# Denying God



## default (Jun 27, 2005)

If someone in their unregenerate state says God is dead, is that an unforgiveable sin?


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 27, 2005)

I don't think so. Their sin, while inescusable and an affront to a Holy God, is merely being consisten with their own nature.


----------



## default (Jun 27, 2005)

Ok, let's take it a step further, is claiming to be antichrist (note, not the antichrist) unpardonable?


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 27, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Loriann_
> Ok, let's take it a step further, is claiming to be antichrist (note, not the antichrist) unpardonable?



If they die before being pardoned. In fact, the reason I see Christ saying that blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unpardonable is due to the generation to whom he was speaking. With the destruction of Jerusalem the chance for repentance was lost for those generational Jews. I think this ties in well with Hebrews 6:4

For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened

If they die defending an old, typological order (Jerusalem and the Temple) then they will forever miss their chance at repentance.


----------



## Texas Aggie (Jun 27, 2005)

Just a thought concerning the unpardonable sin....

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is unpardonable (Mark 3:29).

How does one do such a thing? The unregenerate can do nothing to offend God in such a manner... they are already taken care of. The unpardonable sin may in fact be directed to "His people."

This means that it may apply to a person who has been made a partaker of the New Covenant. They have been given all that God has provided for one's regeneration (justification) and salvation under the terms of the New Covenant. They have been given a heart transplant, His law in their heart and His Spirit indwelling.

The Spirit teaches and leads the believer to a path of holiness (sanctification). The Spirit leads the believer down the straight and narrow way, in a walk with God as Enoch and Noah. The Spirit teaches the believer the "things pertaining to God."

The unpardonable sin occurs when the individual says "I will have none of this." To me, this is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Grace (Hebrews 10:26-29).


----------



## Robin (Jun 27, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> Just a thought concerning the unpardonable sin....
> 
> Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is unpardonable (Mark 3:29).
> ...



Your conclusions are a bit off....So, here's a bit of relief.....

The unpardonable sin was committed by the Sanhedrin -- who attributed the godly works of Christ to Satan. They had first-hand knowledge and present witness to the miracles of God in Christ and whole-heartedly accused Christ of being in league with Beelzebub.

We live in the "age of mercy" --- so as hard as it might be to grasp, there really is no unpardonable sin that can be committed unless the unbeliever holds hostility and rejection of Christ's mercy 'till the end of their life. Then it's "game over." Even Hitler; Benni Hinn; Depak Chopra could/can receive mercy if the true Gospel is embraced by faith.

As Romans puts it: "God saves the wicked" THAT is the miracle of salvation! And this is truly Good News.

Btw, I don't know if you're worried about it...but if a Believer fret's that he/she may have committed the "unpardonable" THAT is THE SIGN that they are truly saved. The unsaved never even imagine that they offend God....only truly regenerate souls detect the feeling of God's sublime holiness and majesty and therefore FEAR that they might have fallen short or offended Him. When we suffer these agonies, the remedy is to flee to the knowledge of Christ --- flee to Christ and look to what He has done. Don't look inward....look to Christ. Don't be afraid: The Gospel is outside of us and will even save us from our selves!



Robin


----------



## Texas Aggie (Jun 27, 2005)

Thanks for the reply Robin. Well said.

Do we not also attribute Godly works of Christ to Satan and vice versa? Christ's miracles do not prove His deity whatsoever (this is not Gospel). This applied to the Sanhedrin as well as us today. In addition, the devil does everything possible to be in the same league as Christ and we have made such wonderful associations.

The Sanhedrin were also not partakers of the Holy Ghost (as we are given such a provision under the terms of the New Covenant). The age of "œmercy and grace" we live in also has law. What do you do with Hebrews 10? Naturally Hitler could be saved (although we have no outward indication of that). God can reveal Himself in an infinite number of ways and at a time of His choosing.

God saves all men , including the wicked by means of covenant. To say you have no part of the covenant means you have no understanding of the purpose of the Holy Spirit. (I'm not saying "you" particularly, I mean believers in general).

I'm personally not worried about it. I'm worried about what lies the devil will get the elect to believe. "Once saved always saved" is a common quote. My personal favorites are "We are not under the law but under grace..." and "Christ has freed us from the law."

Inward is the first place to look because if the Spirit is not there, you may need ask for it ASAP. If the Holy Spirit is not leading you down a path of holiness, you may be led by another.

