Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 12:10
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.
10. it shall be forgiven him ] Thus our Lord prayed even for His murderers. This large rich promise is even further amplified in Mat 12:31. It is the sign of a dispensation different from that of Moses, Lev 24:16.
unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost ] The other passages in which mention is made of this awful ‘unpardonable sin’ and of the “blasphemy against the Holy Ghost” are Mat 12:31-32; Mar 3:29-30; 1Jn 5:16. The latter sin is expressly declared to be closely connected with the attributing of Christ’s miracles to Beelzebub On the exact nature of the ‘unpardonable sin’ theologians have speculated in vain, and all that we can see is that it must be the most flagrant degree of sin against the fullest light and knowledge.
it shall not be forgiven ] St Matthew adds “neither in this age (or ‘this dispensation’), nor in the age to come (the ‘future dispensation,’ i.e. the dispensation of the Messianic kingdom).” The two terms ‘this aeon’ and ‘the future aeon’ are of constant occurrence in Rabbinic literature. The passage if it means more than ‘in either dispensation’ proves, as St Augustine says, that some would be forgiven if not in this life yet in the next (De Civ. Dei, Luk 21:24).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
See the notes at Mat 12:32.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Luk 12:10
Blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost–
Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost
I.
First, the OCCASION on which this declaration was made requires our particular attention; for it does not appear that it was ever repeated or applied to any other subject.
II. Let us, then, inquire into THE NAME AND NATURE OF THE CRIME TO WHICH OUR SAVIOUR SO SOLEMNLY REFERS.
1. It is necessary to attend to the name, for it is often applied erroneously. Thus we often hear of the sin against the Holy Ghost; whereas it is called in Scripture by no name except blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. This distinction, however, is highly important; for there may be other sins against the Holy Ghost, though less criminal than blasphemy, and therefore not liable to the same terrible punishment. Thus the Apostle Paul said to the Thessalonians, Quench not the Spirit, and to the Ephesians, Grieve not the Holy Spirit.
2. We must, therefore, next consider the application of the word blasphemy here. In the original language of the New Testament it signifies detraction, or calumny, or slander, and is frequently mentioned as a crime committed against man. Thus, in the Acts of the Apostles, the Jews accused Stephen, saying, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God. But, in our language, blasphemy is never used in a general sense, or is said to be committed against man; it always denotes a crime committed against God.
3. Another observation deserves particular attention. The word blasphemy is never applied by our Saviour or His apostles to opinions formed in the mind, or to mere errors of judgment.
4. To prevent mistake it is necessary that we should define the nature of this crime with the utmost correctness and precision.
(1) Now as it is to be remembered that it is called blasphemy against God, or against the Holy Ghost, so it is necessary to remember that though the crime may be conceived and planned in the mind, yet it cannot be completed till it be uttered in words; for speech is essential to it, as the word blasphemy strictly and properly signifies hurtful speech.
(2) There was, however, a part of the crime of the Pharisees which was committed in their minds. It consisted in the malignant desire and intention of using words for the purpose of producing on the minds of others feelings of contempt or aversion, and disbelief, in relation to the miracles of Jesus. Still the crime was not completed till it was committed in words.
III. We come now to a very important question, WHY IS BLASPHEMY AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST DECLARED TO BE UNPARDONABLE?
1. It was not a crime to which the Pharisees were led by unforeseen accident, by sudden surprise, by laudable or even excusable feelings. On the contrary, it was deliberate, it was the result of reflection, it was a plan cautiously formed; for it was the consequence of a consultation among the scribes and Pharisees; and it formed the ground of a conspiracy against Jesus.
2. It showed, in this particular case, a total disregard of truth, It indicated a high degree of depravity, a complete want of principle, no fear of God, and a contempt for supernatural evidence, though of the strongest kind. In fine, it proved that their minds were closed against conviction; and that no proof, however powerful, nor means of improvement, however perfect, would be effectual.
3. But the strongest reason which can be given for declaring blasphemy against the Holy Ghost to be unpardonable, is, that it seems to be a crime for which there is no repentance. There are cases in which repentance becomes impossible. For repentance presupposes the existence of some good principles; it presupposes a disposition to discover truth, to examine evidence, to see our faults, and to be ready to acknowledge them, to feel shame, regret, and remorse for offending God. But there is nothing that we know which could produce repentance in men who have, for a long life, wilfully, stubbornly, and habitually rejected the most powerful means of conviction. Repentance supposes a sense of guilt capable of being roused on account of faults which we have discovered. But this cannot be when the understanding is perverted, and the conscience seared, and when the evil passions have expelled the pious and benevolent affections. It is true that the dread of future misery may still remain; but when the mind is reduced to so deplorable a state, the fear of future misery plunges men into despair. Now, where there is no repentance, we are not taught to expect pardon. Hence we may see why blasphemy is unpardonable. (J. Thomson, D. D.)
Of the sin against the Holy Ghost
First: What this sin against the Holy Ghost is, for people are very ignorant of it. Secondly: How and in what respect this sin against the Holy Ghost is above all other sins the unpardonable sin.
I. IF YOU ASK, WHAT THIS SIN IS? I answer both negatively and affirmatively. Negatively.
1. It is not that sin, whereby men do barely deny the personality, or the deity of the Holy Ghost. Possibly a man may deny the personality or the deity of the Holy Ghost, and yet not sin the sin against the Holy Ghost. For as Chrysostom observes, in his time there were divers heretics that did deny the personality and the deity of the Holy Ghost, and yet afterwards repented, and were received into the bosom of the Church. As it doth not consist therein, so neither cloth it consist in every opposition, or in a bare opposition unto the work of the Holy Ghost, as distinct from the Father and the Son. Unto God the Father belongs power; unto the Son, wisdom; unto the Spirit, holiness. The work of the Father is to create; the work of the Son, to redeem; the work of the Spirit, or the Holy Ghost, to sanctify. And hereupon some have thought that opposition unto holiness is the sin against the Holy Ghost. But you find here it is a blasphemy, therefore not every opposition. As it doth not consist therein, so it is not necessary that every man that sins the sin against the Holy Ghost, should be an universal apostate, backsliding from the profession of the gospel, and the power thereof. I know it is ordinarily thought so; but I say, it is not necessary that whosoever doth sin the sin against the Holy Ghost, should be a gospel apostate, backsliding from the gospel, and the power thereof, once professed: for these Pharisees, who sinned against the Holy Ghost, never professed the gospel, neither do we read of any backsliding in them, from the power of the gospel once professed; and yet they sinned against the Holy Ghost. Surely, therefore, such a gospel apostasy is not of the essence of the sin against the Holy Ghost. Some think that this sin doth consist in final unbelief and impenitency; but final impenitency and unbelief is not the sin against the Holy Ghost, for by final unbelief and impenitency, they either understand that impenitency and unbelief which a man lives and dies in, or that which he purposeth to continue in to the last. The latter cannot be the sin against the Holy Ghost, for many have purposed to continue in their unbelief to their death, and yet have been converted and pardoned. And the first cannot be the sin against the Holy Ghost, for–
1. The Jews whom Christ spake unto did then commit this sin, and yet they had not continued in it to their death.
2. Final unbelief is rather a sin against the Son; but the sin against the Holy Ghost is distinguished from that.
3. Our Saviour saith, Those that commit this sin shall not be forgiven in this world, nor in the world to come. Not in this world. If, therefore, final unbelief or impenitency be this sin, then Christ should threaten that he that dies in his sin shall not be forgiven whilst he lives.
