Luke 12:10 --Question concerning the Trinity. (Edited Title)

  • Thread starter Thread starter WallyS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WallyS

Guest
Hello!

I don’t know if this is the proper place to ask. But I have just come across a verse that makes me ponder the divinity of Jesus.

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2012:10&version=NASB

Luke 12:10

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.

How can this be if the Trinity is combined of three equal persons?
 
Hello!

I don’t know if this is the proper place to ask. But I have just come across a verse that makes me ponder the divinity of Jesus.

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2012:10&version=NASB

Luke 12:10

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.

How can this be if the Trinity is combined of three equal persons?
I may not be understanding your particular question. Why would you need to ponder the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ from that scripture passage?

I understand the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is to not believe that you can be forgiven.

I would appreciate it if someone were to correctly clarify your question, and comment on what I wrote as well.
 
Hello!

I don’t know if this is the proper place to ask. But I have just come across a verse that makes me ponder the divinity of Jesus.

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2012:10&version=NASB

Luke 12:10

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him.

How can this be if the Trinity is combined of three equal persons?
…no error there… Jesus, the Word Incarnate, happens to also be fully human… so as the Son of Man (Jesus born of Mary) people can be confused (as prophecy states) and even reject Him… however, the Holy Spirit, the other Paraclete, He is the Spirit of God, the Father, and the Spirit of God, the Son… and as in the Old Testament warning (not to blaspheme against Yahweh God/Name) Jesus is transferring the warning to the Holy Spirit since it is through the Holy Spirit (the Seal of the New Covenant) that man can listen to the Father’s Call to Follow the Son, Who happens to Be the Resurrection and the Life!

Reject the Holy Spirit and you’ve missed the boat!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Not sure what official Church teaching is, but I learned it to be that blaspheming against the Holy Spirit was not believing that your sins can be forgiven or not accepting forgiveness. In the Gospels, it seems to imply that Judas, after commiting suicide, went to Hell. I don’t think it is because Judas handed Jesus over. We do that all the time ourselves. Judas commited suicide out of grief and remorse. It seems to me that he thought his sin to be too much to be forgiven.
 
WRONG. Who said Judas commited suicide? His bowels burst open but I don’t remember it saying suicide. I could be wrong about that but that is what I remember happening in the beginning of Acts.

Blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is to attribute God’s work to Satan with full knowledge and intent. While unforgivable, I don’t think (and could be wrong) that it guarantees hell.
It will not go unpunished, that is certain.

EDIT: OK I don’t know for sure why I thought that, and I could be wrong because I looked it up

Blasphemy : (catholic parish edition) abusive, contemptuous, and irreverent language toward God.
 
In response to your first question, according to the NAB, it stated he hanged himself in Matthew 27:5
Your definition is also one I’ve heard and as I stated, I really don’t know. Poor catechisis, maybe. 🤷
 
Not sure what official Church teaching is, but I learned it to be that blaspheming against the Holy Spirit was not believing that your sins can be forgiven or not accepting forgiveness. In the Gospels, it seems to imply that Judas, after commiting suicide, went to Hell. I don’t think it is because Judas handed Jesus over. We do that all the time ourselves. Judas commited suicide out of grief and remorse. It seems to me that he thought his sin to be too much to be forgiven.
…problem with that is that it suggests that Judas was aware of a spiritual reality… I doubt that the person who was going through the motions, that after hearing Jesus’ take on the alabaster issue determined that he should sell Him out, would, in the most excruciating moments of his life, reason that Jesus was God and that all he had to do was repent, confess, and seek Jesus’ forgiveness…

Maran atha!

Angel
 
…problem with that is that it suggests that Judas was aware of a spiritual reality… I doubt that the person who was going through the motions, that after hearing Jesus’ take on the alabaster issue determined that he should sell Him out, would, in the most excruciating moments of his life, reason that Jesus was God and that all he had to do was repent, confess, and seek Jesus’ forgiveness…

Maran atha!

Angel
Jesus himself gave the prophecy that it would not end well for the traitor.

Prophecy will always be fulfilled.
 