[Edited on 6-27-2005 by Texas Aggie]

[Edited on 6-27-2005 by Texas Aggie]


----------



## Robin (Jun 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> Christ's miracles do not prove His deity whatsoever (this is not Gospel). ...What do you do with Hebrews 10?
> 
> I'm worried about what lies the devil will get the elect to believe. "Once saved always saved" is a common quote. My personal favorites are "We are not under the law but under grace..." and "Christ has freed us from the law."
> ...



Hey Matt,

A bit more clarification....

There is NO way that anyone can commit the "unpardonable sin" today. It is a historical thing. For someone to commit that particular sin, they had to be in personal contact with Christ, in history.

God's mercy and pardon is His own business (we'd both agree.) So, exactly how the reprobate are left reprobate falls under the inscrutable will of God. The Christian is only the messenger of The Message (the Gospel.)

Also, I'd beg to differ, Christ's miracles were evidence of His Deity. The Sanhedrin knew this (!) and YET, attributed the miracles to Satan (their arrogance was so great.) Each and every miracle Christ did had a precise purpose: to confirm that the OT Covenant was being fulfilled; physical signs that Christ was the Messiah, of Yahweh. Example: OT Israel received manna in the desert; Christ fed the 5 thousand "stating" He was the Bread of Life. Christ heals the blind man "stating" He is the Light of the World. Christ raises Lazarus proving He is the resurrection and the Life. Recall, John the Baptist even asked about this and Christ's response was to tell John of His works (miracles) He was performing.

As for Hebrews 10 - it should not be disconnected from all the chapters gone before it. It is a logical train of thought and argument....chapter 10 is addressed to Jewish Christians doubting Christ's complete and final sacrifice as redeeming them. It does not imply that a believer loses salvation if they are not good at obeying God's Law. (Which is important to understand...because since we all struggle in sin, where do we cut that line of either being "IN or OUT"?)

I'm curious, if the believer is to look inward to find the Holy Spirit....just how would we know He is _in_ there? I mean, if we depended upon inner reflection -- and not the Word of God - how can we tell the difference between the Holy Spirit's "voice" and our own conscious? How do we know that it's not indigestion doing the "speaking"?

I guess what I'm trying to emphasize is -- looking AWAY from our SELF is the only way to freedom, mental peace and assurance of what Christ has done for the Christian. After all, it is Christ's work that saves --- not reflections upon how good we're doing obeying the Law.

I'm not antinomian. God's mercy sets us free to obey the Law. The unregenerate cannot obey it - nor do they want to.

I totally agree with concerns about the so-called false security folks have. I tend to think emphasizing Christ is probably better than fretting about Satan's tactics. (He's already defeated -- and Scripture doesn't focus on Satan's works but rather Christ.)

Well, at least that's the way I see it.....



r.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Jun 28, 2005)

I think simply being born of a woman is enough to condemn us as much as possible before the Lord's judgment. Any sins we commit after birth merely confirm our Original Sin and depravity all the more. We can't be condemned and then condemn ourself more, can we? Nature is enough, the rest just confirms it so that we have no excuse.


----------



## default (Jun 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by RobinBtw, I don't know if you're worried about it...but if a Believer fret's that he/she may have committed the "unpardonable" THAT is THE SIGN that they are truly saved. The unsaved never even imagine that they offend God....only truly regenerate souls detect the feeling of God's sublime holiness and majesty and therefore FEAR that they might have fallen short or offended Him. When we suffer these agonies, the remedy is to flee to the knowledge of Christ --- flee to Christ and look to what He has done. Don't look inward....look to Christ. Don't be afraid: The Gospel is outside of us and will even save us from our selves!
> 
> 
> 
> Robin _


_

No, If your directing this toward me, no, I'm not the one that said such blasphemy. Someone I know and love dearly has.

Thank you all for your replies.

Continue with the discussion, it's most interesting._


----------



## Robin (Jun 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> I think simply being born of a woman is enough to condemn us as much as possible before the Lord's judgment. Any sins we commit after birth merely confirm our Original Sin and depravity all the more. We can't be condemned and then condemn ourself more, can we? Nature is enough, the rest just confirms it so that we have no excuse.



 Exceptionally well put, Gabe!

r.


----------



## Texas Aggie (Jun 28, 2005)

Thank you for the reply Robin.

Just my perspective on the issue... and I don´t want to sound contentious (because I do acknowledge I may be completely wrong). Here are my thoughts:

I do not see the "œunpardonable sin" as strictly historical. I believe that we are in personal contact with Christ everyday. His Spirit dwells within us, leading us to a path of true holiness. If you have the Spirit, you have all three of the Godhead.

