2/28/20

"STUDIES IN THE MINOR PROPHETS" Hosea - God's Redeeming Love (8:1-10:15) by Mark Copeland




                    "STUDIES IN THE MINOR PROPHETS"

                Hosea - God's Redeeming Love (8:1-10:15)

INTRODUCTION

1. Thus far in our survey of the book of Hosea, we have seen...
   a. The analogy of Hosea and Gomer, illustrating God's experience with Israel
      1) Israel's rejection symbolized, in the names of Hosea and Gomer's children 
           - Hos 1:2-9
      2) Israel's restoration foretold - Hos 1:10-2:1
      3) Israel's unfaithfulness described, depicted as a wife guilty of harlotry - Hos 2:2-13
      4) Israel's restoration described, finally cured of her idolatry - Hos 2:14-23
      5) Israel's restoration symbolized, depicted as a harlot taken 
         back to be a wife - Hos 3:1-5
   b. God's indictment of Israel
      1) The charges brought against Israel - Hos 4:1-5:15
      2) Israel's appeal rejected - Hos 6:1-7:16
   -- The theme proposed for this book has been "God's Redeeming Love"

2. The love God has for Israel does not preclude the need for 
   punishment if she is to be truly redeemed...
   a. As mentioned in Hos 2:13
   b. This punishment will be seen in the form of the Assyrian 
      invasion, as foretold in the section now before us

[In this lesson, we shall continue our survey of Hosea by noticing 
God's warning of punishment that is to befall Israel, chapters 8-10...]

I. GOD'S PUNISHMENT FOR ISRAEL (8:1-10:15)

   A. WARNING OF APPROACHING JUDGMENT (8:1-14)
      1. Judgment is coming because they transgressed the covenant - Hos 8:1-6
      2. They have sown the wind, through their alliances with Assyria,
         and shall reap the whirlwind - Hos 8:7-10
      3. The altars of their religion has made them sin, their 
         punishment will be a "return to Egypt" (Egypt as a symbol of captivity)  - Hos 8:11-13
      4. Israel has forgotten his Maker, and even Judah places more 
         trust in fortified cities; but judgment will come upon them both - Hos 8:14

   B. ASSYRIAN CAPTIVITY FORETOLD (9:1-17)
      1. Because Israel has played the harlot - Hos 9:1-2
      2. Ephraim (Israel) shall "return to Egypt" - Hos 9:3-9
         a. Egypt used as a type for captivity, but then Assyria is mentioned by name
         b. They will be unable to celebrate the feasts
         c. They will be punished for their sins
      3. The fleeting glory of Israel - Hos 9:10-17
         a. Though considered the firstfruits, they soon gave themselves over to idolatry
         b. Thus their glory will fly away, and they will be like one childless
         c. For their wickedness, God will cast them away

   C. ISRAEL'S SIN AND CAPTIVITY REITERATED (10:1-15)
      1. Her guilt and coming captivity - Hos 10:1-8
      2. Her sin and coming punishment - Hos 10:9-15

[With such ample warnings through prophets like Hosea, God let Israel
know what was to befall her. Yet the prophet's message did not end
there. A message of hope concerning restoration was also proclaimed, 
which we will shall consider in our next lesson. For a few remaining 
moments, let's review...]

II. SOME KEY PASSAGES IN THIS SECTION

   A. "I HAVE WRITTEN FOR HIM THE GREAT THINGS OF MY LAW, 
        BUT THEY WERE CONSIDERED A STRANGE THING"
      1. Notice Hos 8:12
      2. This is a sad commentary on the condition of Israel
         a. God had done a wondrous thing by giving them His Word - cf.Ps 19:7-11
         b. Yet they had become so perverted that God's word seemed strange to them!
      3. Is this not true today as well?
         a. We have been richly blessed with the full revelation of 
            God's will through His Son Jesus Christ
         b. Yet many people (even some in the church)...
            1) ...are so unaware of what the Bible says
            2) ...are so caught up in the thinking of the world
            ...that the principles and truths of God's word are  "considered a strange thing"!
      -- Is God's word considered a strange thing to you?

   B. "SOW FOR YOURSELVES RIGHTEOUSNESS, REAP IN MERCY"
      1. Consider Hos 10:12
      2. While we cannot earn our salvation by good works, works of 
         righteousness can result in experiencing God's grace and mercy
         a. A case in point is the conversion of Cornelius - Ac 10:1-6
         b. His fear of God, prayers, and alms did not save him, but God did take notice
         c. By striving to serve and please God, he came to know the way of mercy and salvation
      -- Thus we should be diligent in our service, not to earn 
         salvation, but to receive God's gracious mercy - e.g., Onesiphorus - 2Ti 1:16-18

   C. "YOU HAVE PLOWED WICKEDNESS, YOU HAVE REAPED INIQUITY"
      1. Read Hos 10:13
      2. Iniquity (injustice, NASB) is the natural consequence of wickedness
         a. When people turn their ears away from hearing the Word of 
            God, they will be wicked
         b. And the consequence is great injustice and lawlessness
      -- Sadly, I believe we can see why our society is reaping so much
         injustice and lawlessness today (because of the wickedness that is sown)
         
CONCLUSION

1. The messages of Hosea, though first spoken to a people of an earlier
   time, speak to us also...
   a. History tends to repeat itself; we need to learn from the mistakes of others
   b. The people of God are not immune from apostasy, wickedness and rebellion

2. As Paul wrote to the church of Corinth, after reviewing parts of Israel's history...

   "Now these things became our examples, to the intent that we should
   not lust after evil things as they also lusted." (1Co 10:6)

3. God's "intent" in preserving the Old Testament was that we might 
   benefit from Israel's mistakes
   a. The works of prophets like Hosea can certainly help
   b. Will his words be well known to us, or will they too be"considered a strange thing"?

I pray this study will help his words become more familiar to us...
 

Can a Person Live in Adultery? by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=4181

Can a Person Live in Adultery?

