Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 12:31

Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy [against] the [Holy] Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

31 37. Blaspheming against the Holy Ghost

31. Wherefore ] The conclusion of the whole is you are on Satan’s side, and knowingly on Satan’s side, in this decisive struggle between the two kingdoms, and this is blasphemy against the Holy Ghost an unpardonable sin.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

In this place, and in Mar 3:28-30, Jesus states the awful nature of the sin of which they had been guilty. That sin was the sin against the Holy Spirit. It consisted in charging him with being in league with the devil, or accusing him of working his miracles, not by the spirit or power of God, but by the aid of the prince of the devils. It was therefore a direct insult, abuse, or evil speaking against the Holy Spirit – the spirit by which Jesus worked his miracles. That this was what he intended by this sin, at that time, is clear from Mar 3:30, because they said he had an unclean spirit. All other sins – all speaking against the Saviour himself – might be remitted. But this sin was clearly against the Holy One; it was alleging that the highest displays of Gods mercy and power were the work of the devil; and it argued, therefore, the deepest depravity of mind. The sin of which he speaks is therefore clearly stated. It was accusing him of working miracles by the aid of the devil, thus dishonoring the Holy Spirit.

All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven – That is, only on condition that people repent and believe. If they continue in this sin they cannot be forgiven, Mar 16:16; Rom 2:6-9.

Blasphemy – Injurious or evil speaking of God. See the notes at Mat 9:3.

A word against the Son of man – The Jews were offended at the humble life and appearance of the Saviour. They reproached him as being a Nazarene – sprung from Nazareth, a place from which no good was expected to proceed; with being a Galilean, from Galilee, a place from which no prophet came, Joh 7:52. Jesus says that reproaches of this kind could be pardoned. Reflections on his poverty, on his humble birth, and on the lowliness of his human nature might be forgiven; but for those which affected his divine nature, accusing him of being in league with the devil, denying his divinity, and attributing the power which manifestly implied divinity to the prince of fallen spirits, there could be no pardon. This sin was a very different thing from what is now often supposed to be the sin against the Holy Spirit. It was a wanton and blasphemous attack on the divine power and nature of Christ. Such a sin God would not forgive.

Speaketh against the Holy Ghost – The word ghost means spirit, and probably refers here to the divine nature of Christ – the power by which he performed his miracles. There is no evidence that it refers to the third person of the Trinity; and the meaning of the whole passage may be: He that speaks against me as a man of Nazareth – that speaks contemptuously of my humble birth, etc., may be pardoned; but he that reproaches my divine nature, charging me with being in league with Satan, and blaspheming the power of God manifestly displayed by me, can never obtain forgiveness.

Neither in this world, nor in that which is to come – That is, as Mark expresses it, hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation. This fixes the meaning of the phrase. It means, then, not the future age or dispensation, known among the Jews as the world to come, but it means that the guilt will be unpardoned forever; that such is the purpose of God that he will not forgive a sin so direct, presumptuous, and awful. It cannot be inferred from this that any sins will be forgiven in hell. The Saviour meant simply to say that there were no possible circumstances in which the offender could obtain forgiveness. He certainly did not say that any sin unpardoned here would be pardoned hereafter.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Mat 12:31

All manner of sin and blasphemy.

Sin against the Holy Ghost

1. This is not a sin which one can commit by accident, and without knowing it. This is an alleviation to many who are in great distress. They fear that they have committed the unpardonable sin. It is the closing of a long series of wickednessed.

2. No man need fear that he has committed the unpardonable sin who is deeply alarmed and anxious about it; for the very nature of that sin is moral insensibility.

3. Ordinary procrastination, the putting aside of things right on account of the superior attraction of some worldly good-these things though dangerous, are not the sins which our Saviour marked. Many persons are grieving the Divine Spirit, who are not properly to be called blasphemers against the Holy Ghost.

4. Is this perversion frequent? Men are not likely to fall into it suddenly. This moral perversion may be the result of physical dissipation. Constant resistance of good- impulses may lead to it. (H. W. Beecher.)

Tampering with the moral sense destructive of it

By this minute, constant, and continued tampering with his moral sense, he at last comes to that state in which the light of the glory of God, when it shines upon him, produces no more effect than the morning sun, shining upon the face of a corpse that ties in the east window. When men lie dead in the house, the morning bell calls them not. They do not hear the children on the stairs. Their ears are deaf to the sweet sounds of birds out of doors. The beauty dispersed all abroad, their eyes do not behold. And I see men whose moral sense is so dead that it is never touched by all the mercies of God above, nor by all the mercies of God distributed among men below. (H. W. Beecher.)

Dissipated men not always destitute of moral sensibility

There are sometimes very bad men in whom, if you could only steal into the chapel of their souls, and strike the bell there, you could rouse up a sensibility which would surprise their friends and them. But it is shut. It is kept locked up. Then there are other men whose dissipation seems to make a clean sweep, so that there is nothing left in them. It destroys the imagination; it destroys the affections; it destroys the whole moral sense. You may sound on every nerve, and along every chord, and there is no place left in them that has not been destroyed by dissipation. (H. W. Beecher.)

Moral sensibility mans best gift

I hear men thank God that He gave them such reason. Reason is a stately and noble gift, surely; but conscience is better than reason. I hear men congratulating their fellows that God gave them genius. They are poets. They are orators. They are artists. They carve the stone. They depict in colours the various forms of life. And this, surely, is a munificent gift from the hand of God. But no genius is comparable to the sense of that which is right and wrong. Genius of conscience is the best genius that a man can have. (H. W. Beecher.)

Conscience most needed

A man may cut away every mast on his ship, and yet pursue his voyage. A man may have everything on deck carried overboard, and yet make some headway. A man in the middle of the ocean can afford to lose everything else better than he can afford to lose the compass in the binnacle. When that is gone he has nothing to steer by. That little instrument is his best friend. It is his guide. And that conscience which God has given you is your compass and guide. You can afford to lose genius, and taste, and reason, and judgment better than that. Keep that as the apple of your eye. Keep it clear, and strong, and discerning. Be in love with your conscience; and let your conscience be in love with God. A conscience held in love, is the very foundation not only of a spiritual manhood, but of happiness in an earthly manhood. (H. W. Beecher.)

The sin against the Holy Ghost

I. What is the difference between speaking against the Son of Man and speaking against the Holy Ghost? By speaking against the Son of Man is meant here all those reproaches which they cast upon our Saviours person, the meanness of His birth, without reflecting upon that Divine power which He testified by His miracles. By speaking against the Holy Ghost is meant their blaspheming the Divine power whereby He wrought His miracles.

II. Wherein the nature of this sin or blasphemy against the Holy Ghost doth consist. Some have supposed it to be final impenitency, because that is unpardonable; but why that, it is hard to say. Others place the sin in obstinate opposition to the truth; but it is hardly imaginable that a man will oppose the truth when he is actually convinced that it is truth. The Pharisees are the persons guilty of this sin. The ground of complaint is clear (Mar 3:28-29): they charged Christ with being a magician. They would rather deny the reality of Christs miracles than own Him to be Messiah.

III. In what sense is it said to be peculiarly unpardonable?

IV. How it comes to pass that this sin above others is incapable of pardon?

1. Because by this sin men resist their last remedy, and oppose the best and utmost means of their conviction. Can God do more for a mans conviction than work miracles before his eves.

2. Because this sin is of such a high nature, that God is therefore justly provoked to withdraw His grace from such persons; and it is probable, resolved so to do: without which grace they will continue impenitent.

V. Make this discourse useful to ourselves.

1. To comfort some very good and pious persons who are liable to despair, upon an apprehension that they have committed this great sin. I cannot see how any person now is likely to be in those circumstances as to be capable of committing it. Total apostasy from Christianity comes nearest to it (Heb 6:4-6).

2. To caution men against the degrees and approaches of this sin-profane scoffing at religion. Be ready to entertain the truth of God whenever it is fairly propounded. (J. Tillotson.)

Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost

I. The sin spoken of in the text is described as blasphemy. It is common to speak of the sin against the Holy Ghost; Jesus does not call it sin, but blasphemy. Nor are they the same. All blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is sin; but all sin against the Holy Ghost is not blasphemy. This narrows it to a particular sin. What are we to understand by it? When abusive words are uttered against God wilfully, knowingly, and malignantly, it is blasphemy.

II. That this blasphemy is described as a sin specially against the Holy Ghost. Why this, and not a sin against the Father or the Son? Not because He is more sacred than the Father or the Son. The Persons of the Trinity are all equal in glory. But because that in revilingly opposing the gospel the work of the Holy Spirit is specially opposed. It is the Divine Spirit who takes of the things of Christ, and through the Word presents them to the mind. It is a defiance of His peculiar prerogative.

III. The crowning fact connected with this sin is its unpardonableness. Why, when there is forgiveness for all sin, is there none for this? What sin could be more heinous? It cannot be because of any inadequacy in Christs atonement-His blood cleanseth us from all sin. Nor that the mercy of God cannot reach to such a sin; it is infinite. Nor that the gospel is unable to overcome such obduracy. The truth is there is no sin in itself unpardonable. This would contradict ver. 31. The reason is found not in its turpitude, but in its nature, as it discovers a heart resolutely opposed to the Spirit and the truth. If the Spirit be scorned, it follows, pardon is impossible. An earthly parent cannot forgive a child till it has exhibited sorrow for its offence; and as sorrow for sin is unknown to those guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, their salvation is impossible.

