2009/03/29

BLASPHEMOUS AMERICAN JESUS



BLASPHEMOUS AMERICAN JESUS
THE TRUE JESUS CHRIST IS ONLY IN THE GOSPEL-THE NEW TESTAMENT-NO IN THE FANTASY INVENTED BY MATTHEW VAUGH-MARK MILLAR

the returned Christ on earth is in Acts 1:11
Remember Galatians 1: 6-9

http://groups.google.com/group/anti-blasphemy-central?hl=it

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mark Millar - Telling the Revelation in 'American Jesus'
Matt Brady

Newsarama.com Matt Brady

newsarama.com Wed Mar 25, 5:13 pm ET
The Book of Revelation will be told in comics.


For Mark Millar, the creator behind such eyebrow-raising projects as Wanted, Kick-Ass, War Heroes, Marvel's Civil War, Ultimates and soon Ultimate Avengers, calling something American Jesus isn't that big of a deal.


American Jesus is the larger name of Millar's re-telling of The Book of Revelation from the Bible, set in contemporary times. Both the returned Jesus and the Anti-Christ grow up in a world where at least one of them can more easily reconcile his powers with the notion that he may be a mutant, rather than a supernatural being whose presence signifies the beginning of the end of everything.


The first installment of the three part story, Chosen was originally published in 2004 by Dark Horse, and this week, is being released in a new trade paperback collection bearing the name American Jesus - from Image Comics.


We spoke with Millar about the larger project and the first installment that's now available.


Newsarama: Mark, take us back to the start here on what was originally published as Chosen - what was the spark of the story?


Mark Millar: The American Jesus idea hit me a few of years back. When I was a kid, I read the Bible like everyone else, and I sort of hoped that the ending would happen in my lifetime. The Book of Revelation is just really cool - all the old stuff with the sandals just sounded less exciting than the returning Jesus versus the Beast at the end of time. I think everyone who reads it kind of assumes that it's going to happen in their lifetime, so just as a kid, it sounded great. So the idea has been percolating in me for a long time, and has actually appeared in a couple of projects that I've done over the years.


I think it came to a head with me when I started thinking about the first volume, Chosen, and it crystallized into a very linear story - a story about what it would be like to be Jesus in the present day, growing up with television, movies and everything that kids these days grow up with. And I also thought it would be interesting to show the Anti-Christ as well, but not in a slasher-film kind of way, but rather just showing a kid growing up who knows that he's got to be the bad guy in this big battle and terrible stuff; and then - of course, you have to have them meet. If you look at it that way - it's God versus Satan. It's probably the world's most famous story, and yet, it's rarely, if ever dramatized.


As a kid, I remember watching a copy of The Final Conflict - the last Omen movie - and being so upset that it wasn't the big fight with Jesus. But back then, I suppose it would be too controversial to do something like that. But now, luckily we're in these crazy times where you can get away with anything, so God versus Satan gets a telling in American Jesus.


NRAMA: Speaking of these crazy times - when this miniseries originally came out, and even recently with the FULL first issue up on Newsarama, there's not a hue and cry that at one time you would have expected to greet such a project. Were you surprised that this didn't make the evening news with a story about how comics are attacking religion and someone needs to take a look at them for the children's sake?


MM: Oh no, not at all. I wrote the thing with the purpose in mind of not offending Christians because I am one. I'm a practicing Catholic, which is incredibly unusual in the entertainment industry. I've always found it the cheapest of cheap shots to go for Christianity. I just think there are so many positive things about it, so why go for the negatives?


To me, Christianity has always been a very relaxed thing. Growing up with it in the West of Scotland may be very different than it is in some parts of America, but generally it's very tolerant and people are very nice, and will go out of their way to help people less fortunate than they are. So it's always been a very positive thing in my life.


I always cringe slightly when I see writers going after Christianity and especially the Catholic Church. It's like the secret handshake of the bad writer. It's like making Hitler your villain in a story - it's so easy. Find something new to say. It's not brave or particularly clever anymore. I think it was brave 400 years ago when you'd still get burned at the stake for it, and even brave 40 or 50 years ago, when attitudes were different and people would get it trouble or be ostracized for it, but now, my God, it's probably more shocking to be a Catholic than to be a Satanist.


And if you read the story, there's nothing in it that can be held up and waved by Bill O'Reilly as the latest threat to society and Western Civilization. If anything, this is a bookend to Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. That's the story of the crucifixion, and this is the story of his return. The thing I liked about The Passion was that the people who went nuts about it were the religious groups - the people that are normally campaigning against movies. So I thought, wouldn't it be nice to tap into that and do something that's just pretty straight from the Bible and give it a modern spin and just tell a good story.


