Here’s my longer sermon notes from this morning’s Metro Christian Centre service (dated 26th Nov. 2023), session nine in our series on the Holy Spirit.
Due to the topic, these notes are much longer than what I shared this morning and go on to give a context to this particular verse. I hope these words help to understand what this verse is not saying and what it is saying.
You can also catch up with this via MCC’s YouTube channel (just give us time to get the video uploaded).
‘Deliver us from all ignorance and forgetfulness and hard-hearted insensitivity’—Sergius Bulgakov[i]
‘Never free, never me | So I dub thee “Unforgiven”.’—Metallica[ii]
READ: MATT 12:15-34 (CEV)
(NB: parallel passages can be found in Mark 3:28-29, and Luke 12:10)
‘”I tell you any sinful thing you do or say can be forgiven. Even if you speak against the Son of Man, you can be forgiven. But if you speak against the Holy Spirit, you can never be forgiven, either in this life or in the life to come.”’ (Matt 12:31-32, CEV)
THE CUTTING-ROOM FLOOR
Whenever a movie is filmed, hours of footage ends up on the ‘cutting room’ floor. It’s not just bad takes, where actors messed up their lines or a mobile phone rings in the middle of a historical drama. Often, the problem is time. A director has to make a 2hr long movie for the cinemas, but they have 3hrs of film. So cuts are made; scenes are clipped, conversations are snipped.
Occasionally, though, after the cinematic release, a ‘director’s cut’ is released on DVD or Blu-Ray, where the cut scenes are put back in. Peter Jackson’s extended edition of The Lord of the Rings trilogy, for example, is 12 hrs long in total! The perfect length for a Tolkien geek like me, whenever there’s a duvet day.
I want you to know that this thirteen-week long series on the Holy Spirit is not long enough. As I was planning this series, unexplored places and unspoken conversations have ended up on the cutting room floor, so to speak. It was nothing personal. I was trying to avoid a twenty-six-week long series becoming a year-long series.
As a sneak peek at the director’s cut: On my cutting-room floor was 2 Corinthians 5:5, where Paul reminds his audience about the resurrection, the renewal of creation; that God’s ultimate plan is not that we remain dead and disembodied, but that we will live again—re-embodied. Paul, in 2 Cor. 5:5, says that the Holy Spirit, with us now, is a guarantee of that future end goal of God’s. The Holy Spirit is the assurance of the resurrection to come.
There is also a closer look at the episode where Simeon meets an eight-day old Jesus (Lk. 2:25-35), on my cutting-room floor. Simeon starts praising God in a spontaneous way, but his words are not spontaneous. The Spirit isn’t helping him conjure nice phrases out of thin air. The words flowing from Simeon’s mouth are from the book of Isaiah—words Simeon must have read on a regular basis and would know intimately, and the Spirit is bringing these familiar words to the forefront of Simeon’s scripture-soaked mind, helping Simeon to see their fulfilment in Jesus.
There’s a similar situation like this in the passage we’ve just read, as Matthew also picks up a cluster of Isaiah’s words and helps his audience see Jesus in them.
These scenes would have been a nice springboard into talking about the relationship between the Spirit and the Scriptures.[iii]
But both of these topics (resurrection, and the Spirit and the Bible) require more than a slot in a series. They deserve a series of their own. And I’m not sure I am able to convey either of them in a helpful way yet. So, they are on the cutting room floor … for now.
To be completely honest with you, as I have wrestled with this week’s passage (the verses above), I have been very, very tempted to chuck it on the cutting-room floor, too.
This is a scary verse. Not only is it scary, but, as I have plunged into this verse over the past couple of weeks, trying to get my head around it and how it has been understood, I don’t think I have ever experienced a headache like this verse has caused.
Earlier on in this week, I thought, ‘Forget it. I’ll talk about 2 Cor. 5:5 instead! No one will know.’
I don’t want to skip this verse, however. Both pastorally and personally, this verse has caused tremendous anxiety. People have used it to inflict harm on others. More than this, I have met, and still know people who feel they have committed the ‘unforgivable sin’ (as it is known), and feel that God has hardened his heart towards them, and will not forgive them, and that God has flung them onto the cutting room floor.
This verse has haunted people, understandings of it have locked them in cages of guilt, enforcing a view that says, ‘It’s not that God can’t forgive you, but that God will not forgive you.’
When you hold to such a view, all it does is drive you deeper into a place of darkness and despair, as we shrink deeper into a cage of guilt.