Jesus himself gave the prophecy that it would not end well for the traitor.

Prophecy will always be fulfilled.
Correct! …and Jesus also thanked the Father that not one was lost but the one that had to be lost so that Scriptures could be fulfilled… so just let him find his away, huh?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Correct! …and Jesus also thanked the Father that not one was lost but the one that had to be lost so that Scriptures could be fulfilled… so just let him find his away, huh?

Maran atha!

Angel
I perceive these to be very wise words.
 
In that case, the Lord will rejoice more when he is found than the ones who were not lost.

I do feel humbled by this thought so it would appear to be good.
 
Here is the comment from St. Ahtanasius from the Catena Aurena,

The ancients indeed, the learned Origen and the great Theognostus, describe this to be the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, when they who have been counted worthy of the gift of the Holy Spirit in Baptism, fall back into sin. For they say that for this reason they can not obtain pardon; as Paul says, It is impossible for those who have been made partakers of the Holy Ghost to renew them again, &c.

But each adds his own explanation. For Origen gives this as his reason; God the Father indeed penetrates and contains all things, but the power of the Son extends to rational things only; the Holy Spirit is only in those who partake of Him in the gift of Baptism. When then catechumens and heathens sin, they sin against the Son who abides in them, yet they may obtain pardon when they become worthy of the gift of regeneration. But when the baptized commit sin, he says that their offense touches the Spirit, after coming to whom they have sinned, and therefore their condemnation must be irrevocable.

But Theognostus says, that he who has gone beyond both the first and second threshold deserves less punishment, but he who has also passed the third, shall no more receive pardon. By the first and second threshold, he speaks of the doctrine of the Father and the Son, but by the third the partaking of the Holy Spirit. According to St. John, When the Spirit of truth is come, he will lead you into all truth. Not as though the doctrine of the Spirit was above that of the Son, but because the Son condescends to those who are imperfect, but the Spirit is the seal of those who are perfect. If then not because the Spirit is above the Son, blasphemy against the Spirit is unpardonable; but because remission of sin is indeed to the imperfect, but no excuse remains to the perfect, therefore since the Son is in the Father, He is in those in whom the Father and the Spirit are not absent, for the Holy Trinity cannot be divided. Besides this, if all things were made by the Son, and all things consist in Him, He will Himself be truly in all; so that it must needs be, that he who sins against the Son, sins against the Father also, and against the Holy Spirit. But holy Baptism is given in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And so they that sin after baptism commit blasphemy against the holy Trinity. But if the Pharisees had not received baptism, how did He condemn them as if they had spoken blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, of which they were not yet partakers, especially since He did not accuse them simply of sin, but of blasphemy? But these differ, for he who sins transgresses the Law, but he who blasphemes offends against the Deity Himself. But again, if to those who sin after baptism there is no remission of the punishment of their offenses, how does the Apostle pardon the penitent at Corinth; but he travails in birth of the backsliding Galatians until Christ be formed again in them.
 
But again, if to those who sin after baptism there is no remission of the punishment of their offenses, how does the Apostle pardon the penitent at Corinth; but he travails in birth of the backsliding Galatians until Christ be formed again in them.
So, does the learned Origen answer this question?

Perhaps the answer is in this statement: “…the Son condescends to those who are imperfect, but the Spirit is the seal to those who are perfect.” Everyone knows that we are not perfect, yet Christ redeems us…an on-going process.

Could this be applied to those already in Heaven? Would a saint ever blaspheme?!! :bigyikes: The angels did, and the Church says that Satan will never be forgiven. :dts:

Actually, I believe that’s what brought the learned Origen to the brink of heresy!
 
In that case, the Lord will rejoice more when he is found than the ones who were not lost.

