# Denying the Holy Spirit is now a fad



## reformedman

Click Here for Video

Current trend now, a group making it fun and popular to, get this.... deny the Holy Spirit. They want you to join the group with the hip background music, the attractive faces, the YouTube popular post. They are advertising, trying to get out the word, trying to hit as many people as possible. And when you are like me, and you believe God is sovereign, there's absolutely no worry. You see, you don't go to hell by pronouncing some words, in an earthly language, like a magical abracadabra which places a mysterious seal over your head. There is no chance thing left up to men. God Saves! This truth has been bound to believe that nothing we do can send us to hell, we are already secure in that path before we ever even lift a finger. We were all bound to hell, all of us. But God, because of his great love for his people, has elected some to come out of that path, and take a tangent slope away from that direction.

Saying the words, "I deny the existence and the power of the Holy Spirit" does not garauntee a person to go to hell, believing it does. 
Contrastly, consider this: 
saying the words, "I believe the existence and my salvation in Jesus Christ" does not garauntee a person to go to heaven, believing it does.

So then, I believe that even though these children 10-20 years old, all pronounce the english words, "I deny etc..." doesn't mean squat, their belief in it does. But we all believed that at one time!!!!
We all believed in ourselves, we all denied God and his salvation, we all refused his inifinite and great soter-mercy!!!

It would be nice to see some of these kids turn and repent and then look at their video refusal and be hit by the conviction of such a great salvation in Jesus Christ.

PS additional note: yes, confession is needed, for the true believer. Confession can be done by everyone in the entire world, if it is not done with the truth inside the person it will not accomplish anything, therefore, confession is not what saves, confession from a true believer does prove salvation. God's work is what in fact saved in order to produce the confession.


----------



## Puritanhead

But if they persist in their unbelief until their death, it's evidence of their blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and they goto _H-E-Double-Hockey-Sticks_.


----------



## MrMerlin777

Puritanhead said:


> But if they persist in their unbelief until their death, it's evidence of their blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and they goto _H-E-Double-Hockey-Sticks_.




I thought that was H E double toothpicks? Oh well, whadoo I know, I'm just a Lab tech.


----------



## etexas

Puritanhead said:


> But if they persist in their unbelief until their death, it's evidence of their blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and they goto _H-E-Double-Hockey-Sticks_.


Yep!


----------



## Contra_Mundum

The stupid things people did once, a long time ago, used to be limited in effect simply by geography. Eventually most were forgotten. Now they live on forever in cyberspace. How many of these people will be chagrined in later years when their children find this junk on the web?


----------



## Staphlobob

reformedman said:


> Click Here for Video additional note: yes, confession is needed, for the true believer. Confession can be done by everyone in the entire world, if it is not done with the truth inside the person it will not accomplish anything, therefore, confession is not what saves, confession from a true believer does prove salvation. God's work is what in fact saved in order to produce the confession.



Along this same line, yesterday, preaching on John 4, I noted that the only true worship that has ever taken place, or eve will, is that done by believers. All the rest is empty fluff.


----------



## Dagmire

Is simply saying "I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit" blaspheming the Holy Spirit? Isn't blaspheming the Spirit something like seeing the good works of a Christian and saying they are controlled by the devil?


----------



## bookslover

I follow Jesus said:


> Yep!



Hey, Max! That's a pretty good Clint Eastwood impression you've got going on your avatar photo! I like it...


----------



## etexas

Dagmire said:


> Is simply saying "I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit" blaspheming the Holy Spirit? Isn't blaspheming the Spirit something like seeing the good works of a Christian and saying they are controlled by the devil?


To deny the existence of the third Person of the Godhead is to my mind blasphemy. Let us put it another way: If a person denied the existence of the Father or of the Son would that not be blasphemy?


----------



## Dagmire

But haven't we _all_ denied the existence of God in lives past? If denying the Holy Spirit is blasphemy, then we have all committed the unforgivable sin.


----------



## etexas

bookslover said:


> Hey, Max! That's a pretty good Clint Eastwood impression you've got going on your avatar photo! I like it...


Was not really going for the Eastwood thing, I was taking a black and white when our cat jumped on the desk as the mac photo booth was taking the pic. I was giving her a bit of a sour look during the "snap" and thought oh well......I'm just "gonna" use this one anyway.


----------



## etexas

Dagmire said:


> But haven't we _all_ denied the existence of God in lives past? If denying the Holy Spirit is blasphemy, then we have all committed the unforgivable sin.


Of course, but my take is that it would have to be a persistant thing.


----------



## Dagmire

Hmm... anyone else care to comment?


Mark 3:22-30
22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, *"He has Beelzebub," and, "By the ruler of the demons He casts out demons."*
23 So He called them to Himself and said to them in parables: "How can Satan cast out Satan? 
24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 
25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 
26 And if Satan has risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but has an end. 
27 No one can enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. And then he will plunder his house.
28 "Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; 
29 but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation"-- 
30 *because they said, "He has an unclean spirit."*





That says to me that calling the Holy Spirit unclean is blasphemy against Him, not denying His existence.