IV. May this sin be still committed? I think it may. It is common with those who hold that these Pharisees had committed the unpardonable sin, and that its commission was limited to their time, to argue as if Jesus had performed this miracle by the power of the Holy Spirit, and that the sin consisted in ascribing the power by which it was performed to Satan. Our Lord does not say If I cast out devils by the Holy Spirit, but by the Spirit of God, and St. Luke has it finger of God-a figure significant of power. Christ uniformly speaks of His miracles as if the power that performed them was His own, or that of His Father-The works which I do in My Fathers name, etc. The power of working miracles was not conferred on Christ; by virtue of His Divinity He required no such endowment. It is important to keep this in view, in order to see that there is no ground for the allegation that He wrought the miracle before us by the Holy Spirit, and that, therefore, these Pharisees were guilty of blaspheming Him. The fact that three of the evangelists quote this narrative is significant. Observe, that our Lord specifies two sins-speaking against the Son of Man, and speaking against the Holy Ghost. Now, on looking at the narrative, it appears that the sin, committed in the present instance, was that of speaking against the Son of Man. He it was who wrought the miracle; and He wrought it, as we have seen, by His own power; and He it was against whom the malice of the Pharisees was aimed. Now, had they been actually guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, Jesus would doubtless have said so. Does He not, however, rather intimate-by the antithesis which He presents between blasphemy against the Son of Bran and that against the Holy Ghost, and by the pardonableness of the one and the unpardonableness of the other-that it was blasphemy against Himself of which they had been guilty? Why speak of blasphemy against the Son of Bran if the sin which they had committed was actually blasphemy against the Holy Ghost? And why speak of the pardonableness of blasphemy against Himself, if they had committed another sin which was unpardonable? Would that not be to tantalize? But such a supposition is utterly at variance with what we know of the tenderness of the Saviours character. We regard Jesus as, in effect, saying-Dreadful as it is to speak disparagingly of the Son of Man in this the day of His humiliation, when His true character is veiled, there is a day coming, when the evidence of My Divine commission will be complete, not only through the miraculous outpouring of the Spirit, but by the conversion of thousands to the gospel; and, when that day comes, they who treat the work of the Spirit as they now treat Me, shall, even in this life, pass from the sphere of mercy to that of inevitable doom. One fact identifies this saying of Christ with the outpouring of the Spirit, beyond all dispute. If you turn to Luk 12:10-12, you will read-And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven. And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say: for the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say. These words seem to have been spoken on a different occasion from the present. From the first verse, we learn they were addressed to disciples; and from this fact we infer that the sin in question may be committed, not only by Christs avowed enemies, but by those who confess His name. Observe then, that while, in the 10th verse, He repeats in substance the words of our text, in the 11th and 12th verses He predicts what actually took place immediately after the dispensation of the Spirit had began on the day of Pentecost. For, when Peter and John were brought before the council, it is stated that, on Peter rising to speak, he was filled with the Holy Ghost (Act 4:1-8). And what was that but a literal fulfilment of what Christ predicted in immediate connection with the text as given by Luke? For the Holy Ghost, he said, shall teach you, in the same hour, what ye ought to say,-conclusively showing that it was the dispensation of the Spirit which Christ had more particularly in view when He uttered the awful words of our text. So far, then, from thinking, as some have done, that this sin consisted in ascribing the miracles of Christ to Satanic agency, and that it could only be committed during the period of Christs earthly ministry, I rather conclude, on these grounds, that the Saviour specially pointed to that future which is our present, as the season of its commission.

V. Before concluding, it may be proper to ask if we can find, in our conduct or in that of others, the image of anything like this sin?

1. There are the Jews. No people so privileged; None have so sinned.

2. Another form in which this sin against the Holy Ghost now presents itself is that of scornfully resisting conscientious convictions.

3. Perhaps it is in the annals of infidelity we must seek in our day for the grossest forms of this sin. How different all this from the spirit of those who dread the very possibility of having committed this offence! (W. Reid, D. D.)

The sin against the Holy Ghost, and the danger of rashly applying it to ourselves or others

I. What the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, mentioned by our saviour, is.

II. What is the true sense of our saviours declaration that this one sin shall not be forgiven?

III. Why he passed such a severe sentence upon this one sin.

IV. What sins do or, do not, approach towards that which is mentioned in the text?

1. The case of unbelievers.

(1) Unbelievers ignorant of the gospel, or its proper evidence, are not blameable for their unbelief: nor surely inexcusable, though they should add reproachful words to it, speaking evil of things they know not.

(2) But such unbelievers who through contemptuous negligence refuse to consider the doctrine of Christ, or from a vain opinion of the sufficiency of their own reason, reject it, put themselves in the high road towards the sin here condemned.

(3) If they have, since they came to a full use of reason, deliberately confessed Christianity, and then forsaken it and become scoffers at it, this case is worse than if they had never believed.

2. The case of believers. Some have maintained that any deliberate sin amounted to it. This against Scripture. Sometimes good men have entertained irreverent thoughts; but this when under disturbance of mind, and had not command of their thoughts. (T. Secker, LL. D.)

Disease fated because the remedy is rejected

Suppose the providence of God had so ordered it, that all diseases should be curable by some one particular course of medicine; still, whoever despised and ridiculed that course, instead of taking it, must perish. And in like manner, though all sins would else be pardonable through the grace of the gospel: whoever scorns the utmost efforts of that grace, must fail of it. And our Saviour foreseeing that these persons would, pronounces their doom. Every advantage, that any others ever were to enjoy, they had enjoyed to the full, without effect: and it was not suitable to the honour of Gods government, or the holiness of His nature, to strive with such by still more extraordinary methods; and do for the worst of men what he had not done for the rest. Their condition, therefore, was not that they should be denied pardon though they did repent; but it was foreknown that they would not repent. (T. Secker, LL. D.)

Things we never got over

There are sins which though they may be pardoned, are in some respects irrevocable:

1. The folly of a misspent youth.

2. In the category of irrevocable mistakes I put all parental neglect.

3. The unkindness done to the departed.

4. The lost opportunities of getting good.

5. The lost opportunities of usefulness. (Dr. Talmage.)

The unpardonable sin

I. Let us endeavour to remove some mistakes respecting this subject. Many sins supposed to be of the nature of the one here denounced have been remitted, therefore cannot be irremissible.

1. Sins against great light, conviction and knowledge.

2. Sins after real and high experience of the Divine favour are also improperly supposed to be of this character.

3. The sin of opposing the truth daringly has also been mistaken for the dreaded sin under consideration.

II. Describe the peculiar character of the blasphemy which our Lord here pronounces irremissible.

1. It appears that some among the Pharisees had committed the sin; they applied to the Holy Spirit the diabolical name.

2. The Pharisees heard their conduct described without being the least affected.

3. Men may approach near to this sin now, but cannot complete it.

III. Exhortation and caution.

1. The reverence due from all of us to the Divine Spirit.

2. We should do all in our power to promote that religion which is the offspring of the Holy Spirit. (J. Leifchild.)

1. The nature of the sin itself is such as to preclude the possibility of forgiveness.

2. When there is any desire for salvation you have not committed this sin.

I. All men have sin and blasphemy to be forgiven.

II. That it is to man only that all manner of sin shall be forgiven.

III. That it shall be forgiven to all men who seek forgiveness by the method which the gospel has announced. (T. Raffles, D. D.)

The unpardonable sin

We might expect that the best gift of the Holy Ghost would have some corresponding awfulness attaching to it. We have in the Bible four separate sins against the Holy Ghost laid out in a certain order and progression-grieving, resisting, quenching-these have been forgiven. But there is a fourth stage when the mind, through a long course of sin, proceeds to such a violent dislike of the Spirit of God, that infidel thoughts and horrid imaginations come into the mind. They become habitual. This sin against the Holy Ghost does not lie in any particular act or word; it is a general state of mind. It is unpardonable, because the mind of such a man cannot make one move towards God. (J. Vaughan, M. A.)

The unpardonable sin

1. How a man may shut against himself all the avenues of reconciliation.

2. There is something mysterious in the process. They choose not to repent; and this choice has been made so often and so perseveringly that the Spirit has let them alone.

3. There is nothing in it to impair the freeness of the gospel, or the universality of its calls.

The amplitude of Divine forgiveness

A king publishes a wide and unexpected amnesty to the people of a rebellious district in his empire, upon the bare act of each presenting himself, within a limited period, before an authorized agent, and professing his purposes of future loyalty. Does it at all detract from the clemency of this deed of grace, that many of the rebels feel a strong reluctance to this personal exhibition of themselves, and that the reluctance strengthens and accumulates upon them by every day of their postponement; and that, even before the season of mercy has expired, it has risen to such a degree of aversion on their parts as to form a moral barrier in the way of their prescribed return that is altogether impassable? Will you say, because there is no forgiveness to them, there is any want of amplitude in that charter of forgiveness which is proclaimed in the hearing of all; or that pardon has not been provided for every offence, because some offenders are to be found with such a degree of perverseness and of obstinacy in their bosom, as constrains them to a determined refusal of all pardon? The blood of Christ cleanseth from all sin; and there is not a human creature who, let him repent and believe, will ever find the crimson inveteracy of his manifold offences to be beyond the reach of its purifying and its peace-speaking power. (Dr. Chalmers.)

The unpardonable sin

I. What is this sin or blasphemy against the Holy Ghost? This assertion of the Pharisees discloses three odious sentiments.

1. A deceitful contradiction.

2. An unutterable perversity of heart.

3. A terrible blasphemy.

II. Why is this sin, and this sin only, unpardonable either in this world or in the next?

1. Would it be too great, too odious, to find grace before God?

2. Could the reason of this exception be found in a special decree of God, who, from motives unknown to us, would have blotted this particular sin from the list of those He is disposed to pardon?

III. Was this sin peculiar to the times of Jesus Christ, or are we still liable to become guilty of it? Materially, no; virtually, yes. (The Late Grandpierre, D. D.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 31. All manner of sin and blasphemy] , injurious or impious speaking. [Anglo-Saxon], mocking and deriding speech, Anglo-Saxon. See Mt 9:3.

But the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost] Even personal reproaches, revilings, persecutions against Christ, were remissible; but blasphemy, or impious speaking against the Holy Spirit was to have no forgiveness: i.e. when the person obstinately attributed those works to the devil, which he had the fullest evidence could be wrought only by the Spirit of God. That this, and nothing else, is the sin against the Holy Spirit, is evident from the connection in this place, and more particularly from Mr 3:28-30. “All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme; but he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation; BECAUSE they said, He hath an unclean spirit.”

