Has anyone heard of the “deadly sin” referred to in (I think) 1 Jn as being a sin that leads to physical death?
I know it to be mortal sin as the church teaches it, but this was thrown at me and I was in dis-belief. I was told that this is a sin like drug addiction, which will lead us prematurely to death on earth.
This is a new one for me.
The Protestant tendency to regard the
Bible as the source of all authority leads Protestants to use passages to illuminate or explain each other. Thus, John’s reference to “sin leading to death” in
1 John 5:16 is most commonly matched with Jesus’ statement in
Matthew 12:31-2, Mark 3:29 and Luke 12:10, that “blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven”. This match is made on the basis that a sin which is not forgiven must lead to death.
The next question regards what actually constitutes ‘blasphemy against the Spirit’. For that, the context of Jesus’ comment, in which the Pharisees were accusing Jesus of driving out demons “by Beelzeboul, ruler of the demons” (
Mt 12:24), is often used: the Pharisees are then described as ‘blaspheming against the Spirit’ by ascribing God’s works to the power of the Devil. By asserting this when they could not know it to be true, they were breaking the ninth of the Ten Commandments by presenting false testimony against another: in this case, God.
(
This bit gets technical.)
Having said all of this, the strength of that link between 1 John 5:16 and Matthew 12:31-2 et al. depends upon reading John’s comment as a reference to only one sin. The Greek, however, does not do that explicitly: John says, “εστιν αμαρτια προς θανατον” (‘there is sin towards death’). No article (‘the’) or number (‘a’/‘one’) is used for αμαρτια, ‘sin’, here. While no article is need, and it could mean only one sin, it could also be a collective term, referring to a whole category of sin. John similarly uses αμαρτια in a collective, categorical sense, without an article or number, in 1:8 and 3:9. Thus, it is quite possible that John was thinking of an idea somewhat similar to the concept of ‘mortal sin’ as defined by later theologians, and was not necessarily referring to ‘blasphemy against the Spirit’ at all.
(Did that clarify things, or just muddy them up more?)