The thing is, I think it will get some more notice, and probably be held up a little. At some point soon, there will be some movie news, and when it becomes a movie thing instead of a comic thing, it will hit the mainstream a little more and hit a much wider audience.


NRAMA: It's harder to ignore when it's a movie retelling of revelation, rather than a comic book...


MM: [laughs] That's right. The thing is, we've got it pretty sweet in comics. Probably 99% of the time, nobody notices us. We have our regular audience, and they're a very intelligent audience, and we write things for them. So it's going to be interesting when it starts to reach a wider audience. I'm finding this with Kick-Ass as well - something like Hit Girl in that story - a ten year-old girl that's swearing and killing people. In comics that can kind of get by without much of a fuss, but when that starts to reach more of the mainstream...I think there might be something of a fuss made. Thye same thing will probably happen with American Jesus.


NRAMA: You had a title change and a publisher change - what went into that?


MM: Chosen was always going to be the first part of a trilogy. American Jesus was the trilogy, and Chosen was always part one of that. This is one guy's side of it all, and in book two, we'll see the other guy's side of it all. So this is something that I've planned on for ages, but unfortunately, between things like Civil War, Ultimates, Wolverine, Fantastic Four and other things, I've had so much less time for my creator-owned stuff that I'd planned.

I think I originally planned for the first part to come out in 2004 and the rest to come out in 2005-2006. So, as much as my books are usually late...this is four years later than I wanted, so it's nice to finally get this back on track and have it come out.

NRAMA: What brought you over to Image Comic from Dark Horse for the collection and the subsequent parts of the story?

MM: Probably [Image partner] Robert Kirkman. He's been on this fanatical campaign to get everyone over to Image, and I just admired that fanaticism. He was telling me, ages back, that I could be reaching a whole new audience with Image and making twice as much as I did at Marvel, and all the other things that a Scottish person wants to hear, so, being like Scrooge McDuck, I gave it a try to see what it would be like. I do have to say though, ICON [Marvel's creator-owned imprint and home to Kick-Ass] is great - the deal we have with Kick-Ass is one that took us way beyond our wildest expectations, so I was hesitant, but I like Robert, and I like the Image guys, and War Heroes was already over there, so I figured we'd give it a try and see how it goes.

NRAMA: Does this mean that you're looking at Image as more of a home now?

MM: I'll still do the vast majority of my work at Marvel, but I'm also very much aware of the fact that ICON exists because Image exists. If Image didn't exist, I doubt Marvel would have the slightest interest in doing something like ICON, and DC probably wouldn't be doing so much creator-owned projects under their imprints either. All of these things started after Image because creators started doing their own material. So I think Image is a very important thing in the industry to support - and also, people do very well over there - there are some guys at Image who are making much more than the biggest creators at Marvel and DC. So it makes real sense to have Image around.

NRAMA: Getting back to the story, in writing American Jesus, which is, as you've said, a telling of the Book of Revelation, were you typing with the Bible open beside you, matching up imagery and characters as you went, or is this a broader-brush adaptation that hits on the larger beats of the story?

MM: Not really. I was familiar enough with the source material in the same way that most comic book writers are familiar with Amazing Spider-Man #1-#125 or something like that. I spent a lot of my childhood reading the Bible and going to Catholic School, so the material that I was drawing from was familiar to me, and I never had to open the Bible to check references or anything.

Also, I met with a friend of mine who's a priest who is, certainly one of Scotland's, if not one of the world's foremost authorities on the Apocalypse....I just love the idea that there's someone out there who is an authority on the Apocalypse!

NRAMA: It's always good to have his number within reach...

MM: [laughs] Yes, exactly! He gets called out for some very interesting things. I was tormenting myself on this, trying to figure out how literal I should be, because when you look at some of this stuff, it's quite esoteric and doesn't lend itself to the natural three act structure that most stories have - not to mention that there's no real conclusion other than "God wins." There are no beats or real flow within the story. So I wasn't sure how much I should show in my story - should I show the Seven Heads and the Seven Seals and all of that? And my friend said to just take the basic idea of it and do my own thing. It was great advice that was very liberating as well. So I've taken the very broad strokes and am taking my own interpretation of it, and that works much better in terms of story structure because of that. So sometimes going back to the original source can bind you a little bit.

NRAMA: Going back to the whole conflict and controversy side of things, have you ever considered the flipside - that is, that once this hits the mainstream, you're embraced by the Left Behind audience and the Christian readership that is into End Times prophecy and find this to be appealing to them?

