”And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the (Holy) Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.” (Matthew 12:31-32 NIV)
I have recently been reading Alfred Edersheim’s The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah for the second time. (I read it once when I was much younger, in my mid-twenties, but at that time, I think I read it much too quickly, and a lot of what he says did not really sink in. I am reading it a lot slower, and more deliberately now.)
What Edersheim says in Book One, Chapter 22, pages 574-577 is astonishing. Please take the time to read this slowly and let it sink in:
But even before these two events, that had happened which would induce the Pharisaic party to increased measures against Jesus. It has already been suggested, that the party, as such, did not attend Jesus on His Galilean journey. But we are emphatically told, that tidings of the raising of the dead at Nain had gone forth into Judea. No doubt they reached the leaders at Jerusalem. There seems just sufficient time between this and the healing of the demonized dumb on the return-journey to Capernaum, to account for the presence there of those Pharisees, who are
expressly described by St. Mark as ‘the Scribes which came down from Jerusalem.’
Other circumstances, also, are thus explained. Whatever view the leaders at Jerusalem may have taken of the raising at Nain, it could no longer be denied that miracles were wrought by Jesus. At least, what to us seem miracles, yet not to them, since, as we have seen, ‘miraculous’ cures and the expelling of demons lay within the sphere of their ‘extraordinary ordinary’ – were not miracles in our sense, since they were, or professed to be, done by their ‘own children.’ The mere fact, therefore, of such cures, would present no difficulty to them. To us a single well-ascertained miracle would form irrefragable evidence of the claims of Christ; to them it would not. They could believe
in the ‘miracles,’ and yet not in the Christ. To them the question would not be, as to us, whether they were miracles – but, by what power, or in what Name, He did these deeds? From our standpoint, their opposition to the Christ would – in view of His Miracles – seem not only wicked. but rationally inexplicable. But ours was not their point of view. And here, again, we perceive that it was enmity of the Person and Teaching of Jesus which led to the denial of His claims. The inquiry: By what Power Jesus did these works? they met by the assertion, that it was through that of Satan, or the Chief of the Demons. They regarded Jesus, as not only temporarily, but permanently, possessed by a demon, that is, as the constant vehicle of Satanic influence. And this demon was, according to them, none other than Beelzebub, the prince of the devils. Thus, in their view, it was really Satan who acted in and through Him; and Jesus, instead of being recognized as the Son of God, was regarded as an incarnation of Satan; instead of being owned as the Messiah, was denounced and treated as the representative of the Kingdom of Darkness. All this, because the Kingdom which He came to open, and which He preached, was precisely the opposite of what they regarded as the Kingdom of God. Thus it was the essential contrariety of Rabbinism to the Gospel of the Christ that lay at the foundation of their conduct towards the Person of Christ. We venture to assert, that this accounts for the whole after-history up to the Cross. Thus viewed, the history of Pharisaic opposition appears not only consistent, but is, so to speak, morally accounted for. Their guilt lay in treating that as Satanic agency which was of the Holy Ghost; and this, because they were of their father the Devil, and knew not, nor understood, nor yet loved the Light, their deeds being evil. They were not children of the light, but of that
darkness which comprehended Him not Who was the Light. And now we can also understand the growth of active opposition to Christ. Once arrived at the conclusion, that the miracles which Christ did were due to the power of Satan, and that He was the representative of the Evil One, their course was rationally and morally chosen. To regard every fresh manifestation of Christ’s Power as only a fuller development of the power of Satan, and to oppose it with increasing determination and hostility, even to the Cross: such was henceforth the natural progress of this history. On the other hand, such a course once fully settled upon, there would, and could, be no further reasoning with, or against it on the part of Jesus. Henceforth His Discourses and attitude to such Judaism must be chiefly denunciatory, while still seeking – as, from the inward necessity of His Nature and the outward necessity of His Mission, He must – to save the elect remnant from this ‘untoward generation,’ and to lay