|
Concordant Studies
OVERWHELMING GRACE, AND
UNPARDONABLE SIN
THE CLAIM against our teaching on this theme is usually set forth thus:
The Bible says that those committing this sin shall not be
forgiven (Luke 12:10, AV); whereas the Concordant teaching is that, eventually, all
such sinners shall be forgiven. Since such a teaching contradicts the Bible,
therefore it is wrong.
It is sad that most
cannot detect the fallacies in such logic. It is sadder still that most are
ready to assume the worst, gullibly presuming that such a representation of our teaching
together with the issues in question, constitutes a fair and adequate representation
thereof.
Any such caricature
of the true issues, however, is simply begging the question, and is most misleading.
Besides its inaccuracy and lack of fairness, it assumes what is at issue, which is whether
by the words shall not be forgiven, it follows that some will be subjected to
unending divine wrath, even as interminable estrangement from God. It is also a straw man,
for it only disproves that which we do not deny, the proposition that if some were
to lie under a penalty consisting of unending divine wrath, it could not also be true that
no one, actually, would ever be subjected to such a penalty.
However expressed,
the gist of the argument often set forth by believers in the eventual salvation of all
concerning this question of the sin that shall not be pardoned is that it is not to be
understood categorically. It is claimed that the Lords statement about a sin that
will not be pardoned is not absolute or unqualified. The sin, it is explained, will not be
pardoned only within the present eon and the coming eon, not beyond. This supposition is
inferred from the words, neither in this eon nor in that which is impending.
It is then further claimed that, following the coming eon, the penalty which formerly had
applied to this misdeed will then be rescinded. It is said that such sinners will then
be pardoned, so that, at the consummation, they may finally be saved.
Conversely, believers
in eternal torment, besides claiming that the duration of the penalty for this sin is
eternal, not eonian, also place great stress on the account in Luke 12, which
simply declares of such sinners that they shall not be [being] pardoned
(v.10), making no mention of either the present or the impending eon. Since the record in
Luke is in the form of a declarative sentence ending in a period, one in which it is
therein affirmed simply that this sin shall not be pardoned, it is claimed
that not only will this sin not be pardoned either in the present or in the coming eon,
but that it will not be pardonedperiod.
Remarkably, all such
believers, whether in the salvation of all or in the eternal torment of many, are united
in the supposition that if those committing the sin of the blasphemy of the spirit are not
pardoned from the penalty of this sin, then they cannot be saved. Hence, the universalist
believers seek to prove that, eventually, such pardon will be granted, while the
partialist believers seek to show that it will not.
This issue, however,
in relation to the question of final destiny, is a false issue; yet it is the one that is
nearly always debated concerning the so-called unpardonable sin. The issue is
not whether pardon will or will not eventually be granted. The issue is, instead, whether
the revelation of Scripture, elsewhere stated, concerned with the accomplishment of
Christs sacrificial death, affirms (1) that all those for whom Christ died will be
saved, and (2) that He died for all.
To put this another
way, If it is really true, concerning mankind, that, Even as, in Adam, all are dying, thus
also, in Christ, shall all be vivified . . . the last enemy death
being abolished . . . that God may be All in all
(1 Cor.15:22,26,28), then we may be certain that whatever the negative truth may be
concerning a sin that shall not be pardoned, it will not deny the positive truth that God
shall be All in all mankind.
Will those for whom
Christ died be saved? And, Did He die for all? If so, then all will be saved; if not, then
all will not be saved. Whether we answer in the affirmative or in the negative to these
questions, in either case, any question concerning the sin which shall not be
pardoned is a moot point, one without significance insofar as these far grander questions
are concerned.
Still, it is well to
understand the subject of the sin that shall not be pardoned. Yet in their preoccupation
with issues of final destiny, those arrayed on both sides of that much more consequential
question, often have failed to resolve significant issues of this lesser subject at hand.
