Kobojunkie:
Remember, the New Covenant was directed, not at those who did not believe, but those who would choose to FOLLOW HIM.
Again, remember what Jesus Christ Himself said to you there in Mattew 12, speaking against Jesus Christ will not earn you that penalty -- it is speaking against the Spirit of God Himself that will do just that.
The one example of this incident is the case of Ananias and Sapphira in the Book of Acts 5, but I suggest you start reading from chapter 4.
Even believers say it too and nothing happens because they are not under the oath of the New Covenant.
Read those verses again, but thing time, let the scripture read itself to you. Jesus Christ did not directly accuses them of committing the sin in question. So, why do you conclude that He did?

In the Mark 3 account, Jesus Christ went home and the one's He gathered onto Himself were not the Teachers of the law who accused Him of using the powers of Satan but His followers and people gathered to hear Him teach them.

In Matthew 12, you also see that Jesus Christ does not directly attack the Pharisees in His declaration but is instead teaching and we know that He did not really direct His teachings at the Pharisees and Scribes but instead His followers, and the crowds that gathered to learn from Him often.

Remember, Jesus did not come to do away with the Old Covenant, and the Pharisees and Scribes were Old Covenant believers, so it would have been tyrannical even, of Jesus Christ to subject them to laws completely different from those they believed in.
According to the Old Covenant, blasphemy was speaking against God Himself, and yes, there were Israelites who did just that and paid for it with their lives too. Jesus Christ's New Covenant commandment instead specified that blasphemy was speaking against the Spirit of God instead, and it is my belief that the unforgivable part of it is that the penalty is death by the Spirit of God... immediately taking away any chances one has at forgiveness after committing such an act.

wow, what non understanding of what is said and of the scriptures
with confusion and blindness, but you do fool yourself though

1Co_14:33  For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
2Co_4:4  In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

[quote author=MuttleyLaff post=95650811]Interesting to know you admit that you battle and/or struggle with giving unconditional love?

now brother, of course, goodness does not equate to righteousness, but do you know why goodness does not equate to righteousness, lmso. Well, it simply is because righteousness is living up to the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law, lmso, while goodness is going a step above righteousness, lmso. You didnt at all know that before now, isn't it, lmso. I hope you being uninformed about that dont find the info "complex", lmso

Monsieur, I have given bodydialect57 a response, howbeit, privately. NTBB.

"Yet indeed Christ, of us, still being without strength, according to the right time, died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die"
- Romans 5:6-7

You had said earlier that God accepts kind, loyal, loving people; my response was; No! he makes them acceptable, I say once more. I know it has been your argument that there isn't anything wrong with gay relationships as long as the fruits associated with the Spirit are displayed; I have said this: as long as they (the gay lovers) are in Christ, they will manifest fruits acceptable before God.

I don't know if you quoted that verse in Romans 5 to refute my saying that goodness doesn't equate to righteousness; but if you did, you took my words and argument out of context; I'm glad you did quote that verse because it would help me buttress my point.

There are three sets of people in the text:

1. The ungodly or sinful or vile or rebellious or impious
2. The righteous person
3. The good or innocent person.

I guess the person who "liked" your response has seen as I have seen that you have said severally on this thread and others (threads opened to discuss or argue on the unnatural nature of homosexuality) that you have said if two consenting gay persons exhibit the fruits resembling that of the Spirit, they are indeed delighting God. That is true only if those individuals are in Christ. If not, those "works" do not stem from God. It's a chess move when you feign ignorance that my juxtaposition of goodness and righteousness was a comparison between the good and the righteous. The text you quoted said (in its context): Christ died for the ungodly to demonstrate God's love; He did not die for the good person nor for the (righteous) person. (Do you see how you are eisegetical again? "good" meant innocent in that text and not the meaning you fabricated)

Romans 3:10 says (in several translations): "The Scriptures tell us, No one is acceptable to God!"; "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"; "there is none that doeth good, no, not one".

Isn't it clear to see that no one is acceptable to God because no one is good or righteous? Whether gay or straight, all of mankind is sinful and guilty, until they believe in Christ's atonement. But Muttleylaff thinks otherwise: He says, as long as one is loving, loyal, faithful, committed in their relationship, and hurting no one, God will accept them.

In your definition of good and righteous, good excelled; you gave a definition of your understanding of who a righteous person is, but you left out a definition for a good person. Now, this is biblical view of righteousness (without the law, the alley you hid in): He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false and does not swear deceitfully. Do you see that David's view of a righteous person is holiness and God? Cornelius was a good man but his goodness would have been counted as vain if he did not seek God, without the law. Saul was a good man, a true Hebrew; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless; but his qualification was worthless without Christ. I hope you acknowledge that my view of righteousness is entrenched in holiness and the knowledge of Christ not the law; goodness does not equate to holiness, because many that are good themselves yet do but little good to others; but those that are useful commonly get themselves well beloved, and meet with some that in a case of necessity would venture: is it clear goodness can be subjective? But purified goodness, the offspring of righteousness, can ne'er be subjective but is good to all (Gal. 6:10).

<sup>God accepts all that manifest the fruit of the Spirit, which evident in Galatians 5:22-23 are:
love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, humility, endurance, gentleness and self-control

I am sure that you would agree that one cannot manifest the fruit of the spirit without the assistance of God’s holy spirit, lmso. I am sure that you would agree that God accepts everyone that manifests the fruit of the spirit, which is: "kind, loyal, caring, trusting, loving, and faithful" sic. You dont really know what the gospel is. They are not justified because of manifesting the fruit of the Spirit, lmso, but they are justified by having the very righteousness of God in Christ because they have been made right with God through Christ. They are just-if-ied because of, the if, of Yahusha Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ. On the condition of believing in and on Yahusha Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, they automatically, are justified. Praise God. Alleluia!</sup>

Perhaps it is your style to shroud your intentions through ambiguity of words so that you may fathom the stage of spiritual development of those you dialogue with; I have stated severally how those in gay relationships who are in Christ are made acceptable through Christ, and let none of us who find such existence detasteful cease from troubling them because they are in Christ Jesus. By repeating the same thing I have said shows you don't read what I write.

"To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved" - Ephesians 1:6

You said: God accepts all that manifest the fruit of the Spirit; it would have been biblically correct if you had said, "Those that manifest the fruit of the Spirit show that God accepted them".

^{Fyi, we all made acceptable according to whatever we've opted for or chosen to do and that God permits. Cases in point, lmso, Satan was made acceptable according to God's election. Pharaoh was made acceptable according to God's election. King Saul was made acceptable according to God's election. Judas Iscariot was made acceptable according to God's election. Hitler was made acceptable according to God's election. Abacha was made acceptable according to God's election et cetera, lmso}

Perhaps, it was bedtime when you wrote this. I'd like to admonish you to read a good book on the role of Divine Election in salvation; then you would understand my intention.

T^{hank you for reinforcing my earlier point above about not living up to the letter of the law but to live up to the spirit of the law, lmso}.

It would be nice if you go through my response on 5.11.2020 and today's response at least two times.