MM: I'd be comfortable with that, actually. I was going through the states a few months back, and all the places everyone said I would hate - all the flyover states - they were the ones that I liked the best. I mean, I'm a left-leaning Scot, and I'm comfortable with conservative Americans. I think America, especially during the Bush years, and even now, sees itself split into two groups, and I feel comfortable in both of them. The Left Behind audience is an audience that I understand because they embrace material that I'm interested in, so if they pick up the book, great. As I said, I don't think there's anything in it that they would hate - this is more of a straightforward story without the violence that usually makes it into my other books.

NRAMA: As you said, you're a Christian raised in the church and with the Bible. Was there any trepidation when you decided to take on this story? Revelation is obviously widely open to interpretation, but there are warnings to those who would willingly misinterpret it or use t to lead those of faith astray - not that that's every stopped any number of individuals form interpreting it freely according to their agenda or time period... Was there any conflict between your faith and the story you were looking to tell?

MM: Not at all. Like I said, the Christianity I grew up with wasn't fire and brimstone, just as it isn't for most people. It was a very loving, community thing. So the idea of doing your own interpretation of the Book of Revelation is something that my old neighbors would be interested in reading. It's not something that anyone would judge you for. I think if you did something horrible or deliberately offensive, then yeah, there would be a problem, but I don't think there's anything wrong with telling it as a story, no different than The Passion or any of the Old Testament books that were turned into movies.

It's quite interesting to me that the most exciting of all the books in the Bible is the one that's never been dramatized. We know Moses, we know Jesus' story, but this is the big one. Maybe the budget hasn't been there when it comes to film, or that it's difficult to tell - it's short, and quite esoteric. It's more like a trailer for a story. The way I describe it is if the Old Testament is Star Wars, the New Testament is Empire Strikes Back, and Revelation is just the trailer for the next one - something that shows you the coolest stuff is yet to come.

NRAMA: The Return of the Jesus...

MM: (laughs) That's it! You think he's dead, but he's back! That's when it all gets really exciting, when he comes back for the big fight! I mean, the New Testament without Revelation is like Han Solo still frozen in the carbonite.

NRAMA: So what's the plan from here? You're very busy, but with this now out in a trade, I'm assuming that there's a timeline for the next two installments?

MM: Yeah, definitely - we're going to run them starting later in the year with Book Two, and then Book Three early next year so all three books will be out before the movie. The movie will comprise all three books, and will be one big two and a half hour film - and there should be news about the movie coming soon.

Related:

Read the first FULL issue of American Jesus right here at Newsaram

Read the first FULL issue of War Heroes right here on Newsarama


Original Story: Mark Millar - Telling the Revelation in 'American Jesus'
Newsarama.com is the go-to source for the latest comic book and genre entertainment news, reviews and commentary. Newsarama's passionate audience contributes to lively discussions ranging from classic and new comics to movies, TV, manga, anime and more. Watch previews, interviews and more on our video player, sneak peeks of new comics on our Comic Book Viewer and sign up for our RSS feeds. And be sure to join our community so you can voice your opinion on our articles and in our lively forums.

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/newsarama/20090325/en_newsarama/markmillartellingtherevelationinamericanjesus

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<


Matthew Vaughn Adapting Mark Millar's American Jesus
March 26, 2009
by Alex Billington


"They really are adapting everything aren't they," Dan Hacker said on Twitter after I first mentioned this news. British filmmaker

Matthew Vaughn will team up again with comic book author Mark Millar to adapt Millar's American Jesus comic book series. The story centers on the return of Christ in the modern world, leading to a final confrontation with the Antichrist in a bid to save humanity. Vaughn is already planning to start this up in the summer after finishing Kick-Ass, which doesn't have a distributor yet and was independently financed. American Jesus will be developed the same way, independently, by Millar.

Mark Millar's "American Jesus" follows a twelve-year-old boy who suddenly discovers he's the returned Jesus Christ. He can turn water into wine, make the crippled walk and perhaps even raise the dead. How will he deal with the destiny to lead the world in a conflict thousands of years in the making?

American Jesus, made with artist Peter Gross, originally appeared as a three-issue miniseries in 2006 with the title "Chosen." When Millar decided to continue the story as a trilogy of miniseries, the overarching title became "American Jesus." The second installment is subtitled "The Resurrection" and is due out in the fall. If you're interested in picking this up, the actual trade paperback collecting the first mini-series is out later this week (pre-order it on Amazon), so wait until then to buy it. I'm not at all familiar with the series, so I'm curious if it's really interesting enough to stand up to the likes of Millar's Kick-Ass or Wanted. Thoughts?