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Confusion exists in the mind of some concerning the status of those who commit the sin of adultery. It is generally recognized that a couple becomes guilty of adultery when they form a sexual relationship in violation of Christ’s teaching in Matthew 19:9. But what is a church to do when one or both of those marriage partners present themselves for church membership, expressing their regret for their sin, but their intention to continue their relationship? Some argue that the couple can be forgiven, if they say they are sorry, on the grounds that people cannot live in adultery. They were guilty of committing adultery when they first came together, but they cannot be guilty of living (in an ongoing state) in adultery, and so may continue their marriage without being guilty of further sin.
Meanwhile, the church tends to shy away from dealing with the matter, permitting the couple fellowship but, amid vague feelings of uncertainty, keeping them at arm’s length. In the midst of this inconsistency, the church unwittingly brings itself under the same indictment leveled at the churches in Pergamum (Revelation 2:14) and Thyatira (Revelation 2:20-22) for their unholy “tolerance.” We must permit God’s words to give us guidance rather than be influenced by our human inclinations, sympathies, or emotions. God’s Word speaks very clearly to this matter.
It is true that sin may be viewed as the practice of isolated acts that are contrary to God’s will. But it does not follow that individuals cannot live in sin. A “liar” is one who is involved in separate acts of lying. What makes him a liar, and therefore guilty of living a life of lying, is his refusal to cease telling lies. A person is a “murderer” if he has killed one or more persons and continues to entertain the possibility of repeating such behavior. A person is an “adulterer” because he has formed a sexual relationship which violates God’s law and refuses to cease that illicit relationship. Simply saying he is sorry for the existence of this adulterous union will not and cannot alter what, in God’s sight, is “not lawful” (Matthew 14:4). As long as that marriage is continued, the parties involved are adulterers (Romans 7:3). Only by terminating that relationship can the parties involved put an end to their adultery. Otherwise, they “continue to commit adultery” (Matthew 19:9—the present tense continuous action), “live in fornication” (Colossians 3:5-7), and “live in [sin]” (Romans 6:2). When Paul reminded Christians at Corinth of their conversion day, he noted that some had previously been fornicators, adulterers, and homosexuals (1 Corinthians 6:9-11). Who could possibly doubt the fact that their salvation would have been impossible unless these sexual unions were terminated? Indeed, how could they “that are dead to sin, live any longer therein” (Romans 6:2)?

Boy Came Back from Heaven? by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=5096

Boy Came Back from Heaven?

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

It was 2004 when 6-year-old Alex Malarkey was plunged into a coma by injuries sustained in a car accident. After waking two months later, he claimed he had seen angels who took him to heaven to meet Jesus. Six years later, Tyndale published a book by the boy, co-authored with his father, titled The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven, which became an instant bestseller, even spawning a documentary DVD. Now, at the age of 16, Alex has retracted his claims and, thankfully, is urging people to return to the Bible for the only reliable source for information on the afterlife (Zylstra, 2015).
Manmade religion typically relies heavily on subjective experience that the perpetrators expect people to accept based solely on personal “testimony.” However, such an approach to arriving at truth is in stark contrast with Bible teaching. God has always insisted that humans must weigh the evidence and draw only those conclusions warranted by that evidence (Miller, 2011). When God revealed new information, He never expected anyone to merely accept the word of another—even a prophet from God—without confirmation by an undeniable miraculous sign that demonstrates divine authenticity (John 10:37; see Miller, 2003a).
What’s more, the Bible speaks definitively concerning the afterlife. Since the Bible can be shown to be the inspired, infallible Word of God (Butt, 2007), it can be relied on to provide accurate information regarding life after death. It does not answer all our questions, but it gives sufficient information by which one can know with certainty the general parameters of life beyond the grave. The Bible teaches that for all individuals who died in Bible history, in every case, a miracle was necessary to restore the separated spirit of the individual to the body. This return of a person’s spirit constituted a resurrection. But miracles served a very specific purpose in Bible times—a purpose no longer needed (Miller, 2003a). Since God has chosen not to work miracles today (1 Corinthians 13:8-11; Ephesians 4:8-13), and no resurrections will occur until the general resurrection (John 5:25-29; Luke 14:14; 1 Corinthians 15:12ff.), there is no such thing as an “out-of-body experience” (for more discussion, read Miller, 2013).
Further, the Bible lays out a fairly complete treatment of afterlife (see Miller, 2003b). Briefly, God gives people this life on Earth to prepare their spirits for their eternal abode. When a person dies, his or her body goes into the grave, while the conscious spirit enters the hadean realm to await the final Judgment. At the Second Coming of Christ, all spirits will come forth from hades and be resurrected in immortal bodies. All will then face God in judgment, receive the pronouncement of eternal sentence, and then be consigned to heaven or hell for eternity (read Luke 16:19-31; cf. Miller, 2003b).
As usual, people could spare themselves a lot of hype and sensationalism that ends in embarrassment, disillusion, and resentment if they would simply consult the sure Word of God and order their thinking and life according to its precepts.
For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account (Hebrews 4:12-13).
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so (Acts 17:11, emp. added).

REFERENCES

Butt, Kyle (2007), Behold! The Word of God (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).
Miller, Dave (2003a), “Modern-Day Miracles, Tongue-Speaking, and Holy Spirit Baptism: A Refutation--EXTENDED VERSION,” Apologetics Press, http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=1399.
Miller, Dave (2003b), “One Second After Death,” Apologetics Press, https://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1188&topic=74.
Miller, Dave (2011), “Is Christianity Logical? Parts 1&2,” Reason & Revelation, 31[6]:50-52,56-59; 31[7]:62-64,68-71, http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=977.
Miller, Dave (2013), “What About ‘Out-of-Body Experiences’?” Apologetics Press, https://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=4694&topic=74.
Zylstra, Sarah Eekhoff (2015), “The ‘Boy Who Came Back from Heaven’ Retracts Story,” Christianity Today, January 15, http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2015/january/boy-who-came-back-from-heaven-retraction.html?paging=off.

Book Review: The Good Book: Reading the Bible with Mind and Heart by Wayne Jackson, M.A.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=232

Book Review: The Good Book: Reading the Bible with Mind and Heart

by  Wayne Jackson, M.A.

