How do we define the umpardonable sin?

[marco]

In Matthew 12:31 we have: “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men.�

Was Jesus just being dramatic here, trying to frighten his listeners? What on earth is "blasphemy against the Spirit"? Did Jesus, somewhere, elaborate on this dramatic statement?


And in what way is such blasphemy worse than, say, mass murder?

[Athetotheist]

Christ came as the second Adam to do what Adam had failed to do. He would overcome sin as a human being. He would be an Atonement for man's past sins and provide coverage for sins as mankind repented, and he would provide a way for man to attain the crown of rulership of the Earth as he was intended to have.

If the sacrifice of Jesus paid the price only for those who believed in it, whereas Adam's sin was passed to all whether they believed it or not, how did Jesus do even as much as Adam did, let alone more?

You'll notice that Jewish Bible law lists punishments for those who break it AND rewards for those who keep it. This indicates that, to those who wrote the Jewish Bible, it is humanly possible to keep divine law. Here's a parable I heard, and which I think is useful:

One bright moonlit night, a father took his son out into the back yard and said, "Son, I want you to flap your arms and fly to the moon, and if you don't I'm going to give you a beating." The boy flapped his arms as hard and as long as he could and never left the ground. And his father beat him. And as he stood there stinging with pain and wiping tears from his eyes, his father said, "Now, son, I want you to understand that I only told you to fly to the moon to show you that you couldn't."

Is that the kind of father you believe God to be?

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 221 by Athetotheist]

You have hit exactly on the reason that Jesus' sacrifice covers all of mankind's sins, as long as they do not practice willful sins. Mankind could not help Adam's deliberate rejection of God, and the fact that Adam genetically passed on his imperfection to his descendants. The Bible says, "You can't get something clean out of someone unclean (Job 14:4)." When Adam rebelled, he lost his bid on eternal life. He wasn't perfect any more, and I feel that it involved a DNA adjustment. So all of mankind that descended from him was imperfect and destined to die, just as Adam did.

But Jehovah didn't leave humans in the lurch. He immediately put into action His plan to offer them a way to beat the onus put on Adam and Eve, by accepting the covering sacrifice of another perfect man, who remained faithful.

Humans could not help what they inherited from Adam, but they can help whether or not they deliberately practice doing things that they know God detests.

[Sojournerofthearth]

[Replying to post 216 by ttruscott]

You asked,
Have you considered that this scenario may be a result of having already sinned the unforgivable sin, ie one who has sinned unforgivably may try to repent and come back to GOD but inevitably fails and turns away being unable to overcome their addiction to sin and having left, repudiated, GOD's grace of receiving faith fully.

I think that is what I said, well less the part of them trying to repent. Our own righteousness is as filthy rags. It has to be God's righteousness in us. No man, of his own volition can overcome sin. Any sin, not repented of, is unpardonable. God does not grant pardon. Each sin brings a death penalty-murder, lying, stealing, and even coveting, because sin brings death. It has to be reckoned. Hence the sacrifice of one whose worth was more than the sum total of the whole of mankind... else there is no covering for our sins. You have to go to God and ask for forgiveness, and the help and strength, through His Spirit, to overcome.

It also says in Hebrews that without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin. But these are those who know the truths of God, put them into practice in their lives, saw the benefits, saw the miracles and turned away, putting the sacrifice of Christ to shame, whereby they are left without a sacrifice to cover their sins... because as you know, the blood of bulls and goats can never cover a sin. All that is left, at that point, is to face the 2nd death... but according to Isaiah, there is a resurrection of mankind to bring them to God, mankind who laments they are "cut off." Why did Christ speak in parables? Why does he say it is NOT FOR THEM TO UNDERSTAND. Why does Paul say, each in their own order?

But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. (1 Corinthians 15:20-23)

Soj

[ttruscott]

Therefore I insist that the unforgivable sin must remove the person from all GODly ability to bring the person to repentance or to negate the consequences of that sinful choice.

If God has mercy on whom he will (Romans 9:18),

HE is willing to have mercy on the elect, not the unforgivable.

is willing that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9)

The range of meaning of to will/ to be willing is: am (1), desire (2), desires (1), desiring (1), intend (1), intended (3), intending (1), like (1), planned (1), unwilling* (1), want (7), wanted (3), wanting (2), will (1), willing (3), wills (3), wish (1), wished (1), wishes (1), wishing (3).

It therefore does NOT refer only to that which HE wills by predestination or predetermination. When HE created us HE desired, wanted, hoped and intended us to all become HIS Bride by our free will by putting our faith in HIM as our GOD. Even now knowing they cannot repent HE would welcome them if they did as that fits HIS purpose more than anything else but hell is proof they cannot repent. Anyone who by their free will decision allows HIM to change their mind, will come to repentance.

and takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 18:23), how can any sin remove any person from all GODly ability to bring the person to repentance?

Answered already and again for this one last time! HIS commitment to their free will decisions being unchangeable by HIM forces HIM to ignore their plight caused by their free will decison and to allow them to go through the consequences of the choices they made.

Which is greater: the power of "addictive" sin to corrupt the human mind or the power of God to renew it?

You know the answer to this: HIS elect became just as enslaved and addicted to evil as Satan et al but since by their free will they also gave HIM prior permission to go against their free will decison to become evil if they ever came in danger of hell, HE fulfills HIS promise to them (called election) to renew them no matter what it cost HIM.