I do feel humbled by this thought so it would appear to be good.
…I do not want to deceive you… it seems that my poor editing allowed for a typographical error to lead to you to the conclusion that I’ve been attempting to bring others to…

…the word should have been “way” not away… but the error played right into the argument since you put together the passage of the lost sheep quite nicely…

I believe that the worst possible offense that we can commit to is that of betraying God (Holy Trinity) and I believe that none can be more lost than a person who willfully adheres to such acts… yet, we can see Judas awakening from his stupor and while not fully cognizant of what it means to be aligned to Jesus he attempts the most antropological event in his spiritual existence: he recognizes Christ as an innocent and he convicts himself guilty of His Death: in full impotence, Judas grieves.

…since we know from Scriptures that the Good Shepherd seeks out the lost sheep, I find that it is not beyond God’s Mercy to have included Judas with those to whom Jesus Preaches in the Spirit:
18 Christ himself died once and for all for sins, the upright for the sake of the guilty, to lead us to God. In the body he was put to death, in the spirit he was raised to life, 19 and, in the spirit, he went to preach to the spirits in prison. 20 They refused to believe long ago, while God patiently waited to receive them, in Noah’s time when the ark was being built. (1 St. Peter 3:18-20)
Maran atha!

Angel
 
Here is the comment from St. Ahtanasius from the Catena Aurena,

The ancients indeed, the learned Origen and the great Theognostus, describe this to be the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, when they who have been counted worthy of the gift of the Holy Spirit in Baptism, fall back into sin. For they say that for this reason they can not obtain pardon; as Paul says, It is impossible for those who have been made partakers of the Holy Ghost to renew them again, &c.

But each adds his own explanation. For Origen gives this as his reason; God the Father indeed penetrates and contains all things, but the power of the Son extends to rational things only; the Holy Spirit is only in those who partake of Him in the gift of Baptism. When then catechumens and heathens sin, they sin against the Son who abides in them, yet they may obtain pardon when they become worthy of the gift of regeneration. But when the baptized commit sin, he says that their offense touches the Spirit, after coming to whom they have sinned, and therefore their condemnation must be irrevocable.

But Theognostus says, that he who has gone beyond both the first and second threshold deserves less punishment, but he who has also passed the third, shall no more receive pardon. By the first and second threshold, he speaks of the doctrine of the Father and the Son, but by the third the partaking of the Holy Spirit. According to St. John, When the Spirit of truth is come, he will lead you into all truth. Not as though the doctrine of the Spirit was above that of the Son, but because the Son condescends to those who are imperfect, but the Spirit is the seal of those who are perfect. If then not because the Spirit is above the Son, blasphemy against the Spirit is unpardonable; but because remission of sin is indeed to the imperfect, but no excuse remains to the perfect, therefore since the Son is in the Father, He is in those in whom the Father and the Spirit are not absent, for the Holy Trinity cannot be divided. Besides this, if all things were made by the Son, and all things consist in Him, He will Himself be truly in all; so that it must needs be, that he who sins against the Son, sins against the Father also, and against the Holy Spirit. But holy Baptism is given in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And so they that sin after baptism commit blasphemy against the holy Trinity. But if the Pharisees had not received baptism, how did He condemn them as if they had spoken blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, of which they were not yet partakers, especially since He did not accuse them simply of sin, but of blasphemy? But these differ, for he who sins transgresses the Law, but he who blasphemes offends against the Deity Himself. But again, if to those who sin after baptism there is no remission of the punishment of their offenses, how does the Apostle pardon the penitent at Corinth; but he travails in birth of the backsliding Galatians until Christ be formed again in them.
…I don’t mean to seem more scholarly than the scholars… but there are two points which I would argue:
  1. Jesus did not make reference to blasphemy against the Holy Spirit in reference to those who were seeking/had been Baptized… He actually charged the unBelievers because the attempted to attribute His Power/Authority to Satan instead of recognizing the Holy Spirit’s Function in God’s Plan (worship and Salvation);
  2. Jesus Being God is in deed in all things… but we must allow for Christ’s definition of Abiding in man as explained in St. John’s Gospel:
15 If you love me you will keep my commandments. 16 I shall ask the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete to be with you for ever, 17 the Spirit of truth whom the world can never accept since it neither sees nor knows him; but you know him, because he is with you, he is in you. 18 I shall not leave you orphans; I shall come to you. 19 In a short time the world will no longer see me; but you will see that I live and you also will live. 20 On that day you will know that I am in my Father and you in me and I in you. 21 Whoever holds to my commandments and keeps them is the one who loves me; and whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I shall love him and reveal myself to him.’ 22 Judas – not Judas Iscariot – said to him, ‘Lord, what has happened, that you intend to show yourself to us and not to the world?’ 23 Jesus replied: Anyone who loves me will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we shall come to him and make a home in him. (St. John 14:15-23)
While it is true that man is created in the Image and Likeness of God… it is also true that not all creatures choose to become children of God (St. John 1:1-18; 3:16-21); so while we must recognize that man has been made in God’s Image, we cannot speak for all as to whether or not they want God to Abide (Live) in them!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
…I do not want to deceive you… it seems that my poor editing allowed for a typographical error to lead to you to the conclusion that I’ve been attempting to bring others to…