If you have done something you feel is unforgivable, and you feel you can’t turn to God, then you where can you go? You may end up seeking solace in the very thing you feel guilty about, numbing the pain by repeating the act. You may even think, ‘I might as well carry on, it’s too late anyway.’ Then, afterwards, you feel doubly ‘unforgivable’, even guiltier, even more wretched, and in feeling God has forsaken you, you repeat the process… It’s a vicious cycle.
It’s not just a religious experience. People who work with those struggling with addiction have observed the same cycle. No addict wants to be an addict. The addiction entices, ensnares and it condemns—they feel it to their core every time they use. But at the same time, they feel the addiction is the only thing that truly understands—the only embrace they’ll receive, the only escape offered.
I refuse to believe that God has intentionally locked anybody in such a repetitive, destructive loop, withholding an escape from us. If this is the case, than God would be as culpable of our sins as we are.
Rather, the good news we are commanded to preach is that there is forgiveness of sins in Jesus Christ (Lk. 24:47). In Christ, God has come to set prisoners free from the captivity of sin and death!
God isn’t treble bolting the door from the inside, keeping us out. God is breaking the door down, busting the locks, tying up the ‘strong man’, the enemy of our souls, and breaking the chains of the captives, calling them to follow him out of the gloom. In Christ, God is plundering Satan, as Jesus makes clear in what we have just read.
In Jesus, there is light for those who sit in darkness! In Jesus, there are new beginnings! In Jesus, there is hope!
“The Lord our God is merciful and forgiving, even though we have rebelled against him.” (Dan. 9:9, NIV)
“As far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.” (Ps. 103:9, NIV)
“In [Jesus] we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace.” (Eph. 1:7, NIV)
“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (1 Jn. 1:9, NIV)
“For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin. Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.” (Heb. 4:15-16, NIV)
I want you know, before we go any further, just in case you fall asleep, that God has not hardened his heart toward anyone. Rather, through the outpouring of his Spirit, as we have already seen in this series, God’s desire is to renovate our hearts of stone into hearts of flesh (Ez. 11:19).
You are not on the cutting room floor, regardless of how terrible you feel you are, or how little you feel you have to offer.
As the famous D. L. Moody apparently said it, ‘many people want to bring their faith, their works, their good deeds to [God] for salvation. Bring your sins, and He will bear them away into the wilderness of forgetfulness….’
Christ is God’s forgiveness embodied toward you. So take hold of that crucified and risen body, keep eating that living bread, keep drinking that living water, and it will refresh, it will reform and it will revitalise you.
God has not condemned you to imprisonment. God has condemned you to resurrection. ‘So wake up, O sleeper. Rise from the dead, and let the light of Christ shine upon you.’ (Eph. 5:14)
SHOT BLASTING…
Of course, having said all that, there’s still this verse!
In a series of the Holy Spirit, I think this is an important verse to look at. But what do we do with this idea of ‘speaking against’, or ‘blaspheming’, the Holy Spirit? How are we to understand this in light of everything else?
Is there something that is unforgivable?
I’m asking, because, to be perfectly frank, I don’t know. I thought I knew. But the more I have studied this passage the more confused I have become. I’m just being honest.
I want to ask two things of you as we continue:
Firstly, please stay awake for what follows.
Secondly, please forgive me. I’m not going to answer the question this morning—I will fail where many greater than me have failed. But, I simply want to share with you my wrestles with this text, as one sibling to his other siblings, in the hope that I can be helpful in showing what this verse cannot mean.
There’s a statue in my hometown of Bolton that was covered in moss, mould and pigeon dung. So much so, that you couldn’t really see what the statue was. The general shape was there, but its details were lost and buried beneath a century’s worth of muck. A few years ago, someone finally took a shot blaster to it, and now it’s no longer an eyesore.
Although I don’t know how to respond to Jesus’ words, I hope that, in wrestling with this, we can at least shot blast off some of the muck that has clung to this verse, and make it less of an eye sore.
There is an enormous diversity of opinion about the interpretation of the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. So we’ll do this a layer at a time.
LAYER 1: REALLY BAD SINS
Possibly the worst interpretation of this text is to say that blasphemy of the Spirit is ‘really bad sins’.
I’m not sure when the list of what those really bad sins was first compiled, or what the criteria was for a really bad sin, or who gets to decide that criteria, because the list can vary, depending on who compiles it. The list sometimes includes things like murder and adultery; for some, its abortion and suicide; in other versions of the list, it also includes denying Jesus when facing persecution.
If there was a layer of interpretation to be likened to pigeon poo, this is it.
Firstly, none of these things are mentioned or happen in the context Jesus is speaking to. The Pharisees and religious leaders Jesus is addressing aren’t accused of any of these things. We’ll come back to the context later.