broad and wide the foundations of the future Church. But the old hostile Judaism must henceforth be left to the judgment of condemnation, except in those tears of Divine pity which the Jew-King and Jewish Messiah wept over the Jerusalem that knew not the day of its visitation. But all this, when the now beginning movement shall have reached its full proportions. For the present, we mark only its first appearance. The charge of Satanic agency was, indeed, not quite new. It had been suggested, that John the Baptist had been under demoniacal influence, and this cunning pretext for resistance to his message had been eminently successful with the people. The same charge, only in much fuller form, was not raised against Jesus. As ‘the multitude marvelled, saying, it was never so seen in Israel,’ the Pharisees, without denying the facts, had this explanation of them, to be presently developed to all its terrible consequences: that, both as regarded the casting out of the demon from the dumb man and all similar works, Jesus wrought it ‘through the Ruler of the Demons.’ And so the edge of this manifestation of the Christ was blunted and broken. But their besetment of the Christ did not cease. It is to this that we attribute the visit of ‘the mother and brethren’ of Jesus, which is recorded in the three Synoptic Gospels. Even this circumstance shows its decisive importance. It forms a parallel to the former attempts of the Pharisees to influence the disciples of Jesus, and then to stir up the hostility of the disciples of John, both of which are recorded by the three Evangelists. It also brought to light another distinctive characteristic of the Mission of Jesus. We place this visit of the ‘mother and brethren’ of Jesus immediately after His return to Capernaum, and we attribute it to Pharisaic opposition, which either filled those relatives of Jesus with fear for His safety, or made them sincerely concerned about His proceedings. Only if it meant some kind of interference with His Mission, whether prompted by fear or affection, would Jesus have so disowned their relationship.
But it meant more than this. As always, the positive went side by side with the negative.
Without going so far, as with some of the Fathers, to see pride or ostentation in this, that the Virgin–Mother summoned Jesus to her outside the house, since the opposite might as well have been her motive, we cannot but regard the words of Christ as the sternest prophetic rebuke of all Mariolatry, prayer for the Virgin’s intercession, and, still more, of the strange doctrines about her freedom from actual and original sin, up to their prurient sequence in the dogma of the ‘Immaculate Conception.’ On the other hand, we also remember the deep reverence among the Jews for parents, which found even exaggerated expression in the Talmud. And we feel that, of all in Israel, He, Who was their King, could not have spoken nor done what might even seem disrespectful to a mother. There must have been higher meaning in His words. That meaning would be better understood after His Resurrection. But even before that it was needful, in presence of interference or hindrance by earthly relationships, even the nearest and tenderest, and perhaps all the more in their case, to point to the higher and stronger spiritual relationship. And beyond this, to still higher truth. For, had He not entered into earthly kinship solely for the sake of the higher spiritual relationship which He was about to found; and was it not, then, in the most literal sense, that not those in nearest earthly relationship, but they who sat ‘about Him, nay, whoever shall do the will of God,’ were really in closest kinship with Him? Thus, it was not that Christ set lightly by His Mother, but that He confounded not the means with the end, nor yet surrendered the spirit for the letter of the Law of Love, when, refusing to be arrested or turned aside from His Mission, even for a moment, He elected to do the Will of His Father rather than neglect it by attending to the wishes of the Virgin-Mother. As Bengel aptly puts it: He contemns not the Mother, but He places the Father first. And this is ever the right relationship in the Kingdom of Heaven!
This is staggering! A few things need to be noted to rightly understand what Edersheim is saying. In our day, there isn’t much recognition of the miraculous or the supernatural because of the current emphasis we place on finding so-called scientific explanations for everything. This is the intellectual pride of man that is so pervasive in our culture. Many ancient cultures were much more in tune with the spiritual aspect of life. Witnessing the miraculous or supernatural was more commonplace, and did not seem that unusual. Real miracles, that cannot be explained in any other way, catch our attention more so than they did for ancient peoples.