[Sojournerofthearth]

[Replying to post 221 by Athetotheist]

If the sacrifice of Jesus paid the price only for those who believed in it, whereas Adam's sin was passed to all whether they believed it or not, how did Jesus do even as much as Adam did, let alone more?

It wasn't Adam's sin that was passed to mankind, but it was his allegiance to
the one who was put in charge of the Earth, instead of to God. He took to himself, and to the rest of his progeny, the "right" to choose for himself what would be his definition of good and evil, right and wrong.

As the second Adam, Jesus came in the power of God, with the Spirit of God without measure, whereby he was able to resist what Adam could not. Adam chose to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and took to himself the right to make his own way, without God's spirit.

Cute story... but a little off center. God gave Adam wings and he chose not to fly...

[ttruscott]

Is that the kind of father you believe God to be?

Of course not. Nor is it the kind of GOD any Christian believe HIM to be. It is a false view designed to support an anti-Christian position. It also exemplifies the straw man logical fallacy.

[Athetotheist]

You have hit exactly on the reason that Jesus' sacrifice covers all of mankind's sins, as long as they do not practice willful sins.

The only sins covered by the Jewish sacrificial system, which Jesus supposedly replaced, were incidental ones, but forgiveness for willful sins was also always available----through repentance (Ezekiel18:21). So again, how is the Jesus way better?

He wasn't perfect any more, and I feel that it involved a DNA adjustment. So all of mankind that descended from him was imperfect and destined to die, just as Adam did.

How does bodily death from a DNA adjustment doom anyone to be sinful?

But Jehovah didn't leave humans in the lurch. He immediately put into action His plan to offer them a way to beat the onus put on Adam and Eve, by accepting the covering sacrifice of another perfect man, who remained faithful.

Faithful to what? The laws set down by the Israelites as being given to them by their God? There's plenty of evidence that Jesus didn't follow them perfectly.

[Athetotheist]

Therefore I insist that the unforgivable sin must remove the person from all GODly ability to bring the person to repentance or to negate the consequences of that sinful choice.

If God has mercy on whom he will (Romans 9:18),

HE is willing to have mercy on the elect, not the unforgivable.

is willing that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9)

The range of meaning of to will/ to be willing is: am (1), desire (2), desires (1), desiring (1), intend (1), intended (3), intending (1), like (1), planned (1), unwilling* (1), want (7), wanted (3), wanting (2), will (1), willing (3), wills (3), wish (1), wished (1), wishes (1), wishing (3).

It therefore does NOT refer only to that which HE wills by predestination or predetermination. When HE created us HE desired, wanted, hoped and intended us to all become HIS Bride by our free will by putting our faith in HIM as our GOD. Even now knowing they cannot repent HE would welcome them if they did as that fits HIS purpose more than anything else but hell is proof they cannot repent. Anyone who by their free will decision allows HIM to change their mind, will come to repentance.

and takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 18:23), how can any sin remove any person from all GODly ability to bring the person to repentance?

Answered already and again for this one last time! HIS commitment to their free will decisions being unchangeable by HIM forces HIM to ignore their plight caused by their free will decison and to allow them to go through the consequences of the choices they made.

Which is greater: the power of "addictive" sin to corrupt the human mind or the power of God to renew it?

You know the answer to this: HIS elect became just as enslaved and addicted to evil as Satan et al but since by their free will they also gave HIM prior permission to go against their free will decison to become evil if they ever came in danger of hell, HE fulfills HIS promise to them (called election) to renew them no matter what it cost HIM.

Romans 9:18 says that God has mercy on whom he *will* have mercy, not on whom he "can" have mercy. So there shouldn't be anyone who is "unforgivable"; that would take away God's power of will.

If the God of the Bible also "hardens whom he will" (Romans 9:18 again), that suggests that he holds sway over everyone's free will. How can anyone hardened by God retain free will? And if they don't retain free will, how are they responsible for being hardened?

Do the "elect" know who they are? If so, how?

[Athetotheist]

Is that the kind of father you believe God to be?

Of course not. Nor is it the kind of GOD any Christian believe HIM to be. It is a false view designed to support an anti-Christian position. It also exemplifies the straw man logical fallacy.

If you deem this argument a straw man, you must be confirming the Jewish Bible's teaching that humans are capable of keeping divine law.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to post 221 by Athetotheist]

If the sacrifice of Jesus paid the price only for those who believed in it, whereas Adam's sin was passed to all whether they believed it or not, how did Jesus do even as much as Adam did, let alone more?

It wasn't Adam's sin that was passed to mankind, but it was his allegiance to
the one who was put in charge of the Earth, instead of to God. He took to himself, and to the rest of his progeny, the "right" to choose for himself what would be his definition of good and evil, right and wrong.

".....through the disobedience of the one man many were constituted sinners...." (Romans 5:19)

The Christian Bible has Adam diminishing something which Jesus had no way of restoring.

What if the first sin had been committed by Cain, or Abel, or Seth, or by one of their offspring? Presumably, the sinner's line would be tainted with condemnation, but other lines wouldn't. What if several of them had committed separate sins at different times? Would that have brought condemnation onto all their lines of progeny from various sinful fathers? And if the disobediance of two or three or ten had constituted two or three or ten lines of progeny as sinners, would two or three or ten saviors have been necessary to bring justification to them all? Who would all those saviors have been? Or would Jesus have had to come and be sacrificed again and again as more and more family lines were tainted with sin while others weren't? Really, how does any of it make sense?