Calvinism and the Unpardonable Sin

A worry to many is something called the unpardonable sin, which none of the non-elect have to worry about, considering none of their sins are pardonable, as Christ apparently did not die for them. So then, who committed the unpardonable sin?

If you say that the sins of the non-elect are actually pardonable, which you would have to say to affirm the existence of an unpardonable one, then you would have to admit that the non-elect have hope of salvation, as long as they do not commit the unpardonable sin. If, however, someone commits an unpardonable sin, it can only be a non-elect person, as an elect person cannot commit the unpardonable sin.

Personally, I do not believe that unpardonable sins exist. I believe that Jesus "tasted death for every man" and that he "offered one sacrifice for sins forever.", including all the sins of every human being throughout their lifetime. if there were an unpardonable sin, then Christ did not "taste death for every man".

 

Jesus took on Himself "the seed of Abraham", man, "to bring many sons to glory", "the children which God hath given me", Jesus said.

Hebrews 2:16, 10, 13.

Comments borrowed for Gill: Hebrews 2:9 - Bible Verse Meaning and Commentary

"Christ died, not merely as an example, or barely for the good of men, but as a surety, in their room and stead, and that not for every individual of mankind; for there are some he knows not; for some he does not pray; and there are some who will not be saved:"

Greek consideration:

You can't have "man" to hang your hat on.

uper pantov has to carry the connotation of "on behalf of" or "for the sake of", "everyone", "all", or "the whole", rather than "every man without exception".

"the word "man" is not in the original text, it is only (uper pantov) , which may be taken either collectively, and be rendered "for the whole"; ...for whom Christ gave himself, and is the Saviour of;"

as far as the Greek goes and then, in context:

Context consideration;

"distributively, and be translated, "for everyone";

"for everyone of the sons God brings to glory, ( Hebrews 2:10 )

"for everyone of the "brethren", whom Christ sanctifies, and he is not ashamed to own, and to whom he declares the name of God, ( Hebrews 2:11 Hebrews 2:12 )

"for everyone of the members of the "church", in the midst of which he sung praise, ( Hebrews 2:12 )

"for every one of the "children" God has given him, and for whose sake he took part of flesh and blood, ( Hebrews 2:13 Hebrews 2:14 )

and for everyone of the "seed" of Abraham, in a spiritual sense, whose nature he assumed, ( Hebrews 2:16 )"

10 "For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.

11 "For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,

12 "Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.

13 "And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.

14 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

15 "And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

16 "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham."


Then rock solid as ever, the Doctrines of Grace also handle your other verse, when Jesus offered one sacrifice for the sins of His people, as in Matthew 1:21; "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins."

 

Jesus defined the unpardonable sin as attributing to Satan the miracles performed in the power of God Holy Spirit. Really doesn’t have anything to do with the doctrines of grace.

peace to you

 

Logically the only unpardonable sin is unbelief. All sins can be forgiven for those that believe. By continuing in the sin of rejecting Him and refusing His offer of forgiveness and new life in Jesus Christ they commit the unforgivable sin, because it means they are saying that the Holy Spirit's witness about Jesus is a lie.

 

"which none of the non-elect have to worry about," sure they do. Can't put this into an equation to build a philosophy.

"considering none of their sins are pardonable, as Christ apparently did not die for them." Correct, the reprobate's sins are irremissible. See Gill below.

All flawed. All four parts of the sentence are incorrect and not true.

All correct.

Here is the description of remissible and irremissible sins, from Gill;

"Sin may be distinguished into remissible and irremissible."

Of God's Unconditionally Elected:

"All the sins of God's people are remissible, and are actually remitted. God forgives them all their iniquities, and heals all their diseases, their spiritual maladies:

Of the Reprobate's;

"and on the other hand, all the sins of reprobates, of abandoned sinners, that live and die in final impenitence and unbelief, are irremissible;

"He that made them will not have mercy on them", to forgive their sins;

"And he that formed them will show them no favour that way (Isaiah 27:11)."

Because they were not shown Mercy in being Elected to salvation.

This is the unpardonable sin, in case you want to get it down and preach it. Gill.