----------



## etexas

Dagmire said:


> Hmm... anyone else care to comment?
> 
> 
> Mark 3:22-30
> 22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, *"He has Beelzebub," and, "By the ruler of the demons He casts out demons."*
> 23 So He called them to Himself and said to them in parables: "How can Satan cast out Satan?
> 24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
> 25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand.
> 26 And if Satan has risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but has an end.
> 27 No one can enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. And then he will plunder his house.
> 28 "Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter;
> 29 but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation"--
> 30 *because they said, "He has an unclean spirit."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That says to me that calling the Holy Spirit unclean is blasphemy against Him, not denying His existence.


Brother, I have only given my opinion on the subject. Asking a PB pastor might be good. Grace and Peace


----------



## Dagmire

I wasn't trying to say "No, you're wrong!" I'm just trying to understand it myself. That's why I asked for other comments.

Didn't mean to offend.


----------



## etexas

Dagmire said:


> I wasn't trying to say "No, you're wrong!" I'm just trying to understand it myself. That's why I asked for other comments.
> 
> Didn't mean to offend.


None taken at ALL Brother, I think a pastors input might help clarify.


----------



## Staphlobob

Dagmire said:


> That says to me that calling the Holy Spirit unclean is blasphemy against Him, not denying His existence.



Now, we *are* talking about the unforgivable sin, aren't we? If so then the above is the way I've always seen it. Christ performs a miracle in the view of others. Yet rather than giving God the glory, the witnesses claim that this is actually the work of Beelzebub. Hence the unforgivable sin is seeing and knowing God is at work, yet deliberately attributing that work to Satan. 

OTOH blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is forgivable. Didn't Paul say he, and others in the congregations, were once blasphemers?


----------



## Dagmire

I thought the unforgivable sin was blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?

28 "Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; 
29 *but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness*, but is subject to eternal condemnation"--


----------



## Staphlobob

Dagmire said:


> I thought the unforgivable sin was blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?
> 
> 28 "Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter;
> 29 *but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness*, but is subject to eternal condemnation"--



It could be that such a blasphemy is what Mark 3 unpacks and explains.

But chances are I'm confused and ignorant about such things. I spoke/wrote without first checking things out.


----------



## Puritan Sailor

Just throwing in my 

First, I doubt most of these folks have comitted the sin since blaspheming the Holy Spirit requires in the very least acknowledging his existence, which an atheist by definition can't do. If these folks had said they acknowledge his existence and then proceed to blaspheme, then we may have another story. 

Second, I chuckled at their comparison of leaving the stone age when they became atheists. In fact they jumped whole heartedly back into the stone age since any of their scientific theories and logic require a belief in the one true God to comprehend anything meaningfully. They are wholly irrational. Without a universal absolute, there is no possibility of science. Any atheistic cosmology they dream up, is just that, a dream. They just fled back to primitive mythology and fairy tails by rejecting God.


----------



## reformedman

Look at the ten commandments. See the commandment to which there is no forgiveness? 
Exo 20: 7Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

If there is only one sin that is not forgiveable and both of these verses point to not being forgivable, therefore, these must refer to the same sin.
Denying God until death, that's what it is. To deny God the HolySpirit, in inner belief is the unforgiveable sin. We have all done this in our past, but to persistantly do it, as I explained in the OP, is what is not forgiven. Whether we voiced it or not, we at one time, according to scripture, have not believed at some point in our childhood through our inner and true belief.


----------



## Poimen

One wonders if there were atheists in the 'stone age'. If so then they are going back to a primeval faith. If not, then the evolving mind of man must have invented atheism for some reason... ?


----------



## etexas

Puritan Sailor said:


> Just throwing in my
> 
> First, I doubt most of these folks have comitted the sin since blaspheming the Holy Spirit requires in the very least acknowledging his existence, which an atheist by definition can't do. If these folks had said they acknowledge his existence and then proceed to blaspheme, then we may have another story.
> 
> Second, I chuckled at their comparison of leaving the stone age when they became atheists. In fact then jumped whole heartedly back into the stone age since any of their scientific theories and logic require a belief in the one true God to comprehend anything meaningfully. They are wholly irrational. Without a universal absolute, there is no possibility of science. Any atheistic cosmology they dream up, is just that, a dream. They just feld back to primitive mythology and fairy tails by rejecting God.


Patrick, when Christ made his statement about blasphempy against the Holy Spirit he was speaking to the Jews they would not have aknowleged the Holy Ghost as a "Person" of the Godhead as such and yet still were under a condemnation of blasphemy against the same. Is my take on this wrong? Grace and Peace.


----------



## Puritan Sailor

I follow Jesus said:


> Patrick, when Christ made his statement about blasphempy against the Holy Spirit he was speaking to the Jews they would not have aknowleged the Holy Ghost as a "Person" of the Godhead as such and yet still were under a condemnation of blasphemy against the same. Is my take on this wrong? Grace and Peace.