Acehart:
...

lmso brb
PS: Acehart, I have brb below, mind you dont quote that post below or you might get banned and your post hidden for doing so. Just copy out whatever you want to respond to, but dont quote directly the post itself, or else you possibly might trip the bot off

johnw47:
wow, what non understanding of what is said and of the scriptures
with confusion and blindness, but you do fool yourself though

1Co_14:33  For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
2Co_4:4  In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Unfortunately, God is the author of confusion, yes, as the various passages below show. God sends confusion to those He pleases.

Deuteronomy 28 vs 20 (ERV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. “The Lord will send upon you curses, confusion, and rebuke, in all you undertake to do, until you are destroyed and until you perish quickly, on account of the evil of your deeds, because you have forsaken Me

This is God declaring He will throw into confusion all the people who mess with His mission

Exodus 23 vs 27
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. I will send My terror ahead of you, and throw into confusion all the people among whom you come, and I will make all your enemies turn their backs to you.

This is the Genesis writting about how God confused the language of the people at Babel

Genesis 11 vs 7-9
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7-9. Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another’s speech.” So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of the whole earth; and they stopped building the city. Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of the whole earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of the whole earth.

This next one is of God throwing confusion in the midst of the enemies who stood against His people Israel.

Joshua 10:10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.
And the Lord confounded them before Israel, and He slew them with a great slaughter at Gibeon, and pursued them by the way of the ascent of Beth-horon and struck them as far as Azekah and Makkedah.

So, next time you try to pull a verse from anywhere to pretend to make a point, at least make certain to consider the context and appropriateness of the verse to the conversation.

That said... that you do not understand a thing does not mean that which you do not understand is indeed wrong. There are other possibilities, one of them being that you remain closed to ideas outside of the box which your mind may currently live in. Rather, a better approach to understanding what is presented is to ask questions so you gain better insight into what is being said. If after sufficiently dissecting the idea presented, you still find it lacking, then and only then can you then declare it is indeed not worthy of you.

Kobojunkiee:
Unfortunately, God is the author of confusion, yes, as the various passages below show. God sends confusion to those He pleases.

This is God declaring He will throw into confusion all the people who mess with His mission

This is the Genesis writting about how God confused the language of the people at Babel

This next one is of God throwing confusion in the midst of the enemies who stood against His people Israel.

So, next time you try to pull a verse from anywhere to pretend to make a point, at least make certain to consider the context and appropriateness of the verse to the conversation.

That said... that you do not understand a thing does not mean that which you do not understand is indeed wrong. There are other possibilities, one of them being that you remain closed to ideas outside of the box which your mind may currently live in. Rather, a better approach to understanding what is presented is to ask questions so you gain better insight into what is being said. If after sufficiently dissecting the idea presented, you still find it lacking, then and only then can you then declare it is indeed not worthy of you.

junkie
i don't waste much time with those who neither believe
or understand God's word

1Co_14:33  For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
2Co_4:4  In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them

Acehart:
Monsieur, I have given bodydialect57 a response, howbeit, privately. NTBB.

[img]https://s1/images/MuttAmin.gif[/img]
NTBB, lmso

Acehart:
You had said earlier that God accepts kind, loyal, loving people; my response was; No! he makes them acceptable, I say once more. I know it has been your argument that there isn't anything wrong with gay relationships as long as the fruits associated with the Spirit are displayed; I have said this: as long as they (the gay lovers) are in Christ, they will manifest fruits acceptable before God.

I am sure you havent missed each time I typed "... two God believing, have accepted Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour, consenting adults, enjoying having a lifetime until death do part them, loving each other, faithful, kind, caring, committed monogamous homosexual relationship, with no evil or harm done to each other, children, neighbour and environment, but exuding the fruit of the Holy Spirit, as is expected to from any other children of God to do ..."

Acehart:
I don't know if you quoted that verse in Romans 5 to refute my saying that goodness doesn't equate to righteousness; but if you did, you took my words and argument out of context; I'm glad you did quote that verse because it would help me buttress my point.

There are three sets of people in the text:

1. The ungodly or sinful or vile or rebellious or impious
2. The righteous person
3. The good person

[img]https://media./images/14cd04951335766288c672c30e186f98/tenor.gif[/img]
After your flippant point, lmso, you've now found out that its better to buttress it, abi, lmso. You dont get it that, it was you who drag me into this with your deciding to scratch an itch that wasn't there. All I did was chuckling, but you wanted to wipe the grin off my face with saying: "Say something na. Is it because it isn’t about same sex affairs that’s why you aren’t saying anything?" before your charming "I have told you severally that [b]I don’t care about same sex relationships. I have no word of encouragement or discouragement for those who practice it. Only God knows[/b]"

Acehart:
I guess the person who "liked" your response has seen as I have seen that you have said severally on this thread and others (threads opened to discuss or argue on the unnatural nature of homosexuality) that you have said if two consenting gay persons exhibit the fruits resembling that of the Spirit, they are indeed delighting God.

Continue be busy monitoring likes, OK.? Please who particularly, is nature of homosexuality unnatural to?

Smh sighing. Where have I ever said: "... they are indeed delighting God" sic. Please dont be doing this nah, dont be embellishing my words

Acehart:
... That is true only if those individuals are in Christ. If not, those "works" do not stem from God. It's a chess move when you feign ignorance that my juxtaposition of goodness and righteousness was a comparison between the good and the righteous. The text you quoted said (in its context): Christ died for the ungodly to demonstrate God's love; He did not die for the good person nor for the righteous person.

You smh dont understand the crux of Romans 5:6-7. The point made in that narrative, was that very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die, but here is God doing a DIY in the person of Yahshua Ha Mashiach to die for man to have righteousness and goodness, lmso because we all are/were ungodly, lmso.

You've forgotten that only God is Good, lmso and that because of the Ha Mashiach, we have the righteousness of God in Christ. Praise God Alleluia.

Acehart:
Romans 3:10 says (in several translations):
"The Scriptures tell us, No one is acceptable to God!"; "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"; "there is none that doeth good, no, not one".

Isn't it clear to see that no one is acceptable to God because no one is good or righteous? Whether gay or straight, all of mankind is sinful and guilty, until they believe in Christ's atonement. But Muttleylaff thinks otherwise: He says, as long as one is loving, loyal, faithful, committed in their relationship, and hurting no one, God will accept them.

Smh, what have you done with my:
"Cases in point, lmso, Satan was made acceptable according to God's election. Pharaoh was made acceptable according to God's election. King Saul was made acceptable according to God's election. Judas Iscariot was made acceptable according to God's election. Hitler was made acceptable according to God's election. Abacha was made acceptable according to God's election et cetera, lmso"

My guy, go siddon somewhere, abeggy because you're a learner for, lmso.

