and seals him up for inevitable destruction. This is the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. Because the invitations of the Gospel are so liberal and comprehensive, that salvation is offered unreservedly to all; because we are so completely assured of the omnipotence of the Saviour, and the all-sufficiency of his atonement; many have supposed that there is no sin exempted from remission; and that the only circumstance which prevents the pardon of any sin, is the obstinate, persevering, and final impenitence of the transgressor. Of the extent of Immanuel's power, and the virtue of his sacrifice, we never can entertain an opinion too high. If such were his will, he is able to sprinkle the conscience of every child of Adam, and to purge our guilty globe from every stain and vestige of evil; to extinguish the flames of hell, and to cleanse its most black and loathsome regions, from every trace of pollution and crime; to empty it of its inmates; to convey them to paradise; or to light it up with the splendours of purity; to replenish it with the transports of praise, and the ecstacies of bliss; and convert its wide and dreary domains into an image of heaven, and an abode of holiness and delight. For he is able even to subdue all things to himself. But the question is not, what is he able to accomplish? but what has he promised to perform? And when we find that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is represented as just as really a separate sin, as robbery or murder; and when we are just as distinctly told that it shall never be forgiven, as that all other sins, upon the faith and repentance of the sinner, shall be forgiven: we are bound to regard it as a specific sin, and to believe that it shall never be forgiven. This is the case from no defect in the power or grace of the Redeemer; but entirely from his righteous determination to exclude those who commit it from the exercise of mercy, and to leave them uniformly as monuments of his justice. Final impenitence is not so much an independent sin, as the natural and ordinary consummation of a gay, thoughtless, careless, and irreligious life. But, as many who live in this manner, scarcely ever heard that there is a Holy Ghost; with what propriety can they be said to blaspheme him? Undoubtedly all who are guilty of blaspheming him, die impenitent; but unless we are prepared to style insensibility and security blasphemy, we have no authority for maintaining that final impenitence is the sin against the Spirit of God. No express notice is taken of this sin in the Old Testament. But though the name does not occur, we are almost inclined to think that the thing existed; and that it appeared at a very early age of the world. There seems to have been a period in the lives of Cain, Balaam, and Saul, when they were totally abandoned of God, and given over to perdition. And there is reason to believe that there was something bordering upon this sin, in the case of those Jews for whom Jeremiah was forbidden to pray; and of Ephraim, at that awful crisis, when he was joined to his idols, and ordered to be let alone. The first occasion on which it is directly mentioned in the New Testament, is in consequence of the accusation of the Pharisees, that our Lord was in confederacy with Satan, and cast out devils by the assistance of Beelzebub, the prince of the devils.* The next intimation which, it is supposed, is given of this sin, is in the case of Simon Magus; whose heart was wholly engrossed with the love of gain, and who imagined that the gift of the Holy Ghost might be purchased with money, and converted into a mean of promoting his worldly aggrandisement. To this subject Paul also is thought to refer, when he says, "I was a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious, but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly, in unbelief:" words which seem to imply, that, if what he did had been done with the knowledge and conviction of Christ's real character, his condition would have been absolutely desperate. In the epistle to the Hebrews, when speaking of the danger of apostasy, he obviously alludes twice to the same sin. This appears to have been the sin committed by the apostate and licentious teachers, whóm Peter so Mark iii. 28, 29. Luke xii. 10. *Mat. xii. 31, 32. severely reprobates.* And it evidently is this sin which John has in view, when he says, "If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it."† From these different passages, it appears that there are various shades and degrees of this sin; and that it is not any particular act of sin that renders it unpardonable, but the particular circumstances under which it is committed. "The act, in the case of the Pharisees, was uttering blasphemous language against the miracles of Christ; in the supposed case of Paul, it was blasphemously persecuting, and otherwise injuriously treating the church of Christ; in the case of the Hebrews, it was apostasy from the truth; in the case of the false teachers described by Peter, it was not only persecuting the truth, but returning to sensual abominations." So that instead of denying the reality of an unpardonable sin, it would be nearer the truth to say, that there are different kinds of sin that are unpardonable. Without pretending to define accurately what the unpardonable sin is; for the relief of those who are groundlessly alarmed with the fear that they have committed it, it will be proper to point out the principal circumstances in which it consists. 