4. If a man sin against the Father or Son, and die impenitently in that sin, he shall not be forgiven either in this life or in the life to come: but herein the sin against the Holy Ghost is worse than the sins against the Father or the Son, and therefore it cannot consist therein.
5. The apostle saith, There is a sin unto death, I say not that you pray for 1Jn 5:16). Doth he say that we must not pray for a man, and for the forgiveness of his sin when he is dead?
6. It is that sin for which there lies no remission, but a man may sin such a sin whilst he lives: for if any man sin wilfully, there remaineth no sacrifice for sin, and wilfully a man may sin before his death.
7. It is such a sin as a man may know another man is guilty of whilst he lives, for saith the apostle, There is a sin unto death, I say not that you pray for it: but final unbelief and impeniteney is not known till death.
8. Our Saviour saith, He that speaketh a word against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven. But a word may be spoken against the Spirit long before a man dies, and therefore surely this sin against the Holy Ghost doth not consist in final impenitency and unbelief; final unbelief and impenitency is not this sin against the Holy Ghost.
9. For then all wicked men living under the gospel, and dying impenitently, should sin the sin against the Holy Ghost, which is false. You will say, then, What is this sin against the Holy Ghost, and wherein doth it consist? Affirmatively. It is that wilful sinning against God, whereby a man doth maliciously oppose and blaspheme the proper and peculiar work of the Holy Ghost, and that after he hath been convinced thereof by the Holy Ghost. I say, It is a wilful sinning against God; and so the apostle speaks, saying, If any man sin wilfully, after he hath received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:26). So that the sin for which there is no sacrifice, and of which there is no remission, is a wilful sin. Now a man is said to sin wittingly, willingly, and wilfully:wittingly, in opposition to ignorance; willingly, in opposition to force and constraint; wilfully, in opposition to light, knowledge, and reason; and so he that sins against the Holy Ghost doth sin; for says the apostle, If any man sin wilfully, after he hath received the knowledge of the truth, &c. He that commits this sin doth also oppose and blaspheme the proper and peculiar work of the Holy Ghost; for it is called here, a blasphemy, and a blaspheming of the Spirit, as distinct from the Father and the Son. Suppose that some ignorance in the understanding be the remote cause of the sin, yet malice may be the next and chief cause. As for example: suppose that a man hath taken up some prejudice against another, through a mistake and error; yet now he hates him, and out of hatred kills him; shall not this murderer be said to kill him out of malice, because the malice was founded upon a mistake or error? Yes, surely. But why is he said to kill him out of malice? Because malice was the next cause of this murder. So that though ignorance be the remote cause of a sin, yet malice may be the next cause thereof; and being so, he shall be said truly to sin ex malitia, though with some precedent ignorance, as the remote cause thereof. Yet if you ask, how it can be that the will should be always carried out upon what is good, and yet a man sin maliciously? Plainly thus: from what hath been said, the will of man is an universal appetite, willing that which is naturally good, as well as that which is honestly good. If it be carried out upon that which is naturally good, it will hate all that spiritual good which is contrary to the obtainment of it, and the man will oppose and blaspheme what the will hates. Now because the hatred and malice of the will is the cause of that blasphemy and opposition, the man is truly said to oppose and blaspheme out of malice, though the will be carried on upon that which is naturally good at the same time; which was the case of these Pharisees: for they sought their own honour and greatness; Christ and the truth opposing, they did hate Him and the truth; and because they hated Him, the truth, and that light which reproved their sins, they did oppose and blaspheme, and that out of malice, and so the sin against the Holy Ghost is a malicious sin, or that sin whereby a man doth oppose and blaspheme the proper and peculiar work of the Spirit out of malice. Yet this is not all. But, it is that sin against God, whereby a man cloth maliciously oppose and blaspheme the peculiar work of the Holy Ghost, after he hath been convinced thereof by the Holy Ghost; for possibly a man may oppose and blaspheme, even maliciously, the work of the Holy Ghost, and yet not be convinced of it by the Holy Ghost, but otherwise; but these that sin this sin, are such as are enlightened, and made partakers of the Holy Ghost in the gifts and common graces of it (Heb 6:1-20.). And so these Pharisees were convinced by the Spirit which did work that great work before them; and yet after such a convincement wrought by the Spirit, they did maliciously oppose and blaspheme this work of the Spirit. So that I say, the sin against the Holy Ghost is that wilful sinning against God, whereby a man doth maliciously oppose and blaspheme the proper and peculiar work of the Holy Ghost, and that after he hath been convinced thereof by the Holy Ghost.
II. BUT WHY IS THIS SIN, ABOVE ALL OTHER SINS, UNPARDONABLE? Not in regard of difficulty only, or because it is hardly pardoned, as some would; for many sins are hardly pardoned, and yet are not the sins against the Holy Ghost; for, as Zanchy doth well observe, if this sin were only unpardonable, because it is hardly pardoned, then a man might pray for those that sin this sin: but the apostle saith, There is a sin unto death, I do not say that ye shall pray for it (1Jn 5:16). Therefore, the unpardonableness of it doth not lie here. Neither is it unpardonable only in regard of event, because in event it shall never be pardoned, for there are many sins which in event shall never be pardoned, which yet are not the sins against the Holy Ghost. There is many a wicked man that goes to hell, whose sins in event are not pardoned, and yet he did never sin against the Holy Ghost. Neither is it unpardonable because it is so great as doth exceed the power and mercy of God; for Gods mercy and power, in forgiving sins, is like Himself, infinite. Neither is it unpardonable because it is against the means of pardon; for then the sin against the free love of the Father, and the sin against the Son, should be unpardonable. Neither is it unpardonable because a man doth not repent thereof; for then all sins unrepented of should be sins against the Holy Ghost. It is true, that those who commit this sin cannot repent, as the apostle speaks–It is impossible that they should be renewed to repentance (Heb 6:1-20.), because God doth give them up to impenitency: but we do not find in Scripture that their not repenting is made the reason of the unpardonableness of this sin. But the sin is unpardonable because there is no sacrifice laid out by Gods appointment for it If any man sin wilfully, there remaineth no more sacrifice (Heb 10:1-39.), and without blood and sacrifice there is no remission. And thus now ye have seen what the sin against the Holy Ghost is; in what respects it is not, and in what respects it is unpardonable; and so the doctrine cleared and proved, That the sin against the Holy Ghost is the unpardonable sin, which shall never be forgiven, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. The application follows: If the sin against the Holy Ghost be the unpardonable sin, then surely the Holy Ghost is God, very God, true God, as the Father is: for can it be a greater evil, or more dangerous, to sin against a creature, than against God the Father? It is God that is sinned against, now the Holy Ghost is sinned against; yea, the unpardonable sin is against the Holy Ghost. But I am afraid I have sinned this sin, and the truth is I have often feared it: and my reason was and is, because my sins are so great, so exceeding great. Great, say ye; how great, man? I have sinned against my light, I have sinned against my knowledge, I have sinned against my conviction; and therefore I fear I have sinned the unpardonable sin. But I pray, for answer, did not Adam sin against light, when he ate the forbidden fruit? Did he not sin against his knowledge, and against conscience? Yet he sinned not against the Holy Ghost, though he brought all the world under condemnation by his sin; for the Lord Himself came and preached mercy to him, The seed of the woman shall break the serpents head. And I pray did not Jonah, when he run away from God, sin against his light; and did he not sin against his conviction, and against his knowledge? yet he did not sin against the Holy Ghost, for the Lord pardoned him and wonderfully delivered him. Possibly this therefore may be, and yet not a sin against the Holy Ghost. It is true indeed, that those who sin against the Holy Ghost do sin against their light, knowledge, and conscience; but whoever sins against light and knowledge, though he sins greatly, doth not sin against the Holy Ghost. Oh, but I fear that I have sinned this sin, for I have fallen foully into gross sins. That is ill. But I pray did not David sin so; were they not great and gross and foul sins that David fell into, such as one of your civil, moral men would abhor, yet he did not sin