Secondly, if this were to be true, and these sins were unforgivable, then what do we do with the examples, both in the Old and New Testaments, when God forgives these very things?
Peter denied Jesus three times and Jesus forgave him (Jn. 18:15-18, 25-27; 21:15-19). Paul refers to himself as the ‘chief of sinners’ because he was a violent man who persecuted the church (1 Tim. 1:13). Jesus forgave the woman caught in adultery… Moses was killer turned deliver…
We could go on.
David would be the biggest culprit on most lists: He commits adultery with Bathsheba (2 Sam. 11-12). Bathsheba is a victim in it all, by the way. Nathan, the prophet, describes her as being like a lamb who is forcefully taken. So this is rape, as well as adultery. David then has Bathsheba’s husband, Uriah, murdered, in an attempt to cover it all up when he discovers Bathsheba is pregnant. And then, with the trauma of it all, Bathsheba loses the baby.
It’s a horrible story of deepening darkness.
If God doesn’t forgive, David’s prayer of repentance, his request to be washed clean, what we know as Psalm 51, was just a waste of time.
Furthermore, if it’s about big sins, Jesus’ own words on the cross, as violent and abusive hands take hold of his lamb-likeness and crucify him—‘Father, forgive them…’—are also a waste of breath (Lk. 23:34).[iv]
It could be this list has arisen because, as we have seen in this series, The Spirit, rûah, in Hebrew (wind, or breath), is life itself. Therefore, the unforgivable sin is said to be anything that is a ‘crime against life itself.’[v] Yet, God forgives these things—even as they are done to God incarnate.
Don’t misunderstand, these things are serious. Absolutely. We are all aware of the avalanche of consequences, pain and trauma that these things involve and lead to.
It’s not that God gives a ‘thumbs up’ to murder, or writes a permission slip to sin. This is why I disagree with the term often applied to this verse: the ‘unpardonable sin’. God never ‘pardons’ sin, if we believe ‘pardoning’ to mean that God calls what was evil, good. Throughout the Bible, God speaks against crimes against humanity, crimes against life. Also, when God asks us to forgive others, he not asking us to call wrong, right, or evil, good. It’s about resisting the temptation to deepen the wounds, resisting evil with good.
When God forgives, it’s God acting to heal.
As the Scottish minister and writer, George MacDonald explains, ‘All sin is unpardonable. There is no compromise to be made with it. We shall not come out except clean…’[vi]
God desires to liberate us from the cage Sin entombs us within. Sin stunts us, and out world, from growing into all it should be. It robs us of freedom while pretending to promise freedom. Sin prevents us, and others, from enjoying this gift of life to its fullest, as we act against our own best interests. When we sin, we hurt ourselves—we’re not hurting God (Jer. 7:19). We don’t have the power to do that.
Yet, God stands ready to cleanse us, forgive us, and restore us. As Isaiah says it, ‘“Though your sins are like scarlet | I will make them as white as snow. | Though they are red like crimson, |I will make them as white as wool.”’ (Isa. 1:18, NLT)
As I said before, God does not condemn us to wear dirty clothes for life and to be repeat offenders. God offers us hope and new life. ‘Really bad sins’ are not ‘blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.’
LAYER 2: SAYING THE WRONG THING
A popular view in the early church, and still today, was that the ‘unforgivable sin’ was to say anything at all that would be incorrect or inadequate about the Holy Spirit, because Jesus talks about speaking against the Holy Spirit.
According to Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315– c. 387), for example, ‘A man must often fear to say, either from ignorance or assumed reverence, what is improper about the Holy Spirit, and thereby come under this condemnation.’[vii]
In other words, say one wrong word about the Spirit—have one wrong idea about who or what the Spirit is—that’s it, game over.
Watching what you say, thinking before you speak, is always good advice, generally. But really, is this that?
In earlier circles to Cyril, around the early second century, to even doubt or question that something was of the Spirit, would be seen as speaking against the Spirit. The earliest reference to the ‘unforgivable sin’ outside the New Testament occurs in a text called the Didache, which says, ‘do not test or evaluate any prophet who speaks in the spirit, for every sin will be forgiven, but this sin will not be forgiven.’[viii]
This can’t be right, either.
Firstly, the New Testament instructs us to test the spirits (1 John 4:1-5). Yes, don’t quench the Spirit, and don’t scoff at prophecies, but we’re told test and examine everything (1 Thess. 5:19). Even one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is the gift of discernment (1 Cor. 12:10)—the Spirit equips us to test whether it is the Spirit or not the Spirit. Both the Old and New testaments regularly talk about false prophets, and how deceptive Satan can be.