I don't think Jesus charged them with blaspheming the Holy Ghost. I think he was warning them that they were getting close. I think the sin is not committed in ignorance but in full understanding of who Jesus was and then denying his works as the works of Satan. I would think this sin a sin of obstinance, not ignorance. I'm not sure how many people would have ever comitted this sin. Perhaps Judas? Perhaps the folks described in Hebrews 6? I'm not sure. I do think these particular Jews would have had some concept of the Spirit of God since it is all over the OT, but what that concept was in the popular mind back then I don't know. Always willing to learn more though.


----------



## Puritan Sailor

Poimen said:


> One wonders if there were atheists in the 'stone age'. If so then they are going back to a primeval faith. If not, then the evolving mind of man must have invented atheism for some reason... ?



Atheists are really just animists. They ascribed to matter what should be ascribed to God. Things like eternality, sovereignty, the source of life, etc.


----------



## etexas

Puritan Sailor said:


> I don't think Jesus charged them with blaspheming the Holy Ghost. I think he was warning them that they were getting close. I think the sin is not committed in ignorance but in full understanding of who Jesus was and then denying his works as the works of Satan. I would think this sin a sin of obstinance, not ignorance. I'm not sure how many people would have ever comitted this sin. Perhaps Judas? Perhaps the folks described in Hebrews 6? I'm not sure. I do think these particular Jews would have had some concept of the Spirit of God since it is all over the OT, but what that concept was in the popular mind back then I don't know. Always willing to learn more though.


It would indeed be interesting to know what the popular thought was on the Holy Spirit in that period. Indeed we do find the the the OT filled with phrases like "the Spirit of God", Spirit of the Almighty" and others. The Lord must have known they had enough revelation to issue this rebuke.


----------



## Puritanhead

Contextually, as I have heard it presented to me as a doctrine, it actually means attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to an evil force or devils, and essentially denying the Divinity of this Person in the Blessed Trinity, which is abhorrent blasphemy.


----------



## Dagmire

reformedman said:


> Look at the ten commandments. See the commandment to which there is no forgiveness?
> Exo 20: 7Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
> 
> If there is only one sin that is not forgiveable and both of these verses point to not being forgivable, therefore, these must refer to the same sin.
> Denying God until death, that's what it is. To deny God the HolySpirit, in inner belief is the unforgiveable sin. We have all done this in our past, but to persistantly do it, as I explained in the OP, is what is not forgiven. Whether we voiced it or not, we at one time, according to scripture, have not believed at some point in our childhood through our inner and true belief.




How does the phrase "The Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain" indicate it is unforgivable? It just appears to me like the Lord is making sure we understand that it is sinful to take His name in vain.




Puritan Sailor said:


> I don't think Jesus charged them with blaspheming the Holy Ghost. I think he was warning them that they were getting close. I think the sin is not committed in ignorance but in full understanding of who Jesus was and then denying his works as the works of Satan. I would think this sin a sin of obstinance, not ignorance. I'm not sure how many people would have ever comitted this sin. Perhaps Judas? Perhaps the folks described in Hebrews 6? I'm not sure. I do think these particular Jews would have had some concept of the Spirit of God since it is all over the OT, but what that concept was in the popular mind back then I don't know. Always willing to learn more though.




Mark 3:22-30
22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, "He has Beelzebub," and, "By the ruler of the demons He casts out demons."
23 So He called them to Himself and said to them in parables: "How can Satan cast out Satan? 
24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 
25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 
26 And if Satan has risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but has an end. 
27 No one can enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. And then he will plunder his house.
28 "Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; 
29 *but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation"-- 
30 because they said, "He has an unclean spirit."*


That sounds like He charged them with that sin to me.





Puritanhead said:


> Contextually, as I have heard it presented to me as a doctrine, it actually means attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to an evil force or devils, and essentially denying the Divinity of this Person in the Blessed Trinity, which is abhorrent blasphemy.




It seems quite plain to me. That's why I'm confused about the differing opinions.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

Kids like this are really quite foolish and worthy of mockery.

Gene Cook told me a few months ago that Paul Manata was going to do an "add Circumcision to the Gospel" challenge as the Discomfitter.

Essentially the challenge would consist of encouraging these silly "atheists" to go get circumcised and videotape it, proclaiming: "I am not afraid!"


----------



## Puritanhead

I confess I never downloaded it nor do I care too. But what's so funny about blasphemy Rich? 

I find myself correcting people for the common variety blasphemy all the time, who think I am the nut for being so sensitive about what people say.


----------



## Semper Fidelis

Ryan,

It's funny because it's so ludicrous. If you've ever read The Discomfitter, his work was to answer a fool according to his folly. Paul acted the perfect fool to show how utterly foolish some of these atheists are. Saying "I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit" is so much teenage "my voice just changed and I'm going to prove I'm tough" bravado. His challenge wasn't meant to be real but to show the other challenge for the silliness that it was by suggesting that these teenagers go get circumcised.


----------