Here the matter is made clear beyond the smallest doubt – the unpardonable sin, as some term it, is neither less nor more than ascribing the miracles Christ wrought, by the power of God, to the spirit of the devil. Many sincere people have been grievously troubled with apprehensions that they had committed the unpardonable sin; but let it be observed that no man who believes the Divine mission of Jesus Christ, ever can commit this sin: therefore let no man’s heart fail because of it, from henceforth and for ever, Amen. See below.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Mark repeateth the same, Mar 3:28,29, with no alteration as to the sense, and instead of neither in this world, neither in the world to come, he saith, but is in danger of eternal damnation. Luke hath something of it, Luk 12:10, And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgive him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven. It is a text (which) hath very much exercised great divines, and much more perplexed poor Christians in their fits of melancholy and under temptations. There is in it something asserted, that is, that all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven, Mat 12:32.

Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven; that is, upon the terms other sins are forgiven, repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. By the Son of man here some would understand any ordinary man; but;

1. Christ never spake of any under the notion but himself.

2. It had been no great news for Christ to have told them, that ordinary evil speaking against men should be forgiven.

Doubtless by the Son of man here Christ meaneth himself. He declareth that sins of ignorance should be forgiven; though a man should blaspheme Christ, yet if he did it ignorantly, verily thinking he was no more than the son of man, it should, upon his repentance and faith in him, be forgiven: a text yielding exceeding great relief to souls labouring under the burden of their sins, and reflecting upon their aggravation.

But the difficulty lieth in the latter part of the text, which denieth forgiveness to any who blaspheme the Holy Ghost. Upon this arise several questions. First, What the sin against the Holy Ghost here specified was.

Answer: It is not hard to gather this from the context, and what Mark addeth, Mar 3:30, Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit. Christ was come amongst these persons to whom he speaketh; he had not only preached, but he had wrought many miraculous operations sufficient to convince them that he acted by the power and Spirit of God. They were not only convinced of it, so far as to acknowledge it, but they attributed these operations to the devil, and said he had a devil, and that he did what he did by the power of the devil. This, out of doubt, was their sin against the Holy Ghost, maliciously speaking to the highest reproach of the Holy Spirit, contrary to the rational conviction of their own consciences.

Hence ariseth a second question, Whether any such sin can be now committed.

Answer: If there were no other texts that seem to conclude, there may be such as those, Heb 6:4-6; 10:26,27; 1Jo 5:16, where he speaketh of a sin unto death, for the forgiveness of which he would not have Christians pray. I should conclude that there is no such sin now to be committed, for we cannot have such means of conviction as the Pharisees had, Christ not being on the earth now working miracles; but it is plain from the texts before mentioned, that there is such a sin, that men and women may yet incur the guilt of. But now what that sin is hath exercised the judgment of the greatest divines to describe. I shall not repeat the various opinions about it, many of which are easily confuted; but shall determine from the guidance of the scriptures that mention it, so far as they will direct in the finding of it out.

1. It cannot be any sin that is committed ignorantly. Paul was a blasphemer, but forgiven, because he did it ignorantly.

2. It must be a sin knowingly committed against the operations of the Holy Ghost. So was this sin of the Pharisees.

3. Apostasy must be an ingredient in it: If they fall away, saith the apostle, Heb 6:6. It is a sinning wilfully after the receiving the knowledge of the truth, Heb 10:26.

4. It should seem by this text persecution is an ingredient in it: the Pharisees did not only say this, but they spake it out of malice, designing to destroy Christ.

5. Most certainly it is, that though impenitency cannot be called that sin, yet it must be an ingredient in it, for what sins we truly repent of shall be forgiven, 1Jo 1:9; and therefore the apostle saith of such sinners, It is impossible they should be renewed by repentance.

Upon the whole then, if any person hath been instructed in the things of God, and hath made a profession of religion and godliness, and afterwards falleth off from his profession, and becomes a bitter enemy to it; saying that those things are the effects of the devil in men, which his heart telleth him are the operations of the Holy Spirit, and be so hardy as to persecute and seek to destroy such persons for such profession: the interpretation be to those that hate us and to the enemies of our God: if they have not committed this unpardonable sin, they have done what is very like it; and I know no way they have, but by a timely and hearty repentance to satisfy the world, or their own consciences, that they are not under this dreadful guilt. And that which confirms me in this opinion is, that we rarely hear of such persons renewed by repentance (if any instances of that nature at all can be produced). I know some have thought that this sin might be committed by words, without other overt acts, and indeed blaspheming (properly taken) can signify nothing else but evil or reproachful speaking. But these words must proceed from a malicious heart, full of rancour and revenge; for it is not every word, nor every blasphemy, that is here meant, it is (as Augustine saith) quoddam dictum, quaedam blasphemia, a certain word, a certain blasphemy; not words spoken ignorantly or hastily, or according to our real judgment and opinion; but words spoken maliciously, in order to destroy God or Christ, if it were possible, after sufficient means of light and conviction, that the things which we speak evil of are not from the evil, but, probably at least, from the Holy Spirit of God, and yet we will impute them to the devil, in order to the defaming or destruction of those servants of God who do them, or in whom they are found. We can define nothing certain in the case, but this cometh nearest to the sin here mentioned, that shall never be forgiven in this world, or the world to come; that is, as Mark expounds it, the persons guilty shall be in danger of eternal damnation, by which he hath spoiled the papists argument from this text for their purgatory.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

31. Wherefore I say unto you, Allmanner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto menThe word”blasphemy” properly signifies “detraction,” or”slander.” In the New Testament it is applied, as it ishere, to vituperation directed against God as well as against men;and in this sense it is to be understood as an aggravated form ofsin. Well, says our Lord, all sinwhether in its ordinary or itsmore aggravated formsshall find forgiveness with God. Accordingly,in Mark (Mr 3:28) the languageis still stronger: “All sin shall be forgiven unto the sons ofmen, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme.”There is no sin whatever, it seems, of which it may be said, “Thatis not a pardonable sin.” This glorious assurance is not to belimited by what follows; but, on the contrary, what follows is to beexplained by this.

but the blasphemy against theHoly Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Wherefore I say unto you,…. This shows, that what follows is occasioned by what the Pharisees had said, concerning the miracles of Christ; imputing them to diabolical influence and assistance, when they were done by the Spirit of God, of which they themselves were conscious;

all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: not unto all men, for there are some, who, as they are never truly convinced of sin, and brought to repentance for it, so they never have the remission of it; but to such to whom God of his free grace has promised, and for whom he has provided this blessing, in the covenant of his grace; for whom the blood of Christ was shed, for the remission of their sins; and who, by the Spirit of God, are made sensible of them, and have repentance unto life given them, and faith in Christ, by which they receive the forgiveness of them: the sense is, that all kind of sin, whether committed more immediately against God, or man, the first or second table of the law, or against any of the divine precepts; be they sins small or great, secret or open, sins of heart, lip, or life, or attended with whatsoever aggravating circumstances; and all kind of blasphemy, or evil speaking of men, or of angels, or of the name of God, but what is hereafter excepted, there is forgiveness of in the grace of God, through the blood of Christ, even for all sorts of men and sinners whatever. The Jews have a saying z, that God pardons all sins,

“hmzh Nm Uwx, “except lasciviousness”.”

But this is not excepted by Christ, only what follows,

but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, shall not be forgiven unto men: by which is meant, not every ignorant denial of, and opposition to his deity and personality; nor all resistance of him in the external ministry of the word; nor every sin that is knowingly and wilfully committed; but it is a despiteful usage of the Spirit of grace, an opposing, contradicting, and denying the operations wrought, or doctrines revealed by him, against a man’s own light and conscience, out of wilful and obstinate malice, on purpose to lessen the glory of God, and gratify his own lusts: such was the sin of the Scribes and Pharisees; who, though they knew the miracles of Christ were wrought by the Spirit of God, yet maliciously and obstinately imputed them to the devil, with a view to obscure the glory of Christ, and indulge their own wicked passions and resentments against him; which sin was unpardonable at that present time, as well as under that dispensation then to come, when the Spirit of God was poured down in a more plenteous manner.

z Tanchuma apud Buxtorf. Heb. Florileg. p. 126.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

But the blasphemy against the Spirit ( ). Objective genitive. This is the unpardonable sin. In 32 we have to make it plainer. What is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? These Pharisees had already committed it. They had attributed the works of the Holy Spirit by whose power Jesus wrought his miracles (12:28) to the devil. That sin was without excuse and would not be forgiven in their age or in the coming one (12:32). People often ask if they can commit the unpardonable sin. Probably some do who ridicule the manifest work of God’s Spirit in men’s lives and attribute the Spirit’s work to the devil.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

1) “Wherefore I say unto you,” (dia touto lego humin) “Therefore I tell you specifically as regards attributing the work of the Lord to the Devil, rather than to Divine power through the Spirit of the Lord, that anointed Him for the miraculous ministry, Luk 4:16-20.

2) “All manner of sin and blasphemy,” (pasa hamartia kai blasphemia) “That all (kind of) sin or anarchy and blasphemy;” All lawless acts and all blasphemy, which is speaking against holy, consecrated, or Divine persons, places and things.

3) “Shall be forgiven unto men:” (aphethesetai tois anthropois) “Will be forgiven (or pardoned) to men,” Act 13:38-39; Rom 3:22; Rom 3:24. Who seek such pardon or forgiveness, through Him who died to redeem from all (all kinds) of iniquity, Tit 2:14; Joh 6:37.

4) “But the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost,” (he de tou pneumatos blasphemia) “Yet, the blasphemy of the Spirit;” To attribute the work of Christ to the Devil, is not “The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost,” for Paul attributed the work of Jesus Christ and the church to the Devil before he was saved, yet he found pardon, in spite of his blasphemy, Act 8:1; Act 8:3; Act 9:1-2; Act 26:9-11; Gal 1:13.