Acehart:
In your definition of good and righteous, good excelled; you gave a definition of your understanding of who a righteous person is, but you left out a definition for a good person. Now, this is biblical view of righteousness (without the law, the alley you hid in): He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false and does not swear deceitfully. Do you see that David's view of a righteous person is holiness and God? Cornelius was a good man but his goodness would have been counted as vain if he did not seek God, without the law. Saul was a good man, a true Hebrew; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless; but his qualification was worthless without Christ. I hope you acknowledge that my view of righteousness is entrenched in holiness and the knowledge of Christ not the law; goodness does not equate to holiness, because many that are good themselves yet do but little good to others; but those that are useful commonly get themselves well beloved, and meet with some that in a case of necessity would venture: is it clear goodness can be subjective? But purified goodness, the offspring of righteousness, can ne'er be subjective but is good to all (Gal. 6:10)

You've slid into prooftexting with Psalm 24:4, abi, hmm? How you managed to weed in that David explicitly used righteous in that verse is mind boggling. Why dont you share what you find that specifically doesnt equate to holiness in two God believing, have accepted Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour, consenting adults, enjoying having a lifetime until death do part them, loving each other, faithful, kind, caring, committed monogamous homosexual relationship, with no evil or harm done to each other, children, neighbour and environment, but exuding the fruit of the Holy Spirit, as is expected to from any other children of God to do

Acehart:
Perhaps it is your style to shroud your intentions through ambiguity of words so that you may fathom the stage of spiritual development of those you dialogue with; I have stated severally how those in gay relationships who are in Christ are made acceptable through Christ, and let none of us who find such existence detasteful cease from troubling them because they are in Christ Jesus. By repeating the same thing I have said shows you don't read what I write.

Don't play the victim to circumstances you created. I was minding my business, happily smiling away to myself before you came to yank and pull at my leg

Acehart:
"To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved"
- Ephesians 1:6

You said:
God accepts all that manifest the fruit of the Spirit; it would have been biblically correct if you had said, "Those that manifest the fruit of the Spirit show that God accepted them".

You cant give what you dont have inside. You cant manifest the fruit of the Spirit, if the Seed hasn't been accepted in you

With your paraphrasing, you only were again reinforcing my point, lmso. Thank you very much

Acehart:
Perhaps, it was bedtime when you wrote this. I'd like to admonish you to read a good book on the role of Divine Election in salvation; then you would understand my intention.

"However, I have let you live for this purpose:
to show you My power and to make My name known in all the earth.”
- Exodus 9:16

"For the Scriptures say that God told Pharaoh,
“I have appointed you for the very purpose of displaying my power in you and to spread my fame throughout the earth.”
- Romans 9:17

"Yahweh has made everything for its own end
-- yes, even the wicked for the day of evil.”
- Proverbs 16:4

You dont know jack, lmso. Dont know mẹmẹ

Acehart:
It would be nice if you go through my response on 5.11.2020 and today's response at least two times.

I wish you take up this advice for yourself, lmso so you hopefully can see your gaffes at work, lmso

Acehart, you've got a ban and your hidden from commenting another thread abi, hmm? What thread is it that got your banned

[img]https://s5/images/ezgif-2-bb81ab7ea10d.gif[/img]

MuttleyLaff:
Acehart, you've got a ban, and your hidden from commenting another thread abi, hmm? What thread is it that got your banned

Thanks, man. One learner said to another learner: I know it. Anyway, I have learned something for myself, thanks to you.

Ciao

Acehart:
If "context is king", you wouldn't have fluffed when you said Elisha went to Shiloh to offer a sacrifice to God.

Where and when did I typed or said that "Elisha went to Shiloh to offer a sacrifice to God" sic, hmm?/quote]

Acehart:
I would not have you uninformed, again, regarding Shiloh: With the loss of the ark to the Philistines at Aphek, Shiloh was rejected as the chosen place, and there was no place in which Jehovah's name dwelt until the building of Solomon's temple in Jerusalem. Have you forgotten that Elijah built an altar to Yahweh at Carmel (1 Ki 18: 30-32) and complained that the Israelites had destroyed the altars of Jehovah (1 Ki 19: 14)? Ps 78 states that Shiloh was the place where Jehovah first made his dwelling, but when?

[img]https://s5/images/tenor041725c2b0ac1f20.gif[/img]
Untangle the mess you created and introduced all by yourself, lmso.

Acehart:
In the temple sermons of Jeremiah, Jer 7: 12-15 and 26: 4-6,9 I see that Shiloh was the most important sanctuary in the pre-monarchic period, which was destroyed before Elisha was born; so how could he go to pay obeisance there?

Straw man fallacy strongly at play here, lmso

Acehart:
I want you to know that I wasn't doing an exposition on Matt.11:28-30, but I was using the verse in the light of Acts 15:9-10 - if God has purified the heart of any gay, I would not lay yoke on them that would cause them to be discriminated against

Why are you fixated on the heart of the gay be purified why not be preoccupied with your own heart being purified. What exactly is it in the heart of gays that require their heart being purified an more than yours that needs being purified, huh?

1John 4:1

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them.

If a man operating by the Spirit of God is wrongly accused of working with demons, l believe such will be forgiven if he repents. We have been admonished to try every spirit and not just believe any cos of so many fakeries in the world.


Acts 8:6--25
6 [b]And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which (5259) Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did.
7 For unclean spirits, crying with loud voice, came out of many that were possessed with them: and many taken with palsies, and that were lame, were healed.
8 And there was great joy in that city.
9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:
10 To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.
11 And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.
12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued, with Philip, and wondered, beholding the (3173) miracles and signs which were done.
14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever, I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish,, with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.
22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.
24 Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the Lord for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me.
25 And they, when they (3303,) had testified and preached the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and preached the gospel in many villages of the Samaritans.[/b]

Again in the scriptures quoted above, the case of Simon, who was once a wizard was mentioned. He requested to pay money so as to get Holy Spirit's power. He must have been doing this in his former trade of wizardry, hence his offering them money. Peter rebuked him sharply and asked him to repent.

johnw47:


i answered @No 3: if the person at the time was lying then he/she was not acting on the Holy Spirit


if you wrongly accused someone of being of the devil
when they were in fact inspired by the Holy Ghost at the time,
is that an unpardonable sin?

i don't know, it would be if you were talking about Jesus Christ,
look it up, and then post back and inform, thanks in advance

Bodydialect57:
1John 4:1

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them.

If a man operating by the Spirit of God is wrongly accused of working with demons, l believe such will be forgiven if he repents. We have been admonished to try every spirit and not just believe any cos of so many fakeries in the world.


Acts 8:6--25
6 [b]And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which (5259) Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did.
7 For unclean spirits, crying with loud voice, came out of many that were possessed with them: and many taken with palsies, and that were lame, were healed.
8 And there was great joy in that city.
9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:
10 To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.
11 And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.
12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued, with Philip, and wondered, beholding the (3173) miracles and signs which were done.
14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever, I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish,, with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.
22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.
24 Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the Lord for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me.
25 And they, when they (3303,) had testified and preached the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and preached the gospel in many villages of the Samaritans.[/b]

Again in the scriptures quoted above, the case of Simon, who was once a wizard was mentioned. He requested to pay money so as to get Holy Spirit's power. He must have been doing this in his former trade of wizardry, hence his offering them money. Peter rebuked him sharply and asked him to repent.

you believe if a man operating by the Spirit of God is wrongly accused of working with demons, the accuser will be forgiven if he repents,

ok, you may be right, but why tell me your belief, better to post proof

some children believe the cow jumped over the moon, it doesn't mean i will believe it

Isaiah 55:7

Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.

