Blasphemy against the Spirit: A study of Matthew 12:31-32

Have you ever been in a situation where you are accused of blaspheming the Holy Spirit? Or perhaps you may have wondered whether you have inadvertently done so yourself? Today we see a number of preachers who astonish thousands, perhaps millions, of Christians by performing signs and wonders. They say things that people want to hear, and not what they need to hear. Now perhaps some of you may have been followers of such preachers before. Perhaps you may have found yourself in a situation where you begin to closely examine their teachings with God’s Word. You begin to detect inconsistencies with their teachings. And when you finally decide to point out these inconsistencies for the sake of the body of Christ, you find yourself suddenly surrounded by loyal followers of these preachers.

Some of you may know what I’m talking about. These people would try their best to silence you. They would accuse you of being judgmental, of being ignorant. They would accuse you of “putting God in a box.” Some would even accuse you of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

But is it true? Are you blaspheming against the Holy Spirit? What does blaspheming the Holy Spirit really mean?

If you’ve been around long enough, you would know the expression “blasphemy against the Spirit” has sometimes been used as a weapon to threaten well-meaning Christian critics into silence. To many Christians, this expression sounds pretty scary and they wonder what this expression really means. They wonder if they are guilty of committing this serious sin. The source of this expression is found in two of the Gospels in the Bible: Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:28-29. While many answers are available on the Internet that explain what it means, I will, nevertheless, attempt to understand its meaning by doing a study of Matthew 12:31-32.

Greek text and translation of Matthew 12:31-32

³¹ διὰ τοῦτο λέγω ὑμῖν, πᾶσα ἁμαρτία καὶ βλασφημία ἀφεθήσεται τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἡ δὲ τοῦ πνεύματος βλασφημία οὐκ ἀφεθήσεται. ³² καὶ ὃς ἐὰν εἴπῃ λόγον κατὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ· ὃς δ' ἂν εἴπῃ κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου, οὐκ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ οὔτε ἐν τούτῳ τῷ αἰῶνι οὔτε ἐν τῷμέλλοντι.

³¹ Because of this I am saying to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven to men, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. ³² And whoever speak a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven to him, but whoever speak against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven to him, neither in this age nor in the [age] to come.

Literary context of Matthew 12:31-32

These words spoken by Jesus in Matthew 12:31-32 take place in the midst of a confrontation between Jesus and the Pharisees. The confrontation begins in vv. 22-23 where Jesus astonishes the onlookers by healing a demon-possessed man who is blind and mute. As the onlookers wonder in amazement whether Jesus is the promised Messiah, the Pharisees, who are plotting to destroy Jesus (v. 14),[1] accuse Jesus of drawing power from Satan to cast the demon out of the possessed man (v. 24).[2] However, Jesus, in response, defends his healing by highlighting the Pharisees’ faulty logic with an analogy from internal civil conflict (vv. 25-28). Jesus also follows up this analogy by using another analogy to explain the purpose of his exorcisms (vv. 29-30). In vv. 31-32, Jesus uses the phrase διὰ τοῦτο (“because of this”), not only to point to his previous analogy, but probably also to point back to the entire incident where the Pharisees accuse him as well (v. 24).[3]

Theological analysis of τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (“the Son of Man”)

In Matt. 12:31-32, Jesus uses the term τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (“the Son of Man”) to refer to himself. This enigmatic term is used “more frequently than any other (except ‘Jesus’ itself) to refer to Jesus in the Gospels.”[4] In the Gospel of Matthew, this term is primarily used to “emphasize the identity of Jesus as the coming Son of man and as a figure who is rejected on earth.”[5] While Matthew uses this term to portray Jesus as the coming savior and judge (e.g., 13:41; 19:48), Matthew also uses it with reference to Jesus as a homeless person (8:20) and “an object of derision for associating with sinners” (11:19).[6]

It is, however, important to note that in some other passages, “the term carries strong echoes of the tradition starting from Daniel 7 in which the Son of Man is a powerful figure who will come and exercise sovereign authority granted by God.”[7] But this association with Daniel is not quite immediately apparent and thus, it baffles some of Jesus’ hearers (e.g., Jn. 12:34).[8]