5) “Shall not be forgiven unto men.” (ouk aphethesetai) “Will not be forgiven or pardoned,” for anyone who commits it. The term “The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost,” or Spirit, seems to be the “final no,” a sinner “blabs” against the Holy Spirit. It appears to be, not merely blaspheming or deriding, directly or indirectly the Holy Spirit, but a particular “final act,” of rebellion against His voice and call, so that the danger is, none knows when the Holy Spirit is calling him for that final time, Heb 4:7-1 Pro 29:1; Pro 1:21-29.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

31. Therefore I say to you. This inference ought not to be confined to the clause immediately preceding, but depends on the whole discourse. Having proved that the scribes could not blame him for casting out devils, without opposing the kingdom of God, he at length concludes that it is no light or ordinary offense, but an atrocious crime, knowingly and willingly to pour contempt on the Spirit of God. We have already said, that Christ did not pronounce this decision on the mere words which they uttered, but on their base and wicked thought.

All sin and blasphemy. As our Lord declares blasphemy against the Holy Ghost to be more heinous than all other sins, it is of importance to inquire what is the meaning of that term. Those who define it to be impenitence (127) may be refuted without any difficulty; for it would have been in vain and to no purpose for Christ to say, that it is not forgiven in the present life. Besides, the word blasphemy cannot be extended indiscriminately to every sort of crimes; but from the comparison which Christ makes, we shall easily obtain the true definition. Why is it said that he who blasphemes against the Spirit is a more heinous sinner than he who blasphemes against Christ? Is it because the majesty of the Spirit is greater, that a crime committed against him must be punished with greater severity? Certainly that is not the reason; for as the fullness of the Godhead (Col 2:9) shines in Christ, he who pours contempt upon him overturns and destroys, as far as it lies in his power, the whole glory of God. Now in what manner shall Christ be separated from his Spirit, so that those who treat the Spirit with contempt offer no injury or insult to Christ?

Already we begin to perceive, that the reason why blasphemy against the Spirit exceeds other sins, is not that the Spirit is higher than Christ, but that those who rebel, after that the power of God has been revealed, cannot be excused on the plea of ignorance. Besides, it must be observed, that what is here said about blasphemy does not refer merely to the essence of the Spirit, but to the grace which He has bestowed upon us. Those who are destitute of the light of the Spirit, however much they may detract from the glory of the Spirit, will not be held guilty of this crime. (128) We do not maintain, that those persons are said to pour contempt on the Spirit of God, who oppose his grace and power by hardened malice; and farther we maintain, that this kind of sacrilege is committed only when we knowingly endeavor to extinguish the Spirit who dwells in us.

The reason why contempt is said to be poured on the Spirit, rather than on the Son or the Father, is this. By detracting from the grace and power of God, we make a direct attack on the Spirit, from whom they proceed, and in whom they are revealed to us. Shall any unbeliever curse God? It is as if a blind man were dashing against a wall. But no man curses the Spirit who is not enlightened by him, and conscious of ungodly rebellion against him; for it is not a superfluous distinction. that all other blasphemies shall be forgiven, except that one blasphemy which is directed against the Spirit. If a man shall simply blaspheme against God, he is not declared to be beyond the hope of pardon; but of those who have offered outrage to the Spirit, it is said that God will never forgive them. Why is this, but because those only are blasphemers against the Spirit, who slander his gifts and power, contrary to the conviction of their own mind? Such also is the import of the reason assigned by Mark for the extreme severity of Christ’s threatening against the Pharisees; because they had said that he had the unclean spirit; for in this manner they purposely and maliciously turned light into darkness; and, indeed, it is in the manner of the giants, (129) as the phrase is, to make war against God.

But here a question arises. Do men proceed to such a pitch of madness as not to hesitate, knowingly and willfully, to rush against God? for this appears to be monstrous and incredible. I reply: Such audacity does indeed proceed from mad blindness, in which, at the same time, malice and virulent rage predominate. Nor is it without reason that Paul says, that though he was

a blasphemer, he obtained pardon, because he had done it ignorantly in his unbelief, (1Ti 1:13😉

for this term draws a distinction between his sin and voluntary rebellion. This passage refutes also the error of those who imagine that every sin which is voluntary, or which is committed in opposition to the conscience, is unpardonable. On the contrary, Paul expressly limits that sin to the First Table of the Law; (130) and our Lord not less plainly applies the word blasphemy to a single description of sin, and at the same time shows, that it is of a kind which is directly opposed to the glory of God. (131)

From all that has been said, we may conclude that those persons sin and blaspheme against the Holy Spirit, who maliciously turn to his dishonor the perfections of God, which have been revealed to him by the Spirit, in which His glory ought to be celebrated, and who, with Satan, their leader, are avowed enemies of the glory of God. We need not then wonder, if for such sacrilege there is no hope of pardon; for they must be desperate who turn the only medicine of salvation into a deadly venom. Some consider this to be too harsh, and betake themselves to the childish expedient, that it is said to be unpardonable, because the pardon of it is rare and difficult to be obtained. But the words of Christ are too precise to admit of so silly an evasion. It is excessively foolish to argue that God will be cruel if he never pardon a sin, the atrocity of which ought to excite in us astonishment and horror. (132) Those who reason in that manner do not sufficiently consider what a monstrous crime it is, not only to profane intentionally the sacred name of God, but to spit in his face when he shines evidently before us. It shows equal ignorance to object, that it would be absurd if even repentance could not obtain pardon; for blasphemy against the Spirit is a token of reprobation, and hence it follows, that whoever have fallen into it, have been delivered over to a reprobate mind, (Rom 1:28.) As we maintain, that he who has been truly regenerated by the Spirit cannot possibly fall into so horrid a crime, so, on the other hand, we must believe that those who have fallen into it never rise again; nay, that in this manner God punishes contempt of his grace, by hardening the hearts of the reprobate, so that they never have any desire towards repentance.

(127) “ Quant a ceux qui disent que c’est un endurcissement jusqu’a la mort;” — “as to those who say that it is hardened obstinacy even to death.”

(128) “ Ne seront pas toutesfois tenus coulpables de ce grand crime duquel il est ici parle;” — “will not, on that account, be held guilty of the great crime here spoken of.”

(129) “ Et cela c’est desfier Dieu, et luy faire la guerre, comme les Geans des Poetes, ainsique porte le proverbe Latin;” — “and that is to defy God, and make war with him, like the Giants of the Poets, as the Latin proverb bears.”

(130) “ Restreint nommement a la Premiere Table de la Loy ce peche contre l’Esprit;” — “expressly limits to the First Table of the Law this sin against the Spirit.”

(131) “ Que c’est un peche qui battaille directement contre la gloire de Dieu;” — “that it is a sin which fights directly against the glory of God.”

(132) “ Veu que l’horreur d’iceluy nous devroit a tous faire dresser les cheveux en la teste;” — “since the horror at it ought to have such an effect on all of us, as to make the hair stand on our head.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(31) The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost.Better, against the Spirit, the word Holy not being found in any MSS. of authority. The question, What is the nature of the terrible sin thus excluded from forgiveness? has, naturally enough, largely occupied the thoughts of men. What, we ask, is this blasphemy against the Holy Ghost? (1.) The context at least helps us to understand something of its nature. The Pharisees were warned against a sin to which they were drawing perilously near. To condemn the Christ as a gluttonous man and a wine-bibber, as breaking the Sabbath, or blaspheming when He said, Thy sins be forgiven thee, was to speak a word against the Son of Man. These offences might be sins of ignorance, not implying more than narrowness and prejudice. But to see a man delivered from the power of Satan unto God, to watch the work of the Spirit of God, and then to ascribe that work to the power of evil, this was to be out of sympathy with goodness and mercy altogether. In such a character there was no opening for repentance, and therefore none for forgiveness. The capacity for goodness in any form was destroyed by this kind of antagonism. (2.) We dare not say, and our Lord does not say it, that the Pharisees had actually committed this sin, but it was towards this that they were drifting. And in reference to later times, we may say that this is the ultimate stage of antagonism to God and to His truth, when the clearest proofs of divine power and goodness are distorted into evidence that the power is evil. The human nature in that extremest debasement has identified itself with the devil nature, and must share its doom.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

31. Wherefore That is, in consequence of what has just been said. This seems to imply either that the Pharisees had committed a blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, or were in great danger of so doing. There is nothing to show conclusively which. All manner All sorts of sin may upon repentance, through the atonement, be forgiven. Blasphemy The original meaning of the word blasphemy is simply reproach or slander. At the present time it is applied almost exclusively in reference to the Supreme Being. It may therefore, in general, be defined “the utterance of a presumptuous insult toward God.” But as it may be as truly committed in thought or in act as in speech, it may rather be defined the offering a presumptuous insult to God. It is a great sin. Humanly speaking, there may be greater crimes; but there can be no greater sin. If the magnitude of an offence be measured by the rank of the dignity insured, this must be pre-eminently an infinite sin. It is therefore the wonder and the glory of the atonement that it should be forgiven, or that the author of it should escape everlasting retribution. This passage informs us that such forgiveness, through the atonement, can take place, when the blasphemy and the insult infringe against the Father or the Son; but when the blasphemy finds itself appropriated by the Holy Ghost as an insult to himself, there is no forgiveness.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

“Therefore I say to you, All sin and blasphemy will be forgiven to men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.”

Here Jesus directly challenges the Pharisees. So wonderful and so startling is the revelation of the power of the Spirit of God at work in the world, and therefore of the presence of the Kingly Rule of God, that to actually turn against it is to turn from God. And if the heart persists in such an attitude, it will become hardened. Then forgiveness will not be possible. Not because God withholds a forgiveness that is sought for, but because such men harden themselves against ever seeking it.

Jesus’ words here are both an encouragement and a warning. They are an encouragement in that they declare that all kinds of sin and blasphemy may be forgiven man. There is nothing that puts us beyond God’s forgiveness if we truly repent, if we acknowledge our sin and are changed in heart and mind in relation to it. They are thus an assurance that for all of us, however sinful we may have become, there is a way back to God.