It’s right to question! Don’t just believe everything you hear or see. Test it!
Secondly, many of us, myself included, have held wrong ideas about the Spirit of God. As we mature, as we learn, our understanding changes. If we are written off for holding one, even momentary, wrong idea about the Holy Spirit (like whether it is an ‘it’ instead of person, or whether it should be Ghost or Spirit), then none of us haved passed.
Additionally, as we have learnt over the past couple of weeks, isn’t it the Spirit’s job to teach us truth (Jn. 16:5-15)? The Spirit itself takes you and me on the journey towards understanding. The Spirit instructs us in our error, guiding us and convicting us when needed. The Spirit is more like a driving instructor, than a driving examiner—he’s not out to fail us, but to perfect us.
So if you’re worried that you’re now on the cutting room floor for saying the wrong thing, don’t be. This is not that. Just keep listening to the Spirit, stay on the journey.
LAYER 3: BLASPHEMY
Another layer of thinking close to ‘saying the wrong thing’ is outright blasphemy: slandering God; misrepresenting God; speaking evil of God; complaining about God; rebelling against God.
Personally, I hope it is not this, because as a teenager who didn’t believe in God, I called God some horrible things, using some horrible words. Even thirteen years ago, when I had my breakdown and I thought God had failed me, I said some pretty horrible things toward God.
Biblically speaking, though, it can’t be this. In a nutshell, the prophets of Israel constantly challenged Israel on their misrepresentation of God and their rebellion, and their prophetic call was that Israel should return to God, that God wished to wash them clean and give them a new heart. Throughout the scriptures, God turns rebels in worshippers.[ix]
Not only this, but the writers of Psalms, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Job … to name a few, levy some harsh words and accusations at God. Some of my breakdown words came from their rants. Are these biblical writers on the cutting-room floor? And what does this mean for you and me when we read those scriptural words out loud? Although, many of the OT writers directed accusations at God, they were not abandoned by Him for their outbursts
Furthermore, Paul, the writer of most of the New Testament, the big preacher of the grace of God shown in Jesus, confesses, as he admits to being the chief of sinners, that he blasphemed the name of Christ. But, as he goes on to say, ‘This is a trustworthy saying, and everyone should accept it: “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners”—and I am the worst of them all. But God had mercy on me so that Christ Jesus could use me as a prime example of his great patience with even the worst sinners. Then others will realize that they, too, can believe in him and receive eternal life.’ (1 Tim. 1:15-16, NLT)
So if you’re worried about this being that, don’t be. The name you’ve slandered, is still the name you can call on and put your trust in.
LAYER 4: DEITY DENYING
Another connected layer, was to see this as speaking against the Deity of Jesus—the unbelief that Jesus is a part of the Godhead.
This came about as a way of making sense of this strange thing about how you can speak against the Son of Man (the Messiah) and you’ll be forgiven, but not if you speak against the Holy Spirit.
After discussing the Trinity the other week, what does this mean? Can I speak against a third of God, but not another third? And what about the Father?
The view seems to have started with Athanasius (c. 296–373), who understood this strange saying to mean that to speak against Jesus’ humanity was forgivable, but to deny his divinity would never be forgiven.[x]
Athanasius was not saying we can disregard Jesus’ humanity. Definitely not. He wrote an amazing book called On The Incarnation, showing how crucial to faith and how powerful it is that God became human, that God took on our flesh, that God became one of us. Athanasius was a huge defender of Jesus being fully God and fully man.[xi]
What he was saying, though, is that you can understand misunderstanding a human messenger. If Jesus did no miracles, and just became a human going around saying he was God, you can appreciate people questioning that, thinking he was crazy. Any man going around claiming to be God would be treated with suspicion, even today. I think that would be a sane response for anybody. However, if a human came and did things humans cannot do, things clearly only the power of God could do, while claiming to be God, then this is harder to deny.
Now, on a plus side, I think this comes close to what happens in this story. These particular Pharisees see what Jesus is doing—something only God could do—but they don’t believe he is who he says he is.
But, I have a huge problem with this. These Pharisees wouldn’t be the only ones who struggled to grasp that Jesus was God in flesh. His own disciples struggled, too!
In John 14, one of Jesus’ disciples come to him and asks for Jesus to show him the Father—show us God. To which Jesus replies, ‘Phillip, don’t you know who I am, even after all this time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the father… Believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me. Or at least believe because of what you have seem me do.’ (Jn. 14:8-11)
Notice that Jesus does not say, ‘Phillip, sorry pal, you’ve just blown it.’