"There is one sin which is commonly called, the "unpardonable sin", which is the sin, or blasphemy, against the Holy Ghost; and of which it is expressly said, that "it shall not be forgiven, neither in this world, nor in the world to come" (Matthew 12:31, 32).

"But not every sin against the Holy Ghost is here meant; every sin committed against God is committed against the Holy Ghost, as well as against the Father and the Son; he, with them, being the one God, against whom all sin is committed:

"nor is it a denial of his deity, and of his personality, though sins against him, yet they arise from ignorance of him, and are errors in judgement; and from which persons may be recovered, and repent of, and renounce:

"nor is a denial of the necessity of the operations of his grace on the souls of men, in order to their regeneration, conversion, and sanctification, this sin, for the same reasons: men may, and good men too, grieve the Holy Spirit by their sins; yea, vex him, as the Israelites; and yet not sin the unpardonable sin:"

The sin against the Holy Ghost is not a sin against the law,
but against the gospel.

"yea, a man may break all the Ten Commandments, and not sin the sin against the Holy Ghost; it is a sin not against the law, but against the gospel;

The sin against the Holy Ghost lies in the denial of the great and fundamental truth of the gospel, salvation by Jesus Christ, in all its branches; peace and pardon by his blood, atonement by his sacrifice, and justification by his righteousness;

"and this after he has received the knowledge of this truth, under the illuminations, convictions, and demonstrations of the Spirit of God; and yet, through the instigation of Satan, and the wickedness of his own heart, knowingly, and wilfully, and maliciously denies this truth, and obstinately persists therein.

"So that as he never comes to repentance, he has no forgiveness, here nor hereafter.

"Not because the Holy Spirit is superior to the other divine Persons; for they are equal: nor through any deficiency in the grace of God, or blood of Christ;

"but through the nature of the sin, which is diametrically opposite to the way of salvation, pardon, atonement, and justification;

"for these being denied to be by Christ, there can be no pardon; for another Jesus will never be sent, another Saviour will never be given; there will be no more shedding of blood, no more sacrifice, nor another sacrifice for sin; nor another righteousness wrought out and brought in.

And, therefore, there remains nothing but a fearful looking for of judgement and indignation, to come on such persons.

"Upon all which it may be observed, from what a small beginning, as the sin of our first parents might seem to be, what great things have arisen; what a root of bitterness that was which has brought forth so much unwholesome and pernicious fruit;

"such a vast number of sins, and of such an enormous size: what a virtue must there be in the blood of Christ, to cleanse from such sins as these, and all of them; and in his sacrifice to make atonement for them; and in his righteousness to justify from them!

"And how great is the superabounding grace of God,
that where sin has thus abounded, grace should superabound!"

 

So, the translators made a mistake then? Numerous translators rendered the verse in a similar way.

You cannot simply claim that for every instance of inclusion of all mankind in the Bible, the language is intended to convey the elect. If there was any question as to whether all people were included, or only the elect, why wasn't it translated differently?

 

No. If the non-elect must go to hell for the one sin that cannot be forgiven, then they cannot go to hell for all the other sins they committed, because they are not the one sin that cannot be forgiven.

If Calvinism is true, then free-will is based on desire rather than choice and is therefore not freewill. So according to Calvinism, God created robots with desires, which had sentience, and could not choose salvation. Then he damned the majority of those robots to be tortured in everlasting fire. In order for someone to be responsible for their actions, they need to have free-will.

 

The translation expresses an implication "everyone", "the whole", "all" into our language as explicitly being "every man", which is just translation in action and does no harm to anything in the context, until someone sinfully desires to pull one misinterpretation of a one word out of the canon by itself and assume it has a meaning which it does not connote.

Which you should not do.

But which you do.

"You cannot simply claim that for every instance of inclusion of all mankind in the Bible".

How about, "You cannot simply claim that for every instance of "all" or "everyone" or "the whole world" etc., has a meaning expressing the "inclusion of all mankind in the Bible", by assuming it.

And by assuming it, I mean calling the instances in the verses you are talking about as containing wording that specifies and is restricted to the "inclusion of all mankind in the Bible".

