Blasphemy against holyspirit
- Thread starter Naveen949134
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The original Church unanimously believed in "free will" - that men are given the choice of whom they will serve but that God coordinates His plan though divine foreknowledge of human choices. The idea that human beings are TOTALLY UNABLE TO make ANY CHOICE was imported into Christian terminology from Gnostic Manichaeism primarily by Augustine of Hippo the so-called "father of the (Western) Catholic Church. Those who taught before Bishop Augustine did not accept any part of TULIP nor does the Eastern Church accept Augustine as a leader in the Church
My fallible memory of my study of Augustine is that he was one of those who avoided TULIP by saying that God presents the elect only with those options that He foreknows they will "freely" choose leading to saving faith, but that ruse did NOT affirm Scripture teaching divine love for all including the non-elect--so no cigar.
It was not just Augustine, and I agree with many of the things Augustine teaches - However, Tertullian teaches that one can lose salvation, Hermas in 80 AD affirms it, Justin Martyr affirms it, Iraneus affirms it - these are the early church fathers you are saying affirm your position, yet they all believed that one could lose their salvation if they departed from the faith.
The Early Church Fathers believed that Christians could lose their salvation. That was consistent with their belief that we must continue in faith to inherit eternal life.
Whoops, I guess that's why I ought to wear my glasses when I read! I totally misread a few words and kind of changed the way I posted, but yes, I agree that the early Church fathers along with you that one could walk away from salvation.
Augustine's belief in God's absolute control of all things - including the desires and will make him a determinist. This is not what those before him taught:
1. This expression [of our Lord], ‘How often would I have gathered thy children together, and thou wouldest not,’ set forth the ancient law of human liberty, because God made man a free [agent] from the beginning, possessing his own power, even as he does his own soul, to obey the behests (ad utendum sententia) of God voluntarily, and not by compulsion of God. For there is no coercion with God, but a good will [towards us] is present with Him continually. And therefore does He give good counsel to all. And in man, as well as in angels, He has placed the power of choice (for angels are rational beings), so that those who had yielded obedience might justly possess what is good, given indeed by God, but preserved by themselves. On the other hand, they who have not obeyed shall, with justice, be not found in possession of the good, and shall receive condign punishment: for God did kindly bestow on them what was good;
(Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 4, chapter 37, paragraphs 1 – 7)
Tertullian was not the only one who believed we must CONTINUE in the faith to be saved, They ALL did. The idea that we could live in perpetual sin and still enter glory was not according the teaching of Jesus Himself:
45 But suppose that servant says in his heart, ‘My master will be a long time in coming,’ and he begins to beat the menservants and maidservants, and to eat and drink and get drunk. 46The master of that servant will come on a day he does not expect and at an hour he does not anticipate. Then he will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.
(Luke 12:45-46)
This servant began as a follower of Jesus began to rebel and walk in sin. As a consequence he was re-assigned to a different end
Augustine's deterministic theology came from his ten year association with the Gnostic cult of Manichaeism. When he first converted to Christianity he dispensed with those things teaching instead the traditional teachings of Christianity which held to libertine human free will and to God's guiding through divine foreknowledge. These had no part whatsoever in Augustine's later teaching that everything is pre-determined and hence were foreign to the entire theology of TULIP. Augustine continued his importation of MANICHAEAN theology by inventing Original Sin which he did by MISreading Romans 5:12 in out of corrupt Latin texts instead of the original Greek since he could not read Greek. I have always imagined how much he would have learned had he journeyed across the sea and consulted with someone who understood, read and wrote Greek as their native language. I am talking about the Greatest Preacher of the Third Century, John Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople
Yes, doctrines that excluded divine omnilove and justness,
hence disagreement on CC regarding election.
Yes, and Heb.6:4-6 indicates that apostasy or a believer repudiating saving faith is the unforgiveable form
of speaking against the HS: tantamount to recrucifying Christ.
We can't ignore the meaning of passages to reconcile them.
Some people don't know what 'blasphemy' means, and aren't familiar with the Greek word that means something like slander or villify. But there is alternate wording in the very passage in Matthew 12
31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come. (NKJV)
If someone doesn't know what 'blaspheme' means, then it says in verse 32 'who speaks a word against Him.' Notice Jesus said in verse 32 'anyone'--and does not limit it to someone who has full knowledge. Christ's opponents in the passage do not believe in Him. It's not like they have the knowledge of God.
Look at the accusation these Pharisees had leveled against the Spirit by Whom Christ had cast out devils, the Holy Spirit.
24 Now when the Pharisees heard it they said, “This fellow does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons.”
(NKJV)
Have a look at Mark 3 also.
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.”
Hoti, in Greek, translated 'gar' in verse 30 is evidence that what follows explains what comes before. It can be translated 'for', 'because' or 'since. The warning against blaspheming the Holy Spirit is logically connected to their accusation of the Spirit recorded in verse 30.
No, but you missed/failed to recognize where Jesus told unbelievers to repent, seek and be saved.
What's that got to do with unbelievers blaspheming the Holy Spirit? You seem to be having trouble with context.
I believe the "context" indicates that there is only one unforgiveable sin of blasphemy against the HS (Matt.12:31),
and so Jesus must have been referring to the unforgivable sin of apostasy Paul described in Heb.6:4-6,
or else there would be two.
You may have no trouble with Scripture contradicting itself, but I prefer harmonizing when possible.