Shortly after this scene, Thomas asks to stick his fingers into the open wound of Jesus’ resurrected body (Jn. 20:24-29). Thomas, too, had issues grasping the scale of what was happening and what it all meant. But Jesus doesn’t dismiss him, saying Thomas is unforgivable. Rather, Jesus encourages him to plunge his doubting digits into his wounds and believe.
There are many more examples. We could again, go back to Paul who violently opposed the claims that the followers of Jesus were making about Jesus. Even in my own story, there was a time when I did not believe that Jesus Christ was God. If this is unforgivable, eternally unforgivable, then why am I here following Jesus?
I want to encourage you, today. If you’re questioning whether Jesus is God or not, then I want you to know you are not unforgivable. Don’t think God has labelled you with a ‘no hope’ sticker. Instead, follow Jesus’ invitation and stick your doubting digits into him; allow Him to show you He is God.
So, even though it is a good theory, that rightly makes sense of something cryptic, it cannot be this. I still have to ask why did these particular Pharisees and scribes get this unique response while those who spent more time with Jesus, and really, should have known better, got a more compassionate response?
Which brings us to the last layer …
LAYER 5: IMPENITENCE
The most popular understanding of this verse is to read it as Jesus describing a hardened heart against God.
It was the African theologian, Augustine who seems to have kick started this view, in his sermon on Matthew 12.[xii] In short, Augustine reasoned that many people who made sacrilegious statements about the Holy Spirit, and who committed some horrible things, etc., later came to be forgiven and followed Jesus, so this cannot be what Matthew 12:32 was about. The blasphemy against the Spirit must be a special and specific thing. And since all sins are forgiven when one receives the gift of the Holy Spirit, the ‘blasphemy against the Spirit’ for which there is no forgiveness must be impenitence, an unwillingness to receive the forgiveness offered to us by God, in Jesus.
It’s been tweaked through the years, extra clauses have been stuck on here and there by various schools of thought, but, this view is still, by far, the general consensus. A view held by infernalists and universalists of old and new alike.
Karl Barth writes, ‘To wish to withstand the Holy Spirit would be the one unforgivable sin.’[xiii]
George MacDonald, wrote, ‘[this sin] lies in shutting out God from his [gracious] influences upon the man …. Without the Spirit to witness with his Spirit, no man could know himself forgiven, even if God appeared to him and said so… If the Spirit of God is shut out from his heart, how is he to become better?’[xiv]
Two similar views, from two very different poles. But in both, there’s this sense that we can close our eyes to the light of God. To close your eyes does not mean that the light has gone out, but it is to put out one’s sight.
Of course, we have to understand this unwillingness. No one who holds to this view is claiming that it is a matter of us struggling to grasp God forgiveness. We have all struggled with guilt, at some point. Even as Christians! We have all struggled to grasp how God could forgive us.
This unwillingness is not our struggle to grasp the depth, height, breadth and length of God’s love.
There is a world of difference in not wanting to be forgiven because we don’t feel we should be forgiven, and not wanting to be forgiven because we don’t feel we should need to be forgiven.
One’s about worthiness (I have often thought that I am not worthy). The others about Lordship.
As many commentators note, the context here is not one of doubt, it’s one of enmity. How can you receive forgiveness if you, in hostile resistance, push away the means of God reaching out to you? It’s like trying to quench your thirst while refusing to drink.
Actually, its saying you’re not thirsty in the first place. ‘I have no need of that.’[xv]
I’ll be honest. I’m sympathetic to this view. The writer of Hebrews warns against being deceived by sin and hardening our hearts against God (Heb. 3:13). Jeremiah, speaking to Israel on God’s behest, tells them that they have done two things: they have rejected the fountain of living water that is God, and dug for themselves broken cisterns that contain no water at all (Jer. 2:13). In Acts 7, Stephen, full of the Spirit and retelling the story of Israel, pleads with his countrymen to stop resisting the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51).
Again, I’m very sympathetic to this view. However, is this what Jesus is addressing is this passage?
Don’t misunderstand; there is no other name through which we are saved. Personally, I don’t want to harden my heart against God’s Spirit. I want, and I want others to want, an open heart to what the Spirit wants to do in us; a heart that enthrones Jesus Christ as Lord.
But I also believe God can take hearts of stone and transform them into hearts of flesh.
As much as I like this perspective, is this passage addressing a hardened heart? Is this the sin these Pharisees are committing? Is Jesus merely championing what we already know; that the Spirit is God’s means of imparting His presence and forgiveness toward us and within us? If so, does this mean that what Jesus says is ‘unforgivable’ isn’t really ‘unforgivable’, it’s just a figure of speech?