Simon, in Acts 8:18-19 offered Peter money so he could be given Holy Spirit's power in exchange. This obviously means he likened the Spirit's power to that of his wizardry since he always gives money to acquire those demonic powers. Peter knew he was wrong in likening the Holy Spirit power to demons, so he rebuked his ignorance and asked him to repent.

John 6:37

All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

johnw47:


you believe if a man operating by the Spirit of God is wrongly accused of working with demons, the accuser will be forgiven if he repents,

ok, you may be right, but why tell me your belief, better to post proof

some children believe the cow jumped over the moon, it doesn't mean i will believe it

Bodydialect57:
Isaiah 55:7

Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.

Simon, in Acts 8:18-19 offered Peter money so he could be given Holy Spirit's power in exchange. This obviously means he likened the Spirit's power to that of his wizardry since he always gives money to acquire those demonic powers.

simon didn't liken the Holy Spirits power to wizardry
for simons wizardry couldnt do those things that the apostles did
and that's why he tried to buy it

Bodydialect57:
Peter knew he was wrong in likening the Holy Spirit power to demons, so he rebuked his ignorance and asked him to repent.

John 6:37

All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

peter didn't rebuke simon for likening the Holy Spirits power to demons
but for trying to buy the Holy Spirits gift




simon didn't say someone had the spirit of the devil, when they in fact had the Holy spirit,
and that's the subject you have been talking about

you are becoming even more confused

johnw47:



simon didn't liken the Holy Spirits power to wizardry
for simons wizardry couldnt do those things that the apostles did
and that's why he tried to buy it



peter didn't rebuke simon for likening the Holy Spirits power to demons
but for trying to buy the Holy Spirits gift




simon didn't say someone had the spirit of the devil, when they in fact had the Holy spirit,
and that's the subject you have been talking about

you are becoming even more confused

The subject l have been talking about is that if such a person realises his mistake and repents, he will be forgiven. If Simon"s example didn't satisfy you, how about Isaiah 55:7?

Bodydialect57:
The subject l have been talking about is that if such a person realises his mistake and repents, he will be forgiven. If Simon"s example didn't satisfy you, how about Isaiah 55:7?

well good, if that's what you have been talking about
i already replied to that:

johnw47:


you believe if a man operating by the Spirit of God is wrongly accused of working with demons, the accuser will be forgiven if he repents,

ok, you may be right

but to some other things you have been talking about, smile

johnw47:


simon didn't liken the Holy Spirits power to wizardry
for simons wizardry couldnt do those things that the apostles did
and that's why he tried to buy it

peter didn't rebuke simon for likening the Holy Spirits power to demons
but for trying to buy the Holy Spirits gift

you are becoming even more confused

and even more confused still

Kobojunkiee:
Unfortunately, God is the author of confusion, yes, as the various passages below show. God sends confusion to those He pleases.

so you believe God is the author of confusion
i suppose with your confusion you must also believe that satan is the god of peace

1Co_14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Rom 15:33  Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.




God has used the tool of confusion
He certainly is not the author of it

God's creation was good until satan,
starting in the garden confused it
when he deceived adam and eve to
believe God lied to them. and adam
and eve believed the serpent and
disobeyed God



Gen 1:31  And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.


satan of course is the author of confusion, lies, murder, etc.

Joh 8:44  Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Bodydialect57:
Matthew 12:22-32.

.....
The Lord Jesus Christ spoke those words as part of his responses to the Pharisees of His time who accused Him of healing a blind and dumb by Beelzebub, the prince of devils.
What word/words can one speak against the Holy Spirit and will not earn forgiveness in this world and the one to come?

Cc Acehart, FinallyDead

Hi Body,
I trust you're good. Guess you're aware I've been off this platform for months and I'm just seeing this.

There is only one sin that can't be forgiven and it's not unbelief. Every unbeliever is guilty of unbelief before they believe and get forgiven of it, so unbelief is a forgivable sin. The unforgivable sin is that which once commited can never be forgiven as discussed in the excerpt of mine bottom of page.

NB: In case you're wondering why it's called blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, which hearing you may expect that someone curses the Holy Spirit. Actually, looking at the scene in your text in which the Lord mentioned it, blasphemy here conveys the meaning: a willful rejection even when truth is known.
The Pharisees blasphemed the Son because they knew it's only by the hand of God that a jew can perform signs and so they knew he was of God but they still rejected him and rather called it Baalzebub just because of what it would cost them to approve of the Lord's ministry. So the meaning of blasphemy here is a rejection in spite of knowledge of truth.
So when he speaks of blasphemy of the Spirit, this meaning is maintained, as also explained in the excerpt, and only a believer who has already known the things of the Spirit (an unbeliever never has such knowledge) can commit this sin by rejecting Christ and hence, the Spirit of God that dwells in him. Take note that those that do same to Father, (like the sons of Israel), and to the Son(like the Pharisees) can still be forgiven because He would still die on the cross for their sins and they can receive the Spirit in their hearts but after this, whoever does it to the Spirit,(believers) have nothing left to hope on.

Sinning willfully can only be correctly defined in the context of the text.
Also consider how drastic it is that Paul says there is no sacrifice remaining for such a sin and hence no forgiveness except fearful judgement(Heb10:26-27).
Actually, contrary to his aim, @OP picked a text that contravenes eternal security.
So first off, who was Paul referring to? Paul was certainly referring to those who were believers already but we're pressured to abandon faith by persecution from neighbouring Jews, as shown in the preceding verse
Hebrews 10:25[25]Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

The succeeding verses also confirm he referred to believers, the only people who could ever have been sanctified by the blood of the Son.
Hebrews 10:29[29]Of how much sorer punishment, suppose you, shall he be thought worthy, who has rejected with disdain the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant with which he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?

So what exactly is the willful sin? It is not just any sin a believer commits, of course. It is only the sin of apostasy- an outright turning back on faith in the Lord that one once held(which faith is the only means of salvation) i.e. when the believer no longer wants Jesus as his Lord. We also see that this apostasy called "insulting the Spirit of grace" in Heb10:29 was what the Lord called blasphemy of the Holy Spirit which can never be forgiven:
Luke 12:10[10]And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man(unbelievers), it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemes the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven

This sin is also what John calls the "sin unto [eternal]death" which when a brother commits, there is no room for forgiveness, hence no recommendation to pray for such(1Jn5:16). It leads instantly to (eternal)death(1Jn5:16). Every other sin doesn't instantly lead to eternal death(1Jn5:17) but can lead to the delusion of committing this sin if allowed to harden the heart, by continuing in them(Heb3:13)
1Jn 5:16-17 KJV 16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. 17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

Not every believer qualifies to commit this sin but only one who has passed through all stages of spiritual development mentioned in Heb6:4-6 which can be summarised as having made Jesus Lord first and then having been baptized into the Holy Spirit with the evidence of spiritual gifts of power/anointing.
Heb 6:4-6 KJV 4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and became sharers of the Holy Spirit, 5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come, 6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
It is however very rare for a true believer to commit such a sin.