Peter J. Gomes is a Baptist clergyman who preaches for Harvard University’s Memorial Church, and who also teaches at the university in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The cleric professor has created a maelstrom of controversy recently with the publication of The Good Book: Reading the Bible with Mind and Heart (1996). The design of this book is to neutralize the Scriptures of their doctrinally demanding thrust, thus accommodating the ancient volume to the inclinations of modern society.
Gomes argues, for example, that the Bible does not condemn abortion. He contends that the biblical term “murder” refers only to the premeditated destruction of human life “outside the womb” (p. 45)—a distinction that is arbitrary, and which, in fact, is at variance with Exodus 21:22-23.
Further, Gomes, a self-confessed homosexual, alleges that the use of the Bible to condemn homosexuality is the product of simplistic interpretative methods that reflect a failure to comprehend the context in which the Scriptures were written. Such proceduralism he calls “textual harassment.” These sort of charges flow easily, of course, from those who reject the plain testimony of the Bible in the interest of their own personal agenda. For example, the author makes an artificial distinction in types of homosexual relationships. One moment he contends that Paul, in his various letters, merely was condemning the “debauched pagan expression” of homosexuality; then, he alleges that the apostle hardly can be faulted for his ignorance, because he knew nothing of “the concept of a homosexual nature” (p. 158). He also suggests (p. 25) that there was a homosexual relationship between David and Jonathan—a notion not reflected even remotely in the Old Testament narrative regarding these great men. Gomes obviously is desperate for some semblance of support for his aberrant lifestyle.
The professor charges that the New Testament itself is anti-Semitic. One chapter is titled: “The Bible and Anti-Semitism: Christianity’s Original Sin.” It is hardly anti-Semitic, however, to contend that the Jews’ salvation is to be found only in Jesus Christ, when the same condition prevails for the Gentiles as well. No one can read Romans 9:1ff., where Paul’s heart throbs with love for his brothers in the flesh, and charge the apostle with hatred and racism.
This volume is filled with reckless charges, sweeping generalizations, and invalid arguments. It is utterly bereft of scholarly acumen.
Of late, Gomes has been a frequent guest on the talk-show circuit, and his book has received laudatory reviews in the popular press. This is to be expected from media that disregard the authority of the Bible, and seek justification for hedonistic lifestyles.

REFERENCES

Gomes, Peter J. (1996), The Good Book: Reading the Bible with Mind and Heart (New York: William Morrow).

THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF SCRIPTURE by steve finnell

http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-original-intent-of-scripture-by.html

THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF SCRIPTURE  

by steve finnell


Should believers in Christ be concerned with God's original intent? Does the original intent of Scripture matter? Is the Bible an evolving book to be added to, as cultural norms change?

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. (NKJV)

What was the original intent of 2 Timothy 3:16-17? That creed books, church catechisms, Bible commentaries, the writings of famous preachers, the views of theologians, and post Biblical books of so-called new revelation, be deemed as Scripture? I do not think so!

Acts 2:36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."(NKJV)

What was the original intent of Acts 2:36?   To teach mankind that Jesus was simply one of many Lords and many Christs? NO!

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (NKJV)

What was the original intent of Acts 2:38? To teach that immersion in water was because sins were forgiven the minute that a person believed that Jesus was Lord and Christ? Was it to prove the Holy Spirit was given prior to repentance and baptism? Was it to tell the world that water baptism was not essential for the forgiveness of sins. Did the original intent convey the view, that baptism was for a testimony of a person's faith? NO, NO, NO!

Mark 16:15 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. (NKJV)

What was the original intent of Mark 16:15? To tell the world that God had selected a few that would be saved and He had selected all others to burn in hell, for eternity? NO!

Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved...(NKJV)

What was the original intent of Mark 16:16? To teach that infants were guilty of Adam's sin and had to be baptized before they were mature enough to believe and confess Jesus as Lord and Christ? NO, infants are not guilty of sin.

The original New Covenant terms of pardon have been not changed by God. Only men change the terms of pardon. Do you really want to trust men to get you into heaven?

GOD"S TERMS OF PARDON: 1. Faith, John 3:16. Repentance, Acts 3:19, Acts 2:38. Confession, Romans 10:9. Water Immersion, Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21, Acts 22:16, Galatians 3:27.

Keeping Vows And Forsaking The World by B. Johnson


http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Johnson/Edna/Elizabeth/1939/keepingvows.html


Keeping Vows And Forsaking The World
Some say that keeping vows is not that big of a deal. We can see by the recent statistics on marriage and divorce that the marriage vows count for little in today’s society. And what about our commitment to Christ when we were immersed in the waters of baptism? Did we promise to lose our lives for Christ and the gospel? Did we agree that Jesus is our king and Lord? If He truly is our Lord, we must do the things He says (Luke 6:46).
I hear from some who claim to be members of the church that the reason they became Christians was to escape pain and suffering and to go to heaven instead of hell. Their mind (attitude) seems to focus on what they can get from God rather than how they can serve Him. They seem to have forgotten they did not create themselves, but that He created them (Psa 100:3; Rom 1:21; Mark 8:36-37).
Judas Iscariot sold his soul for 30 pieces of silver (Mat 26:15). Some today seem quite willing to sell their souls for a high-paying job, a new house, a new car, or even prestige or power. Both partners in a household will frequently work seven days a week to lay up treasure here on earth (Luke 12:16-21; Mat 6:26), but they rarely will spend more than an hour on Sunday to ‘serve the Lord’. Would spending that much time each week make any other commitment prosper? Certainly not, so why do people think it would please the Creator?
Others cite family ties or commitments to explain why they have no time to assemble for study or worship or to work for Christ during the week. Maybe they believe they have to spend hours upon hours educating their children or helping them with homework. Perhaps they find it necessary to care for aging or invalid parents. Provided we do not let these things stand in the way of our service to the Lord, we can do them with His blessing.
But some use these duties as an excuse for not serving the Lord. Jesus said: “He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me” (Mat 10:37). “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:26).
Beth Johnson
The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The King James Version.
Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

A lesson in 40 seconds by Gary Rose




OK, I did what the picture told me to do, now what? So now I am an idiot? Perhaps, but probably not. I just wasted several seconds (forty seconds, if you can believe the picture) and accomplished nothing. Or did I? If I realized that there are people out there that will trick you, lie to you, persuade you to do things that you really do not want to do, then – I have really learned something. The sorry truth is that many people in this world do not have your best interest at heart. Whether or not you think you deserve it, some people will hate you for who you are and try to destroy you. If you try to follow God you are a target. The apostle Paul says...