Discover More: Movie News, Opinions



http://www.firstshowing.net/2009/03/26/matthew-vaughn-adapting-mark-millars-american-jesus/

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>





Millar Resurrects "Chosen" As "American Jesus"
by Kiel Phegley, Staff Writer
More from this Author
Sun, September 28th, 2008 at 8:58AM PST

Updated: Sun, September 28th, 2008 at 4:15PM PST

Text Size

Decrease
Increase


On a run from one creator-owned project to the next, Mark Millar is looking backwards a bit for his next independent launch — specifically, the writer behind "Wanted," “War Heroes” and "Kick-Ass" will be reviving he and Peter Gross' 2004 series "Chosen" at Image Comics with a new trade paperback volume retitled "American Jesus Volume 1: Chosen" in January followed by two follow up mini series, the first of which holds the appropriate subhead "The Second Coming." The announcement came during Baltimore Comic-Con Sunday morning.

"The whole thing was always planned as a nine-issue series, and it was going to be made up of three trilogies so I could get three #1s out of it," laughed the Scottish scribe while talking with CBR News earlier this week. "I've always got an eye on sales, so I wanted to get three #1s. Plus, with it being a biblical thing, a trilogy seemed to make sense. We even ended the first one on a cliffhanger."

Originally published as a three-issue series from Dark Horse as part of Millar's initial push of creator-owned Millarworld titles, the series followed the story of 12-year-old Jodie Christianson, who while growing up a regular Midwestern kid in the mid '80s discovers that he is, in fact, the returned Christ on earth. Millar and Gross will reteam for the two follow up volumes, as the writer explained "we own this 100% together, the same as John Romita, Jr. and I on 'Kick-Ass' or Tony Harris and I on 'War Heroes' or J.G. Jones and I on 'Wanted.' Anything I do on creator-owned books, we split it right down the middle, which is the only fair thing to do because they're putting as much work into it as I am."

Millar also explained that he's always intended to have a unifying title for the proposed trilogy. "The series itself was always going to be called 'American Jesus.' My idea for it was always 'The American Jesus Trilogy.' That was one of the original titles I came up with. The other one was 'Bible 2' saying it was the sequel to the Bible, but I thought that might come off as a bit facetious. I could get shot saying that. But I looked at it as 'The Bible sold a lot of copies, and it would be quite nice if there was a sequel.'

"So my plan was to just finish the story, and I've just been so busy at Marvel for three years with 'Civil War' and 'Ultimates' and 'Fantastic Four' and 'Old Man Logan' and everything. Just one project after another stopped me from getting to this. And it was slightly frustrating."

The inability to find time for "American Jesus" in his schedule was doubly frustrating for Millar as it was also lined up for a feature film adaptation around the same time as he made a deal for he and J.G. Jones' "Wanted."

"About three years ago, we first started talking to someone about doing the movie," he said. "We talked to Sony Screen Gems. They wanted to make it, and they made us a nice offer and everything, but then something happened where I looked at it and it didn't feel like a movie. Because I was trying to get as much money out of the studios as possible, I saw it as three movies like 'Lord of the Rings' — one big movie split over three pictures. But when I really looked at it, the three issues of 'Chosen' is one hour of a movie. Maybe even 50 minutes. So that's when I pulled the plug on Sony Screen Gems, when I realized we're better [completing the full nine issues] and it's at the most one movie [as it stands].

"Matthew Vaughan, who's directing 'Kick-Ass' right now, wanted to do 'Chosen' next, and I said, 'Let's do ‘Kick-Ass’ just now, and we'll come back to ‘Chosen’ later once I've figured out the next six issues because there's a lot of ways it could still go at the moment.'"

As for what kind of story would dictate enough plot and characterization (along with what can be assumed is a healthy amount of social commentary given Millar's past work), Millar held back on giving too many details just yet. "I don't want to spoil the ending of 'Chosen' for anybody who hasn't read that, but the second volume is about the adult Jesus in the modern day walking around in the world of Guantanamo Bay and conservative Republicans running Americans who don't have that much in common with a 2000-year old Judean idea of what Christianity is. It's Jesus in the modern world, and they crucified him last time, so it's kind of updating that for the modern world."

Now discuss this story in CBR's Image Comics forum.

Keywords: american jesus, mark millar, peter gross, image comics, chosen



http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=18237



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



Chosen Review
Jumping Jesus on a Pogo Stick! Minus the Pogo Stick, of course.
by Hilary Goldstein

November 3, 2005 - Blasphemy. That's the first thought many will have spying the cover to Mark Millar's Chosen. Few writers would have the balls to write a modern-day tale about the returned spirit of Jesus Christ, but Millar does so expertly. In the hands of a lesser writer, Chosen could have been a heavy-handed strike for or against Christianity. Chosen is not a bash on religion any more than Mike Carey's Lucifer is a commendation of Satan. Check your reservations and don't be so quick to pass this book on the shelf.

