There’s this funny thing going on these days. Athiests are trying to commit the unpardonable sin. They actually think they’re doing it, and that’s what cracks me up. They think mouthing words of denial of Nicean creeds puts them ipso facto into hell with no way out.
If they’re athiests, why do they care? Doesn’t this sound wierd? If He isn’t real, then why worry about trying to apply (erroneously) scriptures to their lives so as to damn them?
Besides, as previously discussed, blasphemy of the Holy Spirit presupposes a real, concrete belief and then a rejection of a belief about who His character has been revealed to be. When I say revealed I assume you know that to have something revealed to you rules out deception.
It was ‘REVEALED’ to the Pharisees who Jesus was and who it was that empowered his miracles. That was the original belief that they held about him. Nicodemus said “we know” and it was based on His miracles. So they first knew His miracles were of God, but later blasphemed that given knowledge and called it satan.
See, this is something an athiest can never do. They never start with belief. They don’t know God. He isn’t alive and real in them, so there is therefore no given or revealed knowledge of a personal kind to blaspheme against, and THAT is the root of the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, the unforgivable sin. It requires an ultimate and permanent hardening to come upon the heart so as to enable one to reject God in this way. It’s the love of self that brings this about.
But athiests don’t have relationships with God to reject.
So this whole goofball thing they’re doing on youtube is just silly and not possible for them to even do.
Recap:
Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit requires that there first be an accepted and known belief in God that is given personally by His Spirit, something He makes known in a convincing way to the individual that brings them to absolute assurance that He is real.
Then you simply begin loving your self and your own ideals of God more than what He has revealed Himself to be. This will enable you (keep it up for a few years) to eventually call His works satanic.
But then that requires you to believe in God, still. And a Devil. A real one, not an idea of impersonal Karma or some stupid crap like that.
So it looks like these poor athiests actually still have a chance to be saved after all!!
Sorry to burst your guys’ bubbles, but you haven’t commited blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, i.e. the unforgivalbe sin. It’s not possible for you to do. To do it requires belief in God and someone named Satan.
So you’re not qualified for this sin.
Don’t worry, you are for lot’s of others.
Stealing, lying, murder (hate in the heart), adultery (lust in the heart), idolatry (making a god for yourself, even atheism), coveting, dishonoring mom and dad, using God’s name for useless purposes, etc.
So cheer up athiest! You’re still a sinner and a terrible offense to God, but just not by commiting the unforgivable sin. It’s not possible for you to do.
And no, you’re NOT a good person. Just quit it already.
mark jr.
15 responses so far ↓
Mary // May 11, 2007 at 9:00 pm |
Mark Jr.
I always wondered when Nicodemus said
“We know you are from God” -
was he just trying to flatter Jesus since he was coming to him at night and didn’t seem to have the courage to come in daylight.
But you are saying then that Pharisees knew Jesus was from God. That’s all new to me. Is there something I am not getting here in the greek?
Mary // May 11, 2007 at 9:03 pm |
I mean were the pharisees really convinced his miracles where from God? Or did they think ill of Him and were just playing with him “Good teacher” ect…
iseeitdifferently // May 11, 2007 at 9:34 pm |
I think that before Jesus began publicly denouncing their hypocricy that , yes, they did believe He was sent of God. But when the offense came so did rejection.
That’s how I see it.
There’s nothing peculiar about the Greek that I know of, just the plain sense of it hit me one day. “We KNOW”…
There was a plurality in that “we” and I believe it was an overall collective sentiment held by the Pharisees.
It seems that when God messes with people’s pet sins they always kill the messenger who brings that precise word of indictment, not stopping at the outward goodness but going into the marrow.
Dinner time, taco salad. Gotta go…
mark jr.
Some Thoughts on the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit (part 1) « Hand Me A Scalpel // July 10, 2007 at 7:36 pm |
[...] on the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit (part 1) Jump to Comments (Don’t forget to go to Part 2 after reading this one!) I think something fell into place the other day while listening to J. [...]
Janet // October 31, 2007 at 1:28 pm |
Hebrew 6:4-6 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put him to an open shame.
This scripture passage is one I thought of that I believe explains the unpardonable sin. Others are found in scripture as well.
Brandon // February 25, 2008 at 7:27 am |
Sometimes I wish God would do something miraculous like become a man and come to earth and teach us all how to live…
oh wait…
He did, and we (mankind) rejected him, and continue to reject him today….
So what your saying is, blasphemy of the holy spirit is like when someone gets “saved” and then decides to hate God?
or something… confusing…
Nautilus423 // February 27, 2008 at 8:52 pm |
Good points, the last couple paragraphs were too harsh, though.
iseeitdifferently // February 27, 2008 at 11:40 pm |
Have you read Ezekiel lately? If a man stood up in church one day and said, “the Lord says that this church is likened to a slut who is looking for a man with a donkey sized penis and who ejaculates like a horse.”
Ezekiel said that….no, God said it! Ezekiel 23:20. Especially look at the NIV translation, it’s more graphic, but all translation say the same thing. In fact, the literal language is even more offensive to our sensibilities.
