The unpardonable sin

j_seph

Senior Member
#21
I think you are really stretching the text to get that meaning from it, especially since that would contradict this:

Psalm 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
Some reading

The wicked are estranged from the womb - The allusion here undoubtedly is to the persons principally referred to in the psalm - the enemies of David. But their conduct toward him suggests a more general reflection in regard to “all” the wicked as having the same characteristics. The psalmist, therefore, instead of confining his remarks to them, makes his observations general, on the principle that all wicked men have essentially the same character, and especially in respect to the thing here affirmed, that they go astray early; that they are apostate and alienated from God from their very birth. The words, “the wicked,” here do not necessarily refer to the whole human family (though what is thus affirmed is true of all the human race), but to people who in their lives develop a wicked character; and the affirmation in regard to them is that they go astray early in life - from their very infancy.

Strictly speaking, therefore, it cannot be shown that the psalmist in this declaration had reference to the whole human race, or that he meant to make a universal declaration in regard to man as being early estranged or alienated from God; and the passage, therefore, cannot directly, and with exact propriety, be adduced to prove the doctrine that “original sin” pertains to all the race - whatever may be true on that point. If, however, it is demonstrated from “other” passages, and from facts, that all men “are” “wicked” or depraved, then the assertion here becomes a proof that this is from the womb - from their very birth - that they begin life with a propensity to evil - and that all their subsequent acts are but developments of the depravity or corruption with which they are born. It is only, therefore, after it is proved that people “are” depraved or “wicked,” that this passage can be cited in favor of the doctrine of original sin.

The word rendered are “estranged” - זרוּ zoruÌ‚ - means properly, “to go off, to turn aside,” or “away, to depart;” and then it comes to mean “to be strange,” or “a stranger.” The proper idea in the word is that one is a stranger, or a foreigner, and the word would be properly applied to one of another tribe or nation, like the Latin “hostis,” and the Greek ξειÌ�νος xeinos Exodus 30:33; Isaiah 1:7; Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 29:5; Psalm 44:20. The meaning of the term as thus explained is, that, from earliest childhood, they are “as if” they belonged to another people than the people of God; they manifest another spirit; they are governed by other principles than those which pertain to the righteous. Compare Ephesians 2:19. Their first indications of character are not those of the children of God, but are “alien, strange, hostile” to him. The phrase “from the womb,” refers, undoubtedly, to their birth; and the idea is, that as soon as they begin to act they act wrong; they show that they are strangers to God. Strictly speaking, this passage does not affirm anything directly of what exists in the heart “before” people begin to act, for it is by their “speaking lies” that they show their estrangement; yet it is proper to “infer” that where this is universal, there “is” something lying back of this which makes it certain that they “will” act thus - just as when a tree always bears the same kind of fruit, we infer that there is something “in” the tree, back of the actual “bearing” of the fruit, which makes it certain that it “will” bear such fruit and no other. This “something” in the heart of a child is what is commonly meant by “original sin.”
 

j_seph

Senior Member
#22
I take this as the ones let's say, Islamist who are not Christians yet have babies. The expected destination is they will not be Christians as they are not raised as such. So unless they were to pass before they were old enough to comprehend God than they would come into blasphemy at some point
 

hobbs27

Senior Member
#23
I think maybe what Hobbs is saying is how can one blaspheme the Holy Spirit without ever having the opportunity to know or accept the Holy Spirit? How can one who is totally depraved ever get the chance to do so?
If one doesn't have an effectual calling how can he deny the Holy Spirit?
I would think one would have to have some inkling that the Holy Spirit is viable in order to blaspheme it. Without experiencing it's feeling, how could one deny it?

Exactly. I don't see any way that denying the drawing of the Holy Spirit can fit into the rules of Calvinism, or be within TULIP.

Maybe there is, but I haven't seen a good explanation yet.
 
Thread starter #24
So are you saying, best of a worst case scenario that a God fearing Pastor of a church that lives as free if sin as possible, lives for the Lord and his wife that walks just as close to the Lord as he could have a baby to get killed that said baby could end up in He77?

How can a 1 year old who knows nothing about the Lord, does not even know how to talk even know it sins, much less pray for forgiveness if it did sin?

