What is the sin of the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit?
The immediate context of Matthew 12:22-32 is of paramount importance to understand Matthew 12:31-32 where the sin of blasphemy against the Spirit is mentioned. We will therefore begin our exegesis at Matthew 12:22.
In Matthew 12:22 a demon oppressed man was brought to Jesus. Jesus healed him so that the man who was blind and mute was able to speak and see. In response, all the people were amazed and said ‘Can this be the Son of David?’ as the ESV phrases it. However, the question is probably better rendered ‘Surely this couldn’t be the Son of David could it?’ given that the Greek form of the question is slanted to expect a negative response. It seems that the people were reluctant to accept that Jesus was the Messiah. This point will be important once we arrive at 12:31-32.
But when the Pharisees heard it they said ‘It is only be Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.’ The Pharisees had seen Jesus perform what was obviously a miracle, and being unable to refute its authenticity they endeavoured to challenge its origin. They therefore attributed this miracle to satanic power rather than to God. But as G.C. Berkouwer said in his book Sin, the Pharisees were challenging this miraculous work out of a ‘conscious disputing of the indisputable.’
The Pharisees had just encountered indisputable truth only to call it evil. They were engaging in an action where they twisted blatant truth so that they could continue to reject Jesus as the Messiah. They, along with the people, did not want to accept that Jesus was the Messiah as we saw with their question. However, the Pharisees are now willing to twist reality in order to escape the Lord Jesus.
Sin is a stupefying condition that tempts us to turn away from the living God and believe a lie. In light of this struggle the Author of the Letter to the Hebrews urges his people to take care lest they have an ‘evil, unbelieving heart’ leading them to fall away from the living God. They are instead to ‘exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of [them] may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.’
Jesus, who knows their thoughts, reacts to the senselessness of the Pharisees by giving them four things to think about; Firstly he says, in verse 25, ‘Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand?’ In this first point Jesus is highlighting the stupidity of suggesting that Satan performed this miracle against himself.
His second point is made in verse 27. In that verse he says, ‘And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges.’ The Pharisees knew that their own sons could only cast out demons by God’s power, and they knew there was no other way. For this reason they were being thoroughly inconsistent. And the very existence of others who had cast out demons by God’s power was enough to expose and judge the Pharisees and their inconsistency.
Next, in verse 28, Jesus declares, ‘But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.’ Jesus has just demolished the suggestion that he casts out demons by Beelzebul, which leaves only one valid explanation; that he casts out demons by the Spirit of God. And if this is so, then the logical conclusion is that he is the promised King who is now in their midst. And when the King shows up, then that means in a very real way the kingdom of God has come.
Fourthly, Jesus gives a powerful illustration. He says, in verse 29, ‘Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds up the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house.’ In this verse Jesus is showing us that someone greater than Satan is required to defeat and plunder Satan.
Having exposed the illogicality of Satan casting out Satan, Jesus then moves to the heart of his message to the people and Pharisees. In verse 30 he says, ‘Whoever is not with me is against me and whoever does not gather with me scatters.’ Even though the Pharisees are dead set against Jesus, the people are determined to remain neutral, however Jesus blows that possibility out of the water. He says, ‘whoever is not with me is against me.’ Meaning that those who are lukewarm towards Jesus are actually diametrically opposed to him. So whether it is ignorance of known truth or outright rejection of known truth, both actions prove that people are not with Jesus but against him.
Furthermore, it is the concept of opposing Jesus that helps us to understand verses 31-32. There is a definite semantic link between verse 30 and 31 with the use of ‘therefore’ which literally means ‘because of this’. In this verse ‘this’ is singular, however the whole context of 12:22 onwards is in also in view and is very significant. For the context enables us to understand what Jesus means when he talks about ‘blasphemy of the Spirit.’ Jesus has clearly just performed an incredible wonder only for the people to doubt that Jesus is who he claimed to be, and for the Pharisees to ascribe this miracle to Satan rather than God. Consequently, the context strongly suggests that blasphemy of the Spirit must involve some kind of denial of irrefutable truth, and even a willingness to bend known truth so that it becomes a lie.
In verse 31 Jesus says, ‘Therefore, I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.’ Now the most incredible aspect of this verse is that all kinds of sins and blasphemies can be forgiven. We will focus on the unforgivable sin, yet it is worth pausing to contemplate the wonder of forgiveness.
