus into his heart, but still battles self-serving human nature such as alcohol for example and happens to beat his child is forever damned to hell. This suggests that God's sacrifice is insufficient to cover sin. Sin itself is action, blasphemy in the context you've given is not the commission of sin, but an utterance of the enemy's power while denying the power of the Holy Spirit.

Anyway, what do you think?

I think you should never lose as much as one more wink of sleep over this. Your concern shows me a respect for the Spirit that goes beyond many who claim to believe. This is not to say that the clergyman who embezzles money from the Church is not subject to eternal judgment, but the judgment is not ours to make and I'd argue is not Scripturally certain. However; the man who denies the power of the Holy Spirit while granting it to the enemy is saying that Jesus acted in the power of Satan. This man is not acting in the interest of self-service, they are acting very pointedly, against God. In context, these were the Pharisees who not only denied the power of the Holy Spirit, but claimed it was the power of Satan in order to discredit the very foundation of Jesus' ministry. In short, this is admitting spiritual power, but denying the power of the Holy Spirit.

In your examples, the "holy" man is acting in selfishness. In the context given by Scripture, the men are acting very directedly against God.

[Tiresias]

Interesting question whether Peter committed the Unpardonable Sin by denying Christ.

But then, isn't he believed to be the first bishop of the Church at Rome? The first Pope of the Catholic Church?

I don't spose he'd enjoy that distinction if he was also damned to Hell.

Maybe the theological function of the idea of Eternal Sin is to establish that the Holy Spirt is sacred above everything: Even the Blood of Christ cannot wash away a sin against It.

Your interpretation of this Scripture suggests that a man who has accepted Jesus into his heart, but still battles self-serving human nature such as alcohol for example and happens to beat his child is forever damned to hell.

Not exactly, because a man who has accepted Jesus might have a moment of weakness during which he is not mindful of what he is sinning against. He "knows not what he does."

My interpretation is that if a man were capable of sinning "in the Spirit"—that would be the most diabolical, monstrous, and therefore unforgivable sin because it would bring the Holy Spirit into contact—or proximity—with sin.

Does that make sense?

This is not based on a specific bit of scripture. However, Jesus forgives the theives on the cross because they sinned in ignorance. So, it seems to follow, if there is an unforgivable sin, it must be committed with and against the sinner's knowledge of God.

Do Christians agree on what Eternal Sin is? On who has committed it—if anyone?

The idea that Eternal Sin is a verbal blasphemy against the Spirt means Adolf Hitler was not beyond redemption so long as he confined himself to murdering 6 million Jews. Nietzsche, on the other hand, was beyond salvation because he wrote The Anti-Christ.

A book is worse than genocide in God's eyes? That seems very strange unless you allow for my idea about "sinning in the Spirit".

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Tiresias 

Do Christians agree on what Eternal Sin is? On who has committed it—if anyone?

Christians can not agree on what constitutes baptism.

The idea that Eternal Sin is a verbal blasphemy against the Spirt means Adolf Hitler was not beyond redemption so long as he confined himself to murdering 6 million Jews. Nietzsche, on the other hand, was beyond salvation because he wrote The Anti-Christ.

I'm not familiar with the book. Did Nietzsche claim Christ's miracles were really manifestations of Satan? If Saul of Tarsus was not beyond forgiveness, it seems neither would Hitler. Of course, I'm not the judge of such things.

A book is worse than genocide in God's eyes? That seems very strange unless you allow for my idea about "sinning in the Spirit".

I wouldn't necessarily discount the importance of a book while discussing aspects of God's chosen medium to mankind.

I believe a great many allow for ideas about sinning and about salvation. Some things are strange to some and some things are clear to others. Some believe once saved always saved, others believe the saved can be lost. Some believe water baptisms are necessary, others believe they are not.

A great many have fashioned arbitrary laws by which to condemn one another while forgetting the weightier matters such as justice, mercy, and faith. One can spend their entire life looking for evil as an intellectual endeavor and yet never find God. One cannot be the adversary against that which one does not believe exists. One who has chosen to be an adversary and does so in faith, has already made a clear and conscious choice. One who makes this choice does not wonder whether or not they've made it.

