I think I might have come across a contradiction that is not publicized very much. In Mark 11:26, Jesus says, "forgive, if you have anything against anyone so that your father in heaven will also forgive your transgressions. But if you do not forgive, neither will your father who is in heaven forgive your transgressions."

But Matthew 12:31 says, "Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven..."

The word translated "blasphemy" is literally "slander" or "evil talk." I know for sure that I've violated this commandment, so there's no salvation for me.

Matthew 12:31 which says, the only unforgivable sin is "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit," seems to conflict with Mark 11:26 which says that not forgiving is also an unforgivable sin.

So what do you think?

[This message has been edited by Le pede (edited February 18, 2001).]

The concept is this, if you cannot forgive someone...then why should God be expected to forgive you?

As far as blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is concerned, the blasphemy is the rejection of the Holy Spirit and what He can provide. It's not using God name in vain....so don't worry, you can still be saved.

The two verses are on two different topics and no way in contradiction with each other.

Note:Some manuscripts do not contain Mark 11:26.

But, ksc, the word "blasphemy" has nothing to do with "rejection," it has to do with saying something evil against the Holy Spirit. I have heard the interpretation of the verse you have presented before and it doesn't agree with what the passage actually says.

And Mark 11:26 (and I do realize that some manuscripts do not have it) doesn't imply a rhetorical question in any sense. It is a declaration of fact: "If you don't forgive, God won't forgive you." There is no "why should..." involved.

[This message has been edited by Le pede (edited February 18, 2001).]

Here is another contradiction I just discovered....After Jesus was born, Mary and Joseph gave a "sin offering" at the temple. This was because Jewish tradition is that sex is sinfull, and everyone who comes into the world is a sinner. If she was a virgin, and an Angel had really told her her son would be the massiah, why would she have had the guilty conscience?

JragonFli:

I pointed this out in the "Blood Sacrifice" thread. It seems to inflict mortal damage on the theology that sacrifice was designed to forgive sin. In fact, it was designed to cleanse ritual impurity--that is all.

Perhaps this contradiction has been mentioned recently. If so, I apologize in advance.

"After this Jesus and his disciples went to Judea, and he extended his stay with them there and began to baptize." (Jn 3:22)

The above contradicts the following:

"Jesus was aware of the rumor that had reached the Pharisees: Jesus is recruiting and baptizing more disciples than John. (Actually, Jesus himself didn't baptize anyone; his disciples did the baptizing.) So he left Judea again for Galilee. His route took him through Samaria." Jn 4:1-4

"Rejection" would seem to precede "blasphemy" in most cases, I imagine. The thought comes before the deed or word, to put it another way. I'd like a more detailed definition of "rejection," however. Some have described it as letting yourself get sent to hell -- which makes it a somewhat tautological concept, i.e. the unforgivable sin is to make yourself unforgivable.

I don't think "rejection" would necessarily precede blasphemy. What is condemned here are not motives, but actions. Remember, to most Christians, its rarely the thought that matters (though it does matter sometimes), but the action. "Speaking evil" against the Holy Spirit can theoretically be done by either a believer or non believer. It is, in essence, cursing the Holy Spirit. I don't think Christians think about it a lot because people rarely curse the Holy Spirit (they curse God all the time).