1. It includes opposition to Christ and his cause. This is a quality which, in a greater or less degree, belongs to every sin: but it is pre-eminently characteristic of that one which is declared to be irremissible. This evidently was the case with the Scribes and Pharisees. When by a miracle, Jesus had given an indubitable proof of his mission, and forced upon the people the conviction that he was the long-looked for Messiah; to what measures had the Pharisees recourse? Like candid and honest men, who were doubtful of the reality of the mighty work which they had witnessed, did they leave the multitude to the free exercise of their judgment? carefully abstain from infusing either prejudice or prepossession into their minds? encourage inquiry? assist them in their re searches? and anxiously examine every incident by which they and the people might be enabled to arrive at a fair and satisfactory decision? This certainly is the course which they would have adopted, if they had been men of integrity, and had found themselves at any loss upon the subject. But without feeling the least uncertainty respecting either the author, or the nature of the miracle; convinced that it laboured under no fraud nor artifice, but was a direct result of Divine power; in order to blast his reputation, and prevent him from enjoying the reception that he deserved; from pure antipathy against his person and his cause, they falsely and maliciously branded him as an impostor and an agent of Satan. "This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub, the prince of the devils.” 2. It arises from hatred and malice. It is not committed from want of care and watchfulness, as in sins of surprise; nor from want of knowledge, as in sins of ignorance; nor from want of courage and resolution, as in sins of infirmity; nor from rashness and selfconfidence, as in sins of presumption: but it possesses a guilt and malignity peculiar to itself, by proceeding from pure and unmingled hatred against Christ and godliness. Could they obtain their desire, they would gladly, not only extinguish the religion which he has left us, but also annihilate his own existence. They wish that there were no God. Their language may be bad and abusive. Their actions may savour strongly of the camp of Satan. But their hearts are worse; and could we only see what is passing there, we should find unbridled fury rankling against God and goodness. This was the case with the Pharisees. They hated Christ. They endeavored to ensnare him in his teaching: and sought by what means they might take away his life. They did not put him to death in anger: for that acts rashly, and without reflection: but consulted how they might destroy him; and employed artifice and cunning to apprehend him: and thus were deliberate and malicious murderers. And the same spirit of malevolence still characterizes the conduct of apostates. They crucify Christ afresh. Unable to repeat the literal action; by renouncing the faith of the Gospel, and bring ing by their ungodly lives disgrace on the cause which they once professed, they give their consent and sanction to the diabolical deed of the Jews: they trample his blood under foot, and do despite to the Spirit of grace. 3. It is committed in opposition to light and knowledge, and the conviction of the sinner's own mind. This is a circumstance which is inseparable from its nature, and goes far to mature and complete its guilt. Paul admits that if he had knowingly committed the crimes with which he was chargeable, his case would have been hopeless. But amidst all the means of better information that he possessed, he never had been persuaded of the truth of Christianity, and that the cause which he was persecuting was the cause of God: and, therefore, he tells us, he “obtained mercy, because he did it ignorantly, in unbelief.” The Hebrews not only had the Gospel clearly announced unto them, but they had become the subjects of deep convictions and powerful impressions. They had been enlightened, and tasted the heavenly gift; they had been made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and had tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come. Though none of these expressions denotes that Divine change which necessarily accompanies salvation; they at least intimate, that they to whom they are applied, had been made to feel convictions peculiarly deep, and impressions of no common strength and liveliness; and, therefore, their future apostasy was a sinning wilfully after they had received the knowledge of the truth. This was the principal ingredient in the sin of those apostates mentioned by Peter. Their doom was sealed, because "after they had known the way of truth, they had turned aside from the holy commandment." And there can be no doubt that this was the circumstance which placed the Pharisees beyond the reach of mercy. Though they affected to treat Christ as an impostor, and to regard his miracles as the effect of magic or diabolical enchantment; in their hearts and consciences they knew better. They knew who he was. They were convinced of the * * John vii. 28. |