It is noteworthy that the impossibility of redeeming such believers is not because God's mercy can ever be exhausted but because sin automatically hardens the conscience hence a believer who continues in sin to a certain point becomes totally hardened in heart and deceived by sin(Heb3:13) such that he himself no more wants to retain faith in the Lord for security of his soul. Which faith alone is the only basis to enjoy God's provision of salvation.
Hence the unforgivable sin is apostasy a.k.a. blasphemy(insult) of the Holy Spirit a.k.a. sin unto [eternal]death a.k.a. willful sin.

Thanks MH, l am good. All thanks to God Almighty.

Yes, l knew you were away for that period and was certain you will contribute when you come online. Thanks for your succinct input. God bless you.

Finallydead:


Hi Body,
I trust you're good. Guess you're aware I've been off this platform for months and I'm just seeing this.

There is only one sin that can't be forgiven and it's not unbelief. Every unbeliever is guilty of unbelief before they believe and get forgiven of it, so unbelief is a forgivable sin. The unforgivable sin is that which once commited can never be forgiven as discussed in the excerpt of mine bottom of page.

NB: In case you're wondering why it's called blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, which hearing you may expect that someone curses the Holy Spirit. Actually, looking at the scene in your text in which the Lord mentioned it, blasphemy here conveys the meaning: a willful rejection even when truth is known.
The Pharisees blasphemed the Son because they knew it's only by the hand of God that a jew can perform signs and so they knew he was of God but they still rejected him and rather called it Baalzebub just because of what it would cost them to approve of the Lord's ministry. So the meaning of blasphemy here is a rejection in spite of knowledge of truth.
So when he speaks of blasphemy of the Spirit, this meaning is maintained, as also explained in the excerpt, and only a believer who has already known the things of the Spirit (an unbeliever never has such knowledge) can commit this sin by rejecting Christ and hence, the Spirit of God that dwells in him. Take note that those that do same to Father, (like the sons of Israel), and to the Son(like the Pharisees) can still be forgiven because He would still die on the cross for their sins and they can receive the Spirit in their hearts but after this, whoever does it to the Spirit,(believers) have nothing left to hope on.

What Matthew 12:31-32 simply means ; Jesus never said the pharises have committed d sin against the Holy Spirit but He was teaching and cautioning them not to cause thats where what they said is drifting to. remember every word we speak has meaning in spirit.
Jesus not only came physically to save us from sin but also to show n teach us how to live right just like Him so God will be pleased.
Matthew 12:31-32 who ever causes d Holy Spirit dts God Himself directly , can not be forgiven dts why devil n his pple can not be forgiven ever. not in ds world or in d world to come. so pls brethren , dont ever cause God d Father else you can never b forgiven. If u cause Jesus Christ(God) sure you can b forgiven but not Almighty God d Father

chidifrank:
What Matthew 12:31-32 simply means ; Jesus never said the pharises have committed d sin against the Holy Spirit but He was teaching and cautioning them not to cause thats where what they said is drifting to. remember every word we speak has meaning in spirit.

Exactly! He never directly accused them of in fact blaspheming but He used the opportunity to teach His followers yet another commandment of the New Covenant.

chidifrank:
Jesus not only came physically to save us from sin but also to show n teach us how to live right just like Him so God will be pleased.
Matthew 12:31-32 who ever causes d Holy Spirit dts God Himself directly , can not be forgiven dts why devil n his pple can not be forgiven ever. not in ds world or in d world to come. so pls brethren , dont ever cause God d Father else you can never b forgiven. If u cause Jesus Christ(God) sure you can b forgiven but not Almighty God d Father

This has nothing to do with the unforgivable sin though. One ought to be careful to separate it in the way Jesus Christ did from all other sins that we commit. Recall that Jesus Christ never compared blasphemy of the kind He described to say the sin of Lust, or sin of hate of one's enemies. No, all the other sins are forgivable as long as one draws breath and is able to seek forgiveness, but blasphemy, according to Him, does not fit that bill... it is unforgivable i.e. the person who commits such a sin might as well have died the second after since there is no recourse.

Kobojunkie:
Exactly! He never directly accused them of in fact blaspheming but He used the opportunity to teach His followers yet another commandment of the New Covenant.
This has nothing to do with the unforgivable sin though. One ought to be careful to separate it in the way Jesus Christ did from all other sins that we commit. Recall that Jesus Christ never compared blasphemy of the kind He described to say the sin of Lust, or sin of hate of one's enemies. No, all the other sins are forgivable as long as one draws breath and is able to seek forgiveness, but blasphemy, according to Him, does not fit that bill... it is unforgivable i.e. the person who commits such a sin might as well have died the second after since there is no recourse.

Blasphemy Jesus Christ warned us abt is talking and referring only abt insulting God our Father (Holy Spirit) directly and that is unforgivable dts what most pple in d old testament did and they were not forgiven and saw d anger of God. Any other sin is forgiveable. but dont curse God to His face. You disobey your father but cursing your father to his face directly, mehnnn no be all father go take dt one .
feel free to throw more light. thanks

chidifrank:

Blasphemy Jesus Christ warned us abt is talking and referring only abt insulting God our Father (Holy Spirit) directly and that is unforgivable dts what most pple in d old testament did and they were not forgiven and saw d anger of God. Any other sin is forgiveable. but dont curse God to His face. You disobey your father but cursing your father to his face directly, mehnnn no be all father go take dt one .
feel free to throw more light. thanks

The Old Covenant blasphemy law is sin directed against God Himself. The penalty is death by stoning.

The New Covenant blasphemy law is sin directed against the Spirit of God Instead. According to Jesus Christ, you can curse God or Jesus Christ Himself, but a direct attack against the Spirit of God, that is what Is unforgivable and the penalty.. I believe Is death by the Spirit of God.

God is a merciful God and willing to forgive us all our sins so long as we ask Him. Now what would make God ever go back on His promise? What would make Him refuse to honor His own agreement with man? Nothing, right? Well, I also believee that those found guilty of the unforgivable since are also instantly snuffed out by the Spirit of God so they never get/have the chance to seek forgiveness for the sin committed.
God always keeps His word, He will always forgive those who seek His forgiveness - No sin is too great for Him to forgive.

[quote author=Finallydead post=95800652]

Hello,

When I read your comment last week, I felt some things weren’t right; nevertheless, I refrained from responding because I felt you did a good job in your exposition and no one can fault your conclusion. On the other hand, I was steered to read your comment again, and I was troubled; after pondering on your comment for a while, these were my concerns:

1. Your conclusion didn’t fit smoothly into the entire narrative of Matthew 12:38-42.

2. You envisaged how the passage may challenge the doctrine of eternal security, yet, your exposition with its conclusion have undertones contrary to the doctrine of eternal security. (I know it isn’t your intention to follow that path).