Ephesians 5 ( World English Bible )
  [6]  Let no one deceive you with empty words. For because of these things, the wrath of God comes on the children of disobedience.  [7] Therefore don’t be partakers with them.  [8] For you were once darkness, but are now light in the Lord. Walk as children of light,  [9] for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth, [10] proving what is well pleasing to the Lord.  [11] Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather even reprove them.  [12] For the things which are done by them in secret, it is a shame even to speak of. [13] But all things, when they are reproved, are revealed by the light, for everything that reveals is light. [14] Therefore he says, “Awake, you who sleep, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you.” 

  [15]  Therefore watch carefully how you walk, not as unwise, but as wise;  [16] redeeming the time, because the days are evil.  [17] Therefore don’t be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.


Empty words deceive, so don’t listen to what the ungodly say (verse 7). Remember, once you didn’t see God’s light and were under the control of evil- wake up and remember Jesus’ influence is the true light (verse 14). Be wise with your time and live (walk in this world) wisely (vss. 15 & 16) because of Jesus (verse 14). And lastly, seek God’s will and understand it (verse 17).

The point here is that the picture is probably just a waste of your time, but God’s word will set you on a course that will lead you to be the best person you can possibly be. I have no idea who made that picture, or what their motives are, but I know that God loves me and wants the best for me. I intend to listen to him.

HOW ABOUT YOU?

2/26/20

"STUDIES IN THE MINOR PROPHETS" Hosea - God's Redeeming Love (4:1-7:16) by Mark Copeland




                    "STUDIES IN THE MINOR PROPHETS"

                Hosea - God's Redeeming Love (4:1-7:16)

INTRODUCTION

1. In our previous lesson we began our survey of the book of Hosea...
   a. Noting that Hosea was a prophet to the northern kingdom of Israel
   b. Whose work began as Amos' was ending, and prophesied from 750-725 B.C.

2. The key to understanding the book is the analogy illustrated in the
   first three chapters...
   a. In which Hosea and his wife Gomer illustrates God's experience with Israel
   b. Which served as an object lesson to express "God's Redeeming
      Love" for His people

3. We therefore saw in the first three chapters...
   a. Israel's rejection symbolized, in the names of Hosea and Gomer's children - Hos 1:2-9
   b. Israel's restoration foretold - Hos 1:10-2:1
   c. Israel's unfaithfulness described, depicted as a wife guilty of harlotry - Hos 2:2-13
   d. Israel's restoration described, cured of her idolatry - Hos 2:14-23
   e. Israel's restoration symbolized, depicted as a harlot taken back to be a wife - Hos 3:1-5

4. The rest of the book contains the messages of Hosea, proclaimed with
   this analogy in the background; there is...
   a. God's indictment of Israel and her sins - Hos 4:1-7:16
   b. God's warning of punishment that is to befall her - Hos 8:1-10:15
   c. God's promise of a future restoration - Hos 11:1-14:9

[In this lesson, we shall continue our survey of Hosea by noticing 
God's indictment of Israel for her sins, chapters 4-7...]

I. GOD'S INDICTMENT OF ISRAEL (4:1-7:16)

   A. THE CHARGE AGAINST ISRAEL (4:1-5:15)
      1. Against the nation as a whole - Hos 4:1-3
         a. For no truth, mercy, or knowledge of God is in the land
         b. All forms of wickedness are rampant
      2. Against the priests in particular - Hos 4:4-14
         a. It does no good to contend with the people, for people do
            not respect their priests
         b. The priests themselves have rejected knowledge, which is to their destruction
         c. The priests feed off the sins of the people, increasing their own spiritual adultery
      3. A word of warning to Judah in the south - Hos 4:15-19
         a. Judah, don't be like Israel!
         b. Judah, leave Ephraim (Israel) to her idols!
      4. Against the priests, rulers, and people - Hos 5:1-7
         a. They have been a snare, not a help
         b. Their idolatry has led Israel to stumble, even Judah as well
         d. God has withdrawn Himself from them
      5. The impending sentence - Hos 5:8-15
         a. Ephraim (Israel) shall be laid waste, and Judah shall not escape either
         b. Like a lion, God will come upon them and tear them away
         c. This God will do until they confess their sin and diligently seek Him

   B. THEIR APPEAL REJECTED (6:1-7:16)
      1. The call to repentance - Hos 6:1-3
         a. Some believe these three verses are Hosea's desperate plea to Israel to repent
         b. Others think that these are the words of Israel, but was not sincere
         -- In either case, verse four reveals the shallowness of Israel's faithfulness
      2. Rejected because of Israel's true condition - Hos 6:4-7:16
         a. Faithfulness was only temporary, like the morning cloud or early dew
         b. They offered sacrifices, but did not show mercy or truly know God
         c. They transgressed the covenant, and became defiled, even influencing Judah
         d. When God would have healed them, their iniquity was even worse
         e. Idolatry, alliances with pagan nations, rejection of God's
            efforts to discipline them...all these things were the 
            charges brought against Israel!

[Like a Judge in court God has brought His charges against unfaithful
Israel.  Like an unfaithful spouse who committed adultery, so Israel 
has done to God!  Our next study will consider God's warning of the 
punishment to befall Israel, but before we finish this lesson let's 
review..]

II. SOME KEY PASSAGES IN THIS SECTION

   A. "MY PEOPLE ARE DESTROYED FOR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE"
      1. Notice Hos 4:1,6
      2. This verse, like many others in the Bible, emphasizes the 
         importance of knowing the Word of God - cf. Jm 1:21
      -- How is your knowledge of God's Word?