against the Holy Ghost, for the Lord pardoned him, and Nathan said from the Lord, The Lord hath forgiven thee. Oh, but yet I fear that I have sinned this great sin, for I am much declined, I have lost my former acquaintance and communion with God; I have lost my former heat and affections to good, and in duty; and I fear upon this account that I have sinned this great sin. Be it so: yet did not the Church of Ephesus lose her first love? yet this Church of Ephesus did not sin the sin against the Holy Ghost: why? for the Lord saith unto her, Repent and do thy first works. She could not have repented thus if she had sinned this sin. Oh, but yet I fear that I have sinned this great sin, because that I have sinned directly against the Spirit; I have quenched, I have grieved, I have resisted the Spirit: the Spirit of the Lord hath come and fallen upon my heart in preaching, and I resisted and grieved it; the Spirit of the Lord hath fallen upon my heart in prayer, and I have grieved that; therefore I fear I have sinned this great sin that shall never be pardoned. This is ill too; but those that you read of in Act 7:1-60., resisted the Holy Ghost, yet they did not sin the sin against the Holy Ghost, for then Stephen would not have prayed for them. But I am afraid that I have sinned this great sin, the sin against the Holy Ghost, because I have not owned, but denied the truth. The work of the Spirit is to enlighten and to lead into truth, and I have not owned, but denied the truth rather, therefore I fear that I have sinned this great sin against the Holy Ghost. This is evil, very evil. I remember a speech of Godteschalehus, worthy to be written in letters of gold: I am afraid, said he, to deny the truth, lest I should be for ever denied by the truth, that is, Christ. But I pray, did not Peter deny the truth when he denied Christ; and did he not do it again and again, and did he not do it openly, with scandal; and did he not do it after admonition; and did he not do it with cursing and swearing? and yet he did not sin against the Holy Ghost, for the Lord pardoned, and took him into His bosom, and made him a blessed instrument in the Church. Thus far yet a man may go possibly, and yet not sin this sin. Oh, but I am afraid yet that I have sinned it, for I have been an opposer of goodness, I have been an opposer of the people of God, and I have been a blasphemer; therefore I fear I have sinned this sin. This is ill indeed. But, I pray, tell me, was not Paul an opposer and blasphemer of the saints and ways of God; and yet he did not sin against the Holy Ghost; for I did it ignorantly, saith he: I was a blasphemer and a persecutor, but I obtained mercy, for I did it ignorantly. Oh, but yet I fear I have sinned this great sin, for I have forsaken God, and God hath forsaken me; God is gone, Christ is gone, and mercy is gone. Oh, what freedom once I had, but now God is departed from me, God hath forsaken me: and I fear it is upon this account, because I have sinned this great sin. But doth not David say, How long, O Lord, wilt Thou forget me, forsake me? and our Saviour Himself saith, My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me? There is a gradual forsaking, and there is a total. As with a man that goes from his house; possibly he goes a voyage, or is from home a quarter, half year, or a year; but he doth not leave his house; for his wife, his children, and goods are there still: but another man goes from his house, the house is let, and he carries away all his goods: this is a total departure, the other gradual. So now it is with the Lord: He doth sometimes forsake His own children for a time; but He doth not pull down His hangings, or carry away His goods; He doth not go away, but returns again; this is gradual. But there is a total forsaking of a man, and then He gives him up to his sin. Now this is not the burden that you lie under; for if God had thus forsaken you, you would be given up to your sins, and you would give up yourselves unto all uncleanness. Oh, but I am afraid, yet, that I am under the worst forsaking, and that therefore I have sinned this great sin; for I do lie despairing, saying, God is gone, and mercy gone; I am in the dark. Oh, I despair, I despair, and upon this account I fear I have sinned this great sin, the sin against the Holy Ghost. But, now, whosoever you are that have laboured under this fear, as indeed this fear I know hath oppressed many, give me leave to ask you four or five short questions. The first is, Whether canst thou not find in thy heart to forgive men that do trespass against thee? Do not you find a disposition in your own heart to forgive others? Yes, I praise the Lord that I do. Now if you can find in your heart to forgive others, I am sure God can find in His heart to forgive you, and therefore you have not sinned this great sin, which is unpardonable. Secondly, Whether, aye or no, have you ever opposed the ways of God, the people of God, and that out of malice? No: I confess I have opposed them, but the Lord knows I did it ignorantly, it was not out of malice; then remember the description of this sin. Thirdly, Whether, aye or no, do not you desire to be humbled for every sin, though it be never so small? Yes, for though I know that my greatest humiliation cannot make an atonement for my sin; yet I know that the least humiliation in truth doth please God, and it is my duty to be humbled for every sin; for the least sin is a great evil; and He that commands humiliation for the one, commands it for the other also; and through grace I desire to be humbled for every sin. Why, then, you cannot have sinned against the Holy Ghost, for it is impossible that they that sin this sin should be renewed to repentance. Fourthly, Whether, aye or no, do not you desire above all things the breathings of the Spirit of God upon your heart? Yes: oh that God would come and breathe upon my poor soul in duty. But those that sin against the Holy Ghost do despite to the Spirit of grace (Heb 10:1-39.). Fifthly, Where do you find in all the Bible that those that sin this sin against the Holy Ghost are afraid that they have sinned it? Those that sin against the Holy Ghost are never afraid that they have sinned against the Holy Ghost. But again, If the sin against the Holy Ghost be indeed the unpardonable sin, what cause have we all to look to our steps, to our words, to our actions? Beloved, this sin against the Holy Ghost is the professors sin; a man less than a professor cannot sin this sin against the Holy Ghost; this sin against the Holy Ghost is the knowing mans sin, a man less than a knowing man cannot sin the sin against the Holy Ghost: and, as I said before, a man may possibly go very far in sin, and yet not commit this great unpardonable sin: so now, on the other side, I say, possibly a man may go very far in religion, and yet he may sin this sin. These Pharisees that committed it had the key of knowledge: knowing they were, and very knowing in the Scriptures; as for zeal, they travelled sea and land to make a proselyte; for their practice, they fasted twice a week, exceeding strict in observing the Sabbath day; the lights of the Church, and the eyes of all the people were upon them for their guides; and yet these men sinned this sin against the Holy Ghost. Oh, what care should there be in all our souls; how had we all need to look to our ways! The more truth revealed, the more danger of sinning this sin, the more great works of God are done by the very Spirit and finger of God; if men do oppose and blaspheme, the more danger of sinning this great sin. But you will say, We grant indeed that this sin against the Holy Ghost is the unpardonable sin, and woe be to them that do fall into it, and it cannot be committed but by a knowing man; but what shall we do that we may be kept from this great transgression; that whatsoever sin we do fall into, yet we may be kept from this great evil, and this unpardonable sin? I would that you would mind and consider the description which you have heard, and think of it. But I will tell you what David did. Saith David, 0 Lord, keep back Thy servant from presumptuous sins, so shall I be free from the great transgression. It seems then that presumptuous sinning makes way to this great transgression. Again: Be always humbled for lesser sins. He shall never fall into the greatest, that is always humbled for the least; he shall never fall into the worst that is always humbled for the smallest. Besides, fear is the keeper of innocency; fear is the guard of innocency. If you always fear to commit it, you shall never commit the same. In case that you do at any time fall into sin, say, Well, but through the grace of God, though I commit what is evil, I will never oppose what is good; by the grace of God I will carry this rule along with me: Though I commit what is evil, I will never oppose what is good. In case any great work be done before you that lies beyond your reach and beyond your fathom, say, Though I do not understand this work, I will admire; and though I cannot reach it, yet I will not blaspheme and speak against it. And if heretofore, Christian, thou hast found God breathing upon thy heart in any ordinance, public or private, or in any way of God, take heed, as for thy life, that thou dost never speak evil or blaspheme that way of God wherein thou hast found the Spirit of God breathing. And if, indeed, you would be kept from this great transgression, then take heed of all declinings, and the steps thereof. (W. Bridge, M. A.)
Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost
I. First, then, let us see what the text does not mean. We may, I think, feel quite sure that it does not mean that there is some particular form of words of the kind generally known as blasphemous, which, once uttered, leave him who has spoken without hope. By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. But the intervening context shows us that He is speaking of words as the expressions of the heart, and as indications of its fixed habit and its settled attitude. They were the symptoms of disease, not the disease itself. They marked, not merely local affection, but constitutional derangement. The same principle applies to our good words, which I am apt to think may in the end prove more condemning than our bad ones. That we shall go to heaven for pious ejaculations which are unreal, or go to hell for impious ejaculations equally unreal, is altogether contrary to the tenour of Scripture and to its revelations, and our own ideas or the character and attributes of Him whose judgment is according to truth.
2. Again, the sin spoken of in the text cannot be a sin of which men have ever repented. Because wherever there is repentance there is pardon through the Saviour. This, if I understand anything about the gospel, is its great message. Let us go on to Manasseh, king of Judah (2Ki 21:1-26.). It is not easy to imagine anything worse than we are told about him. He undid the work of Hezekiah, his father. And now, as I get near to saying what seems to me the meaning of the text, I am sorry that I must set aside the opinion of some great and good men; of Wesley amongst them. He thought, and others thought also, that this sin is neither more nor less than the ascribing those miracles to the power of the devil which Christ did by the power of the Holy Ghost–in short, that it was only possible during the Saviours ministry. I cannot think a warning so solemn anal striking, recorded in three of the four Gospels, should relate wholly to a past kind of sin. No: the outward part of sin perpetually shifts and changes: its principle and essence remain the same. Nor should we escape the terror of the text by adopting what I may call the obsolete interpretation as regards the sin. There are other passages, not quite so well known perhaps, but as awful when we think of them. There is, says St. John, a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. St. Jude writes of some who were before of old ordained to this condemnation–twice dead–plucked up by the roots–to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. In the Epistle to the Hebrews we are told of some for whom remained no more sacrifice for sin, and of some whom it was impossible to renew unto repentance. St. Paul, writing to Timothy, mentions some who should proceed no further, who resisted the truth as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses. All these passages remain, even though we succeed in removing the text to the region of the past. All these, as well as the text, must, I think, be read in the same light; and all must be thought of in connection with what I said at the outset–that what can never be forgiven must be something of which men have never repented. What can this be? It can scarcely be anything less than deliberate, conscious resistance to acknowledged truth; persistent choosing of darkness rather than light. You will say, perhaps, that there cannot be such a thing. Are you so sure? Think for one moment. Do you not see something like it–apart from religion altogether–every day? Does not the drunkard, or the spendthrift, or the gambler know his end–I mean in this world–as well as you do? And still he goes on. What can you do for him? Nothing. At least nothing except in the way of hoping against hope. You do your very best: and you are right; but while you cannot prove it, you feel that there is failure before you. Come to the Bible. Take that wonderful case of Ahab and Micaiah. Ahab did not believe that there was no God. Nor did he doubt the mission of Micaiah. Nor did he once hint that he thought him untruthful. He had one objection, and only one: I hate him because he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil. Micaiah exposes to him the deceitfulness of the other prophets: and he still has nothing to say but to repeat his old objection. After which he goes on deliberately to death. Take two instances from the New Testament. What effect was produced by the raising of Lazarus? Some of the Jews sought to put Lazarus also to death. When Peter and John performed what the Jewish rulers admitted to be a notable miracle, which they could not deny, they did what? Threatened them, and tried to hinder the further spread of the gospel thus attested. All these, surely, are cases which–if we merely reflected, without reading the Bible at all–we should be obliged to own were verging on and tending to something unforgivable. This view will be confirmed if a well-supported reading of St. Marks account be the true one. It makes him say–not is in danger of eternal damnation or judgment; but is in danger of eternal sin. The depth of condemnation is only for the depth of sin; and by resisting grace, shutting the eyes to light, we are surely sinking into that depth. It is not that God arbitrarily marks out a sin or even a course of sin, which He will not pardon. But He warns us that we may bring ourselves to a state in which we will not have pardon, and reach the Satanic condition of consummated sin, and seem to say, as he alone can say, Evil, be thou my good. (J. C. Coghlan, D. D.)
The sin that shall not be forgiven
Taking this sentence with the rest of the passage, I cannot doubt that it tells us what the sin of the Pharisees and of the nation was; why they were cast out of their stewardship in that age; why the sentence upon them remains still. We say, They rejected Jesus; they would not believe all the evidence which He brought from prophecies and miracles to attest His divine mission. He says, All words spoken against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but there is a blasphemy against the Spirit of God–there is a confusion of good with evil, of light with darkness–which goes down far deeper than this. When a nation has lost the faculty of distinguishing hatred from love, the spirit of hypocrisy and falsehood from the spirit of truth, God from the devil, then its doom is pronounced–then the decree must go forth against it. I believe that is the natural sense of these awful words here and elsewhere; if we give them that sense we are delivered from imaginations which have darkened the gospel to a number of souls, and the warning to ourselves becomes much more tremendous. (F. D. Maurice, M. A.)
The unpardonable sin
Aretius, a godly and eminent author, speaking of the sin of the Holy Ghost, I saw, saith he, and knew the man myself, and it is no feigned story. There was a merchant in Strasburg whose whole life was abominable for whoredom, usury, drunkenness, contempt of Gods Word; he spent his life in gaming and whoring to his old age. At last he came to reflect on himself, and be sensible of the dreadful judgments of God hanging over his head. Then did his conscience so affright, and the devil accuse and terrify him, that he fell into open and downright desperation. He confessed and yielded himself to the devil as being his. He said the mercy and grace of God could not be so great as to pardon sins so great as his. Then what horror was upon him, gnashing of teeth, weeping, wailing; yea, he would challenge Satan, and wish the devil would fetch him away to his destined torments. He threw himself all along upon the ground: refused both meat and drink. Had you seen him, you would never have forgot him while you had lived; you had seen the fullest pattern of a despairing person. Yet, after the many pains of godly and learned men who came to him, watched with him, reasoned with him, laid open the word and will of God, and after many prayers, public and private, put up for him, at length he recovered and became truly penitent; and having lived piously for certain years after, he died peaceably. Wherefore, he concluded, it is not an easy matter to determine of any man sinning against the Holy Ghost, and incapable of mercy so long as he live.