Sorry you cannot just read a piece of paper or repeat a prayer after someone if you are not being convicted. Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. Hard to fear what you do not know.
J_seph, think about what you're saying. You're saying all babies automatically are holy and righteous enough, by their own merit to stand in the presence of the Almighty, without the blood of Jesus upon them through grace.
But then, upon reaching a certain age(?), they suddenly are not holy enough and do indeed need the blood of Jesus.

That is utterly absurd. And very unscriptural.
It's only through the blood that any will stand before the Most Holy.
 
Thread starter #25
Exactly. I don't see any way that denying the drawing of the Holy Spirit can fit into the rules of Calvinism, or be within TULIP.

Maybe there is, but I haven't seen a good explanation yet.
People everywhere every day are denying, rejecting, blaspheming, scoffing, ridiculing, and hating God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.(Rom.1)They are not being drawn to Him. He does not draw all people to Himself. This is where your concept of it gets derailed.
It's not a universal call.
 

hobbs27

Senior Member
#26
People everywhere every day are denying, rejecting, blaspheming, scoffing, ridiculing, and hating God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.(Rom.1)They are not being drawn to Him. He does not draw all people to Himself. This is where your concept of it gets derailed.
It's not a universal call.
OK, it's not a universal call, I can accept that.
What I can't seem to Relay to you is, we agreed that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is denying the calling. So those that are not called aren't even in the equation.

It's only those that are called that can deny the calling, and turning away from the drawing of the Spirit, to deny the Spirit is calling you is an unpardonable sin.

My point is simple. There's no way you can say blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is denying the drawing of the spirit and stay within the rules of Calvinism. If you agree with me that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is denying the drawing, then your on your way out of Tulip.
 
Thread starter #27
OK, it's not a universal call, I can accept that.
What I can't seem to Relay to you is, we agreed that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is denying the calling. So those that are not called aren't even in the equation.

It's only those that are called that can deny the calling, and turning away from the drawing of the Spirit, to deny the Spirit is calling you is an unpardonable sin.

My point is simple. There's no way you can say blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is denying the drawing of the spirit and stay within the rules of Calvinism. If you agree with me that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is denying the drawing, then your on your way out of Tulip.
I understand what you're saying. I guess I've been using the term "calling" too loosely.(I thought we were on the same page)
In Rom.1, there is an indication that all have the command to honor and reverence their Creator. It's been preached throughout the whole world, and is even obvious through nature. None are without excuse. But yet, some still do not, because of their hard heart.

This is not the same as the "holy calling" of the Spirit.(which we have both already spoken of).
 

gordon 2

Senior Member
#28
I haven't been following the drifts of this tread, and I have a minute... so...

I would think that conforming to a calling would require the knowledge of God's will...to some important extent.

God is the informer of the knowledge of His will through the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit informs of what it is Christ Jesus is all about or His purpose for us through Jesus.

It is possible to know of God but not His will,--- as it is possible to NOT know Jesus or the Holy Spirit provided by God both provided before and after Jesus--yet know there is a God.

So to kick the Holy Spirit to the curb, means a knowledge of the will of God for you and for mankind and how we are to carry ourselves as God ministers to all-- this purposely ignored... for whatever reasons.

To kick God With US to the curb is kind of dumb thing to do--especially when one knows what a blessing is theirs and to all those willing to heed His call. (Esau)

So to sin against the Holy Spirit is to discount the teachings of the Holy Spirit and the will of God, to go directly opposed to it and yet being intimate with the Holy Spirit, be it through the many means God uses to walk with man.

Maybe... the account of Lucifer the fallen one of no repair, is an example of how not to collect $200.00 and how not to pass go.

Or for example, when we set ourselves as the judges of a person or of other peoples and we would deny them dignity basic and the dignity God gives to all mankind and to all individuals, from the sweetest saint to the foulest sinner, that is we do this in God's place or we rob God of his judgement abilities, appropriate them as our own, then we are walking a ship's plank... and if we walk far enough on it... we fall... and the ship continues and leaves us to tread... and treading has an end game. etc..



Pass me not, O gentle Savior,
Hear my humble cry;
While on others Thou art calling,
Do not pass me by.

[Chorus:]
(I'm calling)
Savior, Savior,
(Why don't you)
Hear my humble cry;
While on others Thou art calling,
Do not pass me by.

Let me at Thy throne of mercy
Find a sweet relief,
Kneeling there in deep contrition;
Help my unbelief.