   B. "EPHRAIM IS JOINED TO IDOLS, LET HIM ALONE"
      1. Consider Hos 4:17
      2. The context is that of warning Judah to stay away from Israel
      3. There often comes a time when efforts to restore the erring
         are futile; rather than risk being influenced adversely, 
         withdrawal of association is necessary - cf. 1Co 5:11-13

   C. "YOUR FAITHFULNESS IS LIKE A MORNING CLOUD..."
      1. Read Hos 6:4
      2. Many people are quick to profess repentance, but do remain 
         true to the Lord; how faithful to the Lord are we?

   D. "FOR I DESIRE MERCY AND NOT SACRIFICE..."
      1. This passage (Hos 6:6) was often quoted by Jesus - Mt 9:13; 12:7
      2. It reflects what was said in the Proverbs - Pr 21:3
      3. Micah taught the same principle - Mic 6:6-8
      4. It is not that God did not call for sacrifice, but all the
         worship in the world will not cover a lack of mercy and true 
         knowledge of God! - cf. Hos 4:6, also Jer 9:23-24

   E. "THEY DO NOT CONSIDER IN THEIR HEARTS THAT I REMEMBER..."
      1. Look at Hos 7:2
      2. How sad that people sin, as though there is no God who takes 
         notice of what they are doing
      3. But a time is coming when all that has been done will be 
         brought to light! - cf. Eccl 12:14; Ro 2:16; Rev 20:12
      -- Our only hope is to have our sins forgiven by the blood of Jesus!

   F. "EPHRAIM HAS MIXED HIMSELF AMONG THE PEOPLES"
      1. Cf. Hos 7:8
      2. Through unsavory associations, Israel had been corrupted
      3. Such is the danger of the wrong companions - cf. 1Co 15:33
      4. Thus we need to heed warnings such as those found in 2Co 6:14-18

CONCLUSION

1. Truly the words of prophets like Hosea were "written for our admonition" - 1Co 10:11
   a. Like Israel, we have been richly blessed - Ep 1:3
   b. Like Israel, we are expected to remain faithful - Re 2:10

2. The question is, will we "fall after the same example of disobedience"? - cf. He 4:11
   a. Will we fall for lack of knowledge?
   b. Will we fall because our faithfulness is like a morning cloud or early dew?
   c. Will we fall because we forget the importance of mercy in our service to God?
   d. Will we fall because we do not consider that God remembers what we do?
   e. Will we fall because rather than be the "salt of the earth", we
      become so "mixed" by those in the world we lose our flavor? (cf. Mt 5:14)

Through a careful and serious study of the prophets, we are more likely
to avoid making the same mistakes as Israel, and to heed the words of
the apostle Paul:

   "Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall."
                                                (1Co 10:12)
 

Blind Faith by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=444

Blind Faith

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

A common misconception among atheists, humanists, and evolutionists is that those who reject evolution in order to hold to a fundamental, literal understanding of the biblical documents are guided by “blind faith.” Robinson articulated this position quite emphatically when he accused Christians of abandoning rationality and evidence in exchange for intellectual dishonesty and ignorance of the truth (1976, pp. 115-124). Many within the scientific community labor under the delusion that their “facts” and “evidence” are supportive of evolution and opposed to a normal, face-value understanding of the biblical text. They scoff at those who disagree with them, as if they alone have a corner on truth.
The fact of the matter is that while most of the religious world deserves the epithets hurled by the “informed” academicians, those who espouse pure, New Testament Christianity do not. New Testament Christians embrace the biblical definition of faith, in contrast to the commonly conceived understanding of faith that is promulgated by the vast majority of people in the denominational world.
The faith spoken of in the Bible is a faith that is preceded by knowledge. One cannot possess biblical faith in God until he or she comes to the knowledge of God. Thus, faith is not accepting what one cannot prove. Faith cannot outrun knowledge—for it is dependent upon knowledge (Romans 10:17). Abraham was said to have had faith only after he came to the knowledge of God’s promises and was fully persuaded (Romans 4:20-21). His faith, therefore, was seen in his trust and submission to what he knew to be the will of God. Biblical faith is attained only after an examination of the evidence, coupled with correct reasoning about the evidence.
The God of the Bible is a God of truth. Throughout biblical history, He has stressed the need for the acceptance of truth—in contrast with error and falsehood. Those who, in fact, fail to seek the truth are considered by God to be wicked (Jeremiah 5:1). The wise man urged: “Buy the truth, and sell it not” (Proverbs 23:23). Paul, himself an accomplished logician, exhorted people to love the truth (2 Thessalonians 2:10-12). He stated the necessity of giving diligence to the task of dealing with the truth properly (2 Timothy 2:15). Jesus declared that only by knowing the truth is one made free (John 8:32). Luke ascribed nobility to those who were willing to search for and examine the evidence, rather than being content to simply take someone’s word for the truth (Acts 17:11). Peter admonished Christians to be prepared to give a defense (1 Peter 3:15), which stands in stark contrast to those who, when questioned about proof of God, or the credibility and comprehensibility of the Bible, triumphantly reply, “I don’t know—I accept it by faith!”
Thus, the notion of “blind faith” is completely foreign to the Bible. People are called upon to have faith only after they receive adequate knowledge. In fact, the Bible demands that the thinker be rational in gathering information, examining the evidence, and reasoning properly about the evidence, thereby drawing only warranted conclusions. That, in fact, is the essentiality of what is known in philosophical circles as the basic law of rationality: one should draw only such conclusions as are justified by the evidence. Paul articulated exactly this concept when he wrote: “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). John echoed the same thought when he said to “test the spirits” (1 John 4:1). These passages show that the New Testament Christian is one who stands ready to examine the issues. God expects every individual to put to the test various doctrines and beliefs, and then to reach only such conclusions as are warranted by adequate evidence. Man must not rely upon papal authorities, church traditions, or the claims of science. Rather, all people are obligated to rely upon the properly studied written directives of God (2 Timothy 2:15; John 12:48; 2 Peter 3:16). Biblical religion and modern science clash only because the majority of those within the scientific community have abandoned sound biblical hermeneutics and insist upon drawing unwarranted, erroneous conclusions from the relevant scientific evidence.
The Bible insists that evidence is abundantly available for those who will engage in unprejudiced, rational inquiry. The resurrection claim, for example, was substantiated by “many infallible proofs,” including verification through the observation of more than five hundred persons at once (Acts 1:3; 1 Corinthians 15:5-8). Many proofs were made available in order to pave the way for faith (John 20:30-31). Peter offered at least four lines of evidence to those gathered in Jerusalem before he concluded his argument with “therefore…” (Acts 2:14-36). The acquisition of knowledge through empirical evidence was undeniable, for Peter concluded, “as you yourselves also know” (Acts 2:22, emp. added). John referred to the auditory, visual, and tactile evidences that provided further empirical verification (1 John 1:1-2). Christ offered “works” to corroborate His claims, so that even His enemies did not have to rely merely on His words—if they would but honestly reason to the only logical conclusion (John 10:24-25,38). The proof was of such magnitude that one Pharisee, a ruler of the Jews, even admitted: “[W]e know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him” (John 3:2).
Nevertheless, there are always those who, for one reason or another, refuse to accept the law of rationality, and who avoid the warranted conclusions—just like those who side-stepped the proof that Christ presented, and attributed it to Satan (Matthew 12:24). Christ countered such an erroneous conclusion by pointing out their faulty reasoning and the false implications of their argument (Matthew 12:25-27). The proof that the apostles presented was equally conclusive, though unacceptable to many (Acts 4:16).
The proof in our day is no less conclusive, nor is it any less compelling. While it is not within the purview of this brief article to prove such (see Warren and Flew, 1977; Warren and Matson, 1978), the following tenets are provable: (1) we can know (not merely think, hope, or wish) that God exists (Romans 1:19-20); (2) we can know that the Bible is the verbally inspired Word of God, and intended to be comprehended in much the same way that any written human communication is to be understood; (3) we can know that one day we will stand before God in judgment and give account for whether we have studied the Bible, learned what to do to be saved, and obeyed those instructions; and (4) we can know that we know (1 John 2:3).
By abandoning the Bible as a literal, inerrant, infallible standard by which all human behavior is to be measured, the scientist has effectively rendered biblical religion, biblical faith, and New Testament Christianity sterile—at least as far as his or her own life is concerned. Once the Bible is dismissed as “figurative,” “confusing,” or “incomprehensible,” one has opened wide the doors of subjectivity, in which every man’s view is just as good as another’s. The more sophisticated viewpoint may be more appealing, but it remains just as subjective and self-stylized.