…the word should have been “way” not away… but the error played right into the argument since you put together the passage of the lost sheep quite nicely…

I believe that the worst possible offense that we can commit to is that of betraying God (Holy Trinity) and I believe that none can be more lost than a person who willfully adheres to such acts… yet, we can see Judas awakening from his stupor and while not fully cognizant of what it means to be aligned to Jesus he attempts the most antropological event in his spiritual existence: he recognizes Christ as an innocent and he convicts himself guilty of His Death: in full impotence, Judas grieves.

…since we know from Scriptures that the Good Shepherd seeks out the lost sheep, I find that it is not beyond God’s Mercy to have included Judas with those to whom Jesus Preaches in the Spirit:

Maran atha!

Angel
Yeah I spotted the typo, I figured you meant “way”.

Our Lord did specifically say it would be better for him (the snitch) if he were never born. In order for this to be true, I would have to logically conclude that he is likely beyond salvation. How else could he be better off having never been born?

I do like your argument a lot, though. I do not know what the answer is but you have allowed me to consider a different perspective.
 
Yeah I spotted the typo, I figured you meant “way”.

Our Lord did specifically say it would be better for him (the snitch) if he were never born. In order for this to be true, I would have to logically conclude that he is likely beyond salvation. How else could he be better off having never been born?

I do like your argument a lot, though. I do not know what the answer is but you have allowed me to consider a different perspective.
…that’s my point, Judas could not but be the betrayer… and since God’s Mercy reaches even those who died before Christ’s Incarnation, Death and Resurrection (1 St. Peter 3:18-20) I would not presume to limit God’s Mercy… specially when the Lord does make a clear distinction between ignorance and willful disobedience/rejection:
5 He did not spare the world in ancient times: he saved only Noah, the preacher of uprightness, along with seven others, when he sent the Flood over a world of sinners.
9 All this shows that the Lord is well able to rescue the good from their trials, and hold the wicked for their punishment until the Day of Judgement, 10 especially those who follow the desires of their corrupt human nature and have no respect for the Lord’s authority. Such self-willed people with no reverence are not afraid of offending against the glorious ones, (2 St. Peter 2:5, 9-10)
…either way… I’m not down playing the threat of damnation in Hell!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
…that’s my point, Judas could not but be the betrayer… and since God’s Mercy reaches even those who died before Christ’s Incarnation, Death and Resurrection (1 St. Peter 3:18-20) I would not presume to limit God’s Mercy… specially when the Lord does make a clear distinction between ignorance and willful disobedience/rejection
Luke 22:3 tells us that Satan entered Judas before the Passover meal [Last Supper]:

“3 Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was of the number of the twelve;”
[Luke 22:3 RSV]

While in John 6:70-71 we are told that Jesus knew Judas would betray Him:

“70 Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” 71 He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was to betray him.” {RSV]
 
The answers here that I read are all ones that I would agree with.

One must believe that the Holy Spirit can forgive one in order to find salvation.

One must also not blaspheme any of the Holy Trinity.

Attributing the works of the Holy Spirit to the works of Satan…is this
also not a blaspheme? This is something that I have sometimes heard
people speak who were not on the Lord’s side.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top