The simple fact is
that the present and the coming eons are the only periods in which pardon is offered; and,
during these periods, this sin under consideration will not be being pardoned. It follows
from this, then, that this sin will not be pardoned. Period. However, it does not
follow from the fact that those committing this sin will not be pardonedthat is,
releasedfrom the penalty which Justice deems fit to impose, that they will not be
saved. The Scripture never declares that the punishment imposed upon any sin is that of
endless punishment. And, neither in Matthew 12, Mark 3, Luke 12, or any other chapter of
Scripture, are we told that a penalty which includes unending divine wrath even as
interminable human misery, shall accrue to those who blaspheme the spirit.

UNREMITTED LIABILITY
Wherever
we read that a sin shall not be pardoned, or forgiven, the sense is simply that whatever
the just penalty may be for such a misdeed, it will not be remitted, or let go. It does
not follow, however, from the phrase, concerning him that blasphemeth against the
Holy Ghost, that it shall not be forgiven him (Luke 12:10, AV), that
that from which he shall not be forgiven (i.e., released) is a penalty
consisting of abiding estrangement from God in the presence of eternal burnings.
Where we read in this
verse, as in the Concordant Version, that the one who blasphemes the holy spirit
shall not be pardoned, the implicit idea, conveyed through the figure of ellipsis,
is that such a one shall not be pardoned from the penalty which justly accrues to this
sin. From a literary standpoint, it is simply incorrect to interpret such texts as if
their sense were, shall not be pardoned, from a penalty consisting of or
incorporating a specific woe, namely, that of eternal separation from God.
Such verses say
nothing as to the nature of the penalty for such disobedience; to claim that they
do manifests a deficiency of reading comprehension. Or, in the case of any who are aware
that these texts, indeed, do not reveal the nature of the penalty which accrues to this
sin and yet argue as if these texts did contain such information, the error then
becomes that of circular reasoning, assuming what is at issue as if it had been proved.
Such an error is exacerbated by making such arguments on the basis of our texts under
consideration (i.e., Matt.12:31,32; Mark 3:28-30; Luke 12:8-10), ones which are incapable
of answering such a question.
In accord with
English idiom, the Concordant Version translates aphiêmi as pardon
when used of a king or governor, and as forgive when used in familial or other
interpersonal relations. It is a word of wide usage denoting broadly let off
or away. Its elements signify FROM-LET. The
idea is to let something go, or let someone off. When used of matters of
penality, one who is FROM- LETed, is one who is
exempted from whatever penalty would otherwise be due; likewise, one who is not FROM- LETed, is one who is not exempted from whatever penalty would
otherwise be due.
Even in English, this
sense is clear when the Greek term is translated as pardon, since we are
familiar with matters of governmental pardon. Likewise, in the case of a loan that is not
forgiven, all that is meant is that the obligation to repay remains, since the
obligation is not let go. Indeed, the primary definition of
forgive is to grant pardon for or remission of (something); [i.e.,
to refrain from exacting or inflicting, as a penalty]; cease to demand the
penalty for. 1
Thus the blasphemy of
the spirit shall not be pardoned. The fact that this is so neither in this eon nor in that
which is impending, simply brings before us those eons in which every sin and
blasphemy shall be being pardoned, in the case of those obtaining pardon. The
reason, however, why the one who is blaspheming against the holy spirit shall not
be pardoned, is not because such a sin is some sort of mysterious super-sin,
but because such a sin precludes Christward repentance. Any who maintained such blasphemy
unto death, blocked off the only pathway leading to their pardon. Therefore, instead of
obtaining pardon, they became liable to the eonian penalty for this
very sin.

THE WORD AIĠNION
Those
who are aware of the pertinent issues concerning this word, will not merely slavishly copy
the lexical claims of others, in support of their own opinion, making no mention of other
scholarly sources affirming contrary opinions. Being well-versed in the literature, they
will be well aware that, as on practically all issues, here too, scholars differ among
themselves, even among those of common tradition. 2
Indeed, no one who is
well-informed on this subject, claims that the essence of the word aiġnion
(eonian, CV), itself, consists of the idea of endlessness, since at least
certain texts are stipulated as being incapable of such a signification. Likewise, all
such ones acknowledge that, at least in some cases, the word is used of finite duration.