Jodie Christianson is your typical twelve-year-old boy, enthralled with comic books and Star Wars. When an 18-wheeler spins off a bridge and right on Jodie's head his world takes a drastic change. Unharmed, Jodie emerges from the wreck with incredible knowledge and the ability to perform miracles. But he's no Jesus of olden days. Jodie grew up with American pop-culture. He swears, he "self-dates" and he's not particularly religious. Welcome to the New World, Christ.

The three issues collected in the new trade follow Jodie as he, his family and his town come to grips with the return of the Savior. At heart, Jodie is still a kid, even with his newfound knowledge, and acts in ways you'd never encounter in the Bible. Though much of the town begins to idolize Jodie, a few remain skeptical. And therein lies the great danger for the would-be-Christ. Can he -- and should he -- convert his flock, especially at such a young age? Should he perform miracles in broad daylight? Isn't it about time he went on Oprah?

Everything leads perfectly into a big, surprising twist at the end of the book. Millar came up with the twist first and worked the story backwards, allowing him to plant subtle clues throughout the story. There are some stories that survive solely on the twist and it's true that Chosen would not be quite as great if not for Millar's clever take. That said, Chosen can (and should) be re-read with a completely new perspective and remains incredibly fresh. It's almost like reading a brand new story.

The last third of the Chosen trade includes a cover gallery, a very informative conversation between Millar and artist Peter Gross, a few pages of script and a very funny e-mail exchange between Millar and Dark Horse. Usually this level of good DVD-style bonuses come only with expensive hardcover editions, so this is a welcome addition to an affordable softcover.

Chosen
Written by: Mark Millar
Drawn by: Peter Gross
Publisher: Dark Horse
Genre: Action
Price: $9.95
Suggested Age: 16+
Release Date: November 2, 2005

Learn more about IGN Comics' rating system.
Rating: Must Read



Though the cover and subject matter may be inflammatory, Millar does not take any cheap shots at religion. There is a very specific story Millar set out to tell. This isn't a grand allegory or a thesis on faith. It's a story that would have fit perfectly into the Vertigo line, especially with Books of Magics' Peter Gross providing excellent pencils. If Sandman, Lucifer and Hellblazer are your cup of tea, then you might as well pour yourself some Chosen while you're at it.



http://comics.ign.com/articles/664/664097p1.html

Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit—The “Unpardonable Sin”


Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit—The “Unpardonable Sin”
by Kyle Butt, M.A.


Printer version | Email this article


Through the years, numerous writers have taken on the task of explaining the comment spoken by Jesus concerning the “unpardonable sin”—blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. From these writings have come countless false doctrines, insinuations, and suggested explanations. It is the purpose of this article to explain what “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” is not, what it actually is, and to offer comment concerning whether it still can be committed today.

Three of the four gospel accounts contain a reference to the statement made by Jesus concerning blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. These three passages read as follows.

Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come (Matthew 12:31-32).

Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation—because they said, “He has an unclean spirit” (Mark 3:28-30).

And anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but to him who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven (Luke 12:10).

Each of these references to the statement made by Jesus verifies that Jesus did clearly state that there is a specific sin that “will not be forgiven.” The American Standard Version describes the sin as an “eternal sin” (Mark 3:29). Jesus defined that sin as “the blasphemy against the Spirit.” What, then, is blasphemy against the Spirit?

In order to explain this sin fully, a look at the general context of the statement is critical. Matthew’s account offers the most detail concerning the setting in which Jesus’ statement was made. In Matthew 12:22, the text indicates that a certain man who was demon-possessed was brought to Jesus to be healed. As was His common practice, Jesus cast out the unclean spirit, and healed the man of his blindness and inability to speak. After seeing this display of power, the multitudes that followed Jesus asked, “Could this be the Son of David?” (12:23). Upon hearing this remark, the Pharisees, wanting to discredit the source from which Jesus received His power, declared that Jesus was casting out demons by “Beelzebub, the ruler of demons.” Jesus proceeded to explain that a kingdom divided against itself could not stand, and if He were casting out demons by the power of demons, then He would be defeating Himself. It was after this accusation by the Pharisees, and Jesus’ defense of His actions, that Christ commented concerning the blasphemy against the Spirit. In fact, the text of Mark clearly states that Jesus made the comment about the blasphemy against the Spirit “because they said, ‘He has an unclean spirit.’ ”