Now I’m not trying to use this as license to air my own fleshly nonsense, but if you look at the harsh things Jesus said as well as all the other N.T. writters, you may have to altar what you believe is a right way to speak to people.
As crazy and presumptuous as this may sound, I felt a certain unction to mock the so-called blasphemers. Go figure. I could be wrong, but at the moment I wrote that my mind took me back to Elijah mocking the prophets of Ba’al, Leonard Ravenhill sermons, Paul Washer sermons, Art Katz, Paris Reidhead….etc. Sometimes you have to come on like that.
And isn’t this funny? Those of you who fancy yourselves to be hungry for prophetic things would never dream of speaking like a real prophet has been known to speak in days gone by. We seem to believe that all we’re entitled to is niceties and cutsey gibberish.
G2g,
mark jr.
Nautilus423 // February 28, 2008 at 3:15 am |
I’ve read that verse, yeah. And I think that’s totally appropriate, but just like when Jesus was offensive to the Pharisees, it was offensive to the people that were thought by everyone to be good and righteous. If you were to bash a church for being like a whore (assuming it was correct) that’s okay, but a non-believer? I don’t think that kind of talk is appropriate to call all non-believers. Perhaps the ones that took the blasphemy challenge, but what about atheists that just come on, and see “You’re still a sinner and a terrible offense to God, but just not by commiting the unforgivable sin.” and “And no, you’re NOT a good person. Just quit it already.” How is that in any way showing them the love of God? I understand when you’re talking to the atheists that insult Christ, or try to blaspheme just to spite Christians. But I can just imagine an atheist coming here, reading that blog, and just confirming in their minds the already pretty accurate assumption that all Christians of today are hateful human beings. Those words don’t at all reflect the character of Christ. We need to be known for our love.
mbaker // February 28, 2008 at 3:59 am |
Naut,
I appreciate your willingness to engage in conversation.
What we have to remember that is that Jesus showed His love while we were yet sinners by going to the cross for sinners both past, present and future. His love was not the syrupy over emotional kind that our culture promotes today, but it was nitty-gritty, real proof that He practiced what He preached.
Remember His definition of love was : “Greater lover has no man than he lay down his life for his brother.”
Patting folks on the back and admiring because they seem to be so Spirit led in church. and going out and really showing our love quietly in practical ways are two entirely different things.
Seriously, how many Christians today do you know that would be willing to lay down their lives for sinners like Jesus did?
Vincent Alderman // February 28, 2008 at 6:12 am |
Nitty Gritty? Oh and…He was what He preached… and I like your point Mark, that Ezekiel wasn’t actually speaking…it was God. That is key because it is easy for us to going about our business and point fingers and spout off verses and think we are “prophets.” If we think about Ezekiel…he couldn’t speak until God allowed him to speak for Him. Speaking from the very heart of God should come with the discernment that it is His voice not ours. I think that “agenda” preaching has become too popular. Mbaker…I am having a little trouble with the comparison between us laying down of our lives for a “brother” and Jesus’ laying down his life for us. I am not sure if we can ever make that comparison. Anyways, sorry Mark for responding more to the comments then the actual post. I will try my hardest to respond to your thoughts rather than peoples opinions. Take Care. Christ is All.
Vincent Alderman // February 28, 2008 at 6:12 am |
than*
Vincent Alderman // February 28, 2008 at 6:35 am |
one more thing…I think you should get something brewing on the topic of predestination and free will. I am sure you have thought about it.
mbaker // February 28, 2008 at 6:49 am |
Vince,
Exactly my point. Our brand of love is nothing compared with Christ’s. That’s why I get tired of hearing the over smaltzy theme of “love” hyped to death among Christians who don’t have a clue what real love, like the kind Christ showed, is all about.
iseeitdifferently // February 28, 2008 at 11:28 pm |
Vince,
I’m not all that interested in the “predestination/free will” discussion. I have definite beliefs about the topic, but I was thinking today about a certain generation from long ago.
It was the generation of Wesley and Whitefield. Wesley wrote a magazine called (I think) “The Arminian” and Whitefield was of course a solid 5-point Calvinist. The two were best of friends till the end and God poured out His Spirit in revival fire for all the years that these men preached. They did indeed have very open dialogue over the issues (I have the entire works of Wesley), but it seems that at the end of the bantering….nothing was really gained. I wouldn’t call it a total loss or waste of time; theology never is. I simply have come to a place where, for one, I try to make sure that I dialogue these issues face to face or on the phone with people. Second of all, if the differences between the two theological schools of thought weren’t bad enough to keep God from sending conviction of sin and salvation in pure revival, then I don’t think I want to really “go there”. It’s not all that edifying, for one thing….well, at least over the internet it’s not. It’s too time consuming. If folks want to engage the issues I have links here from Calvinists and Arminians alike. I have a link that goes to Studylight dot org and that resource has both Arminian and Calvinist commentaries on it.
So, I don’t know….I just don’t feel an urgency to get into that particular discussion. Maybe one day I will….but maybe not.
mark jr.