Delivered from despair
The Puritans were wont to quote the remarkable experience of Mrs. Honeywood as an instance of the singular way in which the Lord delivers His chosen. She for year after year was in bondage to melancholy and despair, but she was set at liberty by the gracious providence of God in an almost miraculous way. She took up a slender Venice glass, and saying, I am as surely damned as that glass is dashed to pieces, she hurled it down upon the floor, when, to her surprise, and the surprise of all, I know not by what means, the glass was not so much as chipped or cracked. That circumstance first gave her a ray of light, and she afterwards cast herself upon the Lord Jesus. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 10. Him that blasphemeth] See the sin against the Holy Ghost explained, Mt 12:32.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
See Poole on “Mat 12:31“. See Poole on “Mar 3:28-29“.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
10. Son of man . . . Holy Ghost(Seeon Mt 12:31, 32).
Lu12:13-53. COVETOUSNESSWATCHFULNESSSUPERIORITYTO EARTHLY TIES.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And whosoever shall speak a word against the son of man, it shall be forgiven him,…. These words, though introduced by Luke among the sayings of Christ, recorded in Matt. 10 yet were said by Christ, on occasion of the Pharisees, ascribing his works to diabolical influence and assistance, [See comments on Mt 12:32]
but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost; as the Pharisees did, by charging the miracles of Christ with being done by the help of the devil, when they were wrought by the finger of the Spirit:
it shall not be forgiven. The Ethiopic version adds at the close of this verse, as in Matthew, “neither in this world, nor in that which is to come”.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit ( ). This unpardonable sin is given by Mark 3:28; Matt 12:31 immediately after the charge that Jesus was in league with Beelzebub. Luke here separates it from the same charge made in Judea (11:15-20). As frequently said, there is no sound reason for saying that Jesus only spoke his memorable sayings once. Luke apparently finds a different environment here. Note the use of here in the sense of “against.”
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
A word [] . Distinguished from blaspheme, which follows. A word against the poor and humble Son of Man might, as Godet observes, have proceeded from a sincerely pious Jew, under the influence of his early education, which taught him to regard Jesus as an enthusiast or even as an impostor. The sin of the Jews was in rejecting and resisting the power of the Spirit of Pentecost. Pardon was offered them there for the sin of crucifying the Lord (see Act 2:38 – 40, and compare Act 3:17 – 19).
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man,” (kai pas hos erei logon eis ton huion tou anthropou) “And each one who shall raise up a word (resistance) against the Son of man,” Luk 19:10, obstinately, persistently,
2) “It shall be forgiven him:” (aphethesetai auto) “It will be forgiven to him,” Mar 3:28.
3) “But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost,” (to de eis to hagion pneuma blasphemesanti) “Yet the one continuing blaspheming, (irreverently resisting) the Holy Spirit,” without interruption continually, Heb 4:7; Mat 9:3-6. It appears that the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit involves one in a continual, willful, deliberate, defiance of the call of the Holy Spirit to him, to turn to Jesus. The danger is that none knows when the final call is being rejected, Heb 4:7; Pro 29:1.
4) “It shall not be forgiven.” (ouk aphethesetai) “That one will not be forgiven,” pardoned, justified, or acquitted, Joh 8:24; Mar 3:29; Isa 63:10.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(10) And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man.See Note on Mat. 12:32. Here the words which had first been uttered in connection with the special charge of casting out devils by Beelzebub, seem to be repeated in their more general bearing.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
10. Blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost As it is sadly to be supposed these malignant apostates had. Mat 12:31.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
“And every one who shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him, but to him who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit it will not be forgiven.”
Some of those who are called for judgment (such as Paul) may look back to a time when they had not believed, and had even blasphemed against the Son of Man. But they need not fear. Such blasphemy would have been forgiven them once they turned to Jesus Christ. And forgiveness for this will continue to available as He is proclaimed among men. But those who blaspheme against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. This was an added warning to the crowds who were listening.
This blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is revealed elsewhere as indicating those who, in spite of the clear evidence before their eyes, deliberately and continually close their minds to what they know about Him, so that eventually their minds became so hardened that they are unable even to consider the matter any further (Mar 3:28-30; Mat 12:31-32). It is warning them that if they are not confessing Him now they have the opportunity to repent, but that if they delay until too late they may become too hardened and be unable to repent, and then their doom will be sealed. The example given in Matthew and Mark is of those who saw Him cast out evil spirits, and in spite of their own belief that men who could do this were of God, refused to believe it in Jesus’ case out of pure prejudice. They totally and continually day by day shut their minds against Him, saying dogmatically, ‘He has an unclean spirit’. Such men are in danger of hardening their hearts until they became unmeltable. (Anyone therefore who is afraid that they have committed such a sin can be sure that they have not. For those who have committed it will never be aware of the fact until that Day, for their hearts are too hardened).
Luke may well have had this saying in mind in the way that he depicts Jerusalem throughout his writings. Jerusalem was not rejected for its treatment of the Son of Man, nor even for its crucifying of its Messiah, for the risen Jesus told the Apostles to go to Jerusalem with their message after His resurrection (Act 1:8) and the Apostles afterwards continually went out to Jerusalem with His offer of forgiveness (Acts 1-6), and large numbers responded. But when Jerusalem finally failed to respond wholeheartedly to the work of the Holy Spirit in its midst, and to its Messiah, it would be set to one side (Peter ‘departs for another place’ – Acts 12) and replaced by Syrian Antioch as the centre from which the Good News spread (Acts 13). Yet even then it had the witness of the Jerusalem church still continuing to speak to it. But when in the end its Temple doors finally closed on Paul (Act 21:30), that was also the end of Luke’s interest in the Jerusalem which had previously been so important to him. Following these events Jerusalem did, of course, then make a martyr of James, the Lord’s brother, and the result was that it was finally utterly destroyed. Up to that time the offer of mercy had still been open, although clearly receding, but by its continual rejection of the signs and wonders and testimony in its midst it had finally ‘blasphemed against the Holy Spirit’. Its period of probation had come to an end, and it had become hardened and it thus came to its final punishment from which there was no escape. In 70 AD Jerusalem was finally destroyed. This is probably a very good illustration of what the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit means, and is a picture in miniature of the history of the world.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Luk 12:10. It shall be forgiven him: It may be forgiven him: Doddridge; who observes that the common reading of , is more literal; but the connection shews, it must be taken according to the translation here given; for it would be madness to imagine that in such a case as this, forgiveness must come of course, whether the blasphemer does or does not repent. What grammarians call an enallage of words and tenses, is very frequent in the sacred writings.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
9 But he that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God.
10 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.