Another critical piece of information needed to clarify Jesus’ statement is the definition of blasphemy. Wayne Jackson wrote: “Blasphemy is an anglicized form of the Greek term blasphemia, which scholars believe probably derives from two roots, blapto, to injure, and pheme, to speak. The word would thus suggest injurious speech” (2000). Bernard Franklin, in his article concerning blasphemy against the Spirit, suggested:

The word “blasphemy” in its various forms (as verb, noun, adjective, etc.) appears some fifty-nine times in the New Testament. It has a variety of renderings, such as, “blasphemy,” “reviled,” “railed,” “evil spoken of,” “to speak evil of,” etc. Examples of these various renderings are: “They that passed by reviled him” (Matthew 27:39). “He that shall blaspheme” (Mark 3:29). “They that passed by railed on him” (Mark 15:29). “The way of truth shall be evil spoken of ” (2 Peter 2:2). “These speak evil of those things” (Jude 10). It is evident from these that blasphemy is a sin of the mouth, a “tongue-sin.” All New Testament writers except the author of Hebrews use the word (1936, pp. 224-225).

Furthermore, Jesus defined the term when, after referring to blasphemy, He used the phrase “speaks a word against” in Matthew 12:32.

WHAT THE UNPARDONABLE SIN IS NOT

With the working definition of blasphemy meaning, “to speak against,” or “speak evil of,” it is easy to rule out several sins that would not qualify as the unpardonable sin. Occasionally, murder is suggested as the “unpardonable sin.” Such cannot be the case, however. First, since blasphemy is a “tongue sin,” murder would not fall into this category. Second, several biblical passages show the sin of murder can be forgiven. When King David committed adultery and had Uriah the Hittite murdered, the prophet Nathan came to him, informing him that God had seen that David “killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword” (2 Samuel 12:9). When David confessed to Nathan and repented, the prophet told David, “The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die” (12:13). And, although David was punished for his iniquity, it was forgiven. The Bible plainly demonstrates that murder is not the unpardonable sin.

Adultery surfaces as another sin put forward as unpardonable. Yet the same reasoning used to discount murder as the unpardonable sin can be used to disqualify adultery. First, it does not fit the category of blasphemy. Second, David was forgiven of adultery, just as surely as he was forgiven of murder. The apostle Paul gave a list of no less than ten sins (including adultery) of which the Corinthian brethren had been forgiven (1 Corinthians 6:9-11). Adultery cannot be the unpardonable sin.

Another sin set forth as the unpardonable sin is blasphemy of any kind, not specifically against the Holy Spirit. We know, however, that blasphemy in general cannot be unforgivable for two reasons. First, in the context of the unpardonable sin, Jesus clearly stated that “whatever blasphemies” men may utter (besides against the Holy Spirit) could be forgiven. Second, Paul confessed that before his conversion, he had formerly been “a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief ” (1 Timothy 1:13). These two biblical passages rule out the possibility of general blasphemy as the unpardonable sin.

We begin to see, then, that we cannot arbitrarily decide which sins we think are heinous, and then simply attribute to them the property of being unpardonable, especially considering the fact that even those who were guilty of crucifying the Son of God had the opportunity to be forgiven (Acts 2:36-38). Therefore, since the unpardonable sin falls into a category of its own, and cannot be murder, adultery, general blasphemy, etc., some scholars have set forth the idea that the unpardonable sin is not a single sin at all, but is instead the stubborn condition of a person who persists in unbelief. This understanding, however, fails to take into account the immediate context of the “unpardonable sin.” Gus Nichols, commenting on this idea of “persistent unbelief,” stated: “It is true, great multitudes are going into eternity in rebellion against God to be finally and eternally lost; but it is for rejecting and neglecting pardon graciously extended in the gospel while they live, not because they have committed the unpardonable sin” (1967, p. 236). Wendell Winkler, under a section titled, “What the Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit is Not,” wrote that it is not

postponement of obedience until death. The text implies that those who commit the eternal sin continue to live while having lost all opportunity of salvation; whereas those who postpone obedience to Christ (except those who commit the eternal sin) could have obeyed at any time previous to their death (1980, p. 20).

IN THIS AGE OR IN THE AGE TO COME

Jesus said that blasphemy against the Spirit would not be forgiven “in this age or in the age to come” (Matthew 12:32). Certain religious organizations have seized upon this statement to suggest that Jesus has in mind a situation in which certain sins will be remitted after death—but not this sin. This idea of a purgatory-like state, where the souls of the dead are given a “second chance” to do penance for the sins they committed in their earthly life, finds no justification in this statement made by Christ (nor in any other biblical passage, for that matter). R.C.H. Lenski stated that Jesus’ use of the phrase under discussion meant simply “absolutely never” (1961, p. 484). Hendriksen concurred with Lenski when he wrote:

In passing, it should be pointed out that these words by no stretch of the imagination imply that for certain sins there will be forgiveness in the life hereafter. They do not in any sense whatever support the doctrine of purgatory. The expression simply means that the indicated sin will never be forgiven (1973, p. 528).