REFERENCES

Robinson, Richard (1976), “Religion and Reason,” Critiques of God, ed. Peter A. Angeles (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus).
Warren, Thomas B. and Antony G.N. Flew (1977), The Warren-Flew Debate (Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press).
Warren, Thomas B. and Wallace I. Matson (1978), The Warren-Matson Debate (Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press).

Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit—The "Unpardonable Sin" by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1218

Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit—The "Unpardonable Sin"

by  Kyle Butt, M.Div.

Through the years, numerous writers have taken on the task of explaining the comment spoken by Jesus concerning the “unpardonable sin”—blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. From these writings have come countless false doctrines, insinuations, and suggested explanations. It is the purpose of this article to explain what “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” is not, what it actually is, and to offer comment concerning whether it still can be committed today.
Three of the four gospel accounts contain a reference to the statement made by Jesus concerning blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. These three passages read as follows.
Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come (Matthew 12:31-32).
Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation—because they said, “He has an unclean spirit” (Mark 3:28-30).
And anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but to him who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven (Luke 12:10).
Each of these references to the statement made by Jesus verifies that Jesus did clearly state that there is a specific sin that “will not be forgiven.” The American Standard Version describes the sin as an “eternal sin” (Mark 3:29). Jesus defined that sin as “the blasphemy against the Spirit.” What, then, is blasphemy against the Spirit?
In order to explain this sin fully, a look at the general context of the statement is critical. Matthew’s account offers the most detail concerning the setting in which Jesus’ statement was made. In Matthew 12:22, the text indicates that a certain man who was demon-possessed was brought to Jesus to be healed. As was His common practice, Jesus cast out the unclean spirit, and healed the man of his blindness and inability to speak. After seeing this display of power, the multitudes that followed Jesus asked, “Could this be the Son of David?” (12:23). Upon hearing this remark, the Pharisees, wanting to discredit the source from which Jesus received His power, declared that Jesus was casting out demons by “Beelzebub, the ruler of demons.” Jesus proceeded to explain that a kingdom divided against itself could not stand, and if He were casting out demons by the power of demons, then He would be defeating Himself. It was after this accusation by the Pharisees, and Jesus’ defense of His actions, that Christ commented concerning the blasphemy against the Spirit. In fact, the text of Mark clearly states that Jesus made the comment about the blasphemy against the Spirit “because they said, ‘He has an unclean spirit.’ ”
Another critical piece of information needed to clarify Jesus’ statement is the definition of blasphemy. Wayne Jackson wrote: “Blasphemy is an anglicized form of the Greek term blasphemia, which scholars believe probably derives from two roots, blapto, to injure, and pheme, to speak. The word would thus suggest injurious speech” (2000). Bernard Franklin, in his article concerning blasphemy against the Spirit, suggested:
The word “blasphemy” in its various forms (as verb, noun, adjective, etc.) appears some fifty-nine times in the New Testament. It has a variety of renderings, such as, “blasphemy,” “reviled,” “railed,” “evil spoken of,” “to speak evil of,” etc. Examples of these various renderings are: “They that passed by reviled him” (Matthew 27:39). “He that shall blaspheme” (Mark 3:29). “They that passed by railed on him” (Mark 15:29). “The way of truth shall be evil spoken of ” (2 Peter 2:2). “These speak evil of those things” (Jude 10). It is evident from these that blasphemy is a sin of the mouth, a “tongue-sin.” All New Testament writers except the author of Hebrews use the word (1936, pp. 224-225).
Furthermore, Jesus defined the term when, after referring to blasphemy, He used the phrase “speaks a word against” in Matthew 12:32.