Regarding my first concern: The exchange between Jesus Christ and the Sanhedrin began with the latter’s request for a sign to prove the veracity of Jesus’ claim to be “The One”. He retorted with the narrative of two witnesses- Nineveh and The Queen of the South.

Does your conclusion, apostasy, apply to these foreign nations if they refused the testimony of Jonah and Solomon? Of course not. In all scriptures, only the people of God, His sanctified (a set apart people), can apostatize. But we know Nineveh and Ethiopia were heathen nations, so how could they apostatize?

You correctly submitted that the malicious sin of the Sanhedrin (in this text) was attributing Jesus‘ power to the power of the Lord of Flies, Baal. Blasphemy because they referred to the Holy Spirit as an evil spirit. If we stick strictly to the context, your submissions from the Book to the Hebrews shouldn’t be admitted. However, there is a fine thread that joins your submission with OP’s reference text - willful sin - willful rejection.

Nineveh, was a bustling coastal city (Nahum 2:; which had a booming economy from its marine trade (Nah.3:16). What could have made a city like this stand still for three days to listen to the proclamation of the word of the Lord than one reinforced by the magnitude of the sign of a man being vomited by a fish on its coast in broad daylight? The scriptures says: “Then the people of Nineveh believed in God; and they called a fast and put on sackcloth from the greatest to the least of them.” Perhaps, Nineveh ascribed to Jonah honour as one of their chief deities through the wonder they witnessed, and this paved way for the acceptance of Jonah’s proclamation.

With a minimal sign and the proclamation of a weakling, Nineveh was saved. Yet in Israel, where no man had ever done the miracles Christ did, many didn’t ascribe to Him honour as a deity (For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God) nor listen to Him as a messenger. Preceding the narrative, Jesus says: “Blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it." (Luke 11:28); so their “obedience or disobedience” or “holding fast or disregard” or “observation or lack of it” was the issue. (The word “Observe”, phulassō in Greek, has the following interpretations: to consider, to discern, to acknowledge, to guard, to maintain, to keep, etc.)

Regarding my second concern: You said the following:

The succeeding verses also confirm he referred to believers, the only people who could ever have been sanctified by the blood of the Son.

So what exactly is the willful sin? It is not just any sin a believer commits, of course. It is only the sin of apostasy- an outright turning back on faith in the Lord that one once held(which faith is the only means of salvation) i.e. when the believer no longer wants Jesus as his Lord

.

only a believer who has already known the things of the Spirit (an unbeliever never has such knowledge) can commit this sin by rejecting Christ and hence, the Spirit of God that dwells in him.

It is however very rare for a true believer to commit such a sin. It is noteworthy that the impossibility of redeeming such believers is not because God's mercy can ever be exhausted but because sin automatically hardens the conscience hence a believer who continues in sin to a certain point becomes totally hardened in heart and deceived by sin

In your comments regarding apostasy, you mentioned believers more than three times the number of times you did mention unbelievers; if it means you don’t believe in eternal security of the believer, then I should walk away because any response to refute eternal security would put paid to any further comment from me. But if you believe, your conclusion betrays you because you said: “hence a believer who continues in sin to a certain point becomes totally hardened in heart and deceived by sin“.

You referenced five verses from the Book to the Hebrews as opposed to three from other Books combined. However, it is the verses from the tenth chapter of the Book to the Hebrews that reinforced your conclusion. Therefore, I’d like to speak about your main references in a bid to correct a brother.

Finallydead, we know it is not in the will of man of man to save himself from sin; man’s willfulness not to be saved is according to his nature; So the will of man is not a case of saying “Yes” or “No”, it is a case of man perpetually saying “No”.

I’d like us to see what is “willful sin” means from an OT text:

He who is often rebuked and stiffens his neck will be destroyed suddenly, with no remedy. - Prov.29:1

This verse shows four things:

1. The obstinacy of the wicked.
2. The frequency of the rebuke, corrections and warnings the wicked often receives.
3. The futility of the reproof of the wicked right from inception. (See Psa.58:3-5)
4. His sudden, irreparable, wounding by God.

How does reproof come by to the wicked? through parents and friends, by magistrates and ministers, by the providence of God and by their own consciences, have had their sins set in order before them and fair warning given them of the consequences of them. Yet, all is in vain as they harden their heart. The Mikthtam of David likens them to a deaf cobra that stops up its ear, So that it does not hear the voice of charmers, Or a skillful caster of spells. The problem with this generation of vipers, the Scribes and Pharisees, is their rejection of God’s word, yet they spoke blasphemies. When they spoke blasphemous words, it was because (as Jesus said): “You brood of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak what is good? For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart. But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned."

The scriptures show that the heart of the wicked is the problem -it has not been regenerated or sanctified, and it is continuously unrighteous (Psa. 58:2): The wicked says: How have I hated instruction, and my heart despised reproof (Prov.5:12). This is in contrast to the heart of the righteous of whom it is written: the law of God is in his heart (Isa. 51.7); it pours out good things (Prov.15:28); He holds fast to righteousness (Job 27:6).

So how do these preambles relate to the intention of writer of Hebrews 10? If Paul is really the writer of the Book, he wouldn’t contradict himself in his writing to Titus: Reject a factious man after a first and second warning knowing that such a man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned.

We know that a factious man is a sectarian; Paul spoke exhaustively about such people in his epistles; in one place he wrote: Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ. The sectarians troubled Paul and the church with the propagation of another gospel -the circumcising of the flesh by the Gentiles, the place of the Law of Moses in the new covenant, and the place of ‘works’ (Col. 2:16) in our salvation, whose sole purpose was to nullify the Cross of Christ. The sectarians tried to divide the Israel of God along racial lines; teaching distinctions between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman. They taught things which they ought not;

In Paul’s anger, he said: But even if we (or an angel from heaven) should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be condemned to hell! :They were condemned for their blasphemies (falsehood) against the Cross of Christ. Then, at the height of their heresies, Paul and/or his Brother-in-Christ wrote to their brethren, the Hebrews.

It is worthy to note that the sectarians were Hebrews and weren’t persuaded by the new covenant (Heb.10:19-22); They did not hold fast to the confession of the hope in Christ, but wavered. (Heb.10:23); They didn’t recognize Christ as High Priest and always referred to the Mosaic order of things (Heb.10:1-4,18) for salvation; but most importantly, they disregarded the knowledge of the truth (Heb.10:26). In their unbelief, they afflicted those inclined to believing in Christ with their venom.

The Christian Hebrews had received the gospel from those who heard from the Lord directly (Heb.2:3); and those who heard from the Lord directly worked many wonders in attestation to their preaching (Heb.2:4). They had become dull of hearing and “had need of milk” -faith. The danger of their situation was this: Coldness was creeping in; there were signs that mistrust for their teachers was developing, and misgivings of their teaching grew, perhaps owing to the influences of the sectarians (13:17,18) which led them to be carried aside by strange teachings, forgetful of the teaching of those who first delivered to them the Word of God (8:17-19).