As the writer of Hebrews succinctly wrote, “it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27).

It also has been suggested by several writers that the “age to come” discussed by Jesus refers to the Christian Age. According to this idea, Jesus made the statement in the Jewish Age, when the Law of Moses was in effect, and the “age to come” denoted the Christian Age immediately following, when the Law of Christ would prevail. Putting this meaning to the phrase often leads the advocates of this theory to conclude that the unpardonable sin could be committed in the Christian Age, after the resurrection of Christ. As Winkler surmised, “Thus, since our Lord was speaking while the Jewish age was in existence, he was affirming that the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost would not be forgiven in (a) the Jewish age, nor in (b) the Christian age, the age that followed” (1980, p. 21). Nichols, after affirming the same proposition, concluded:

It follows that this sin, therefore, could be committed during the personal ministry of Christ, and was then committed, as we have seen, and could also be committed under the gospel age or dispensation. They could have attributed the works of the Spirit to Satan after Pentecost, the same as before (1967, p. 234).

Two primary pieces of evidence, however, militate against the idea that Jesus’ reference to the “age to come” meant the Christian Age. First, in Mark 10:30, the gospel writer has Jesus on record using the same phrase (“in the age to come”) to refer to the time when the followers of Christ would inherit “eternal life” (see Luke 18:30 for the parallel passage). This is a clear reference to life after death, since Paul said “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 15:50). Second, Mark’s account of the unpardonable sin describes the sin as an “eternal sin.” The translators of the New King James Version recorded that the person who commits the sin “never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation” (Mark 3:29). Mark’s account, with its emphasis on eternity, shows that the phrase simply is meant to underscore the fact that this sin will “absolutely never” be forgiven (Lenski, p. 484). It is incorrect, then, to use the phrase “in the age to come” to refer to purgatory. It also is tenuous to use the phrase to refer to the Christian Age. The best explanation, to quote Hendrickson again, is that “the expression simply means that the indicated sin will never be forgiven” (p. 528).

WHAT THE UNPARDONABLE SIN IS

As was noted earlier, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the only sin in the Bible that is given the status of unpardonable or eternal. In fact, Jesus prefaced His discussion of this sin by stating that, “every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men,” except for blasphemy against the Spirit. Using the working definition of blasphemy as “speaking evil of,” it becomes clear that the sin described by Jesus was a “tongue sin” that the Pharisees had committed, or at least were dangerously close to committing.

What had the Pharisees done that would have put them in jeopardy of committing the unpardonable sin? According to His own testimony, during Jesus’ time on this Earth He cast out demons by the “Spirit of God” (Matthew 12:28). When the Pharisees saw that Jesus had performed a verifiable miracle, they could not argue with the fact that Christ possessed certain powers that others (including themselves) did not have. Therefore, in order to cast suspicion on the ministry of Jesus, they claimed that He was casting out demons by Beelzebub, the ruler of demons. The name Beelzebub is simply another name for Satan (Franklin, 1936, p. 227), as can be seen from Jesus’ reference to Satan in Matthew 12:26. Even when faced by the miraculous working of the Holy Spirit through Jesus, the Pharisees were, in essence, attributing Jesus’ power to Satan, and claiming that Jesus was “Satan incarnate instead of God incarnate. It is this, and nothing else, that our Lord calls the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost (or Spirit—KB)” (Franklin, p. 227). Maxie Boren wrote: “The context of Matthew 12:22ff. shows clearly that this was indeed the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit—attributing the miracle done by Jesus to the power of the devil. Jesus said it was done ‘by the Spirit of God’ (verse 28) but they (the Pharisees—KB) said it was done by Beelzebub” (n.d., p. 1). It is clear that blasphemy against the Spirit was a definite, singular sin, which could be committed by the Pharisees during the life of Jesus.

IS THE “UNPARDONABLE SIN” THE
SAME AS THE “SIN UNTO DEATH”?

John, in his first epistle, mentioned the fact that “there is sin leading to death” and “there is sin not leading to death” (1 John 5:16-17). His statement in these verses has been connected by more than a few people to Jesus’ remark about the “eternal sin.” It is evident, however, that this connection is based more on opinion than on textual Bible study.