Therefore, the only objective idea inherent to the word itself is that of pertaining
to (inherently unspecified) duration. Hence, even if one should, on hermeneutical
grounds, claim that the referential meaning of this word, in certain contexts, is
the notion of endlessness, he nevertheless may not affirm that such a notion is inherent
to the word itself, in its essential meaning.
Faithful translation
must ever seek to use neutral expressions in representing the Original; not renderings
which are of an interpretative nature. Hence, it follows that aiġnion (1) must not
be translated as everlasting, but simply, somehow, according to the
sense of durative (i.e., of the duration), even if it should be
the judgment of an interpreter that of endless duration is its
referential meaning, in a specific case. Since durative would be an awkward
rendering, the best solution is simply to transliterate aiġnion, in anglicized
form, by the English word eonian. Insofar as translation is concerned,
however, which simply represents what the word says, not that to which it refers,
eonian should not be understood as pertaining to a period of time,
nor to the notion of endlessness, but simply as, pertaining to an [inherently
unspecified] duration of time.

NON-EXEMPTION FROM PENALTY
Wherever
we read that a sin shall not be pardoned, we should always ask ourselves, Not pardoned
from what? The answer to this question, of course, is, Not pardoned from whatever the
penalty may be to which those who commit this sin shall be subjected.
Much of the confusion
surrounding this subject arises from the uncomely custom among men of declaring to certain
of their offenders, Ill never forgive you. They imagine that by
the Lords words that there is a sin that shall not be pardoned, He means to convey
essentially that which they themselves mean by their own phrase, Ill never
forgive you. Any such presumption, however, is surely a gratuitous opinion.
By such assertions,
men mean to affirm that because of a certain misdeed committed by the other party, they
have resolved to impose a certain policy on that other party accordingly. Their policy
here, it is claimed, shall consist of their never forgiving him of his wrongdoing. In
turn, by this they mean to say that they will always hold it against him while acting in a
way toward him consistent with such interminable unforgiveness.
The Lord Jesus,
however, in declaring of the sin of the blasphemy of the spirit that it shall not be being
pardoned, says no such thing as this, speaking either of Himself or of His God and Father.
Instead, He simply affirms that the one committing this sin will not be released
from whatever penalty it may be that God has appointed unto such sinners.
Specifically, He does not say, nor do His words entail, that the penalty which God has
appointed unto such ones is that of unending misery and wrath.
Should the penalty,
howeveras is indeed the casewhich has been appointed consist of the
forfeiture of eonian life, even as subjection to divine indignation in the day of judging,
then that is the penalty from which such an offender will not be released (i.e.,
pardoned or forgiven).
Only if, on other
grounds, it could be proved that the penalty of this sin were that of interminable
divine indignation, could it then be said that such sinners would never be released from
such a penalty. Even in that case, however, it would still be incorrect to say that any
such woeful judgment is revealed here, within our texts in question.
Hence the claim that
the word of our Lords testimony on this theme (cf Matt.12:31,32; Mark 3:29;
Luke 12:10), entails it being so that those committing the sin of blasphemy of the spirit
will be subjected to a future consisting of never-ending miseryeternal punishment by
and everlasting estrangement from Godis perfectly mistaken. Any such claim is merely
a misreading of the Scripture. No such notion either inheres in or follows from the
Lords own carefully-chosen words.
Thus, from
Jesus words concerning the sin of the blasphemy of the spirit, we simply learn that
this sin shall not be being pardoned, or let go; accordingly, the person himself who
blasphemes against the holy spirit shall not be being pardoned. Hence, anyone committing
this sin will not be released from whatever penalty should be imposed on this very
misdeed, according to the divine determination.
To say any less than
this about these texts, is to deny that which the Lord has plainly set forth. Yet to say
any more, is to address issues not inherent in the text itself. All that the Lord is
affirming here is that those committing this sin will not be exempted from its due
penaltywhatever that due penalty may be, and for however long it may be imposed.