But they are also a warning that there is one sin which will not be forgiven to any man, and that is to ‘blaspheme against the Holy Spirit’. In context this has in mind that the Spirit’s work has been openly manifested before the Pharisees in such a way and in such an atmosphere of the presence of the Spirit of God, that it cannot be denied except by a perverse heart. Here the Spirit was openly and manifestly at work, and testifying to Jesus in every heart which was open to receive it. They could see it in what was happening all around them (as also had the towns of Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum had seen it – Mat 11:20-24). And of such things, when performed by what they saw as ‘good Jews’, they had always spoken highly. So if they now closed their hearts to this work of the Spirit, and against all the evidence, because of their own obstinacy, imputed it to Satan, then they were closing their hearts to the only power that could save them. They were deliberately ‘calling good, evil’ (Isa 5:20). But doing that involved the danger of establishing a permanent mindset. And once their hearts had become set in that way there would then be no way in which they could be saved. All hope of forgiveness would have gone. This would not be because God’s forgiveness was not available. That is always available to those who seek it through Jesus. It would be because they would have set their own hearts against any chance of repentance. For every time we resist the working of the Holy Spirit, we add to the barrier in our own hearts against His working, until in the end we make it impossible for us even to think of repentance. True deathbed conversions are rare.

It should be noted in this regard that the sure sign that a person has not yet committed this sin is that they are troubled about it. For the person who has committed this sin will never be troubled about it. His heart will have become so unyielding that he no longer considers the matter any more. He is perfectly satisfied with his ways. But let the person who is troubled then make sure that he repents. For if he does not his opportunity may slip away, and may simply contribute towards his hardening.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Men Are Especially Known By Their Words (12:31-37).

Having put right the Pharisees’ wrong conception about Him He now warns them to beware what they say. For what they say will reveal the truth about them, and they will have to give an account of their very words and what they signify at the Day of Judgment. They will be known by their fruit. ‘You offspring of vipers’ indicates that the Pharisees are still directly in mind, compare Mat 3:7.

The passage continues in a series of contrasts, blasphemy as a whole as contrasted with the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit; speaking a word against the Son of Man in contrast with speaking a word against the Holy Spirit; that such will not be forgiven either in this world/age, or in that which is to come; that the tree and its fruit is either good or is corrupt; that that which is evil cannot speak good things; that a good man brings forth good things, and an evil man brings forth evil things; that by their words men will be justified, or by them will be condemned. In the presence of Jesus men are at a crisis point, and to continually reject His words will be catastrophic (Mat 12:41-45).

Analysis.

a “Therefore I say to you, Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven to men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven” (Mat 12:31).

b “And whoever will speak a word against the Son of man, it will be forgiven him, but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in that which is to come” (Mat 12:32).

c “Either make the tree good, and its fruit good, or make the tree corrupt, and its fruit corrupt, for the tree is known by its fruit” (Mat 12:33).

d “You offspring of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Mat 12:34).

c “The good man out of his good treasure brings forth good things, and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil things” (Mat 12:35).

b “And I say to you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they will give account of them in the day of judgment” (Mat 12:36).

a “For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (Mat 12:37).

Note that in ‘a’ the blasphemy against the Spirit will never be forgiven, and in the parallel men will be condemned by their very words. In ‘b’ speaking against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven either in this world or in that which is to come, while in the parallel men will have to give account for every idle word in the Day of Judgment. In ‘c’ the tree is known by its fruit and in the parallel a man is known by the good or evil treasure that comes from his heart. Centrally in ‘d’ the Pharisees are shown up as evil by their words.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Sin against the Holy Ghost.

A solemn warning:

v. 31. Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

v. 32. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

The Jews were having their day of grace with manifestations of God’s mercy such as had never been granted to any nation before. The Spirit was making a most gracious effort to reach their hearts and minds through the Word as preached by Christ and His disciples. But their leaders and many of the common people were deliberately hardening their hearts against the influence of Christ’s work and message. As long as the opposition and even the blasphemy would flow mainly from ignorance and be directed chiefly against the person of Christ, there would be opportunity and probability of repentance. Just as soon, however, as there is blaspheming against the Holy Ghost, then all this is changed. For this implies that a person has, indeed, conceded and acknowledged Jesus as the Redeemer of the world, that he has had the conviction of faith, that he was unable to deny the evidence; but in the face of evidence and conviction he deliberately, blasphemously rejects the work of the Holy Ghost for his salvation. The phrase: Neither in this world nor in the world to come, emphatically declares that the peculiar nature of this sin precludes all forgiveness; there is absolutely no hope.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Mat 12:31. Shall be forgiven unto men It is evidently our Lord’s meaning here, not that every such sin shall actually be pardoned, but that it is, in the divine economy, capable of being pardoned, or is pardonable. Dr. Campbell renders the passage, in men is pardonable.

Mat 12:31-32. The inference in these verses is not particularly connected with the member of the discourse immediately preceding it; but it arises from the whole series of the reasoning; as if our Lord had said, “Since all these arguments make it evident that I perform my miracles by the Spirit of God, you should not ascribe them to the devil; yet this blasphemy may be forgiven you, because you may repent and believe, upon receiving stronger proofs of my mission from God. When that period comes, namely, after I am raised from the dead by the Holy Ghost; when his miraculous gifts are shed down upon believers, and the nature of the Messiah’s kingdom is more fully made known, the foundation of your prejudices against me shall be wholly removed: wherefore, if you shall then speak against the Holy Ghost by maliciously affirming that his gifts and miracles come from the devil, it shall not be forgiven you; because it is a sin which you cannot possibly repent of, inasmuch as farther evidence shall not be offered you; but you shall be punished for it both in this world and in the world to come.” Or we may translate the clause differently: “It shall not be forgiven him, neither in this age, neither in the age to come;” importing, that no expiation was provided for the blasphemer of the Spirit, neither under the Jewish nor Christian dispensation. St. Mark adds, Mar 3:30. Because they said, he hath an unclean spirit; signifying, that our Lord declared the irremissibleness of the sin against the Holy Ghost on this occasion, that the Pharisees might be awakened to a sense of their danger, in approaching so near as they did to that sin, when, being unable to deny his miracles, they represented them as performed by the assistance of the devil. The reader desirous of seeing the above interpretation indubitably confirmed is referred to Dr. Whitby’s note, and 4th appendix to St. Matthew, and to John Hales’s tracts. Archbishop Tillotson, vol. 1: serm. 17 has endeavoured to prove, that the sin against the Holy Ghost was that which these Pharisees committed in ascribing the miracles of Christ to Satan: and certainly, if they persisted in that blasphemy after the full demonstration of Christ’s mission, this was really to sin against the Holy Ghost. Dr. Clarke’s paraphrase, vol. 6: serm. 1 nearly agrees with what we have above given; but for the satisfaction of the reader on a subject of so much inquiry, we shall here subjoin it: “Since it is as evident as it is possible for any thing to be, that the works which I do are by the immediate authority of God, and by the power of the Holy Spirit, therefore whosoever shall resist this great conviction, by so unreasonable and obstinate a degree of malice, as to ascribe these very works, these greatest and highest evidences of divine authority, to the power of the devil; to such a person God will never afford any farther means of conviction; and therefore, though all other blasphemies, and all particular sins whatsoever, may be repented of and forgiven, yet he who is guilty of this total corruption of mind, this maliciously perverse and desperate rejecting of the greatest and highest conviction which God vouchsafes to afford men, shall never have granted him any farther means of repentance and forgiveness. Every particular kind or sort of sin whatsoever, and all other blasphemies whatsoever, shall be forgiven men: even he that speaks against me (says our Lord) in all other respects, or calumniates me upon any other account whatsoever, and is not at first convinced bymy preaching and exhortations, may yet afterwards be convinced by the mighty works he shall see, and by the power of the Holy Ghost, and so repent and be forgiven: but he who obstinately resists even this greatest and most extraordinary method which God has thought fit to make use of for the conversion of mankind, and maliciously reviles the most evident operations of the Spirit of God; such a one has no farther means left, by which he might be convinced and brought to repentance, and consequently he can never be forgiven.”

Mat 12:32. Whosoever speaketh a word, &c. The prejudices which alleviated the sin of the Jews, who rejected Jesus during his own lifetime, and which in the period here referred to (viz. the day of Pentecost) were to be removed, arose from such causes as these: 1st,His parentage and place of abode; for his countrymen, being well acquainted with both, would not allow him to be the Messiah, because they imagined when the Messiah came, no man would know whence he was, Joh 7:27. 2nd, The old prophet Elias had not appeared to usher in the Messiah, as they expected, according to the doctrine of the scribes, Mat 17:10 founded on the prophesy, Mal 4:5. 3rdly, Christ’s mean condition of life occasioned violent prejudices against him in the minds of the Jews, who firmly believed that their Messiah would be surrounded with all the pomp and splendour of an earthly prince; and who, in speaking of him, had been accustomed to give him the titles of the King of Israel, and Son of God. But, by our Lord’s resurrection from the dead, and by the descent of the Spirit on the Apostles, the foundation of all these prejudices was sapped. Then he was demonstrated to be the Son of God with power, Rom 1:4. Then he was known to have come down from heaven, Joh 6:60-62. Then he was exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance and remission of sins, Act 5:31.A kinglydignity, infinitely superior to all the most dazzling honours of an earthly diadem. See Macknight.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mat 12:31 . ] refers back to all that has been said since Mat 12:25 : On this account because, in bringing such an accusation against me, Mat 12:24 , you have as my enemies (Mat 12:30 ) resisted the most undoubted evidence of the contrary (Mat 12:25 ff.), on this account I must tell you, and so on.

. . .] Genus and species: every sin and (in particular) blaspheming (of sacred things, as of the Messiah Himself, Mat 12:32 ).

