A Christian reading of Mark 3:29

[Thomas]

This is by way a a reply to @talib-al-kalim's offering of an Islamic reading of Mark 3:29 (his post here here)

Before that, a point worth mentioning is the scholars discussion of the translation of the New Testament Greek aionios and aidios into Latin via aeternus. It's argued that the Latin lacks the range of meaning of the original Greek, and is therefore open to misinterpretation. (Much in the same way that the Latin Verbum falls far short of the Greek Logos in John 1:1, and does not do the Greek term sufficient credit.)

Suffice to say that there's enough evidence to show that the original meaning does not necessarily mean 'eternal' as is commonly understood.

+++

Mark:29: "Amen I say to you, that all sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and the blasphemies wherewith they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, shall never have forgiveness, but shall be guilty of an everlasting (aiōnios) sin."

Matthew 12:31-32: "Therefore I say to you: Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but the blasphemy of the Spirit shall not be forgiven. And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world (aion), nor in the (world) to come." (The second world does not actually appear, but is regarded as implicit).

Luke 12:10: "And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but to him that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven."

Thomas 44: "Jesus said, "Whoever blasphemes against the Father will be forgiven, and whoever blasphemes against the son will be forgiven, but whoever blasphemes against the holy spirit will not be forgiven, either on earth or in heaven."

Note that the aion dispute itself occurs only in Mark and Matthew.

What is common to all four is the unpardonable blasphemy.

Thomas 44 uses the Trinitarian formula, and somehow a blasphemy against the Father and the Son are pardonable, whereas against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven. Why is that, if the Three are One, and all are God?

The theologian N.T. Wright says "It isn't that God gets specially angry with one sin in particular. It's rather that if you decide firmly that the doctor who is offering to perform a life saving operation on you is in fact a sadistic murderer, you will never give your consent to the operation."

In Scripture the Holy Spirit convicts of sin and leads people to repentance. The Holy Spirit brings the gospel to life.

If one refuses to acknowledge God, crediting the works and wisdom to Satan (cf Mark 3:22, Matthew 12:24), then one has no place to turn.

The unpardonable sin is in absolute rejection of the Holy Spirit, because the New Testament tells us the Holy Spirit reveals the Son, and the Son reveals the Father.

In the judgement, the soul is faced with the Truth of its own being, its sinfulness, that is, stripped of its illusion and the fruits thereof, and this stripping away can (we suppose) be painful, if we cling on to our illusions as real.

But in so doing, we are surely allowed to acknowledge our sin, and repent of it – "And if any man hear my words, and keep them not, I do not judge him: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world." (John 12:47).

 

[talib-al-kalim]

It's a good idea to suppose that the threefold formula is the base of the variance in Th.
I'm quite with you in the interpretation except the claim that Jesus (p.b.u.h) is between us and God. Jesus didn't reveal the Father; God revealed and still reveals to mankind directly. Sorry I am late and short answering your cause I'm quite busy at the moment.

 

[Thomas]

Sorry I am late and short answering your cause I'm quite busy at the moment.

LOL, no rush. I have been in grandparenting mode, still am, in fact, this is a break ...

I'm quite with you in the interpretation except the claim that Jesus (p.b.u.h) is between us and God.

We don't see it quite like that, our faith being Trinitarian.

To step outside of purely Christian doctrine, can we agree that the Unknowable God sends His Spirit into the heart and 'reveals' Himself there?

If so, this is how and why we talk of a divine 'hierarchy' which refers not in fact to the nature of God, but the nature of our coming to know God... but again I'm slipping into a Christian way of thinking, and I'm not asking that of you ... rather can you understand it of me?

Again ... the idea of unfolding revelation in the heart is in part founded on the sense common to all Christian mystics that when they get to the place where God is, as it were, heart, soul, call it what you will, God is already there, waiting ...

 

[talib-al-kalim]

LOL, no rush. I have been in grandparenting mode, still am, in fact, this is a break ...

I'm still in parent mode...

We don't see it quite like that, our faith being Trinitarian.

discussed alot, but worth while discussing as you go on

To step outside of purely Christian doctrine, can we agree that the Unknowable God sends His Spirit into the heart and 'reveals' Himself there?

Yes. I recently tend to see the "Father", to whom we pray and listen, and the Holy Spirit, God's Spirit that answers in our own thoughts (and much more in the thoughts God chose to inspire as Messengers and the one whom God chose to be the Messiah) are quite the same, the part of God that is acessible to our spirit, a part or an aspect of God.

If so, this is how and why we talk of a divine 'hierarchy' which refers not in fact to the nature of God, but the nature of our coming to know God... but again I'm slipping into a Christian way of thinking, and I'm not asking that of you ... rather can you understand it of me?

I'm very much acquainted to Christian thinking. It is actually what I think as well. We need both, the Message and our own spiritual experience. When I pray, both are present and imbricated: The understanding of the Word I heard or read, which is the base, and the thought, or stream-of-conciousness in prayer, contemplation and meditation.

Again ... the idea of unfolding revelation in the heart is in part founded on the sense common to all Christian mystics that when they get to the place where God is, as it were, heart, soul, call it what you will, God is already there, waiting ...

There's been a lot of exchange between Christian and Islamic mystics. The Islamic mystics (Sufi) learned from Christian ascetics who joined them, and the Christian mysticism of the 10th to 13th century CE is very much inspired from the Islamic mysticism.
Imam Hamid al-Ghazali writes (Ihya Ulum al Din Book 38 Section 1)

Meditation is a state of mind which gives fruit named Marfat and
that state of mind raises an action on bodily limbs and heart.-
Meditation therefore means a state of mind and Marfat. The state
of mind means turning of heart towards the great Watcher and to
keep it engaged in His thoughts and attributes. Marfat is the fruit
of this state Of mind. The meaning of Marfat is the knowledge
that God watches the state of mind, knows its secrets, sees the
actions of man and well know what each man does. People see
outward actions but God sees inward thoughts and outward
actions. This becomes powerful in mind which it turns into a sure
faith. There are many knowledges free from doubt which do not
become powerful in mind, just as the knowledge of death. Those
who have firm belief in this knowledge are the near ones of God.

 

[Thomas]

Oh, indeed!

Would that we pay more attention to our mystics. Not just in what they say, but in the humanity they display, their 'us-ness'.

St Thomas Aquinas, for example, learnt much from both Jewish and Islamic sources.

+++

It's the way of the world. Orthodoxy is required to preserve the unique and original character of its particular Revelation as entire and complete and sufficient unto itself.

Where would we be if we all began picking the nice bits of each other's teachings and discreetly pushed the more troublesome to the edges ... In the end we'd be left with nothing but a projection of our own vanities.

+++

I saw, once, on a TV documentary, a Muslim father teaching his son to wash his hands. Someone on the crew must have had a spiritual sensibility (or an adviser impressed the idea upon them) because the moment was presented, and I saw it – in words according to my tradition – as a sacramental act.

+++

I'll meditate on the words of Imam Hamid al-Ghazali.