We do agree that His mercy and pardon is His business. And yes, Christians are the messengers of the gospel in this sense (gospel meaning "œmessage.") But the sign of Christ´s deity is not of His miracles but of His only sign given (Matthew 12:38-40).

The Gospel accounts for His miracles but His deity strictly rests on His death and resurrection on the third day according to the scriptures. The gospel "œmessage" does give an account of His miracles; however, this is no proof of His deity because the angels and the devils conduct "œmiracles." Believe me, I do not discount Christ´s wonderful miracles.... it is just not proof of His deity.

The Sanhedrin were familiar with sorcery as well as the capability of the fallen. We must also be alert for false miracles (Christ´s miracles we not false by any means, the Sanhedrin just did not recognize Christ as the Messiah because of God).

I see the book of Hebrews, as well as the entire bible, addressed to me (as a person of God). If it is good enough for Jewish Christians, then it is good enough for me. I tend not to relegate parts of the bible as only belonging to certain groups. I see the entire book written to the "œpeople of God." Hindsight is 20/20 and we have such a fantastic written record provided by the Spirit.

Do we as believers, at times, also doubt Christ´s complete and final sacrifice as redeeming us? Can we not be in the same situation as the Jewish Christians? I think Hebrews was written to all believers.

If in fact the book of Hebrews was written to Jewish Christians, why does the Spirit go through such extreme detail concerning the construct and composition of the tabernacle? The Jews, if anybody, would have known this. This is part of the reason why I believe the book was written to us, the elect, written to "œme."

As for 10:26, I think it does imply that a covenant member can loose his salvation after receiving the knowledge of the truth (by the Holy Spirit). One would not even have the provision of the Spirit given by God providing they were not originally made partakers of the New Covenant.

God has made you a partaker of the provisions established in the New Covenant and if you continue to sin willfully "œover and over again" with "œno true repentance" (to me this is the unpardonable sin). Notice "œif" you sin willfully as opposed to "œwhen" you sin willfully.

Your "œwill" is involved with sanctification as part of the New Covenant. I´m not saying there is not provision for your cleansing, nor forgiveness through repentance. After all, Christ is our High Priest at the throne of God and He is the Surety of a better covenant (this is also from Hebrews and directly applies to all believers, not just Christian Jews).

I do believe that it is Christ Himself who will blot your name from the Book of Life. I think he does this upon the elect who commit the unpardonable sin..... that is if one counts His blood of the New Covenant an unholy thing despite everything the Spirit of Grace has taught. He is the ultimate Judge of this (not something we can determine).

You have a role in the New Covenant and it starts with obedience to the law of God (this is by no means your "œjustification" because Christ has provided this which you can not). The demand of the law for your death has been paid by Christ, but the demand for obedience to the law has not been nullified (this is your sanctification). Again, I believe it is Christ who does the blotting (Exodus 32-33, Psalm 69:28, Revelation 3:5).

You are "œperfectly good" at obeying the law because now you are equipped to obey the law (via His Spirit). You can not escape the law now that it is written in your heart and in your mind. You have a heart transplant, a circumcision of your will, which gives you a heart to know and obey God. Your will is aligned to do the will of God, so that you may be led by His Spirit, in a walk with Him as Enoch and Noah.

You know His Spirit is within you. He will lead you to do nothing contrary to the law of God. Your conscience is influenced by His Spirit; however, you also have a will (just as Adam). If you are under the New Covenant, you sin because you choose to sin, not because you are a sinful creature. The law and the Spirit are within and the Spirit will convict you prior to your choice to obey or disobey (that´s how you know He´s there).

Before you are regenerated, looking away from the self is the only thing you can do (because there is nothing inside you other than the unholy). After regeneration, it is a different matter (you are now led and taught by His Spirit).

We agree that it is only Christ´s work that saves (He is the righteousness provided to you that sets you in proper standing before God). This is your justification.... and only Christ can provide this (because you can not and you will not prior to regeneration). Your righteousness before regeneration is as filthy rags (it means nothing to God).

Christ has freed you from the curse of the law which demands your eternal death and subsequent separation from God. He has not freed you to do as you please and there are consequences for you actions (i.e. chastening). He has also made provision for forgiveness of sins after regeneration (a continual sprinkling at the throne).

We agree about Satan. To me, Satan has already been defeated and he knows this. Satan is not after the unregenerate (they are also damned along with him and the fallen angels). He is after those whose names are written in the Book of Life from before the foundation of the world. He wants the elect of God, the people of God, to reject the terms of the covenant and neglect so great a salvation. He does this by means of deceit, lies and temptation so that God´s people willfully disobey His law over and over again.