. .] Blaspheming of the Spirit (Mar 3:29 ; Luk 12:10 ) is the sin in question, and of which that allegation on the part of the Pharisees, Mat 12:24 , is an instance, so that it is probably too much to say, as though the new birth must be presumed, that it can only occur in the case of a Christian , a view which was held by Huther, Quenstedt, and others. As, then, in the present instance the Pharisees had hardened themselves against an unmistakeable revelation of the Spirit of God, as seen in the life and works of Jesus, had in fact taken up an attitude of avowed hostility to this Spirit; so much so that they spoke of His agency as that of the devil: so in general the may be defined to be the sin which a man commits when he rejects the undoubted revelation of the Holy Spirit, and that not merely with a contemptuous moral indifference (Gurlitt; see, on the other hand, Mller, Lehre v. d. Snde , II. p. 598, Exo 5 ), but with the evil will struggling to shut out the light of that revelation; and even goes the length of expressing in hostile language his deliberate and conscious opposition to this divine principle, thereby avowing his adherence to his anti-spiritual confession . This sin is not forgiven , because in the utterly hardened condition which it presupposes, and in which it appears as the extreme point of sinful development, the receptivity for the influences of the Holy Spirit is lost, and nothing remains but conscious and avowed hatred toward this holy agency. In the case of the Christian, every conscious sin, and in particular all immoral speech, is also sin against the Holy Spirit (Eph 4:30 ); but what is meant by blaspheming the Spirit in the passage before us, is to go to the utmost extremity in apostasy from Christ and (1Jn 5:16 , and Huther’s note). See Grashoff in the Stud. u. Krit. 1833, p. 935 ff.; Gurlitt, ibid. 1834, p. 599 ff.; Tholuck, ibid. 1836, p. 401 ff.; Schaf, d. Snde wider d. heil. G. 1841; Jul. Mller, l.c.; Alex, ab Oettingen, de pecc. in Sp. s. 1856, where the older literature may also be found, and where the different views are criticised. [444] For the way in which the blaspheming against the Spirit is supposed to coincide, as far as the Christian is concerned, with the falling away mentioned in Heb 6:4-6 , see Delitzsch On the Hebrews , p. 231 ff.; Lnemann, p. 205 ff.

] should not have its meaning twisted by supplying “ as a rule ,” or such like; nor, with Grotius, is to be taken comparatively ( more heinous than all other sins ). The simple impossibility of forgiveness is just to be sought in the man’s own state of heart, which has become one of extreme hostility to God.

[444] At p. 87, Oettingen defines the sin thus: “Impoenitentia perpetua atque incredulitas usque ad finem, quae ex rebellante et obstinatissima repudiatione testimonii Sp. s. evangelio sese manifestantis et in hominum cordibus operantis profecta blasphemando in Sp. s. per verbum et facinus in lucem prodit.”

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

DISCOURSE: 1355
THE SIN AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST

Mat 12:31. I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

THE sins of men have, in all the ages of the world, been the means and occasions of displaying the Divine goodness. It is through the fall of the first Adam, and the crucifixion of Christ, the second Adam, that we attain the knowledge of Gods mercy, and see how the exercise of it can consist with the rights of justice. The wickedness of the Pharisees, to whom the words of our text were addressed, was exceeding heinous: yet was it an occasion of manifesting the most unbounded compassion of our Lord. He had cast out a devil, and thereby not only conveyed a rich blessing to the person whom he had healed, but had given an irrefragable proof of his own divine mission. But the Pharisees, blinded by prejudice, imputed his miracle to a confederacy with the devil. Our Lord, instead of giving them up, as he might have justly done, to judicial blindness and impenitence, condescended meekly to reason with them on the subject, and then affectionately cautioned them against indulging so base a spirit; assuring them, that all which they had said and done against him might be forgiven; but that if they should persist in this conduct towards the Holy Spirit also, and reject his testimony, they would cut themselves off from all possibility of obtaining mercy.

Our Lords address to them leads us to consider the extent of Gods mercy; and shews us,

I.

To what it will not extend

It is of great importance to ascertain correctly what is meant by the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost
[Many have thought that the sin against the Holy Ghost consisted in ascribing the miracles of Jesus to the agency of Satan. But this opinion is founded on a misconstruction of a passage in St. Marks Gospel [Note: Mar 3:30.]. The Evangelists observation, Because they said, he hath an unclean spirit, was not intended to shew what the sin against the Holy Ghost was, but to specify what the occasion was, which called forth so awful an admonition. In that very place, the inspired writer contrasts the blasphemy against the Son of man, which the Pharisees now uttered, with the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which they were in danger of uttering, when the Holy Ghost should be sent down from heaven [Note: Mar 3:28-29. compared with the words following my text. Observe, he does not say hath blasphemed, but shall blaspheme.]: and he observes that the former might be forgiven; but that the latter could not.

The sin against the Holy Ghost was the acting towards the Holy Spirit, as they now did towards Christ: it was the resisting of all the evidences of Christianity, so as deliberately to pour contempt upon the truths revealed by the Holy Spirit: and, the ascribing of his miraculous powers, and gracious influences, to the agency of Satan [Note: This cannot be made more plain, than by the following paraphrase of a learned commentator: You have represented me as a wine-bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners, and as one who casts out devils by Beelzebub; and you will still go on, after all the miracles which I have wrought among you, to represent me as a false prophet, and a deceiver of the people: nevertheless all these grievous sins shall be forgiven you, if that last dispensation of the Holy Ghost, which I, after my ascension, shall send among you, shall prevail with you to believe in me: but if, when I have sent the Holy Ghost to testily the truth of my mission, and of my resurrection, you shall continue in your unbelief, and shall blaspheme the Holy Ghost, and represent him also as an evil spirit, your sin shall never be forgiven, nor shall any thing further be done to call you to repentance. See Whitbys Dissertation on the subject.].[

Why this sin in particular is excepted from the general offers of ardon, it is also of great importance to understand
[It is plainly declared to be unpardonable. But is not the mercy of God sufficiently extensive to cover this? Yes, doubtless; for it is infinite, as all his perfections are. Is there not then a sufficiency in the blood of Christ to atone for this? Yes; his death is a sufficient propitiation for the sins of the whole world. Must we then refer it to the sovereign decree of heaven; and say, that God, in righteous judgment, has excepted this from the general proclamation of forgiveness? Perhaps this may be one reason: for St. John mentions a sin unto death, for the forgiveness of which it is in vain to intercede [Note: 1Jn 5:16.]. But the more substantial reason is, that the sin itself, in the very nature of things, excludes a person from all hope of mercy. God has provided salvation for us through the blood of his Son, and the influences of his Spirit; and has told us that there neither is, nor ever will be, any other way of salvation for sinful man. Now if we despise this salvation, and account it only a devilish delusion, what can be done? We must die, because we reject the only means of life. As a man who has taken a poisonous draught, may live, provided he apply a proper remedy, so a man who has committed the most deadly sins may nevertheless be saved at last, if he truly embrace the Gospel of Christ: but if he will not use the remedy provided for him, he must abide the consequences, and perish for ever. We must not however imagine, that every rejection of the Gospel is unpardonable; for that, which is occasioned by an ignorance of its true nature, may be forgiven [Note: 1Ti 1:13.]; but it then becomes unpardonable, when it is wilful and deliberate, against the convictions of our conscience, and the dictates of an enlightened judgment. It then argues a mind given up to its own delusions, and sealed up under final impenitence; and therefore it cannot be forgiven, because it will never be repented of.]

There being no other limit to Gods mercy, it is easy to see,

II.

To what it will extend

This only excepted, every species and degree of sin may be forgiven. This blessed truth may be abundantly proved,

1.

From Scripture examples

[If we look at sins committed before conversion, we shall see that every species of enormity has been pardoned. What horrible uncleanness had the Corinthians been guilty of! yet they were washed, justified, and sanctified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God [Note: 1Co 6:9-11.]. Murders have in some instances been, not only committed, but multiplied: yet Manasseh, who, in addition to the most impious idolatries, had filled the streets of Jerusalem with the blood of innocents, was pardoned [Note: 2Ki 21:16. with 2Ch 33:9; 2Ch 33:12-13.]. The persecuting of Gods Church and people also, though it is like the piercing of the apple of Gods eye, has been forgiven: yea, Saul, the most furious of all zealots, was stopped in the midst of his outrages, and transformed into a blessed Apostle, in order that he might be an everlasting monument of the power and grace of Christ [Note: 1Ti 1:16.]. To sum up all in one; the very murder of the Son of God himself has been forgiven; and thousands of those who cried out, Crucify him, crucify him, were converted in answer to that petition of our Lord, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.

We may extend our observation also to sins committed after conversion. Who can contemplate without horror the conduct of David; who, though an eminent professor and patron of religion, defiled the wife of his faithful subject, and, in order to conceal his crime, laid a plot to destroy him? Consider him, I say, murdering this man who was exposing his life continually for his sake, murdering also a multitude of other persons together with him, involving another person in the guilt of all these murders as his instrument and accomplice, and making the very man, whose death he was contriving, the bearer of that letter, which was devoting him to destruction: consider him moreover, when he had accomplished his purpose, blasphemously ascribing the death of all these persons to God [Note: 2Sa 11:25.], then instantly taking the adulterous Bathsheba to live with him as his wife; and, after all, living at least nine months in utter impenitence, as though he had committed no crime at all!! In an ignorant heathen, such conduct would have been inexpressibly vile; but in a saint of God, the man after Gods own heartwho would conceive it possible? To believe that such iniquity was ever committed, seems almost a libel upon human nature. Yet even this, surpassing as it does almost the bounds of credibility, was forgiven, and that too, upon the very first motion of penitence in Davids heart [Note: 2Sa 12:13.]. Peters sin, if viewed in all its aggravations, was scarcely less than this: yet, even while he was committing it, our Lord looked on him with pity and compassion; and afterwards thrice repeated the commission, which restored him openly to his apostleship [Note: Joh 21:15-17.].]

2.