WHAT THE UNPARDONABLE SIN IS NOT

With the working definition of blasphemy meaning, “to speak against,” or “speak evil of,” it is easy to rule out several sins that would not qualify as the unpardonable sin. Occasionally, murder is suggested as the “unpardonable sin.” Such cannot be the case, however. First, since blasphemy is a “tongue sin,” murder would not fall into this category. Second, several biblical passages show the sin of murder can be forgiven. When King David committed adultery and had Uriah the Hittite murdered, the prophet Nathan came to him, informing him that God had seen that David “killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword” (2 Samuel 12:9). When David confessed to Nathan and repented, the prophet told David, “The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die” (12:13). And, although David was punished for his iniquity, it was forgiven. The Bible plainly demonstrates that murder is not the unpardonable sin.
Adultery surfaces as another sin put forward as unpardonable. Yet the same reasoning used to discount murder as the unpardonable sin can be used to disqualify adultery. First, it does not fit the category of blasphemy. Second, David was forgiven of adultery, just as surely as he was forgiven of murder. The apostle Paul gave a list of no less than ten sins (including adultery) of which the Corinthian brethren had been forgiven (1 Corinthians 6:9-11). Adultery cannot be the unpardonable sin.
Another sin set forth as the unpardonable sin is blasphemy of any kind, not specifically against the Holy Spirit. We know, however, that blasphemy in general cannot be unforgivable for two reasons. First, in the context of the unpardonable sin, Jesus clearly stated that “whatever blasphemies” men may utter (besides against the Holy Spirit) could be forgiven. Second, Paul confessed that before his conversion, he had formerly been “a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief ” (1 Timothy 1:13). These two biblical passages rule out the possibility of general blasphemy as the unpardonable sin.
We begin to see, then, that we cannot arbitrarily decide which sins we think are heinous, and then simply attribute to them the property of being unpardonable, especially considering the fact that even those who were guilty of crucifying the Son of God had the opportunity to be forgiven (Acts 2:36-38). Therefore, since the unpardonable sin falls into a category of its own, and cannot be murder, adultery, general blasphemy, etc., some scholars have set forth the idea that the unpardonable sin is not a single sin at all, but is instead the stubborn condition of a person who persists in unbelief. This understanding, however, fails to take into account the immediate context of the “unpardonable sin.” Gus Nichols, commenting on this idea of “persistent unbelief,” stated: “It is true, great multitudes are going into eternity in rebellion against God to be finally and eternally lost; but it is for rejecting and neglecting pardon graciously extended in the gospel while they live, not because they have committed the unpardonable sin” (1967, p. 236). Wendell Winkler, under a section titled, “What the Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit is Not,” wrote that it is not
postponement of obedience until death. The text implies that those who commit the eternal sin continue to live while having lost all opportunity of salvation; whereas those who postpone obedience to Christ (except those who commit the eternal sin) could have obeyed at any time previous to their death (1980, p. 20).

IN THIS AGE OR IN THE AGE TO COME

Jesus said that blasphemy against the Spirit would not be forgiven “in this age or in the age to come” (Matthew 12:32). Certain religious organizations have seized upon this statement to suggest that Jesus has in mind a situation in which certain sins will be remitted after death—but not this sin. This idea of a purgatory-like state, where the souls of the dead are given a “second chance” to do penance for the sins they committed in their earthly life, finds no justification in this statement made by Christ (nor in any other biblical passage, for that matter). R.C.H. Lenski stated that Jesus’ use of the phrase under discussion meant simply “absolutely never” (1961, p. 484). Hendriksen concurred with Lenski when he wrote:
In passing, it should be pointed out that these words by no stretch of the imagination imply that for certain sins there will be forgiveness in the life hereafter. They do not in any sense whatever support the doctrine of purgatory. The expression simply means that the indicated sin will never be forgiven (1973, p. 528).
As the writer of Hebrews succinctly wrote, “it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27).
It also has been suggested by several writers that the “age to come” discussed by Jesus refers to the Christian Age. According to this idea, Jesus made the statement in the Jewish Age, when the Law of Moses was in effect, and the “age to come” denoted the Christian Age immediately following, when the Law of Christ would prevail. Putting this meaning to the phrase often leads the advocates of this theory to conclude that the unpardonable sin could be committed in the Christian Age, after the resurrection of Christ. As Winkler surmised, “Thus, since our Lord was speaking while the Jewish age was in existence, he was affirming that the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost would not be forgiven in (a) the Jewish age, nor in (b) the Christian age, the age that followed” (1980, p. 21). Nichols, after affirming the same proposition, concluded:
It follows that this sin, therefore, could be committed during the personal ministry of Christ, and was then committed, as we have seen, and could also be committed under the gospel age or dispensation. They could have attributed the works of the Spirit to Satan after Pentecost, the same as before (1967, p. 234).
Two primary pieces of evidence, however, militate against the idea that Jesus’ reference to the “age to come” meant the Christian Age. First, in Mark 10:30, the gospel writer has Jesus on record using the same phrase (“in the age to come”) to refer to the time when the followers of Christ would inherit “eternal life” (see Luke 18:30 for the parallel passage). This is a clear reference to life after death, since Paul said “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 15:50). Second, Mark’s account of the unpardonable sin describes the sin as an “eternal sin.” The translators of the New King James Version recorded that the person who commits the sin “never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation” (Mark 3:29). Mark’s account, with its emphasis on eternity, shows that the phrase simply is meant to underscore the fact that this sin will “absolutely never” be forgiven (Lenski, p. 484). It is incorrect, then, to use the phrase “in the age to come” to refer to purgatory. It also is tenuous to use the phrase to refer to the Christian Age. The best explanation, to quote Hendrickson again, is that “the expression simply means that the indicated sin will never be forgiven” (p. 528).