Ver. 10. See Mat 12:31-32 Mar 3:28 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
10. ] See on Mat 12:31 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Luk 12:10 . , etc.: the true historical setting of the logion concerning blasphemy is doubtless that in Mt. (Mat 12:31 ), and Mk. (Mar 3:28 ), where it appears as a solemn warning to the men who broached the theory of Beelzebub-derived power to cast out devils. Here it is a word of encouragement to disciples (apostles) to this effect: blaspheming the Holy Spirit speaking through you will be in God’s sight an unpardonable sin, far more heinous than that of prejudiced Pharisees speaking evil against me, the Son of Man, now.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
word. Not “blaspheme”, as in next clause.
against. Greek. eis. App-101.
the Holy Ghost. With Art. See App-101. As in Luk 12:12.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
10.] See on Mat 12:31.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Luk 12:10. , and) From the denying of Christ in Luk 12:9, the transition is easy to blasphemy against Him.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Son of man
(See Scofield “Mat 8:20”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Luk 23:34, Mat 12:31, Mat 12:32, Mar 3:28, Mar 3:29, 1Ti 1:13, Heb 6:4-8, Heb 10:26-31, 1Jo 5:16
Reciprocal: Mar 4:17 – have Luk 22:65 – blasphemously Heb 10:29 – and hath
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE UNPARDONABLE SIN
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 he forgiven.
Luk 12:10
It is impossible to deny that there is such a thing as an unpardonable sin.
I. What is it?It would seem to be from our Lords words the sin of deliberately rejecting Gods truth with the heart, while the truth is clearly known with the head. It is
(a) The sin of combining light in the understanding with determined wickedness in the will.
(b) The sin into which many fell after Pentecost when they rejected the Holy Spirit and refused to listen to the apostles.
(c) The sin into which many hearers of the Gospel nowadays fall by determined clinging to the world.
(d) The sin which is commonly accompanied by utter deadness, hardness, and insensibility of heart.
II. Let us pray that we may be delivered from a cold, speculative, unsanctified head-knowledge of Christianity. It is a rock on which thousands make shipwreck to all eternity. No heart becomes so hard as that on which the light shines, but finds no admission. The same fire which melts the wax hardens the clay. Whatever light we have, let us use it.
Illustrations
(1) The distinction drawn between speaking against the Son of Man, and blaspheming against the Holy Ghost, ought not to be overlooked. The explanation is probably something of this kind. The sin against the Son of Man was committed by those who did not know Christ to be the Messiah in the days of His humiliation, and did not receive Him, believe Him, or obey Him, but ignorantly rejected Him, and crucified Him. Many of those who so sinned were pardoned, we cannot doubt; as, for example, on the day of Pentecost, after Peters preaching. The sin against the Holy Ghost was committed by those, who, after the day of Pentecost, and the outpouring of the Spirit, and the full publication of the Gospel, persisted in unbelief and obstinate impenitence, and were given over to a reprobate mind. These especially grieved the Spirit, and resisted the ministration of the Holy Ghost. That this was the state of many of the Jews appears from several places in the Acts, and especially Act 28:25-28. See also 1Th 2:15-16.
(2) That those who are troubled with fear that they have committed the unpardonable sin, are just the persons who have not committed it, is the judgment of all the soundest divines. Utter hardness, callousness, and insensibility of conscience, are probably leading characteristics of the man who has sinned the unpardonable sin. He is let alone, and given over to a reprobate mind.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
0
This refers to what is commonly referred to as the “unpardonable” sin. For a full discussion of this subject see the comments at Mat 12:24-32.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Luk 12:10. See on Mat 12:31, in regard to the sin against the Holy Spirit.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Although never man preached or lived as Christ did, yet there were those that spoke against him; the person of Jesus was contemned and reproached, for the meanness of his birth, for the poverty of his condition, for the freedom of his conversation; but this sin did not exclude the hope of pardon: Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; that is, whoever affirms that divine power by which I do my miracles, to be the power of the devil, such blasphemy will be unpardonable, because it is to resist the last remedy, and to oppose the best means of men’s conviction; for what could be done more to convince men that Christ was the true and promised Messiah, than to work so many miracles before their eyes to that purpose. Now these miracles, though evidently wrought by the power of God, the Pharisees ascribed to the power of the devil, which our Saviour calls Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, and a sin unpardonable.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Luk 12:10. And whosoever, &c. Nothing, therefore, can be more dangerous and fatal than to oppose my cause: and yet the denying me in some degree, may, upon true repentance, be forgiven: for whosoever shall speak a word Expressive of unbelief and disregard, or even of opposition and enmity; against the Son of man In this his present state of humiliation and suffering, he may possibly hereafter repent, and on his repentance his sins may be forgiven him. But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost If a mans denying of me rise so high that he blasphemes and reviles the Holy Spirit, and ascribes the miracles wrought by him, in confirmation of the gospel, to the agency of Satan, this sin shall never be forgiven, neither is there place for repentance. And especially he that, after my resurrection and ascension, blasphemes the Holy Ghost, when that Divine Spirit shall have displayed his most glorious agency as my great advocate and witness; he who then opposes that last and most convincing and powerful method of Gods recovering grace, shall, as utterly incorrigible, be abandoned to final destruction. See on Mat 12:31-32.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Verse 10
The Holy Ghost; the Deity. From the connection in which this appears, in Matthew 12:32, where the circumstances which led to it are particularly detailed, it would seem that the sin which is made the subject of this terrible denunciation, is that of assuming towards Almighty God an attitude of direct and open hostility paid defiance.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
Criticism of Jesus was forgivable, but rejection of the Holy Spirit’s testimony that Jesus was the Christ was not (cf. Mat 12:31-32; Mar 3:28-29). This warning continued the cautions against denying Jesus. Jesus implied that His disciples might face temptations to repudiate faith in Him. To deny Him publicly was bad, but to repudiate one’s faith in Him was worse. Jesus did not mean that God would withhold pardon from the disciple who did this or that he would lose his salvation. He presented the alternative not as a real possibility for disciples necessarily but as a warning that showed the seriousness of that type of denial to discourage apostasy.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 23
THE ESCHATOLOGY OF THE GOSPEL.
COIFI, in his parable to the thanes and nobles of the North Humber country, likened the present life of man to the flight of a sparrow through one of their lighted halls, coming out of the night, and then disappearing in the dark winter whence it came; and he asked for Christianity a candid hearing, if perhaps she might tell the secrets of the beyond. And so indeed she does, lighting up the “dark winter” with a bright, though a partial apocalypse. It is not our purpose to enter into a general discussion of the subject; our task is simply to arrest the beams of inspired light hiding within this Gospel, and by a sort of spectrum analysis to read from them what they are permitted to reveal. And-
1. The Gospel teaches that the grave is not the end of life. It may seem as if we were stating but a truism in saying this: yet if a truism, it perhaps has not been allowed its due place in our thought, and its restatement may not be altogether a superfluous word. We cannot study the life Of Jesus without noticing that His views of earth were not the views of men in general. To them this world was everything; to possess it, even in some infinitesimal quantity, was their supreme ambition; and though in their better, clearer moments they caught glimpses of worlds other than their own, yet to their distant vision they were as tile twinkling stars of the azure, far off and cold, soon losing themselves in the haze of unreality, or setting in the shadows of the imposing earth. To Jesus earth was but a fragment of a vaster whole, a fragment whose substances were but the shadows of higher, heavenlier realities. Nor were these outlying spaces to His mind voids of silence, a “dark inane,” without life or thought; they were peopled with intelligences whose personalities were as distinctly marked as is this human “Ego,” and whose movements, unweighted by the gyves of flesh, seemed subtle and swift as thought itself. With one of these worlds Jesus was perfectly familiar. With heaven, which was the abode of His Father, and immeasurable hosts of angels, He was in close and constant correspondence, and the frequent prayer, the frequent upward looks tell us how near and how intensely real the heavenly places were to Him. But in the mind of Jesus this empyrean of happiness and light had its antipodes of woe and darkness, a penal realm of fearful shadow, and which, borrowing the language of the city, He called the Gehenna of burning. Such were the two invisible realms, lying away from earth, yet closely touching it from opposite directions, and to one or other of which all the paths of human life turned, to find their goal and their self-chosen destiny.