From Scripture declarations

[Consult we the Prophets? They speak strongly on this point, declaring that we are redeemed from all sins, even those of a scarlet or crimson die [Note: Isa 1:18.]. Ask we of the Apostles? They speak in terms of similar import [Note: 1Jn 1:7; 1Jn 2:1-2.], and contrast the Gospel with the law in this particular; that whereas there were some sins, for which there was no sacrifice appointed under the law of Moses, there is no iniquity whatever from which we may not be justified by the Gospel of Christ [Note: Act 13:38-39.]. If we attend to the voice of Christ himself, we shall find him no less explicit: he assures us that whosoever believeth in him shall never die, shall never be cast out [Note: Joh 11:26; Joh 6:37.]. Thus universally do the Scriptures testify, that all manner of sin, yea, even the most horrid blasphemies wherewith any man can blaspheme, (except the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost) shall be forgiven unto men.

It must however be remembered, that these declarations suppose that we repent and believe the Gospel; for, without repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus, no sin whatever can be pardoned.]
Before we close, it will be proper to add,

1.

A word of admonition

[We hope and trust that there are not any in this day, who are guilty of the sin, which is here declared unpardonable: but many who scoff at religion, and deride the influences of the Spirit, may be much nearer to the commission of it than they imagine. It will be well for all such persons to pause, and consider on what a precipice they stand for they may do despite to the Spirit of grace till they have quenched his sacred motions, and provoked him to abandon them to their own delusions. The Lord grant that none of us may bring down on ourselves such a tremendous judgment!]

2.

A word of consolation

[Some are tempted to think that they have committed the unpardonable sin: but if it be true, that the commission of it is always attended with judicial blindness, and followed by final impenitence, then no one can have committed it, who is apprehensive that he has been guilty of it: because, instead of indulging such fears, he would go on glorying in his shame, and hardening himself in his iniquities. Let all such apprehensions then be put away; and let that other declaration of the text abide upon our minds for our comfort and encouragement under all the accusations of a guilty conscience [Note: Psa 130:7-8.] O let all of us avail ourselves of this gracious declaration, whilst yet the proffered mercy lies within our reach ]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

“Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. (32) And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. (33) Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.”

I must postpone the observations on this passage to my Commentary on the similar one, Mar 3:28 , to which therefore I refer.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

Ver. 31. All manner of sin and blasphemy, &c. ] All without exception, yea, though it be blasphemy, Isa 44:22 . God blots out the thick cloud as well as the cloud, enormities as well as infirmities. Man cannot commit more than he can and will remit to the penitent. The sun by his force can scatter the greatest mist, as well as the least vapour; and the sea by its vastness drown mountains as well as mole hills. The grace of our Lord “abounds to flowing over,” saith St Paul, , 1Ti 1:14 ; “The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin,” saith St John. Joh 1:7 Ego admisi, unde tu damnare potes me, sed non amisisti unde tu salvare potes me, saith Augustine. And yet Novatus, the proud heretic, denied the possibility of pardon to them that had any whit fallen off in times of persecution, though they rose again by repentance. But God’s thoughts of mercy are not as man’s, Isa 55:8 ; he can and will pardon such sins as no god or man can do besides,Mic 7:18Mic 7:18 ; “Who is a God like unto thee?” For what? “That pardoneth all sorts of sin,” &c. This none can believe without supernatural grace. We are ready to measure God by our model.

But the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, &c. ] This is nothing else, saith John Diazius, to that butcher his brother, quam agnitam veritatem flagitiose insectari a malicious persecuting of the known truth. A sin it is of malice after strong conviction, expressed in words by a tongue set on fire by hell, and in actions coming from a venomous spirit, and tending to opposition and bitter persecution, if their malice be not greater than their power. This was committed by Saul, Julian, Latomus of Lovain, a Rockwood, a chief persecutor at Calice in Henry VIII’s days, who, to his last breath, staring and raging, cried that he was utterly damned, for that he had sought maliciously the deaths of a number of the most honest men in the town, &c. Stephen Gardiner said as much also in effect to himself, when he lay on his deathbed, and so both stinkingly and unrepentantly died, saith Mr Fox.

a Latomus confessus est inter horrendos mugitus, se contra conscientiam adversatum esse veritati. Melancth.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

31, 32. ] , because this is the case: see last note. Notice again the , used by our Lord when He makes some revelation of things hidden from the sons of men: see ch. Mat 6:29 ; Mat 18:10 ; Mat 18:19 : and Mat 12:36 below. The distinction in these much-controverted verses seems to be, between (1) the sin and blasphemy which arises from culpable ignorance and sensual blindness, as that of the fool who said in his heart ‘There is no God,’ of those who, e.g. Saul of Tarsus, opposed Jesus as not being the Christ; which persons, to whatever degree their sin may unhappily advance, are capable of enlightenment, repentance, and pardon: and (2) the blasphemy of those who, acknowledging God, and seeing his present power working by His Holy Spirit, openly oppose themselves to it, as did, or as were very near doing (for our Lord does not actually imply that they had incurred this dreadful charge), these Pharisees. They may as yet have been under the veil of ignorance; but this their last proceeding, in the sight of Him who knows the hearts, approximated very near to, or perhaps reached, this awful degree of guilt. The principal misunderstanding of this passage has arisen from the prejudice which possesses men’s minds owing to the use of the words, ‘the sin against the Holy Ghost.’ It is not a particular species of sin which is here condemned, but a definite act shewing a state of sin, and that state a wilful determined opposition to the present power of the Holy Spirit; and this as shewn by its fruit, . The declaration, in substance, often occurs in the N.T. See 1Jn 5:16 , and note on there: 2Ti 3:8 ; Jud 1:4 ; Jud 1:12-13 ; Heb 10:26-31 ; Heb 6:4-8 . Euthymius expands the sense well and clearly: , , , , , , , , , , ( (?)) .

No sure inference can be drawn from the words with regard to forgiveness of sins in a future state. Olshausen remarks that a parallel on the other side is found in ch. Mat 10:41-42 , where the recognition of divine power in those sent from God is accompanied with promise of eternal reward. He himself however understands the passage (as many others have done) to imply forgiveness on repentance in the imperfect state of the dead before the judgment, and considers it to be cognate with 1Pe 3:18 ff. Augustine speaks very strongly, de Civ. Dei xxi. 24, vol. vii.: ‘Neque enim de quibusdam veraciter diceretur, quod non eis remittatur neque in hoc sculo neque in futuro, nisi essent quibus, etsi non in isto, tamen remittatur in futuro.’ See, on the whole subject, note on 1Pe 3:18 ff. In the almost entire silence of Scripture on any such doctrine, every principle of sound interpretation requires that we should hesitate to support it by two difficult passages, in neither of which does the plain construction of the words absolutely require it.

The expressions (= , Tit 2:12 ; 2Ti 4:10 ; , Mar 10:30 ; , Eph 2:2 ; , Gal 1:4 ) and (= , Mar 10:30 ; , Luk 20:35 ; , Eph 2:7 ) were common among the Jews, and generally signified respectively the time before and after the coming of the Messiah. In the N.T. these significations give place to the present life , and that to come: the present mixed state of wheat and tares, and the future completion of Messiah’s Kingdom after the great harvest. The expression is not found. , &c., seem to differ from . . or . , in never being spoken of, or as in, individuals, but as an age of time belonging to the universal Church.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mat 12:31-32 . Jesus changes His tone from argument to solemn warning .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mat 12:31 . connects not merely with preceding verse, but with the whole foregoing argument. Mark more impressively introduces the blasphemy logion with a solemn . , etc. A broad preliminary declaration of the pardonableness of human sin of all sorts, and especially of sins of the tongue, worthy and characteristic of Jesus, and making what follows more impressive. . . . : pointed, emphatic exception. Evidently the Spirit here is taken ethically. He represents the moral ideal, the absolutely good and holy. Blasphemy against the Spirit so conceived, unpardonable that is our Lord’s deliberate judgment. , injurious speech (from and ), in such a case will mean speaking of the holy One as if He were unholy, or, in the abstract, calling good evil, not by misunderstanding but through antipathy to the good.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 12:31-32

31″Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. 32 Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.”

Mat 12:31-32 This reference to blasphemy against the Spirit is often called “the unpardonable sin.” From the parallel in Mar 3:28 it is obvious that “Son of Man” was not a title for Jesus in this context but a generic use of the Hebrew idiom “sons of men” or “mankind.” This is supported by the parallelism of Mat 12:31-32. The sin discussed was not the sin of ignorance but of willful rejection of God and His truth in the presence of great light. Many people worry about whether they have committed this sin. People who desire to know God or are afraid that they have committed this sin have not! This sin is the continuing rejection of Jesus in the presence of great light, to the point of spiritual callousness. This is similar to Heb 6:4-6; Heb 10:26-31.

SPECIAL TOPIC: THE PERSONHOOD OF THE SPIRIT

“either in this age or in the age to come”

SPECIAL TOPIC: THIS AGE AND THE AGE TO COME

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Wherefore = On this account. Greek. dia touto, same as “therefore”, Mat 12:27.

blasphemy = impious or evil speaking.

against the Holy Ghost = [concerning] the Spirit. Greek. pneuma with Art. See App-101.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

31, 32.] , because this is the case: see last note. Notice again the , used by our Lord when He makes some revelation of things hidden from the sons of men: see ch. Mat 6:29; Mat 18:10; Mat 18:19 : and Mat 12:36 below. The distinction in these much-controverted verses seems to be, between (1) the sin and blasphemy which arises from culpable ignorance and sensual blindness, as that of the fool who said in his heart There is no God,-of those who, e.g. Saul of Tarsus, opposed Jesus as not being the Christ; which persons, to whatever degree their sin may unhappily advance, are capable of enlightenment, repentance, and pardon:-and (2) the blasphemy of those who, acknowledging God, and seeing his present power working by His Holy Spirit, openly oppose themselves to it, as did, or as were very near doing (for our Lord does not actually imply that they had incurred this dreadful charge), these Pharisees. They may as yet have been under the veil of ignorance; but this their last proceeding, in the sight of Him who knows the hearts, approximated very near to, or perhaps reached, this awful degree of guilt. The principal misunderstanding of this passage has arisen from the prejudice which possesses mens minds owing to the use of the words, the sin against the Holy Ghost. It is not a particular species of sin which is here condemned, but a definite act shewing a state of sin, and that state a wilful determined opposition to the present power of the Holy Spirit; and this as shewn by its fruit, . The declaration, in substance, often occurs in the N.T. See 1Jn 5:16, and note on there: 2Ti 3:8; Jud 1:4; Jud 1:12-13; Heb 10:26-31; Heb 6:4-8. Euthymius expands the sense well and clearly: , , , , , , , , , , ( (?)) .