Christ´s work (on earth as well as heaven) and His means for salvation (determined before the foundation of the world) protect the elect from the ways of the devil. The law and the Spirit keep the believer on the path and not out of the way. Your will is involved; therefore, you also have a responsibility under the New Covenant.

Just my perspective on the unpardonable sin.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Jun 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> Who would seriously claim to be the anti-Christ?



Intentionally? A real nut case. Unintentionally? The Popes have done it for a while now. :bigsmile:


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 28, 2005)

Not to tout Occam's Razor or anything, but there is good merit in the simpler answer. I am not claiming to exhaust the matter nor to relegate it to 70 AD, but it does make sense of the biblical data:

In fact, the reason I see Christ saying that blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unpardonable is due to the generation to whom he was speaking. With the destruction of Jerusalem the chance for repentance was lost for those generational Jews. I think this ties in well with Hebrews 6:4

For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened

If they die defending an old, typological order (Jerusalem and the Temple) then they will forever miss their chance at repentance.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Jun 28, 2005)




----------



## Texas Aggie (Jun 28, 2005)

Occam's razor maybe to you Jacob but not necessarily to all.

In your example, the "generation to whom He was speaking of" were not made partakers of the Holy Spirit (they were not under the terms of the New Covenant). Hebrews 6:4 indicates the affected are otherwise.

"Simple answers" sometimes have complicated questions which follow.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> Occam's razor maybe to you Jacob but not necessarily to all.
> 
> In your example, the "generation to whom He was speaking of" were not made partakers of the Holy Spirit (they were not under the terms of the New Covenant). Hebrews 6:4 indicates the affected are otherwise.
> ...



Even if they were not parallel (and you haven't shown that they were not) the point still stands. In fact, my point is even stronger without using texts that suggests New Covenant language. Complicated questions for you, perhaps, but not for me.


----------



## Texas Aggie (Jun 28, 2005)

The point can not stand. How were they "made partakers of the Holy Spirit?" Hebrews 6:4.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> The point can not stand. How were they "made partakers of the Holy Spirit?" Hebrews 6:4.



My apologies. I wrote that last post in two parts while trying to connect computers to the internet. I should have edited the first sentence in conjunction to the last. I realized that using texts that have New Covenantal language in them was unnecessary. In fact, what I have written earlier



> In fact, the reason I see Christ saying that blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unpardonable is due to the generation to whom he was speaking. With the destruction of Jerusalem the chance for repentance was lost for those generational Jews....If they die defending an old, typological order (Jerusalem and the Temple) then they will forever miss their chance at repentance.



Stands as it is as those--unconverted Jews--do not fall under the category of New Covenant language.


----------



## Robin (Jun 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Draught Horse_
> Not to tout Occam's Razor or anything, but there is good merit in the simpler answer. I am not claiming to exhaust the matter nor to relegate it to 70 AD, but it does make sense of the biblical data:
> 
> In fact, the reason I see Christ saying that blaspheming the Holy Spirit is unpardonable is due to the generation to whom he was speaking. With the destruction of Jerusalem the chance for repentance was lost for those generational Jews. I think this ties in well with Hebrews 6:4
> ...



 We cannot ignore the original intention of the author to communicate to the reader --- application is secondary.



R.


----------



## Texas Aggie (Jun 29, 2005)

Thanks for the replies Jacob and Robin. 

OK...., from what I gather, the both of you believe that the scribes who accused Jesus as incarnation of a demon are eternally damned because this was the "unpardonable" sin. Is this correct?

My perspective:
The scribes based this on the "miracles" Jesus preformed... which would not be an uncommon reaction. Why?... because the miracles are not a sign that He is God (no proof of His deity). Naturally the scribes would react in such a fashion.... you would do the same (as a matter of fact, we are commanded by the scripture to do such).

The scribes did not recognize Jesus as God because God Himself caused them not to recognize Jesus for who He was. Furthermore, there would have been no offense to the Holy Spirit simply because the Spirit had not been given out to the scribes, the Pharisees or the generation Christ was speaking to (they were not under the New Covenant).

Blaspheme against the Holy Spirit is blaspheme against that particular person of the Godhead. Christ did not say blaspheme against God or Himself, but against the Holy Ghost. It is blaspheme against the functionality of that Person within the Godhead (although it is subsequently blaspheme against all three). It is through the Holy Spirit that the offense comes to all three.

Now, please tell me how this applies only to the scribes (and their generation) who accused Jesus as being the devil. 