And not only so, but the transition from the Seen to the Unseen was not to Jesus the abrupt and total change that it seems to man. To us the dividing-line is both dark and broad. It seems to us a transmigration to some new and strange world, where we must begin life de novo. To Jesus the line was narrow, like one of the imaginary meridians of earth, the “here” shading off into the “hereafter,” while both were but the hemispheres of one round life. And so Jesus did not often speak of “death”; that was too human a word. He preferred the softer names of “sleep” or “exodus,” thus making death the quickener of life, or likening it to a triumphal march from bondage to liberty. Nor was “the Valley of the Shadow” to Jesus a strange, unfamiliar place. He knew all its secrets, all its windings. It was His own territory, where His will was supreme. Again and again He throws a commanding voice across the valley, a voice which goes reverberating among the heights beyond, and instantly the departed spirit retraces its steps, to animate again the cold clay it had forsaken. “He is not the God of the dead, but of the living,” said Jesus, as He claimed for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob an existence altogether apart from the crumbling dust of Hebron; and as we see Moses and Elias coming to the Mount of Transfiguration, we see that the departed have not so far departed as to take no interest in earthly things, and as not to hear the strike of earthly hours. And how clearly this is seen in the resurrection life of Jesus, with which this Gospel closes! Death and the Grave have done their worst to Him, but how little is that worst! How insignificant the blank it makes in the Divine Life! The few hours in the grave were but a semibreve rest in the music of that Life; the Easter morning struck a fresh bar, and the music went on, in the higher spaces, it is true, but in the same key and in the same sweet strain. And just so is it with all human life”; the grave is not our goal.” Conditions and circumstances will of necessity change, as the mortal puts on immortality, but the life itself will be one and the same life, here amid things visible and temporal, and there amid the invisible and eternal.
2. The Gospel shows in what respects the conditions of the after-life will be changed. In Luk 20:27 we read how that the Sadducees came to Jesus, tempting Him. They were the cold materialists of the age, denying the existence of spirits, and so denying the resurrection. They put before Him an extreme, though not impossible case, of a woman who had been the wife, successively, of seven brethren; and they ask, with the ripple of an inward laugh in their question, “In the resurrection therefore whose wife of them shall she be?” Jesus answered, “The sons of this world marry, and are given in marriage: but they that are accounted worthy to attain to that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: for neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.” It will be observed how Jesus plays with the word around which the Sadducean mind revolves. To them marriage was a key-word which locked up the gates of an after-life, and threw back the resurrection among the impossibilities and absurdities. But Jesus takes up their key-word, and turning it round and round in His speech, He makes it unlock and open the inner soul of these men, showing how, in spite of their intellectuality, the drift of their thoughts was but low and sensual. At the same time Jesus shows that their test-word is altogether mundane. It is made for earth alone; for having a nature of flesh and blood, it cannot enter into the higher kingdom of glory. Marriage has its place in the life whose termini are birth and death. It exists mainly for the perpetuation and increase of the human race. It has thus to do with the lower nature of man, the physical, the earthly; but in the world to come birth, marriage, death will be outdated, obsolete terms. Man then will be “equal unto the angels,” the coarser nature which fitted him for earth being shaken off and left behind, amongst other mortalities.
And exactly the same truth is taught by the three posthumous appearances recorded in this Gospel. When they appeared upon the Mount of Transfiguration, Moses and Elias had been residents of the other world, the one for nine, the other for fourteen centuries. But while possessing the form, and perhaps the features of the old body of earth, the glorious body they wear now is under conditions and laws altogether different. How easy and aerial are its movements! Though it possesses no wings, it has the lightness and buoyancy of a bird, moving through space swiftly and silently as the light pulses through the ether. Or take the body of Christs resurrection life. It has not yet become the glorified body of the heavenly life; it is in its transition state, between the two: yet how changed it is! Lifted above the needs and laws of our earth-bound nature, the risen Christ no longer lives among His own; He dwells apart, where we cannot tell. When He does appear He comes in upon them suddenly, giving no warning of His approach; and then, after the bright though brief apocalypse, He vanishes as mysteriously as He came, passing at the last on the clouds to heaven. There is thus some correspondence between the body of the old and that of the new life, though how far the resemblance extends we cannot tell; we can only fail back upon the Apostles words, which to our human ear sound like a paradox, but which give us our only solution of the enigma, “It is raised a spiritual body”. {1Co 15:44} It is no longer the “natural body,” but a supernatural one, with a spiritual instead of a material form, and under spiritual laws.
But taking the Apostles words as our baseline, and measuring from them, we may throw our lines of sight across the hereafter, reading at least as much as this, that whatever may be the pleasures or the pains of the afterlife, they will be of a spiritual, and not of a physical, kind. It is just here that our vision sometimes gets blurred and indistinct, as all the descriptions of that after-life, even in Scripture, are given in earthly figures. And so we have built up before us a material heaven, with jasper walls, and gates of pearl, and gardens of perennial fruits, with crowns and other palace delights. But it is evident that these are but the earthly shadows of the heavenly realities, the darkened glasses of our earthly speech, which help our dull vision to gaze upon glories which the eye of our mortality hath not seen, and which its heart cannot conceive, except dimly, as a few “broken lights” pass through the dark lenses of these earthly figures. What new senses may be created we do not know, but if the body of the after-life is “a spiritual body,” then its whole environment must be changed. Material substances can no longer affect it, either to cause pleasure or pain; and though we may not yet tell in what the delights of the one state, or the pains of the other will consist, we do know that they must be something other than literal palms and crowns, and other than material fires. These figures are but the stammerings of our earthly speech, as it tries to tell the unutterable.
3. Our Gospel teaches that character determines destiny. “A mans life,” said Jesus, when rebuking covetousness, {Luk 12:15} “consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.” These are not lifes noblest aim, nor its truest wealth. They are but the accidents of life, the particles of floating dust, caught up by the stream; they will be left behind soon as the sediment, if not before, when they reach the barrier of the grave. A mans possessions do not constitute the true life, they do not make the real self, the man. Here it is not what a man has, but what a man is. And a man is just what his heart makes him. The outer life is but the blossoming of the inner soul, and what we call character, in its objective meaning, is but the subtle and silent influence, the odor, as we might call it, fragrant or otherwise, which the soul unconsciously throws out. And even in this world character is more than circumstance, for it gives aim and direction to the whole life. Men do not always reach their goal in earthly things, but in the moral world each man goes to his “own place,” the place he himself has chose, and sought; he is the arbiter of his own destiny.