Again, prior to this past couple of weeks, I would have said, ‘yes’. But now, I don’t know. I don’t believe it’s wrong to admit that.
THE END?
I did not promise any answers.
Admittedly, this may make me a terrible pastor, and a terrible Christian. However, by wrestling with this, openly before you, I hope—I really do hope—that for those of us who are anxious that we have committed the ‘unforgivable’—who think they are beyond hope and that God has slammed the door in their faces, condemning us to sin forever—I hope you can see that this is not the case.
God did not send his Son into the world to condemn it, but to save it! (Jn. 3:17)
Even in this text, is Jesus slamming the door in the face of these religious leaders? Or, in saying these words, is it not more likely that Jesus is still throwing out a lifeline?
It would be wrong to park up our theology and ideas at this verse and not continue reading.
Shortly after this scene, some leaders come back to Jesus, asking for a sign in order to believe that he is from God (Matt. 12:38-41). Jesus replies, saying only a faithless generation would ask for a miraculous sign. It doesn’t sound like a helping hand, does it?
But Jesus does not deny them a sign. He goes on to say that the only sign they will have—the only sign that really matters—is similar to what happened to Jonah. Jesus will be in the belly of the earth for three nights, and then he will rise.
Even here, Jesus holds out to them his own death and resurrection. It’s not game over for them.
As Peter, filled with the Spirit in Acts 2 and 3, says to those who ‘killed the author of life’ (Acts 3:15), God raised him up, by the Spirit (Rom. 6:10) showing Jesus to be speaking the truth. So when Peter, preaching to his fellow Jews, holds out Jesus’ death and resurrection, he says, ‘change your mind (repent), believe, and receive the refreshment that comes from the Spirit (Acts 2:36-40; 3:17-26).
Peter does not add any ‘buts’ or ‘clauses’ to this. There’s no, ‘unless you were one of these Pharisees or religious leaders who on such a date, said such a thing…’
This offer is to everybody, everywhere. It still is.
I know I’ve not been helpful with this text. Forgive me. There is more to follow about the context of this passage that may help, should you wish to read on.
But, please here me when I say this: no one here is unforgivable.
The Spirit is not saying ‘get out’ to anybody. The Spirit is saying ‘Come. If you are thirsty, come—anyone who wants to, come. Come and drink the water of life without charge.’ (Rev. 22:17)
‘If you, Lord, kept a record of sins, | Lord, who could stand? |But with you there is forgiveness, |so that we can, with reverence, serve you.’—Psalm 130:3-4 (NIV)
JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE…
For those who wish to read a little further…
We have certainly not exhausted the options of how to understand this verse.[xvi]
Leaving alternate views behind, let’s look at the text.
If we look at Mark’s comment on this scene within his gospel, the verdict on what this sin is is clear. Mark 3:30 states that Jesus said this ‘because [the leaders] were saying, “He has an impure spirit.”’.
Boom, there it is.
As John Wesley described, ‘Is it not astonishing, that men who have ever read these words should doubt what is blasphemy against the Holy Ghost: Can any words declare more plainly, that it is ascribing those miracles to the power of the devil which Christ wrought by the power of the Holy Ghost.’[xvii]
In plainer English, speaking a word against the Spirit, or blaspheming the Holy Spirit, means attributing the power in Jesus to the Devil rather than to the Spirit. The religious leaders claimed that the source of Jesus’ power was ‘the Lord of dung’ (Beelzebul).
Whether this can still be committed, outside of the historical context of the incarnation, is still a matter of debate among scholars and lay people alike.
But, stating what this sin is, is only part of the conundrum. Why have the Pharisees been charged with risking this sin?
This charge against Jesus’ power was not some slip of the tongue, or done without better knowledge. As Jesus’ response to the leaders shows, their conclusion was not some mere mistake of reasoning, or an accusation from well-intentioned men arguing a different perspective. It was an illogical and ridiculous denial of the obvious. Their charge was done with the obvious intent to malign Jesus’ character and ministry.
It is also important to remember who they were. They were religious leaders, not the general public, and they were using their influence over people to damage Jesus’ reputation.
To put it another way, they were declaring to people that the water Jesus was offering was poisonous. And if you believe the water is poisoned then you won’t drink from it.
At this point, you may be tempted to name people today who misjudge Jesus or speak against him. But this is not that. Jesus, physically speaking, is not here today as he was in the incarnation. It is understandable that people want proof, that people want to be convinced, that apologetics takes place. Additionally, even in the New Testament accounts, as the disciples continued to do miracles, they never levied this charge against anyone. As mentioned above, it’s not wrong to question the miraculous, either—false “miracles” can and do take place. Additionally, with the atrocities that have sadly been carried out in Jesus’ name, it’s reasonable that people wonder how ‘good’ he is. Not because Jesus isn’t good, but because our human filters are far from perfect.