Lexical and theological analysis of τοῦ πνεύματος βλασφημία (“blasphemy against the Spirit”)

The word βλασφημία (“blasphemy”) appears twice in Matt. 12:31. It is defined by the BDAG lexicon as “speech that denigrates or defames,” and could be used with reference to God, humans, the devil, or to any kind of speech that is defamatory.[9] In the Septuagint (LXX), when the root word βλασφημ- is used with reference to God, it is used in the sense of “the disputing of His saving power,” “the desecrating of His name by the Gentiles who capture and enslave His people,” “the violation of His glory by derision of the mountains of Israel (Ez. 35:12) and His people,” “all ungodly speech and action, especially on the part of the Gentiles,” or “human arrogance with its implied depreciation of God.”[10] According to Lev. 24:10-16 and Num. 15:30, the prescribed punishment for blaspheming God is death by stoning.

βλασφημία, when used with reference to God in the NT, is used in the sense of the “violation of the power and majesty of God.”[11] This word appears in Matt. 12:31 in the expression τοῦ πνεύματος βλασφημία, which is best translated as “blasphemy against the Spirit.”[12] While there have been various interpretations as to what this expression means,[13] it is important to examine this expression with regard to its literary context. In Matt. 12:31-32, Jesus makes a distinction between blasphemy against the Son of Man, which is forgivable, and blasphemy against the Spirit, which is not. This distinction raises the question as to how blasphemy against the Spirit is more serious than blasphemy against the Son of Man.

It is quite evident the distinction cannot be, in light of the rest of the Bible, that the Son of Man is less important than the Spirit.[14] An important clue to answering the above question appears to lie in the enigmatic term τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (“the Son of Man”). It should be noted that for much of his ministry, Jesus was “present in veiled form and was thus not unmistakable.”[15] As discussed in the above lexical analysis, the Son of Man is a rejected figure. He is an object of derision. In the eyes of the people, Jesus is a man who “makes no obvious, open claim to be the Messiah.”[16] Thus, to reject the Son of Man would be forgivable.

But in this healing incident, there is an unveiling of the true identity of Jesus as the “Son of David,” the one who would bring healing to all illnesses (cf. Ezek 34:23; 37:25).[17] The onlookers’ amazement in Matt. 12:23 indicates that there can be no explanation for Jesus’ healing other than the work of the Spirit (cf. v. 28).[18] But in spite of this obvious fact, the Pharisees find themselves guilty of “blasphemy against the Spirit” by falsely attributing the work of the Spirit to Satan. Their behavior, clearly, is not done out of sheer ignorance or unbelief of Jesus’ Messiahship. But like the more neutral onlookers, the Pharisees are fully aware of the significance of Jesus’ healing. However, they are consciously and willfully choosing to reject the work of the Spirit so in order to destroy Jesus (v. 14).[19]

In light of this, it would seem, therefore, that the real difference between blaspheming the Son of Man and blaspheming the Holy Spirit lies in particular in the awareness of the individual. While both acts do involve rejecting Jesus as Messiah, the act of blaspheming the Holy Spirit has, in addition, the individual rejecting Jesus with full awareness that Jesus is indeed the Messiah. In other words, the individual has, through the work of the Spirit, self-consciously perceived the truth about Jesus as Messiah, but he willfully turns away from it anyway. Such blasphemy, according to Jesus, can never be forgiven, and it undercuts the very possibility of receiving salvation.

Conclusion

Blasphemy against the Spirit is quite a serious charge. In order to make that charge against anyone, one must, first of all, know what the gospel message is. That is, the message that proclaims the truth about Jesus as Messiah. Also, one must be able to determine whether the accused has self-consciously perceived the gospel message, but has knowingly turned away from it. This is, of course, true in the case of the Pharisees. In Matthew 12, the truth of Jesus as Messiah when revealed by the Spirit is quite obvious for all to see, but the Pharisees choose to turn away from it anyway. Although they know the source of Jesus’ power is from the Spirit, but they willfully attribute it to Satan.

The Pharisees are certainly not alone in this behavior. The rest of the NT bears witness to those who have turned away from the gospel even though the Holy Spirit had enlightened them. As Hebrews 6:4-6 tells us, these people may have perceived the truth of the gospel, participated in the fellowship of believers, and may have even enjoyed the benefits of the church. But salvation was never real for them in the first place. In 1 John 2:19, John tells his readers about some who have departed from the church, thus showing that they never really belonged in it. 