The blasphemy
of the spirit consists in attributing the works of Christ, done by the power of
Gods Spirit, to demons or unclean spirits. As these works were the means used to
produce repentance and pardon, and this was essential for entrance into the kingdom
[prophesied by Israels prophets], it is readily seen that pardon is impossible in
such a case. The time, however, is limited to this eon or the coming eon of the kingdom.
Eventually, all mankind will be far more than pardoned. They will be justified (Rom.5:18)
and reconciled (Col.1:20). But this will not take place until a full eon later, when the
kingdom is given over to the Father (1 Cor.15:24).
We cannot
commit the sin against the holy Spirit because our salvation is not based on miracles and
signs. It follows faith, not sight. And, [before God as our Judge,] we are not pardoned,
but justified (Rom.3:24,26). Condemnation is impossible (Rom.8:1). Moreover, we are
explicitly told that, in the latter eras, some will be withdrawing from the faith, giving
heed to deceiving spirits and the teachings of demons. Any spirit manifestation [or
ostensibly spiritual teaching] not in perfect accord with the scriptures
should be given the most severe tests, lest we be among those who are deceived by
them. 3
Similarly, just as
our Lord declared that those who blasphemed against the holy spirit would not be being
pardoned, He likewise affirmed that the indignation of God is remaining on
those being stubborn as to the Son (John 3:36). Yet even as this latter
passage does not address what will be the consequence, in relation to indignation, should
such stubbornness be removed, the former texts do not address what will be the result
consequent to the time when one who was not pardoned is nevertheless judged.
We should not reason
if a sin should go unpardoned, that therefore those who do not obtain pardon but instead
enter the judging, will never be saved. Even in human systems of justice, many who never
obtain a pardon, who instead must undergo the full penalty for their lawless deeds, after
they have done so, are released from prison, having paid their debt to society. It does
not follow because they were never pardoned, that they were never released from prison.
Even in the case of the most serious crimes where the death penalty is imposed, the state,
at that juncture, considers justice to have been met. It does not sentence the criminal to
eternal death, but simply to death. Should God resurrect and eventually vivify
one thus put to death (and He will!), the state could have no objection that the demands
of its justice had not been met, in any such case.

SUPEREXCEEDING GRACE
Warnings
concerning the sin that is not being pardoned, are not addressed to the members of the
body of Christ. Instead, Pauls message to us is that we are not appointed to indignation,
but to the procuring of salvation, through our Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom we
shall be saved from the indignation of God (1 Thess.5:9; Rom.5:9).
Further, we are not
saved because we believe, but we believe because we are saved. While it is true that we
must believe if we would be saved, this is so simply in light of the fact that salvation
is not apart from faith. It is not, however, that we are required to believe
and accept Christ, for our salvation is in grace, apart from law. Instead, we are
graciously granted to be believing (Phil.1:29); God parts a measure of faith to each of
His chosen ones (Rom.8:33; 12:3).
God saved us out
of our unbelief. Even as in the case of Paul, the faith and love in Christ
Jesus, overwhelms our unbelief (1 Tim.1:14,16). Like self-control,
faith is a fruit of the spirit (Gal.5:23); not a prerequisite of salvation. Our
salvation is not a matter of our making some sort of responsible decision in
favor of a requirement, but of being chosen and predesignated of God, before the
disruption of the world (Eph.1:4,5).
As presented in
Pauls evangel, eonian life is a gracious gift (Rom.6:23). Hence, in granting
us eonian life, God displays not the generosity of His reward, but the transcendent riches
of His grace (Eph.2:7). In this provision, He makes known not His integrity as a
faithful Rewarder, but His vast love as a gracious Saviour. Hence, as many do, to make our
eonian life hinge on our own obedience, is egregiously to misrepresent Pauls evangel
at its very core.
For us, Grace reigns,
for life eonian (Rom.5:21), any forfeiture of an allotment in Gods kingdom that may
be incurred by us for unfaithfulness, notwithstanding (cp 2 Tim.2:11-13;
Gal.5:21). 4
Thus, in this connection, where sin increases, grace superexceeds (Rom.5:20). God
has designated us beforehand for the place of a son for Him through Christ Jesus
(Eph.1:5), having chosen us, foreknown us, called us, graced us with faith, and justified
us as well, all unto this glorious end (Rom.8:30; cp 1 Cor.1:24).