The unforgivable sin would seem logically to mean one who truly believes in God and genuinely hates Him.

[undotwa]

I have always interpreted this as one's refusal to allow the Holy Spirit to operate in one's soul. It is unforgivable not because God is incapable of forgiving, but rather, we place ourselves in direct opposition to God's grace. To be forgiven we must be repentent.

I do get another feeling that Jesus might also be using a bit of hyperbole here, as he often does in order to emphasise his teaching. We must abandon ourselves in God's hands and to whims of the Holy Spirit.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Tiresias 

Interesting question whether Peter committed the Unpardonable Sin by denying Christ.

But then, isn't he believed to be the first bishop of the Church at Rome? The first Pope of the Catholic Church?

I don't spose he'd enjoy that distinction if he was also damned to Hell.

Maybe the theological function of the idea of Eternal Sin is to establish that the Holy Spirt is sacred above everything: Even the Blood of Christ cannot wash away a sin against It.



Not exactly, because a man who has accepted Jesus might have a moment of weakness during which he is not mindful of what he is sinning against. He "knows not what he does."

My interpretation is that if a man were capable of sinning "in the Spirit"—that would be the most diabolical, monstrous, and therefore unforgivable sin because it would bring the Holy Spirit into contact—or proximity—with sin.

Does that make sense?

This is not based on a specific bit of scripture. However, Jesus forgives the theives on the cross because they sinned in ignorance. So, it seems to follow, if there is an unforgivable sin, it must be committed with and against the sinner's knowledge of God.

Do Christians agree on what Eternal Sin is? On who has committed it—if anyone?

The idea that Eternal Sin is a verbal blasphemy against the Spirt means Adolf Hitler was not beyond redemption so long as he confined himself to murdering 6 million Jews. Nietzsche, on the other hand, was beyond salvation because he wrote The Anti-Christ.

A book is worse than genocide in God's eyes? That seems very strange unless you allow for my idea about "sinning in the Spirit".

You are looking at this issue far too simplistically. We have no capacity to judge people and you should avoid it, even if it is mere hypothesising on your part.

[Atomic Rooster]

Masturbating in your room and the Holy Ghost walks in with his new babe.

[Tiresias]

We have no capacity to judge people

Are you sure about that?

[Big Mac]

The gravest sin in Judaism is the sanctification or worship of elohim acharim, foreign deities. Sages likened it to a violation of the entire Torah. If done publicly - in front of witnesses - it is a sin for which capital punishment is the remedy. Note that I have not used the word unforgivable in reference to God's judgment because Jews do not make that determination for Him. However, Judaism does hold that certain sins are unforgivable on a person to person basis: Sins committed against fellow human beings are considered unforgivable if the person sinned against is dead because the sinner no longer has the opportunity to repair the damage done.

[undotwa]

Originally Posted by Tiresias 

Are you sure about that?

I meant that in reference to our final destination - heaven or hell. Only God can judge man.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

On behalf of Christian tutorials and tutors throughout all of history, I apologize for the rampant confusion some of us instill. I'd be willing to bet if you're concerned about blaspheming the Holy Spirit, you've not done it. Even as an agnostic, you seem to have a healthy respect for the Spirit.

That's what I've heard as well. If someone's worried that they've committed blasphemy, they probably haven't.

[olePigeon]

Meecrob.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Meecrob.

???
Urban Dictionary: meecrob

[Monique]

Hurting children.

[Sky Captain]

I personally do not believe in the concept of sin. But if I had to produce an answer:
All on equal ground -
Murder & hurting children.

These top crimes against the spirit/soul.

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Meecrob.

2. meecrob

1. An alternate spelling of mee krob, a Thai dish made from pork, shrimp and egg in a sweet-and-sour sauce mixed with either rice or noodles

Sounds Ok to me unless the sauce is ****.

[Tiresias]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain 

I personally do not believe in the concept of sin.

You're not an ethical nihilist, are you?

What if we substitute "evil" or "immorality" or "wrongdoing" for "sin" ?

[smacintush]

“Truly I say unto you, All their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter: but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin: because they say, ‘He has an unclean spirit’.”