Therefore, the writer warned any ‘unbelieving person‘ with these words: Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God; lest there be any root of bitterness among them, or any profane person like Esau, having more respect to worldly advantages and sensual pleasures than the Holy blessings of the new covenant (3:12, 4:1, 12:16). It is clear that the one who apostatizes didn’t have any root in Christ, but was like Esau who found no place for repentance from sin.

It is clear that unbelief was the root cause of apostasy. In your writeup, Finallydead, you made the effect the cause (contrary to 3:12); you wrote: There is only one sin that can't be forgiven and it's not unbelief. It is not just any sin a believer commits, of course. It is only the sin of apostasy.

You were misled by your interpretation of the word “sanctify” in the tenth chapter -How much severer punishment ...blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified?

To be continued...

@Finallydead

<sup>NB: In case you're wondering why it's called blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, which hearing you may expect that someone curses the Holy Spirit.

So when he speaks of blasphemy of the Spirit, this meaning is maintained, as also explained in the excerpt, and only a believer who has already known the things of the Spirit (an unbeliever never has such knowledge) can commit this sin by rejecting Christ and hence, the Spirit of God that dwells in him. Take note that those that do the same to Father, (like the sons of Israel), and to the Son(like the Pharisees) can still be forgiven because He would still die on the cross for their sins and they can receive the Spirit in their hearts but after this, whoever does it to the Spirit,(believers) have nothing left to hope on</sup>.

Continuation:



"Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace. The just shall live by faith; But if anyone draws back, My soul has no pleasure in him.”But we are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who believe to the saving of the soul". - 10:26-29, 38-39.

I feel sad that I have to conclude this response with an exposition when I need not as the concluding paragraph of the chapter states unequivocally that a believer cannot apostatize. The writer states in clearly that we are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who believe to the saving of the soul.. Why? We are justified and kept by faith alone.

In the Pauline Epistles, Paul in the same doleful spirit as the writer of the Book to the Hebrews, writes to his siblings:

"As a matter of fact, my siblings, I could not talk to you as I talk to people who have the Spirit; I had to talk to you as though you belonged to this world".

Apostle Paul, when writing to the Gentiles, uses strong languages regarding the ceremonies of the Law, calling the receiving of them a falling from grace, and the preaching of another gospel (Gal. 5:4, 1:6). In the same vein, the writer of the Book of Hebrews presents to the believing Hebrews that entanglement in the ceremonies of the Law is a falling from grace (Heb.10:38).


I'd like to have a panoramic view of the subject of Hebrew 10 in hopes that I may arrive at the true meaning of the distinctive use of the word "sanctify" (in verse 29)- without ambiguity, and without falling into the peril of running contrary to true doctrine. While I do this, I have an eye on Jesus' saying: "for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me"; which tells me that anyone who has drunk the power of the Holy Spirit, the Sanhedrin blasphemed, can ne'er blaspheme the Lord.


The theme of this chapter centered around the fellowship of God with His people, Israel, through the sacrifices for sin; and the danger of the Hebrew believers' renouncement of the faith of Christ. Two words used (by the writer) to describe the purpose of the temple sacrifices for sin are: "purge" (9:14) and sanctify (2:11,10:10, 10:14,10:29 and 13:12).

Purge: In the first chapter, the term "purge" is used to describe the purification of sins (1:3); to describe how the blood of bulls sanctifies in reference to the purity of the flesh (9:22); to describe how much more (in contrast with the blood of bulls) the blood of Christ purifies their conscience from dead works (9:14).

Chapter 9:22 states that almost say all things according to the Law are purified with blood; for then would they (Old Testament sacrifices) not have ceased to be offered, because the worshippers once purified would have no more conscience of sins (10:2). Yet, not all who are born into the nation of Israel are truly members of God’s people! (Rom.9:6) even after the sacrifices.



From these passages in the Book, we see :

1. That what made purification necessary was sins, dead works, a conscience of sins etc - that is, sins of those in covenant -Israel, which obstructed the covenant fellowship of God with the people.

2. The medium through which purification of sins, evil conscience, heavenly things and their replicas, and the flesh, is accomplished is blood or sacrifice. (For those who think The blood of Jesus is a substance for pleading on roads, furniture, on people; it just means the Sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary for sins)

3. Remission of sins follows the sacrifice (10:18)

4. Genuine purification, whether of sins or the conscience or of heavenly things themselves, has been attained through the blood of Christ.

5. Purification, which one we the effect of the sacrifice, ensures the service of God is not interrupted.

When defilement is spoken of as adhering to the body, the conscience, or the heavenly things, or their replicas, by the sprinkling of blood purifies. However, under the two, purification is repeatedly done on the occasion of sin.

It should be recognized that in the first covenant, purification was performed (on the Day of Atonement) on behalf of all Israel, yet all people, though in covenant with God, were not sinless e.g Korah. Only sins against the covenant were followed by damnation. (I must not forget that daily offerings for sins were offered by individuals). The sins against the covenant had a bandwagon effect and the Book of Hebrews indicates the falling away from Grace back to the Law as having a bandwagon effect.

2. Sanctify: We know this word has quite a lot of meaning; they include: “to be or make holy”, “to consecrate”, “to dedicate“, “to purify”, or “to be hallowed”. I had written about how the objective of purification was to ensure that the service to God is uninterrupted (we see how the writer encourages the believers not to forsake the assembly of saints); however, it doesn’t suggest that the objective has been fully attained.

On the other hand, sanctify or “to sanctify” is to make a thing or person belong to God. To sanctify is to dedicate to God; to sanctify a people means to consecrate them as a worshipping people. Chapter 13:12 says, Jesus that He might sanctify the People through His blood... This verse shows that sanctification is a once and for all process.

When we look at chapter 10:29 and 9:13, we see an indication of:

1. Sanctification being spoken of when the covenant or people is paramount.

2. Blood or sacrifice is the means of purification.

3. Sanctification and purification are acts done once and for all.

4. The people of the new covenant have been truly sanctified to God through the Blood of Jesus.

Having said all these, the true meaning of the terms “purify” and “sanctify” as fitting the letter, are:

1. Purify: it doesn’t refer to the the moral state of the mind. It doesn’t mean to change the mind from a state of defilement to a state of purity. It bears upon the conscience or the sense of guilt.

2. Sanctification describes the bringing of the people into the relation with God as a worshipping people.

Just like I asserted in my first response, verse 26-31 shows that “Sin willfully” does not describe an act of sin, but a condition. The writer goes on to a supposition- “if we are (found) willful sinners i.e. apostates from the faith of Christ”. He ends with a correction for you -“But we are not of those drawing back to destruction, but of faith to the preserving of the soul.”

Unbelief after the revelation of the light of God and after interaction with the power that declares Christ, is the unforgivable sin, and it leads to apostasy.

Blasphemy is the sin of the unsaved

- Rev. Terry Anderson.

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened,, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 IF they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh,,,,, and put him to an open shame.