I am not being contentious, I just want an understanding of your perspective before I throw mine out.


----------



## RamistThomist (Jun 29, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Texas Aggie_
> Thanks for the replies Jacob and Robin.
> 
> OK...., from what I gather, the both of you believe that the scribes who accused Jesus as incarnation of a demon are eternally damned because this was the "unpardonable" sin. Is this correct?



Not exactly. They are probably eternally damned but I don't think that is the unpardonable sin.





> Blaspheme against the Holy Spirit is blaspheme against that particular person of the Godhead. Christ did not say blaspheme against God or Himself, but against the Holy Ghost. It is blaspheme against the functionality of that Person within the Godhead (although it is subsequently blaspheme against all three). It is through the Holy Spirit that the offense comes to all three.
> 
> I am not being contentious, I just want an understanding of your perspective before I throw mine out.



Your argument looks like:
1)The scribes did not see the miralces as proving Christ's deity.
2)The Spirit was not yet given, no New Covenant, therefore, no blasphemy.
3)Blasphmey against Spirit attacks the functionality of the person and so attacks all three in general.



> The scribes did not recognize Jesus as God because God Himself caused them not to recognize Jesus for who He was. Furthermore, there would have been no offense to the Holy Spirit simply because the Spirit had not been given out to the scribes, the Pharisees or the generation Christ was speaking to (they were not under the New Covenant).



This does not help your argument and is a key premise in mine. The Spirit would be given at Pentecost and in the inter period (AD 30-70) the Scribes rejected the ministry of the Spirit via the apostles.

The Scribes have rejected Jesus and as bad as that is, it is not fatal. The Scribes would later reject the apostles and as bad as that is, it is not yet fatal (as in Acts). At that point, everything is still forgivable. The day of Vengeance has not yet come. But if they reject this second witness--the Witness of the Spirit-led ministry of the apostles--there can be no forgiveness. 

Luke 12:9-12 spells it out clearly:
9 but the one who denies me before men will be denied before the angels of God. 10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. 11 And when they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities, do not be anxious about how you should defend yourself or what you should say, 12 for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say."

The blasphemy of the Holy Spirit here is the rejection of the Spirit-led apostles. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit does not refer to some status in the eternal Godhead. Rather, it refers to the eschatological framework of Jesus' work in his own generation. But after rejecting the second witness of the Spirit at Pentecost, time runs out for Israel.

The application of this for our time is simple: repent the first time.



> Now, please tell me how this applies only to the scribes (and their generation) who accused Jesus as being the devil.



I don't see why I need to. This isn't relevant to the biblical text's argument.

[Edited on 6--29-05 by Draught Horse]

[Edited on 6--29-05 by Draught Horse]

[Edited on 6--29-05 by Draught Horse]


----------



## Texas Aggie (Jun 29, 2005)

Jacob,

What I gather, you believe the "unpardonable sin" (blaspheme of the Spirit) is the rejection of the Spirit-led apostles after the initiation of the New Covenant (during some "inter" period)?.... Is this correct?

After the New Covenant was initiated at Passover (which was offered first to the disciples), the provisions of the covenant began to unfold immediately after His death the following day (when the veil of the temple was rent in two).

The Jews in AD 30 to 70 would have been subject to the same means of grace as we do today (the terms of the new not the old). If God chooses to open one's eyes and make them a partaker of the New Covenant, that is of God... not the Spirit-led apostles. The generation of that time could reject the Spirit-led apostles everyday, for 40 years, and it would mean absolutely nothing. Do not people reject Spirit-led apostles today?

God still saves His elect out of the Jews and the Gentiles. The scribes rejected the ministry of the Spirit-led apostles because they were never made partakers of the New Covenant. Naturally they would reject; they could not (physically)and would not (using their will) come to Christ. They were completely incapable... just as unregenerate man. They had no circumcision of heart, they had no eyes to see nor ears to hear, they had not the law in their hearts and in their minds, nor did they have His Spirit... and they were not placed "in" Christ from before the foundation of the world.

The way I see it, those who "fall away" are those who have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit. They are under the terms of the New Covenant (simply because they have the Spirit).

Blaspheme of the Spirit occurs when one is taught and given all the provisions of the New Covenant, what God has provided to His people (a second time) and they exercise their "will" to live in continual disobedience to the law of God. They reject the covenant and all that the Spirit has to offer. They reject the righteousness of Christ provided to them.

Does not Luke 12 also apply also to us?

[Edited on 6-30-2005 by Texas Aggie]


----------

