The Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit

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 12:32

The blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is a scriptural teaching that has brought about much discussion from different sources over the Christian centuries — some good and some not so good, and some clearly off the rails in terms of scriptural doctrine.

For an example of a misinterpretation: in one of our home groups lately someone suggested that this must mean that the Holy Spirit is greater than Christ the Son, since one can blaspheme Christ but not the Spirit. This is clearly a wrong understanding of this scripture. The three persons of the Godhead are always in agreement with one another — God is not a conflicted personality. And the reality of the relationship between the Father, Son, and Spirit is one of shared love. John 17:5, Jesus spoke about the glory He and the Father shared before the foundation of the world. John 17:24 Christ prayed to the Father and said, “You loved me before the creation of the world.”

As concerns any ranking in the Trinity, Philippians 2:8 says that the Son was obedient to the Father and Hebrews 10:7 and Psalm 40:8 describes the Son’s attitude as “I have come to do your will.” Christ was never in disagreement with the Father, and the Spirit is likewise in no disagreement. We will not see three thrones in heaven, but only one and on that throne we will see Jesus, not the Father. Revelation, which gives us insight into the eternal heavens describes the Son on the throne, not the Spirit. So it does appear to be Father, Son, and Spirit, and not Father, Spirit, and Son.

The idea that the Son is less important than the Spirit is clearly contradicted by Scripture. Matthew 28:18–20 says that ALL authority in heaven and on earth is given unto the Son. Philippians 2:6–11 says that Christ has been given a name above all names,

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

So that is a false understanding of the passage and the issue of the blasphemy against the Spirit. But what is the correct interpretation? Here is my own understanding, and I am in the majority of Protestant and Evangelical interpretation.

A correct interpretation must, first of all, take into account the work of the Spirit, as described in scripture. The ministry of the Spirit is to exalt Christ. John 14:15–24 explains that the Spirit is the presence of the Father and the Son. John 16:8–15 describe the Spirit’s work is to bring conviction of sin to the world and to enlarge the person of Christ to the believer. “But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you” (John 16:13–14). In not speaking on his own, clearly means that the Spirit is submissive to the Father and to the Son. Of course, we would expect nothing else, as God is not conflicted within Himself.

Romans 8:9–11 describes the Spirit and uses several different titles: “The Spirit of God,” “The Spirit of Christ,” “The Spirit,” “The Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead,” and “Christ.”

Second, a correct interpretation must consider the nature of blasphemy against the Spirit. Blasphemy of the Spirit is not like blasphemy of the Son. The work of the Spirit is to bring conviction to hearts (John 16:8–11). Blasphemy is to demean what is holy, and to blaspheme the Spirit is to reject His work of conviction. Though “speaking against the Holy Spirit” was mentioned, (eipe kata tou pneumatos tou hagiou), the sin begins in the heart, as the context requires, for Christ said, “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Matt 12:34). To blaspheme the Spirit is to reject His message of exalting Christ, as well as convicting of sin and leading someone to salvation. Yet we may say that “speaking against” indicates more than a slowness to accept, for many have been slow to accept Christ and later became devout believers. Rather this seems to be a hardened position, “speaking” indicating that they have taken a firm stance on the matter.

This view was popularized several centuries ago by the Welsh biblical scholar Matthew Henry (1662–1714), whose works were championed by many leading Christian figures, such as Charles Wesley and Charles Haddon Spurgeon, for examples. Matthew Henry wrote:

If they continue to blaspheme the Spirit likewise, as an evil spirit, there is no hope of them that they will ever be brought to believe in Christ; for [the] gifts of the Holy Ghost in the apostles were the last proof that God designed to make use of for the confirming of the gospel … This was the most powerful evidence, and more apt to convince than miracles themselves…Those therefore who blaspheme this dispensation of the Spirit, cannot possibly be brought to believe in Christ.

Another scholarly understanding of this passage, that I am aware of, and one is by the imminent scholar Professor Albert Barnes (1798–1970), one of the greatest Greek scholars America ever produced. His view is not altogether different from Matthew Henry’s view, but does see it referring direction to the nature of Christ. Barnes saw this statement by Christ referring to the rejection of His divine nature, of His Messiahship. He paraphrased the intent of this blasphemy as:

He that speaks against me as a man of Nazareth, that speaks contemptuously of my humble birth, etc., may be pardoned; but he that reproaches my Divine character, charging it as being in league with Satan, and blaspheming the power of God manifestly displayed by me, can never obtain forgiveness. (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/barnes/ntnotes.iv.xii.xxxi.html#iv.xii.xxxi-p0.2)

I have the utmost respect and admiration for Albert Barnes, and often use him in the preparation of my sermons. However, he is of the Covenant Theology perspective and I am not entirely in his camp in all things. So I will add another insight from my own theological perspective.

Third, as a dispensationalist, I believe we are helped by seeing this sin in light of the difference between the coming of the Messiah and the inauguration of the Church Age at Pentecost. As I have already stated, the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is more than just speech, though the act of speech is mentioned, and refers to the heart of man. In the Matthew passage above, the greater context was about the harsh rejection of Christ, assigning Him a place with the devil, which Christ said could be forgiven while He walked on the earth. However, once He ascended on high, once the Spirit fell upon the church in the full expression of the Church Age, then people must respond based on the witness of the Spirit in their inner life.

The capacity of the individual to commit this serious a sin, means that the witness of the Spirit of God into the inner life of an individual is a divine encounter, that leaves someone under the obligation to respond. Deciding for Christ is not like choosing the color of your draperies. Each person on earth is under a divine compulsion and obligation to believe in Christ, to receive Him for the Lord He is, to honor Him in our hearts. We will undoubtedly fail at times to live up to our profession, but within the heart is the capacity to surrender and to believe in Christ, to recognize Him as the God He is.

If you have not done this, then do it now. Receive Him as the Lord and Savior the scriptures and the Spirit declare Him to be. God’s Spirit will help you along to accept Him for who He is.