For every sin and blasphemy is ultimately against God. David could say in Psalm 51:4 ‘against you, you only, have I sinned’. Yet those familiar with the story of David’s infidelity and murder are aware that David has sinned not only against God, but against Uriah, Bathsheba, his family, and his nation. Nevertheless, sin is ultimately against God and it is therefore entirely appropriate for David to say ‘against you, you only, have I sinned.’
Now sin is always awful, yet God has made it possible for all kinds of sins and blasphemies to be forgiven, except one. And the sins and blasphemies mentioned in verse 31 are forgiven in the usual way, through Jesus Christ. For ‘there is salvation in no one else, for there is no name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.’ In Christ alone is there forgiveness.
Nonetheless, our task is to explore the unpardonable sin, here referred to as the ‘blasphemy against the Spirit.’ Now the context of this statement is vital, so let us remember that the Pharisees have just tried to attribute to Satan the work of the Spirit. They have done so not out of ignorance, but out of a ‘conscious disputing of the indisputable.’ Which then helps us to understand the nature of the eternal sin here called the blasphemy against the Spirit. Meaning that the blasphemy against the Spirit, from the context of Matthew 12:22-32, must involve the Spirit unmistakably revealing Jesus only for people to dispute the indisputable. The people in Matthew 12 have encountered indisputable truth but because they did not want to accept it, they have called it evil by attributing the miracle to Satan.
But Jesus doesn’t leave it there. He goes on in verse 32 and says, ‘And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.’ This verse presents us with a new challenge. For how can speaking against the Son of Man be forgiven, and yet speaking against the Holy Spirit be beyond forgiveness? Well, the distinction between blasphemy against the Son of Man and blasphemy against the Spirit is not that the Son of Man is less important than the Spirit. (Or that one sin is prebaptismal and the other postbaptismal). Instead, within the context that we have looked at, the first sin is rejection of the truth of the gospel (for which there is repentance and forgiveness), whereas the second sin involves rejection of the same truth but this time in full awareness that this is exactly what one is doing.
Let me explain that further, the first sin is committed when one does not fully understand, whereas the second sin involves a thoughtful, wilful and fully self-conscious rejection of the work of the Spirit through Jesus. The difference is between failure to recognize the light and deliberate rejection of it once recognized.
The second sin is committed knowing exactly who Jesus is because the Spirit has revealed him so clearly that there is simply no other explanation other than that Jesus is who he claimed to be. It is therefore unforgivable for the person committing this sin knows and understands exactly who Jesus is, yet still chooses to oppose God. Even to the extent that they are willing to call truth false, and good evil. For this person there is nothing more that needs to be revealed and they turn their back on God, truth, and the hope of the gospel. It is not initial reluctance or initial rejection, but an informed, settled decision to knowingly twist what they know to be true, and declare it to be something else.
So the first sin was likely committed when Jesus travelled around proclaiming that he was the Messiah. An example of this sin is probably found in Luke 4 when Jesus went into the synagogue of his home town Nazareth, and read from Isaiah 61. Having read the prophecy about the coming Messiah, he declared, ‘Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.’ Jesus was clearly claiming to be the Messiah. But the people didn’t believe him and they rose up and drove him out of town, and tried to throw him off a cliff. Yet in response Jesus just walks away, and he mentions nothing about the unforgivable sin. It wasn’t until Jesus had done many miracles that he could declare in Luke 12 that, ‘everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.’
So the blasphemy of the Spirit involves a denial of Jesus’ blatantly miraculous work by the power of the Spirit in an effort to ignore Jesus. And we see more of this in the gospel according to John. In John 8:18 Jesus testified to himself but then in John 10 when Jesus was confronted by an angry mob because he made himself to be God (John 10:33) he then said in verses 37-8, ‘If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.’
In this text people spoke a word against the Son of Man but instead of giving up on them, or warning them that they were close to the point of no return, he instead urged them to consider the testimony that the Spirit gave through his miraculous works. But we can imagine that if the people persisted to ignore the Spirit’s unrivalled and unmissable testimony, or worse still if they saw and understood yet continued to deny that testimony, then they would be getting close to blasphemy against the Spirit by speaking against his clear revelation of Jesus’s identity.