Centuries ago, Europeans thought tomatoes were poisonous. The wealthy, who could afford to eat this import from South America, were keeling over due to eating tomatoes. They even earned the nickname of ‘the poison apple’. If you’re wondering if the tomatoes we eat today are any different to back then, they are not. But yes, you’re right, we’re not keeling over. So what happened? People eventually realised that the tomatoes were not at fault. It was the pewter plates they were being served on: the acidity of the tomatoes reacted with the pewter, absorbing the poison, which was then digested by those rich enough to eat from a pewter plate.
Jesus is good. He is hope. But, we have, maybe too often, served Jesus up on a pewter plate to the world around us. People have a right to investigate our claims to Jesus being a healer in the midst of the harm we have done, and a prince of peace in light of the wars we have waged.
Again, this is not that.
The context in Matthew 12 is historically unique—here is Jesus, physically present in front of these leaders, doing observable, undeniable good through the power of the Spirit, and they are saying that he is a bad tree.
Why are they doing this?
Well, maybe there is a larger context here.
If you pick up any commentary on Matthew that deals with its themes, you’ll discover that Matthew gives plenty of nods to the Exodus story within his gospel. Here is not the place for that survey. But, in short, the Exodus is the template for forgiveness, liberation and freedom from captivity.
In the Exodus story, there is the Pharaoh; another leader who hardens his heart against God (Ex. 8:19). Or, is it that God hardens Pharaoh’s heart? That’s another debate that has caused many heads to be scratched.
What is important for now is, the more ‘the finger of God’ works his wonders through Moses, the deliverer of God’s people, the harder the Pharaoh’s heart becomes to recognising the power of God. It’s not that Pharaoh does not recognise God’s power. It’s undeniable. Rather, he just won’t yield to it.
Why? Because Pharaoh is committed, resolutely dedicated—infatuated, even—with the glory of the kingdom of Egypt; an Egypt he rules, were he is the expert on all things divine, and where the people are his and not Israel’s God.
In the Exodus narrative, God is determined to liberate his people, and flip the social order. And the more that Pharaoh resists, narratively speaking, the more we anticipate a decisive act of God to bring liberation. Eventually, the events hit a crescendo, and God’s mighty act to save is revealed to the world.
How are the brain cells? Anything sparking yet?
The Exodus story is a microcosm of humanity’s own story; a precursor of our rescue from the bondage to sin and death. Jesus is the great deliver—greater than Moses. And his Exodus is for all humanity—including Israel. Just like Pharaoh wouldn’t let the people go to worship, these particular leaders (I must stress, not all of the leaders) did not want to lose their authority over the people, releasing the people to the freedom Jesus was providing. They were not happy that the crowds were going after Jesus. They, instead, are attempting to scatter the people. Preferring to scatter over seeing them gathered under Jesus’ leadership.
In short, they want to keep their crowns, and seats of power—the very seats and crowns Jesus is destabilizing.
In the unfolding story of Matthew, the resistance of the Pharisees and scribes is a sign, amping up our expectation that God is going to decisively act. And, as Jesus goes on to point out, a few verses later in Matthew 12, that act, that decisive sign of judgement, would be his own death and resurrection.
Of course, Jesus wants to gather these leaders, too. His challenge to them, in Matthew 12, is also his summons and invitation to follow. ‘Follow me,’ he is saying, ‘to freedom and liberty in the new age that is coming.’ But, to do so means these leaders laying down their authority and casting their crowns before Jesus. Will they be like Pharaoh? Or, will they be like the people who followed Moses?
As Eugene Peterson words this verse, ‘“There’s nothing done or said that can’t be forgiven. But if you deliberately persist in your slanders against God’s Spirit, you are repudiating the very One who forgives. If you reject the Son of Man out of some misunderstanding, the Holy Spirit can forgive you, but when you reject the Holy Spirit, you’re sawing off the branch on which you’re sitting, severing by your own perversity all connection with the One who forgives.”’
‘If you want liberty, follow me,’ Jesus is saying. ‘If you wish to remain in Egypt, to remain in the old age and refuse to step in the new, then keep doing what you’re doing.’
You cannot have old kingdom positions in the new kingdom. You can’t even have them in the old, because the old is being replaced, and the old structures will not be present within the new.
I hope this helps, in some way?
Again, to repeat what has already been said, the context in Matthew 12 is not our context today. We are on the other side of this story. Redemption has dawned and the table has been set.