—Book of Mark 3:28-29

It's obvious to me:

The word "spirit" is the translation of the Greek pneuma which literally means "breath". The "breath" in other cultures is used to denote not some supernatural "spirit" of God or a deity or anything that is outside or "other" than man, but rather of "spirit" of or within man. This is a very common view of breath and spirit and I think that it is a mistake on the part of the translators and theologians to imply something "Godly" in the word pneuma. "Holy Spirit" is simply the vital HUMAN spirit within all of us.

To blaspheme the holy spirit is to go against our own humanity. I like to look at it as what Kung Fu Tze called "human-heartedness" or what is innately "human", good or bad. The saint and the sinner in all of us.

To deny yourself of your own humanity by imposing artificial restrictions on your behavior that are diametrically opposed to what it is to be human is the greatest sin of all that will lead to the most suffering. When you think of what creates the most "hell" in our lives it is, for the most part, not what we have done or how we feel but rather how we view and judge those things about ourselves.

THIS is why the popular interpretation of The Bible™ is so utterly dangerous. It tells you NOT to be human and when you ARE human you should feel guilty and penitent.

Let's look at the res of the passage:

(23)So Jesus called them and spoke to them in parables: "How can Satan drive out Satan? (24) If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. (25) If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. (26) And if Satan opposes himself and is divided, he cannot stand; his end has come. (27) In fact, no one can enter a strong man's house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can rob his house. (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."

He is speaking of going against ourselves.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Tiresias 

You're not an ethical nihilist, are you?

What if we substitute "evil" or "immorality" or "wrongdoing" for "sin" ?

Then the word will mean something different. To sin is to go against "Gods law", the other words can be defined within the context of whatever belief system you happen to believe in and don't necessarily have the implied consequences.

[Sky Captain]

Originally Posted by Tiresias 

You're not an ethical nihilist, are you?

What if we substitute "evil" or "immorality" or "wrongdoing" for "sin" ?

No, pantheist.
Student of a Cherokee shamen.

[olePigeon]

"meecrob" is from an episode of South Park. It was one of the unforgivable curse words that brought along the 4 horsemen of the apocalypse.

[Atomic Rooster]

Spirit in Hebrew is the same word for wind. So if you 'break wind' you are doomed.

[SirCastor]

The Unforgivable sin is to deny the Holy Ghost. That is, having received an undeniable witness (a knowledge, completely beyond faith) that Jesus is the Christ, and Savior, and then to intentionally deny that. To say that your knowledge is false (even when you know it to be true.). That is the Unforgivable Sin.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by SirCastor 

The Unforgivable sin is to deny the Holy Ghost. That is, having received an undeniable witness (a knowledge, completely beyond faith) that Jesus is the Christ, and Savior, and then to intentionally deny that. To say that your knowledge is false (even when you know it to be true.). That is the Unforgivable Sin.

So, basically anyone born after 1AD is immune to Unforgiveable Sin, because at that point there's only heresay as to Jesus' divinity.

[SirCastor]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

So, basically anyone born after 1AD is immune to Unforgiveable Sin, because at that point there's only heresay as to Jesus' divinity.

No, there's plenty of opporunity to gain a knowledge (beyond doubt) of Christ's divinity. It would require some sort of divine manifestation for instance. Such an example would as Christ appeared to Saul (who became Paul). That was Paul's witness. I believe that such things could happen today as well, but for most it will not.

[el chupacabra]

There is no unforgivable sin, the context you cited Jesus is speaking about people living during his time. People who saw him perform miracles and still didn't accept him (and a few other things). After Christ died all sins are forgivable.

Some people think of an unforgivable sin today as not accepting christ as their savior. As that is the only way to hell according to the christian religion.

[olePigeon]

Meh. I'll worry about it when I'm dead.

[khufuu]

Buying a PC?

[Tiresias]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

So, basically anyone born after 1AD is immune to Unforgiveable Sin, because at that point there's only heresay as to Jesus' divinity.

AD stands for "Anno Domini", not "After death" as many people think. If I understand this correctly, 1 AD is the year Christ was born. People born after 1 AD would therefore have walked the earth with Christ until he was crucified at age 33. So, don't you mean "anyone born after 34 AD" ?

Sorry to pick nits.