No sure inference can be drawn from the words -with regard to forgiveness of sins in a future state. Olshausen remarks that a parallel on the other side is found in ch. Mat 10:41-42, where the recognition of divine power in those sent from God is accompanied with promise of eternal reward. He himself however understands the passage (as many others have done) to imply forgiveness on repentance in the imperfect state of the dead before the judgment, and considers it to be cognate with 1Pe 3:18 ff. Augustine speaks very strongly, de Civ. Dei xxi. 24, vol. vii.: Neque enim de quibusdam veraciter diceretur, quod non eis remittatur neque in hoc sculo neque in futuro, nisi essent quibus, etsi non in isto, tamen remittatur in futuro. See, on the whole subject, note on 1Pe 3:18 ff. In the almost entire silence of Scripture on any such doctrine, every principle of sound interpretation requires that we should hesitate to support it by two difficult passages, in neither of which does the plain construction of the words absolutely require it.

The expressions (= , Tit 2:12; 2Ti 4:10; , Mar 10:30; , Eph 2:2; , Gal 1:4) and (= , Mar 10:30; , Luk 20:35; , Eph 2:7) were common among the Jews, and generally signified respectively the time before and after the coming of the Messiah. In the N.T. these significations give place to-the present life, and that to come: the present mixed state of wheat and tares, and the future completion of Messiahs Kingdom after the great harvest. The expression is not found. , &c., seem to differ from . . or . , in never being spoken of, or as in, individuals, but as an age of time belonging to the universal Church.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Mat 12:31. , blasphemy) The most atrocious kind of sin. He who insults the majesty of an earthly king by injurious language, is much more severely punished than he who steals many thousands of gold pieces.-, shall be forgiven) so that the punishment may be remitted to the penitent.- , the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost) Sin against the Holy Spirit is one thing, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is another. The word , sin, is not repeated here. The sinner injures himself by sin: the blasphemer affects many others with irreparable harm. And the Pharisees blasphemed the Holy Spirit, not in a mere ordinary holy man, but in the Messiah Himself.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

sin Sin. (See Scofield “Rom 3:23”).

blasphemy Ascribing to Satan the work of the Holy Spirit. Cf. Mat 12:24; Mat 12:32; Mat 12:40.

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

All: Isa 1:18, Isa 55:7, Eze 33:11, 1Ti 1:13-15, Heb 6:4,*etc: Heb 10:26, Heb 10:29, 1Jo 1:9, 1Jo 2:1, 1Jo 2:2

blasphemy: Blasphemy, [Strong’s G988], either from [Strong’s G984], , to hurt, or blast the reputation, or from [Strong’s G906], , to smite with words, or reports, when applied to men denotes injurious speaking, or calumny, and when used in reference to God signifies speaking impiously of his nature, attributes, and works.

but: Mar 3:28-30, Luk 12:10, Act 7:51, 1Jo 5:16

Reciprocal: Exo 34:7 – forgiving Lev 6:7 – it shall be Lev 24:16 – blasphemeth Pro 19:1 – perverse Mar 4:17 – have Luk 11:18 – ye say Luk 22:65 – blasphemously Joh 8:48 – thou

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

2:31

All manner of sin. This phrase is so direct and complete that it will not admit a single exception but the one that Jesus makes. (More on this thought in the next verse.) The original word for blasphemy is defined by Thayer as follows: “Universally, slander, detraction, speech injurious to another’s good name.”

forgiven. Neither in this world, neither in the world to come. The original word for world is AION and one meaning of it is “age.” When Jesus spoke this passage the Jewish age was in force, and the Christian age was to come. The blasphemy against the Holy Spirit would not be forgiven under

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Mat 12:31. Our Lord, who knew the thoughts of His opposers, now explains the awful meaning of their enmity.

Therefore I say unto you. A revelation on the authority of Christ.

Every sin and blasphemy. Every sin up to and including blasphemy, with the exception afterwards mentioned. Blasphemy, the worst form of sin: it is malicious evil-speaking against God. Even this may be forgiven if repented of.

But the blasphemy against the Spirit. The one exception. The Spirit, of course, means the Spirit of God (Mat 12:28). See next verse.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Observe, 1. How our Saviour makes a difference betwixt speaking against the Son of man, and speaking against the Holy Ghost. By speaking against the Son of man, is meant all those reproaches that were cast upon our Saviour’s person as Man, without reflecting upon his divine power as God, which he testified by his miracles. Such were their reproaching him with the meanness of his birth, their censuring him for a Wine-bibber and a Glutton, and the like. But by speaking against the Holy Ghost, is meant, their blaspheming and reproaching that divine power whereby he wrought his miracles; which was an immediate reflection upon the Holy Spirit, and a blaspheming of him.

Observe, 2. The nature of this sin of speaking against the Holy Ghost: it consisteth in this, that the Pharisees seeing our Saviour work miracles, and cast out devils by the Spirit of God, contrary to the conviction of their own minds, they maliciously ascribed his miracles to the power of the devil, charging him to be a sorcerer and a magician, and to have a familiar spirit, by whose help he did those mighty works; when in truth he did them by the Spirit of God.

Observe, 3. That this sin above all others is called unpardonable, of such blasphemers of the Holy Spirit, is not only dangerous, but desperate; because they resist their last remedy, and ooppose the best means for their conviction. What can God do more to convince a man that Jesus Christ is the true Messiah, than to work miracles for that purpose? Now they will say it is not God that works them, but the devil; as if Satan would conspire against himself, and seek the ruin of his own kingdom; there is no way left to convince such persons, but they must and will continue in their opposition to truth, to their inevitable condemnation.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Mat 12:31. All manner of sin and blasphemy The word rendered blasphemy: denotes injurious expressions, whether against God or man. When God is the object, it is properly rendered blasphemy. It is evident that, in this passage, both are included, as the different kinds are compared together: consequently the general term detraction, or injurious speech, ought to be employed, which is applicable alike to both; whereas the term blasphemy, with us, is not used of any verbal injury that is not aimed directly against God. Shall be forgiven unto men That is, on condition of true repentance, and faith in the mercy of God through Christ; or, as the words evidently mean, may be forgiven unto men; for we are not to understand our Lord as asserting that every such sin shall actually be pardoned, but that it is, in the divine economy, capable of being pardoned. But the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men By the blasphemy here spoken of, we are evidently to understand injurious or impious speaking against the Spirit of God, such as the Pharisees were now guilty of; that is, attributing to the devil those miracles which Christ gave full proof that he wrought by the Holy Spirit. That this, and nothing but this, is the sin here intended, is manifest from the connection in which the words stand in this place; and more especially still from the parallel passage, Mar 3:28-30, in which the evangelist, assigning the reason of our Lords making this declaration, adds, Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit; that is, hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of devils casteth out devils. This, then, and this only, is the sin, or blasphemy, as it should rather be called, (and as the Scriptures always call it,) against the Holy Ghost. It is an offence of the tongue; it is committed not by thinking, but by speaking, by evil-speaking, by belying, slandering, or reviling the Divine Spirit, by which our Lord wrought his miracles, ascribing them to the devil: which in fact was calling the Holy Ghost, or the Spirit of the one living and true God, the devil: a more heinous crime than which is not to be conceived.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Verse 31

Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. The sin which I the Pharisees had been committing was that of maliciously and stubbornly ascribing to Satan those works which they well knew could only be performed by divine power.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

Jesus followed up His statement about the impossibility of being neutral (Mat 12:30) with this further warning. The "therefore" (Gr. dia touto) indicates this relationship. Blasphemy involves extreme slander (cf. Mat 9:3). God would forgive any sin, including extreme slander of Jesus, when a person trusted in Jesus. However, He would not forgive blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, in view of the context (Mat 12:24-28), involved attributing Jesus’ works to Satan rather than to the Spirit. The sin was not a matter of speech; the words spoken simply reflected the attitude of the heart. God would not forgive this sin because the person who committed it in Jesus’ day was thereby strongly rejecting Jesus as the Messiah. Even today the only sin one can commit that God will not forgive and that will result in his or her eternal damnation is rejection of Jesus Christ (cf. Joh 3:18). Attributing Jesus’ works to Satan was blasphemy of the Spirit in Jesus’ day and this resulted in damnation.

Can a person commit this sin today? One can reject Jesus Christ, but one cannot blaspheme the Spirit in the same sense in which Jesus’ contemporaries could. To do so one would have to observe Jesus doing His works and attribute them to Satan. [Note: Cf. Barbieri, p. 46.] One could say therefore that blasphemy against the Spirit was an unforgivable sin during Jesus’ earthly ministry. The unforgivable sin at any time since Jesus began His earthly ministry to the present day is rejection of Jesus Christ.

Speaking a word against is the same as blasphemy. Extreme slander of Jesus was forgivable in His day provided it did not go as far as attributing His works to Satan. That constituted blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Jesus gave this warning to the professedly neutral person who might attribute His works to Satan (Mat 12:30). Such a person needed to realize that even though he or she was not speaking against Jesus that one was doing something with much graver consequences.

"Given Matthew’s christological interests and the unique and central position held by Jesus throughout the Gospel, one may understandably be surprised that Matthew has not said the reverse of what stands in the text, i.e., that blasphemy against the Spirit is forgivable but not that against the Son of Man. The gravity of the blasphemy against the Spirit, however, depends upon the Holy Spirit as the fundamental dynamic that stands behind and makes possible the entire messianic ministry of Jesus itself . . ." [Note: Hagner, p. 348.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)