The question confronting the Jewish mind was not, “Are miracles possible?”, which to them, they certainly were. This is not the case with us. Our culture simply dismisses the miraculous as if it is an impossibility. The question to the Jewish mind was, “By what power are these miracles done?” What is the origin?
The Rabbis, the Pharisees, The Scribes, the Teachers of the Law, were supposed to be the religions experts of Jesus’ day. The Rabbis were what we would refer to as the “spiritually elite”. They were held in high esteem by the people. They loved to gather crowds of listeners around them and pontificate on all the fine points of the Law. In our vernacular, we would say “they were full of themselves”. They Pharisees were “the separated ones”. They practiced all the rituals of purification, and strove to keep themselves from being contaminated by people and things they regarded as unclean, or unholy.
The Jewish people of Jesus’ day had been taught by the Rabbis that the Old Testament prophecies concerning the Messiah involved a messiah who would deliver Israel from the current Roman oppression, and usher in a new age of the Kingdom of Israel, much like how it existed during the reign of King David. In their interpretation of things, Israel was to rule over the world.
Jesus did not come in the manner expected. Jesus did not come to restore the political reign of the nation of Israel. Jesus came to set the hearts of lost mankind right with God, and usher in the true Kingdom of God, which is over all. He would accomplish this by offering Himself as the sacrifice to God for the sins of all mankind.
Because of this, the Jewish rulers became hostile towards Jesus and His message. They concluded that Jesus was possessed by Satan. Because of this, they sought to put Him to death. They even convinced His own mother (Mary) and His brothers of this.
Think through this with me. First, the Old Testament prophecies had been totally misinterpreted. They just didn’t get it. To think that the “know it alls” who supposedly had all the answers were so wrong and off-base, and that they were teaching their wrong interpretations to the masses, is frightening. Let’s compare this to a few scenarios that can apply to the culture in which we currently live. People in positions of influence in our culture, political leaders, college professors, entertainers, etc., can be totally wrong in their interpretations of reality, and infect the hearts and minds of millions of people that are swayed by their persuasive influence. Have you learned to think for yourself, and question the so-called experts? We live in an age of misinformation when it seems as if nothing can be taken for granted.
The second thing to notice is that our expectations can sometimes just be totally wrong and not line up with reality. The thing that we all need to ask ourselves is this: “Am I willing to readjust when things don’t pan out the way I expected?” Our expectations can be our downfall.
To think that the religions leaders of Jesus’ day, the ones that were supposed to be the experts, the ones who strutted around in their self-importance, could have witnessed God, Yahweh of the Old Testament, the Creator that they were supposed to know and understand so well, come in the flesh and dwell right in front of their faces, and not recognize who He is, is staggering! Not only did they not recognize or acknowledge Him, they committed the ultimate form of blasphemy by attributing all that He said and did to the power of Satan, and they convinced a huge multitude of people to do the same thing! This is the sin that cannot be forgiven. The unpardonable sin.
Even more astounding is the fact that God used that very thing, the mock trial, the unjustifiable execution of Jesus, to accomplish the very thing that Jesus came to do, to offer Himself as the sacrifice for our sins. Anyone who could ever come to the conclusion, after honestly hearing the case for Jesus and understanding the Gospel message, that God is anything other than the loving Lord of Life, who is willing to go to such lengths to bring us back to Himself, is a fool.
There is absolutely nothing in the entire history of mankind that is even remotely like this. There is no other religious message like this. It only happened once, and it will never happen again.
People tend to think of sin in terms of the bad stuff people do. While it is true that the bad stuff we do, and think, and say, is sin. All of these kinds of sin can be forgiven. The only sin that cannot be forgiven is rejecting Jesus Christ, because He is the ONLY way to God. When you do this, your sin is not forgiven because you have rejected the only method God has provided to accomplish that purpose. It is not God’s fault, it is
Danny's Stump 