However, the scenario of the preachers at the introduction is entirely different. As this study shows, blaspheming the Spirit is not about criticizing preachers. It is not about being skeptical of modern-day signs and wonders. But it is really about willfully turning away from the gospel after having been enlightened by the Holy Spirit. To put it plainly, it is about committing apostasy. Thus, unless the followers of these preachers know for certain that you have willfully departed from the gospel message, these people have instead, without a doubt, used Matthew 12:31-32 in a most inappropriate way.

---

[1] See Matt. 12:14: “But the Pharisees went out and conspired against him, how to destroy him” (ESV).

[2] Michael J. Wilkins, Matthew, NIV Application Commentary, ed. Terry C. Muck (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), Electronic ed., Pradis, observes that the Pharisees’ accusation is “a most serious charge, because practicing magic under the influence of Satan was a capital offense, punishable by stoning.”

[3] Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1-13, Word Biblical Commentary vol. 33A, ed. Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker (Dallas: Word Books, 1993), Electronic ed., Libronix , suggests the phrase διὰ τοῦτο does not link vv. 31-32 with v. 30 but “with the entire preceding episode concerning the charge of the Pharisees that Jesus cast out demons by the power of Beelzebul.”

[4] I. H. Marshall, “Son of Man,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight (Downers Grove: IVP, 1992), 775.

[5] Marshall, Son of Man, 777.

[6] Ibid.

[7] I. H. Marshall, “Jesus Christ,” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. T. D. Alexander and Brian S. Rosner (Downers Grove: IVP, 2000), 597. See Mk. 13:26; 14:62; Lk. 12:8-10.

[8] Ibid.

[9] “βλασφημία” in BDAG Lexicon, Bibleworks 7.

[10] Hermann Wolfgang Beyer, “βλασφημέω, βλασφημία, βλάσφημος” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, trans. Geoffrey. W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964-c1976), Electronic ed., Libronix.

[11] Beyer.

[12] Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 116-118, rightly points out that the phrase τοῦ πνεύματος in Matt. 12:31 is an objective genitive. To identify an objective genitive, the verbal noun in the expression should be converted into a verbal form and the genitive is turned into a direct object. When this method of identification is applied to the expression τοῦ πνεύματος βλασφημία, the phrase “blaspheming the Spirit” is produced. Thus, the expression τοῦ πνεύματος βλασφημία is best translated as “blasphemy against the Spirit.”

[13] D. A. Carson, Matthew, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan), Electronic ed., Pradis, notes that in one interpretation of Matt. 12:31-32, “[t]he blasphemy against the Son of Man is rejection of him by nonbelievers, and this is clearly forgivable when a person becomes a Christian. But blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is committed by a Christian (Christians after Pentecost would understand that only believers enjoy the Spirit) and is equivalent either to apostasy or to rejection of a Christian prophet's inspired message. For this there is no forgiveness.” Another interpretation “ties blasphemy against the Holy Spirit to the ‘age of miracles’ when the Spirit's power could be directly perceived—and rejected.”

[14] John Legg, The King and his kingdom (Darlington: Evangelical Press, 2004), 232, rightly points out that it cannot be that “the Holy Spirit is seen as superior to the Son of God.” Carson also similarly notes that the distinction cannot be that “the Son of Man is less important than the Spirit, or that the first sin is prebaptismal and the second postbaptismal.”

[15] Hagner.

[16] Legg, 232.

[17] Hagner.

[18] Carson notes that the best interpretation treats Matt. 12:31-32 “in its setting during Jesus' life. The Pharisees have been attributing to Satan the work of the Spirit and have been doing so, as Jesus makes plain, in such a way as to reveal that they speak, not, out of ignorance or unbelief, but out of a ‘conscious disputing of the indisputable.’”

[19] Carson comments that the blasphemy against the Spirit is the rejection of the truth “in full awareness that that is exactly what one is doing—thoughtfully, willfully, and self-consciously rejecting the work of the Spirit even though there can be no other explanation of Jesus' exorcisms than that.”