First, there is no biblical evidence that connects the passage in 1 John with the Pharisees’ accusation. Furthermore, the entire context of 1 John gives the Christian readers hope of forgiveness for all sins that they might have committed. John wrote: “All unrighteousness is sin, and there is sin not leading to death” (1 John 5:17). Several chapters earlier, he wrote: “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9, emp. added). In the scope of John’s epistle, any unrighteousness committed by his readers could be forgiven if the transgressor took the proper steps of repentance and confession. Apparently, the “sin unto death” in 1 John is not a specific sin for which it is impossible to receive forgiveness, but rather, is any sin for which a person will not take the proper steps demanded by God to receive the forgiveness available. On the other hand, blasphemy against the Spirit was a specific, eternal sin that never would be forgiven.

CAN THE UNPARDONABLE SIN BE COMMITTED TODAY?

The next question usually asked concerning this sin is whether or not it is still possible to commit it today. Opinions on this question certainly vary, and scholars seem to be divided in their positions. The evidence, however, seems to point toward the idea that this sin cannot be committed today.

First, the circumstances under which the sin is described cannot prevail today, due to the fact that the age of miracles has ceased (see Miller, 2003). No one today will have the opportunity to witness Jesus performing miracles in person (2 Corinthians 5:16).

Second, there is no other mention of the sin in any biblical passage written after the resurrection of Christ. None of the inspired New Testament writers refers to the sin in any epistle or in the book of Acts, and none offers warnings to new converts about avoiding the sin post-Pentecost. Franklin observed:

If it were possible for it to be committed, would there not have been some warning against it? Were there any danger regarding it, would the Apostle Paul, who wrote half the books of the New Testament, have failed to warn against its commission? Paul does not even mention the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The sin in question was actually committed in the days of our Lord’s ministry on earth, but it does not necessarily follow that it could be committed in His absence (p. 233).

In discussing this matter, Gus Nichols wrote: “It seems that all sins committed today are pardonable, and that all can be saved, if they will” (1967, p. 239). V.E. Howard, commented along the same lines when he stated that “there is no unpardonable sin today” (1975, p. 156).

In conclusion, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the only unpardonable sin mentioned in the Bible, and it is mentioned in the context of the Pharisees accusing Jesus of being possessed by the Devil. The context indicates that it was a specific sin, and not a series of forgivable sins, or an attitude of persistent unbelief. After the resurrection, no inspired writer mentions the sin, and no warnings against it were recorded. There is no concrete evidence that it can be committed today. The fact that it is not mentioned after the resurrection, lends itself to the idea that it cannot still be committed. In fact, the indication from passages such as 1 John 1:7,9 is that “all unrighteousness” that a person could commit today can be forgiven by the blood of Jesus. As Howard said when concluding his remarks about the eternal sin: “In the same scripture our Lord gave full assurance that every sin and blasphemy against the ‘Son of man’ shall be forgiven him. Today the gospel of Christ is to be preached to every man on earth and any man on earth may be saved by obeying the gospel (Mark 16:15-16)” [p. 157].

REFERENCES

Boren, Maxie B. (no date), “The Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit,” Class Handout, Brown Trail church of Christ, Bedford, Texas, Lesson 4.

Franklin, Barnard (1936), “The Blasphemy Against the Holy Ghost: An Inquiry into the Scriptural Teaching Regarding the Unpardonable Sin,” Bibliotheca Sacra, 93:220-233, April.

Hendriksen, William (1973), The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

Howard, V.E. (1975), The Holy Spirit (West Monroe, LA: Central Publishers).

Jackson, Wayne (2000), Blasphemy—What Is This Great Sin?, [On-line], URL: http://www.christiancourier.com/archives/blasphemy.htm.

Lenski, R.C.H. (1961 reprint), The Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg).

Miller, Dave (2003), “Modern-day Miracles, Tongue-speaking, and Holy Spirit Baptism: A Refutation,” Reason and Revelation, 23(3):17-23, March.

Nichols, Gus (1967), Lectures on the Holy Spirit (Plainview, TX: Nichols Brothers).

Winkler, Wendell, ed. (1980), What Do You Know About the Holy Spirit? (Fort Worth, TX: Winkler Publications).



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 2003 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
We are happy to grant permission for items in the "Scripturally Speaking" section to be reproduced in their entirety, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) the author’s name must remain attached to the materials; (4) any references, footnotes, or endnotes that accompany the article must be included with any written reproduction of the article; (5) alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, quotations, etc. must be reproduced exactly as they appear in the original); (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, in whole or in part, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken.

For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

Apologetics Press
230 Landmark Drive
Montgomery, Alabama 36117
U.S.A.
Phone (334) 272-8558
http://www.apologeticspress.org






Browse Scripturally Speaking Browse all articles


http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2272