Where is that at?

Where does Hebrews 2:9 say that it says anything about the "inclusion of all mankind"?

Are you adding something to that and all the other instances of verses where you are assuming they talk about including "all mankind", without comparing scripture with scripture?

The claim that you can make is that "many sons", "brethren", "the children God has gaven Me", and "the seed of Abraham" make a restriction on " every man" causing it to not possibly involve the "inclusion of all mankind", contextually.

Not the other way around.

"Every man" does not restrict "many sons", "brethren", "the children God has gaven Me", and "the seed of Abraham" and make the demand on them that they mean all of mankind.

That is what needs to be claimed.

Any and everything possible, grammatically,
can not be assumed to automatically ipso facto
give the proper meaning or correct interpretation, contextually.

There isn't any question in the use of that translation. It meant "every man", with Elect women and children implied, that God gave the Son and the Son died for.

Didn't you read the context in the rest of the next few verses for a half dozen or so clarifications, as the clinchers to its interpretation?

So you have imposed a restriction and committing "one sin", "the sin" and limited not no longer being able to commit any more than that one sin.

You are using a restrictive use for your use of what can be restricted.

That's on you and doesn't make your formulas true for you.

Free-will exists in every inherently sin-cursed individual who may desire to sin or make choices, but they can only desire and choose to further sin, which is by their nature which is only capable of sinning.

Believe it or not God did not recreate the Garden of Eden and give every natural born lost soul an option to choose one of two trees.

Go did not create another God who couldn't change, even if He could.

He created a human being, to have fellowship with, but had to not make him a robot by giving him free-will with the ability to use it and change, which meant sin and he did.

The only method by which to rescue his fallen human to then continue in communion and fellowship with him, forever, and still satisfy God being Just was to provide a Lamb and He did.

And by His own good pleasure, in Mercy chose some to be with Them where they are, forever.

That was the only method possible.

God had to create Adam to not be a robot.

Adam and all of his posterity were all already damned by him choosing to offend God and sinning and falling. God was not obligated to save any soul from damnation then and is still not obligated to 'provide an opportunity to be saved, then or now and He doesn't.

Adam was obligated to keep God's command and He did not and we are obligated to keep the whole law of God and we do not.

Figure that one out. We all are damned to start with and would have all been damned for Eternity, if God had chosen that instead and not provided Jesus to save some, in His Mercy.

That happens to be what He has done and Who God is, as He has revealed Himself in His revelation to mankind in the Bible.

They have free-will and freely will to effectively commit the unpardonable sin of despising the Gospel of Jesus, to what extent they have revelation of it.

Where do you think religiously lost people come from who cry, "Lord, Lord"?

 

From conversations, I thought the “unpardonable sin” of Calvinism was to reject PSA for another theory of atonement. :Cool

 

@Guido it will make it much easier to follow what you are commenting on if you use the reply button so we know which post you are referring to.

The button is found on the bottom right. Click on it and it will copy in the text you are replying to.

 

How do you know that eternity in hell is the punishment for this 'unpardonable sin'? I don't see it in the text.

 

Then why were they saved in unbelief?... My opinion doesn't mean squat but you believe scripture don't you?... Brother Glen:)

Romans 11: 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:

31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.

32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

All Israel is spiritual Jews and Gentiles!

 

So do you believe Christ tasted death for people who will eventually die in their sins ?

 

Yes I do believe scripture. What you have concluded from the text of the KJV is one of the reasons that I do not use the KJV.

Rom 11:29 ForG1063 theG3588 giftsG5486 andG2532 callingG2821 of GodG2316 are without repentance.G278

Rom 11:29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable .G278 NKJV

Rom 11:32 ForG1063 GodG2316 hath concludedG4788 them allG3956 inG1519 unbelief,G543 thatG2443 he might have mercyG1653 upon all.G3956

Rom 11:32 For God has committed G4788 them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all. NKJV

No one is saved in unbelief.
And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him. Hebrews 11:6

Please note the words
"that He might have mercy on all." {Romans 11:32}
not that He would. So there must be a condition for obtaining salvation. And indeed there is.