WHAT THE UNPARDONABLE SIN IS

As was noted earlier, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the only sin in the Bible that is given the status of unpardonable or eternal. In fact, Jesus prefaced His discussion of this sin by stating that, “every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men,” except for blasphemy against the Spirit. Using the working definition of blasphemy as “speaking evil of,” it becomes clear that the sin described by Jesus was a “tongue sin” that the Pharisees had committed, or at least were dangerously close to committing.
What had the Pharisees done that would have put them in jeopardy of committing the unpardonable sin? According to His own testimony, during Jesus’ time on this Earth He cast out demons by the “Spirit of God” (Matthew 12:28). When the Pharisees saw that Jesus had performed a verifiable miracle, they could not argue with the fact that Christ possessed certain powers that others (including themselves) did not have. Therefore, in order to cast suspicion on the ministry of Jesus, they claimed that He was casting out demons by Beelzebub, the ruler of demons. The name Beelzebub is simply another name for Satan (Franklin, 1936, p. 227), as can be seen from Jesus’ reference to Satan in Matthew 12:26. Even when faced by the miraculous working of the Holy Spirit through Jesus, the Pharisees were, in essence, attributing Jesus’ power to Satan, and claiming that Jesus was “Satan incarnate instead of God incarnate. It is this, and nothing else, that our Lord calls the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost (or Spirit—KB)” (Franklin, p. 227). Maxie Boren wrote: “The context of Matthew 12:22ff. shows clearly that this was indeed the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit—attributing the miracle done by Jesus to the power of the devil. Jesus said it was done ‘by the Spirit of God’ (verse 28) but they (the Pharisees—KB) said it was done by Beelzebub” (n.d., p. 1). It is clear that blasphemy against the Spirit was a definite, singular sin, which could be committed by the Pharisees during the life of Jesus.

IS THE “UNPARDONABLE SIN” THE
SAME AS THE “SIN UNTO DEATH”?

John, in his first epistle, mentioned the fact that “there is sin leading to death” and “there is sin not leading to death” (1 John 5:16-17). His statement in these verses has been connected by more than a few people to Jesus’ remark about the “eternal sin.” It is evident, however, that this connection is based more on opinion than on textual Bible study.
First, there is no biblical evidence that connects the passage in 1 John with the Pharisees’ accusation. Furthermore, the entire context of 1 John gives the Christian readers hope of forgiveness for all sins that they might have committed. John wrote: “All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death” (1 John 5:17). Several chapters earlier, he wrote: “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9, emp. added). In the scope of John’s epistle, any unrighteousness committed by his readers could be forgiven if the transgressor took the proper steps of repentance and confession. Apparently, the “sin unto death” in 1 John is not a specific sin for which it is impossible to receive forgiveness, but rather, is any sin for which a person will not take the proper steps demanded by God to receive the forgiveness available. On the other hand, blasphemy against the Spirit was a specific, eternal sin that never would be forgiven.

CAN THE UNPARDONABLE SIN BE COMMITTED TODAY?

The next question usually asked concerning this sin is whether or not it is still possible to commit it today. Opinions on this question certainly vary, and scholars seem to be divided in their positions. The evidence, however, seems to point toward the idea that this sin cannot be committed today.
First, the circumstances under which the sin is described cannot prevail today, due to the fact that the age of miracles has ceased (see Miller, 2003). No one today will have the opportunity to witness Jesus performing miracles in person (2 Corinthians 5:16).
Second, there is no other mention of the sin in any biblical passage written after the resurrection of Christ. None of the inspired New Testament writers refers to the sin in any epistle or in the book of Acts, and none offers warnings to new converts about avoiding the sin post-Pentecost. Franklin observed:
If it were possible for it to be committed, would there not have been some warning against it? Were there any danger regarding it, would the Apostle Paul, who wrote half the books of the New Testament, have failed to warn against its commission? Paul does not even mention the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The sin in question was actually committed in the days of our Lord’s ministry on earth, but it does not necessarily follow that it could be committed in His absence (p. 233).
In discussing this matter, Gus Nichols wrote: “It seems that all sins committed today are pardonable, and that all can be saved, if they will” (1967, p. 239). V.E. Howard, commented along the same lines when he stated that “there is no unpardonable sin today” (1975, p. 156).
In conclusion, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the only unpardonable sin mentioned in the Bible, and it is mentioned in the context of the Pharisees accusing Jesus of being possessed by the Devil. The context indicates that it was a specific sin, and not a series of forgivable sins, or an attitude of persistent unbelief. After the resurrection, no inspired writer mentions the sin, and no warnings against it were recorded. There is no concrete evidence that it can be committed today. The fact that it is not mentioned after the resurrection, lends itself to the idea that it cannot still be committed. In fact, the indication from passages such as 1 John 1:7,9 is that “all unrighteousness” that a person could commit today can be forgiven by the blood of Jesus. As Howard said when concluding his remarks about the eternal sin: “In the same scripture our Lord gave full assurance that every sin and blasphemy against the ‘Son of man’ shall be forgiven him. Today the gospel of Christ is to be preached to every man on earth and any man on earth may be saved by obeying the gospel (Mark 16:15-16)” [p. 157].

REFERENCES

Boren, Maxie B. (no date), “The Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit,” Class Handout, Brown Trail church of Christ, Bedford, Texas, Lesson 4.
Franklin, Barnard (1936), “The Blasphemy Against the Holy Ghost: An Inquiry into the Scriptural Teaching Regarding the Unpardonable Sin,” Bibliotheca Sacra, 93:220-233, April.
Hendriksen, William (1973), The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Howard, V.E. (1975), The Holy Spirit (West Monroe, LA: Central Publishers).
Jackson, Wayne (2000), Blasphemy—What Is This Great Sin?, [On-line], URL: http://www.christiancourier.com/archives/blasphemy.htm.
Lenski, R.C.H. (1961 reprint), The Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg).
Miller, Dave (2003), “Modern-day Miracles, Tongue-speaking, and Holy Spirit Baptism: A Refutation,” Reason and Revelation, 23(3):17-23, March.
Nichols, Gus (1967), Lectures on the Holy Spirit (Plainview, TX: Nichols Brothers).
Winkler, Wendell, ed. (1980), What Do You Know About the Holy Spirit? (Fort Worth, TX: Winkler Publications).