You have not been declared as unforgivable. Rather, you are invited to come and join the feast of the Lamb. You are invited to partake in the Passover Lamb. So come, embrace the Kingdom of God, take your place at His table, step out of darkness and into the light.
[i] Sergius Bulgakov, Spiritual Diary, entry for 7.11.1925
[ii] Metallica, The Unforgiven, Track 4 on the album Metallica (aka, the Black Album)
[iii] Especially as, in the history of the church, there has been an ongoing struggle against two wrong extremes: Have the scriptures and neglect the Spirit, and having the Spirit and neglecting the scriptures.
[iv] You may respond, ‘but they didn’t know what they were doing.’ But, in what sense? They didn’t accidentally slip and accidently hit the nail through Jesus’ hand. They didn’t ‘accidently’ scourge Jesus with whips. Those involved intended to crucify an innocent man. They may not have ‘known’ or ‘believed’ who Jesus was (although, in the same scene, some clearly did see). But this was the execution of an innocent man, nonetheless. Peter, in Acts 2:22-24, 32-35, clearly implies this was not an innocent happening.
[v] Jürgen Moltmann, The Source of Life: The Holy Spirit and the Theology of Life (SCM Press Ltd, London, 1997), p. 54. To be clear, Moltmann does not explicitly express this view in the context in which I state it. Interpolating his own view within the grid of ideas I present here, it would be truer to see Moltmann more on the impenitent scale.
[vi] George MacDonald, It Shall Not be Forgiven, Unspoken Sermons. As an aside, I still think MacDonald’s approach to this verse is the best, and definitely worth a read.
[vii] Catecheses 16.1. in vol. 2 of The Works of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, trans. Leo P. McCauley and Anthony A. Stephenson, Fathers of the Church, ed. Bernard M. Peebles et al. (Catholic University Press, Washington, D.C.:, 1970), p. 76.
[viii] Didache 11.7, in The Apostolic Fathers, 2nd ed., trans. J. B. Lightfoot and J. R. Harmer, ed. Michael W. Holmes (Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, 1989), p. 156
[ix] I can’t remember if it was C. S. Lewis or A. W. Tozer, who said something like this? Maybe both did?
[x] St. Athanasius of Alexandria, Letter to Serapion 4.17, in Patrologia Graeca, ed. J. Migne, 26:664A.
[xi] As an aside, going back to layer 2, the main test of the Spirit in New Testament is recognising that Jesus Christ became a human (1 Jn. 4:2-3). Within early church theological development, this truth was a safeguard to the heretical ideas of Adoptionism and Docetism. For more on this, see Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, Volume 1, The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600).
[xii] St. Augustine of Hippo, Sermons on New Testament Lessons 21.
[xiii] Karl Barth, Evangelical Theology: An Introduction(Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York), p. 55.
[xiv] George MacDonald, It Shall Not be Forgiven, Unspoken Sermons.
[xv] F B Meyer states it this way, ‘in making the allegation, [the Pharisees] were violating their spiritual sense and deliberately blinding their eyes and dulling their ears to God’s Spirit. This is the sin that [has] never forgiveness, because the soul that acts [this way] ceases to wish for it or seek it.’ (F. B. Meyer, Bible Commentary (Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, Illinois, 1979), p. 404
[xvi] If you want a thorough review of the historical perpsectives, then William Combs’ article, The Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit, in the Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal (09:1, Fall 2004), is cited on a regular basis, and is definitely worth a read. If you ‘google’ it, you should find it. If you can’t, drop me an email via my contacts’ page and I’ll email a pdf to you.
Having said this, although I agree with Combs’ diagnosis of this sin, I do not fully agree with Combs’ conclusion. As someone who believes cessationism to be true (i.e., that miracles no longer occur), Combs’ argument is a worry for those of us, like myself, who believe that miracles can and do occur. Additionally, if continuationism (The Spirit is still performing sign miracles) happens to be true, Combs’ own view condemns his self and other cessationists as guilty of the unforgivable sin, believing that the source of so-called “miracles” today is a deceptive spirit. Again, I can’t go along with this. It’s far too simplistic. I have many cessationist friends who love and follow Jesus with an absolute passion, who confess him as Lord and trust in his grace. Like me, they have tasted the Lord’s goodness and know his forgiveness. I do not doubt their salvation for a minute, and I turn to them often for prayer and support.
Also, such a conclusion neglects what follows after the text: the offering of the ultimate sign in Jesus’ redemptive, victorious death and resurrection (as mentioned above).
[xvii] John Wesley, Explantory Notes upon the New Testament (1856). Electronic Edition
TRISTAN SHERWIN 
Leave a comment