[Chorus]

Trusting only in Thy merit,
Would I seek Thy face;
Heal my wounded, broken spirit,
Save me by Thy grace.

[Chorus]

Thou the Spring of all my comfort,
More than life to me,
Whom have I on earth beside Thee?
Whom in heav'n but Thee?
 
Last edited:

Ronnie T

Ol' Retired Mod
#30
Putting all theology aside, I believe that any person who calls out to Christ(in repentance) will be saved.
 

Big7

Senior Member
#33
No such thing as an "unpardonable sin". ;)

Through Reconciliation (confession) and
heart felt Penance ALL sin is washed away.

The thing is not to die in a state of Grave or Mortal
sin, as opposed to Venial sin. Although not good
there is a big difference.

Upon death, Mortal sin removes you from the presence
of God. Venial does not.
 
#34
No such thing as an "unpardonable sin". ;)

Through Reconciliation (confession) and
heart felt Penance ALL sin is washed away.

The thing is not to die in a state of Grave or Mortal
sin, as opposed to Venial sin. Although not good
there is a big difference.

Upon death, Mortal sin removes you from the presence
of God. Venial does not.
How would one go about assuring himself that he doesn't die in a state of grave or mortal sin?

I was thinking that maybe if someone died or took the place of one's grave or mortal sins that one could obtain assurance.
 

gordon 2

Senior Member
#35
How would one go about assuring himself that he doesn't die in a state of grave or mortal sin?

I was thinking that maybe if someone died or took the place of one's grave or mortal sins that one could obtain assurance.
I've been studying the lesson on Fox this morning about the relationship of natural calamity and what Jesus said about it re: Irma.

This is what I understood:

a) Natural calamity does not purposely visit sinners to rub them out.
b) Unless you repent you will be rubbed out.

So... repentance is not a verb perhaps. Perhaps it is not so much about doing something in the way of salvation. Perhaps it is a noun. That is, being repentant one will not perish. So perhaps repentance is a way of being and being repentant is perhaps simply the Christian way of being with God to the degree of one's faith.

To be repentant is to see where once one was blind. To see is to be repentant and to maintain one's relationship with God once gained or to cleave to the bliss of eternal life.

-------------------
2To this He replied, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered this fate? 3No, I tell you. But unless you repent, you too will all perish. 4Or those eighteen who were killed when the tower of Siloam collapsed on them: Do you think that they were more sinful than all the others living in Jerusalem?…

So to live in a state of mortal sin is simply perhaps living in sin or in the wake of sin that kills or infirms one's relationship with The Way, The Truth and The Life.

I think that scripture relates that only one kills-- no assurance, no insurance, no gobermint bailout..
 
Last edited:

gordon 2

Senior Member
#36
Peeking through the rear window brother.
I missed you yesterday and I miss you today. :) I suspect that you are ministering to the sheep today... And may the Kingdom be with you and yours as you board up the windows of those who have no wood and no nails. God bless bros.
 

Israel

Senior Member
#37
The same faith that keeps one from perishing is the same faith that pleads for the salvation of the one who appears as "other". This faith is found in zealousness. The ruthless disregard for one's own appearing.
 
Last edited:

gordon 2

Senior Member
#38
The same faith that keeps one from perishing is the same faith that pleads for the salvation of the one who appears as "other". This faith is found in zealousness. The ruthless disregard for one's own appearing.

Ah yes... but what joy in heaven there is for a saint that repents!

I think that perhaps if we can't reciprocate the love given to us via the Holy Spirit because we chose not to, or disregard it and proceed with the opposite course then we are asking for conviction and if we disregard this correction we are not to a good place...
 

Israel

Senior Member
#39
Ah yes... but what joy in heaven there is for a saint that repents!

I think that perhaps if we can't reciprocate the love given to us via the Holy Spirit because we chose not to, or disregard it and proceed with the opposite course then we are asking for conviction and if we disregard this correction we are not to a good place...
Amen.

Jesus never said that the fellow turned over to the tormentors for refusing to forgive a small debt after being forgiven the largest of them remained in the place of hopelessness. But there would be an exacting.

Something would be used to strip away to "the uttermost ****hing" what prevents from seeing mercy rightly as our chief exchange as brothers.

To find in Jesus plea "Forgive them Father, they know not what they do" ...ourselves.
 
Top