What does the bible say?
Rom_10:13 For "WHOEVER CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED."

And why do they call on His name?
Eph_1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,

So we see that Paul was just saying that those that believe, both Jews and Gentiles, will be saved.

The only sin God can't forgive is the sin of unbelief.
WHY? The reason that unbelief condemns a person is because FAITH in the Son is what is required for one to be saved.

 

You state: "The only sin God can't forgive is the sin of unbelief."

Your statement makes God less than Sovereign and sets up a law that even the King cannot override. The Bible does not teach what you claim.

Second, the "all", in your quote from Romans 11:32, is referring to all who believe, not all the world.

"For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all."
- Romans 11:30-32

God's mercy is not restricted to a people group such as Jews only or Greeks only. His mercy is given to all who believe.

How do they believe? By God saving them by grace alone.
That's how a person comes to have faith.

I posted this song in the Calvin/Arminian board and it's appropriate here.

 

I am curious how you think that God not forgiving unbelief makes Him less than sovereign? Are you saying that God will save those that do not believe? I know that is a calvinist view but it is not biblical. Calvinists have pit salvation before faith. The bible has salvation after faith.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

Now I know you know this truth as I posted in the post you just responded to
Eph 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
God saves those that believe so logically God does not save those that remain in unbelief.

First: I was responding to @tyndale1946 comment in post # 13 re "Then why were they saved in unbelief?" to show that the KJV leads to errors in understanding the bible.
Second: if you look at the context of Rom 11:30-32 which would include Rom 11:25-32 you will find that Paul is speaking to brethren about their fellow Jews that God might have mercy on if they learn form them and trust in Him for salvation. You read into what I said when you conclude that Romans 11:32 refers to the world as the text shows it refers to the unsaved Jews of the world

I agree God in His mercy will save all that believe. Those that remain in unbelief will not be saved.
Joh 3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
Joh 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Calvinists continue to put the card before the horse. Trust what the bible says.

We receive he Righteousness of God Through Faith
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
Rom 3:22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference;
Rom 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Rom 3:24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,
Rom 3:25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed,
Rom 3:26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

 

The unpardonable sin... Brother Glen:)

Matthew 12: 22 Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw.

23 And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David?

24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:

26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?

27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges.

28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.

29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.

30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.

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

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

Won't be forgiven in the Jewish dispensation of time nor in the Gentile dispensation of time either, in this world not the next

 

I agree, they will not be forgiven because they do not trust in Christ Jesus.

The Pharisees' had seen compelling evidence that Jesus was the Messiah and yet refused to believe. They even went so far as to claim that the miracles Jesus did by the power of the Holy Spirit, were in fact done by the power of Satan. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is an unpardonable sin.

The equivalent today would be someone who remains so committed to rejecting Christ that they are determined to find alternative explanations for any obvious proof (such as miracles) attesting to him.

Mat 10:32 Everyone therefore who acknowledges me before others, I also will acknowledge before my Father in heaven;
Mat 10:33 but whoever denies me before others, I also will deny before my Father in heaven.

 

God saves us by grace. As a result of God's work on our behalf, we believe.
Just like the song said, "When I found Jesus, he was standing over me." Later the verse says, "When I found Jesus He was holding on to me." Another verse is, " When I found Jesus, He was removing my shackles." The whole song expresses how Jesus was already assisting us when we "found" Jesus. It's the same with belief. When I believed in Jesus, He was already graciously taking my deadness and making me alive. How can I say this? Because the Bible tells me this is how it happens.

So, God saves us, even while we don't yet believe, and his gracious salvation causes us to believe so that we cannot not believe. There is the difference between you and me. God remains entirely Sovereign, saving whomever He wills to save and giving them faith to believe so that they cannot not believe. Your view teaches us that God is shackled by man and God cannot save until such a man first chooses to believe. Thus, by your theology, you deny the full Sovereignty of God. This doesn't change the fact that God has graciously saved you, but it means you don't understand the full Sovereignty of God and you withhold from God all the glory He deserves. For that, you must give account to God.