This is the evangel
of our salvation; it is the evangel which Paul heralded among the nations (Gal.2:2). It is
in accord with the delight of Gods will and for the laud of the glory of His grace
(Eph.1:6).
Beyond these
marvelous considerations as to our own salvation, may we indeed also come to
realize the glorious truth that our Saviour, God, wills all mankind to be saved,
and to come into a realization of the truth (1 Tim.2:4). That is, God has formed the
decision that this should occur; and, He is operating all in accord with the counsel of
His will (Eph.1:11). All His counsel shall be confirmed, and all His desire will He do
(Isa.46:10).
God is not
exclusively the Saviour of believers, but especially the Saviour of believers.
Those who believe, enjoy a special salvation, with unique blessings for the eons to come.
God is not only our Saviour, but is also the Saviour of all mankind (1 Tim.4:10). The
fact is that God will one day abolish death and become All in all (1 Cor.15:26,28).
It is His purpose as well, through Christ Jesus, to reconcile all, whether those on the
earth or those in the heavens; thus, making peace through the blood of His
cross (Col.1:20).
All contrary claims
such as that all Christ-rejectors or sundry other sinners will be eternally
lost, must be repudiated. Those who make such claims are simply mistaken.
Such ones do not have
a realization of the grace of God in truth (Col.1:6), nor of
the gratuity in grace, which is of the One Man, Jesus Christ
(Rom.5:15). Yet it is only thus, in gratuitous grace, that Christ
Jesus . . . is giving Himself a correspondent Ransom for all
(1 Tim.2:6). And, it is also only thus, consequently, that, even as, in Adam,
all are dying, thus also, in Christ, shall all be vivified (1 Cor.15:22).
In the question of
human destiny, those who oppose the grace of God in truth, either deny that Christ died
for the sake of the salvation of all mankind, or, alternatively, represent
salvation as a reward for obedience, while merely calling it a free
gift. As to the faith, they swerve (1 Tim.6:21), in advocating any
such false teachings.
May we be given eyes
to see and ears to hear the truth of the evangel, the evangel which the
apostle Paul heralded among the nations. Now may the God of expectation, be filling
you with all joy and peace in believing, for you to be superabounding in
expectation, in the power of holy spirit (Rom.15:13).
James Coram
1. Funk & Wagnalls Standard College
Dictionary, p.522 (Pleasantville, New York: The Readers Digest Association, 1966).
2. Extensive information concerning the words eon
and eonian and the various issues related to these words, is contained in many
of our publications. These include the booklets, The Ages;
Eon, as Indefinite Duration ; Whence
Eternity? ; Eternal Torment or Universal
Reconciliation?; The Saviour of All Mankind; and the books, ALL IN ALL;
and THE MYSTERY OF THE GOSPEL.
3. A. E. Knoch, THE CONCORDANT COMMENTARY, p.27.
4. It does not follow that if we do not enjoy an allotment in
Gods reign, that we therefore will not live under its jurisdiction. Basileia
(translated kingdom) is simply the corresponding noun of the verb basileuġ
(translated reign). It will be helpful for us to be aware that even as basileuġ
literally means reign (used as a verb), thus also, basileia also
literally means reign (used as a noun). The former means to exercise a
kings sovereignty; hence, the latter means the sovereign power
pertaining to [a kings sovereignty]. It is only when basileia is used
metonymically, as a figure of speech for a realm ruled by a king (or
the territory or people thereof), that it should be understood in the common sense of the
English kingdom (i.e., dominion). Yet it is on this basis, that of the
common English usage of kingdom, that it is claimed that those who do not
inherit the kingdom, must necessarily either be dead or in hellfire. Any such
notion related to basileia here, however, is not only unwarranted but mistaken, for
it contradicts the glorious truth that the allotment of life eonian (Titus
3:7) is an expectation in grace.

Copyright İ Concordant Publishing Concern
15570 Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, U.S.A. 661-252-2112
This publication may be reproduced for personal use
(all other rights reserved by copyright holder).
|
|