And what we find to be a law of earth is the law of the kingdom of heaven, as Jesus was constantly affirming. The future life would simply be the present life, with eternity as its coefficient. Destiny itself would be but the harvest of earthly deeds, the hereafter being only the after-here. Jesus shows us how while on earth we may lay up “treasures in the heavens,” making for ourselves “purses which wax not old,” and thus becoming “rich toward God.” He draws a vivid picture of “a certain rich man,” whose one estimate of life was “the abundance of the things which he possessed,” the size and affluence of his barns, and whose soul was required of him just when he was congratulating it on the years of guaranteed plenty, bidding it, “Take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry”. {Luk 12:16-22} He does not here trace for us the destiny of such a soul-He does this in another parable-but He pictures it as suddenly torn away, and eternally separated, from all it had possessed before, leaving it, perhaps, to be squandered thriftlessly, or consumed by the fires of lust; while, starved and shriveled, the pauper soul is driven out from its earthly stewardship, to find, alas! no welcome in the “eternal tabernacles.” In the appraisement of this world such a man would be deemed wise and happy, but to Heaven he is the “foolish one,” committing the great, the eternal folly.
The same lesson is taught in the parables of the House-builders {Luk 6:47} and of the Talents. {Luk 19:12} In each there comes the inevitable test, the down-rush of the flood and the reckoning of the lord, a test which leaves the obedient secure and happy, the faithful promoted to honor and rewards, passed up among the kings; but the disobedient, if not entombed in the ruins of their false hopes, yet all shelterless from the pitiless storm, and the unfaithful and slothful servant stripped of even the little he had, passed downwards into dishonor and shame.
In another parable, that of the Rich Man and Lazarus, {Luk 16:19-31} we have a light thrown upon our subject which is at once vivid and lurid. In a few graphic words He draws for us the picture of strange contrasts. The one is rich, dwelling in a palatial residence, whose imposing gateway looked down upon the vulgar crowd; clothed in garments of Tyrian purple and of Egyptian byssus, which only great wealth could purchase, and faring sumptuously every day. So, with perpetual banquets, the rich man lived his selfish, sensual life. With thought all centered upon himself, and that his lowest self, he has no thoughts or sympathies to spare for the outlying world. They do not even travel so far as to the poor beggar who is cast daily at his gate, in hopes that some of the shaken-out crumbs of the banquet may fall within his reach. Such is the contrast-the extreme of wealth, and the extreme of poverty; the one with troops of friends, the other friendless-for the verb shows that the hands which laid him down by the rich mans gate were not the gentle hands of affection, but the rough hands of duty or of a cold charity; the one clothed in splendid attire, the other not possessing enough even to cover his sores; the one gorged to repletion, the other shrunken and starved; the one the anonymous Epicurean, the other possessing a name indeed, but naught beside, but a name that had a Divinity hidden within it, and which was an index to the soul that bore it. Such were the two characters Jesus portrayed; and then, lifting up the veil of shadows, He shows how the marked contrast reappears in the after-life, but with a strange inverting. Now the poor man is blessed, the rich in distress; the one is enfolded in Abrahams bosom, the other enveloped in flames; the one has all the delights of Paradise, the other begs for just a drop of water with which to cool the parched tongue.
It may be said that this is simply parable, set forth in language which must not be taken literally. So it is; but the parables of Jesus were not merely word-pictures; they held in solution essential truth. And when we have eliminated all this figurative coloring there is still left this residuary, elementary truth, that character determines destiny that we cast into our future the shadow of our present selves; that the good will be blessed, and the evil unblessed, which means accursed; and that heaven and hell are tremendous realities, whose pleasures and whose pains lie alike deep beyond the sounding of our weak speech. When the rich man forgot his duties to humanity; when he banished God from his mansion and proscribed mercy from his thoughts; when he left Heavens foundling to the dogs, he was writing out his book of doom, passing sentence upon himself. The tree lies as it falls, and it falls as it leans; and where is there place for the unforgiven, the unregenerate, for the sensual and the selfish, the unjust and the unclean, but somewhere in the outer darkness they themselves have helped to make? To the sensual and the vile heaven itself would be a hell, its very joys curdling into pain, its streets, thronged with the multitudes of the redeemed, offering to the guilty and unrenewed soul but a solitude of silence and anguish; and even were there no final judgment, no solemn pronouncement of destiny, the evil could never blend with the good, the pure with the vile; they would gravitate, even as they do now, in opposite directions, each seeking its “own place.” Wherever and whatever our final heaven may be, no one is an outcast but who casts himself out, a self-immolator, a suicide.
But is it destiny? It may be asked. May there not be an after-probation, so that character itself may be transformed? May not the “great gulf” itself disappear, or at least be bridged over, so that the repentant may pass out of its penal but purifying fires? Such, indeed, is the belief, or rather the hope, of some; but “the larger hope” as they are pleased to call it, as far as this Gospel is concerned, is a beautiful but illusive dream. He who was Himself the “Resurrection and the Life,” and who holds in His own hands the keys of death and of hades, gives no hint of such a posthumous palingenesis. He speaks again and again of a day of test and scrutiny, when actions will be weighed and characters assayed, and when men will be judged according to their works. Now it is at the “coming” of the Son of man, in the glory of His Father, and with a retinue of “holy angels”; now it is the returning of the lord, and the reckoning with his servants; while again it is at the end of the world, as the angel-reapers separate the wheat from the tares; or as He Himself, the great Judge, with His “Come ye,” passes on the faithful to the heavenly kingdom, and at the same time, with His “Depart ye,” drives from His presence the unfaithful and unforgiven into the outer darkness. Nor does Jesus say one word to suggest that the judgment is not final. The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, whatever that may mean, shall not be forgiven, {Luk 12:10} as St. Matthew expresses it, “neither in this world, nor in that which is to come.” The unfaithful servant is “cut asunder”; {Mat 12:46} the enemies who would not have their Lord to reign over them are slain {Luk 19:27}; and when once the door is shut it is all in vain that those outside cry, “Lord, open to us!” they had an open door, but they slighted and scorned it, and now they must abide by their choice, outside the door, outside the kingdom, with the “workers of iniquity,” where “there is weeping and gnashing of teeth” {Luk 13:28}.
Or if we turn again to the parable of the Rich Man, where is there room for “the larger hope?” where is the suggestion that these “pains of hell” may be lessened, and ultimately escaped altogether? We listen in vain for one syllable of hope. In vain he makes his appeal to “father Abraham”; in vain he entreats the good offices of Lazarus; in vain he asks for a momentary alleviation of his pain, in the boon of one drop of water: between him and help, yea, between him and hope, is a “great gulf fixed that none may cross.” {Luk 16:26}
“That none may cross.” Such are the words of Jesus, though here put in the mouth of Abraham; and if finality is not here, where can we find it? What may be the judgment passed upon those who, though erring, are ignorant, we cannot tell, though Jesus plainly indicates that the number of the stripes will vary, as they knew, or they did not know, the Lords will; but for those who had the light, and turned from it, who saw the right, but did it not, who heard the Gospel of love, with its great salvation, and only rejected it-for these there is only an “outer darkness” of eternal hopelessness. And what is the outer darkness itself but the darkness of their own inner blindness, a blindness which was willful and persistent?
Our Gospel thus teaches that death does not alter character, that character makes destiny, and that destiny once determined is unalterable and eternal. Or, to put it in the words of the angel to the seer, “He that is unrighteous, let him do unrighteousness still: and he that is filthy, let him be made filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him do righteousness still: and be that is holy, let him be made holy still”. {Rev 22:11}