Hebrew 6:4-6

Bodydialect57:
"⁴For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened,, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
⁵And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
⁶IF they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh,,,,, and put him to an open shame".
- Hebrew 6:4-6

Not all the followers of Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ are disciples, saints and/or believers

Now regarding Hebrew 6:6 particularly, is this verse, speaking of someone who once truly received Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ and later fell away, or is it referring to one who never truly received Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, hmm?

Please give John 17:12 and John 18:9 considerations, when turning the above question around in your mind, lmso.

3 Wherefore I give you to understand,, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

1Corinthians 12:3

Finallydead:


Hi Body,
I trust you're good. Guess you're aware I've been off this platform for months and I'm just seeing this.

There is only one sin that can't be forgiven and it's not unbelief. Every unbeliever is guilty of unbelief before they believe and get forgiven of it, so unbelief is a forgivable sin. The unforgivable sin is that which once commited can never be forgiven as discussed in the excerpt of mine bottom of page.

NB: In case you're wondering why it's called blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, which hearing you may expect that someone curses the Holy Spirit. Actually, looking at the scene in your text in which the Lord mentioned it, blasphemy here conveys the meaning: a willful rejection even when truth is known.
The Pharisees blasphemed the Son because they knew it's only by the hand of God that a jew can perform signs and so they knew he was of God but they still rejected him and rather called it Baalzebub just because of what it would cost them to approve of the Lord's ministry. So the meaning of blasphemy here is a rejection in spite of knowledge of truth.
So when he speaks of blasphemy of the Spirit, this meaning is maintained, as also explained in the excerpt, and only a believer who has already known the things of the Spirit (an unbeliever never has such knowledge) can commit this sin by rejecting Christ and hence, the Spirit of God that dwells in him. Take note that those that do same to Father, (like the sons of Israel), and to the Son(like the Pharisees) can still be forgiven because He would still die on the cross for their sins and they can receive the Spirit in their hearts but after this, whoever does it to the Spirit,(believers) have nothing left to hope on.

Did Gehazi commit the unforgivable sin? Can what he did be termed unforgivable sin??

MuttleyLaff:
Not all the followers of Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ are disciples, saints and/or believers

Now regarding Hebrew 6:6 particularly, is this verse, speaking of someone who once truly received Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ and later fell away, or is it referring to one who never truly received Yahshua Ha Mashiach aka Jesus Christ, hmm?

Please give John 17:12 and John 18:9 considerations, when turning the above question around in your mind, lmso.

Bodydialect57:
Did Gehazi commit the unforgivable sin?
Can what he did be termed unforgivable sin??

"²⁰Gehazi, the servant of Elisha the man of God, said to himself, “My master was too easy on Naaman, this Aramean, by not accepting from him what he brought. As surely as the Lord lives, I will run after him and get something from him.”
²¹ So Gehazi hurried after Naaman. When Naaman saw him running toward him, he got down from the chariot to meet him. “Is everything all right?” he asked.
²²“Everything is all right,” Gehazi answered.
“My master sent me to say, ‘Two young men from the company of the prophets have just come to me from the hill country of Ephraim. Please give them a talent of silver and two sets of clothing.’”
²³“By all means, take two talents,” said Naaman. He urged Gehazi to accept them, and then tied up the two talents of silver in two bags, with two sets of clothing. He gave them to two of his servants, and they carried them ahead of Gehazi.
²⁴When Gehazi came to the hill, he took the things from the servants and put them away in the house.
He sent the men away and they left.
²⁵When he went in and stood before his master, Elisha asked him, “Where have you been, Gehazi?”
“Your servant didn’t go anywhere,” Gehazi answered.
²⁶But Elisha said to him, “Was not my spirit with you when the man got down from his chariot to meet you?
Is this the time to take money or to accept clothes—or olive groves and vineyards, or flocks and herds, or male and female slaves?
²⁷Naaman’s leprosy will cling to you and to your descendants forever.” Then Gehazi went from Elisha’s presence and his skin was leprous—it had become as white as snow."
- 2 Kings 5:20-27

How long is a piece of string? I rather would have: Did A&E commit the unforgivable sin? Can what A&E did be termed unforgivable sin?

If Apostle Peter lied three times while denying knowing Yahshua HaMashiah aka Jesus Christ and King David who was a killer and adulterer aren't deemed to have flouted Matthew 12:31-32, then, I dont see how Gehazi would have either, considering the fact that, Gehazi lied against a human being, and not the Holy Spirit. The human being's spirit he lied against witnessed the lie, and thus clearly, shows that there's no connect here in all this with Matthew 12:31-32.

MuttleyLaff:

"²⁰Gehazi, the servant of Elisha the ^{man of God, said to himself, “My master was too easy on Naaman, this Aramean, by not accepting from him what he brought. As surely as the Lord lives, I will run after him and get something from him.”
[sup]21} So Gehazi hurried after Naaman. When Naaman saw him running toward him, he got down from the chariot to meet him. “Is everything all right?” he asked.
²²“Everything is all right,” Gehazi answered.
“My master sent me to say, ‘Two young men from the company of the prophets have just come to me from the hill country of Ephraim. Please give them a talent of silver and two sets of clothing.’”
²³“By all means, take two talents,” said Naaman. He urged Gehazi to accept them, and then tied up the two talents of silver in two bags, with two sets of clothing. He gave them to two of his servants, and they carried them ahead of Gehazi.
²⁴When Gehazi came to the hill, he took the things from the servants and put them away in the house.
He sent the men away and they left.
²⁵When he went in and stood before his master, Elisha asked him, “Where have you been, Gehazi?”
“Your servant didn’t go anywhere,” Gehazi answered.
²⁶But Elisha said to him, “Was not my spirit with you when the man got down from his chariot to meet you?
Is this the time to take money or to accept clothes—or olive groves and vineyards, or flocks and herds, or male and female slaves?
²⁷Naaman’s leprosy will cling to you and to your descendants forever.” Then Gehazi went from Elisha’s presence and his skin was leprous—it had become as white as snow."
- 2 Kings 5:20-27

<sup>How long is a piece of string? I rather would have: Did A&E commit the unforgivable sin? Can what A&E did be termed unforgivable sin?

If King David who was a killer and adulterer has flouted Matthew 12:31-32, I dont see how Gehazi would have. Besides, Gehazi lied against a human being, not the Holy Spirit and the human being's spirit he lied against witnessed the lie. Clearly, there's no connect here in all this with Matthew 12:31-32.</sup>[/sup]

What’s up? What was Gehazi’s sin? You said he lied against man; did Ananias and Sapphira not lie against man, though from the Apostle’s reaction, it is made known that they lied against the Holy Spirit?

Acehart:
What’s up? What was Gehazi’s sin?

Gehazi’s sin was covetousness.

Acehart:
You said he lied against man; did Ananias and Sapphira not lie against man, though from the Apostle’s reaction, it is made known that they lied against the Holy Spirit?

Prophet Elisha, said his spirit was present when Gehazi lied. He didnt say Gehazi blasphemed or lied against the Holy Spirit, but Apostle Peter specified what really transpired between Ananias and Sapphira in regards with the Holy Spirit