Anonymous

Difference between revisions of "Blasphemy"

From BiblePortal Wikipedia

Blasphemy (view source)

Revision as of 17:56, 15 October 2021

47,006 bytes added ,  17:56, 15 October 2021
no edit summary
Tag: Reverted
Tag: Manual revert
 
Line 1: Line 1:
== Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament <ref name="term_55178" /> ==
== Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary <ref name="term_80290" /> ==
<p> <b> [[Blasphemy]] </b> <b> ( </b> βλασφημία; for derivation of word see Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible, vol. i. p. 305a).—This word is used in the Gospels, as in other parts of the NT, for abusive speech generally, as well as for language that is insulting to God. Thus we read of ‘an evil eye, blasphemy ( Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 railing), pride,’ etc. (&nbsp;Mark 7:22), where the position of the word indicates human relations. The evil eye is followed by the evil tongue, the one by look and the other by speech expressing malignity towards a fellow-man. Two questions concerning blasphemy come up in the Gospels, viz. the teaching of Jesus Christ on the subject, and the charge of blasphemy brought against our Lord. </p> <p> <b> 1. The teaching of Jesus Christ concerning blasphemy. </b> —Using the term in the general sense, our Lord does not always formally distinguish between insulting speech with regard to God and abusive language towards men. βλασφημία in any application of it is sin. As railing against our fellow-men, it comes in a catalogue of sins together with the most heinous—‘murders, adulteries,’ etc. (&nbsp;Mark 7:22). In this connexion it is treated as one of the ‘evil things’ that ‘proceed from within, and defile the man.’ Thus it is taken to be the expression of a corrupt heart, and as such a defilement of the person who gives vent to it. Nevertheless it is not beyond the reach of pardon. With one exception all revilings may be forgiven (&nbsp;Mark 3:28-29, &nbsp;Matthew 12:31). The comprehensive sentence must include blasphemy against God, although that is not expressly mentioned. In &nbsp;Matthew 12:32 there is a reference to blasphemy against the Son of Man, and in both cases the unpardonable sin of blasphemy against the [[Holy]] Ghost is mentioned; but in neither case is there any reference to blasphemy against the Father. Perhaps the safest thing is to say that this was not in mind at the time, so that no direct pronouncement was made concerning it; and, further, it is to be observed that Trinitarian distinctions do not appear in these teachings of Jesus. Jesus is here the ‘Son of Man,’ not ‘the Son,’ <i> i.e. </i> of God, and the Holy Spirit is God in His manifested activity. Still, it must be implicitly contained in St. Mark’s emphatic sentence, ‘ <i> All </i> their sins … and their blasphemies <i> wherewith soever they shall blaspheme </i> (ὅσα ἂν βλασφημήσωσιν).’ </p> <p> To ‘speak a word against the Son of Man’ is taken as one form of the blasphemy or reviling. Here, therefore, the word is not used in its relation to God. It does not stand for what we now understand by ‘blasphemy’ in our narrower sense of the word. Jesus is not here standing on the ground of His divinity, to insult which would be blasphemy in this modern sense. He is speaking of Himself as seen among men, and referring to personal insults. But, since the term ‘the Son of Man’ appears to be a veiled reference to His Messiahship, for Himself and for the enlightened among His followers He must have meant that those who insulted Him, even though He was the Christ, were not beyond pardon; cf. ‘Father, forgive them,’ etc. (&nbsp;Luke 23:34, om. BD*, etc.). Some doubt, however, is thrown on this reference to ‘the Son of Man’ because (1) it does not occur in the Mk. parallel passage; (2) in Mk. but not in Mt. the phrase ‘the sons of men’ occurs in an earlier part of the saying (&nbsp;Mark 3:28). </p> <p> The nature of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost (&nbsp;Matthew 12:22-32, &nbsp;Mark 3:29, &nbsp;Luke 12:10) must be learnt from the context. This excludes such notions as rejection of the gospel (Iren.), denial of the divinity of Christ (Athan.), mortal sin after baptism (Origen), persistence in sin till death (August.). The form of the blasphemy is given in the words ‘because they said, He hath an unclean spirit,’ and the occasion of it was Jesus’ casting out of demons. Jesus declares that this is done ‘by the Spirit of God’ (&nbsp;Matthew 12:28), or ‘by the finger of God’ (&nbsp;Luke 11:20). To ascribe this action to [[Beelzebub]] is to be guilty of, or to approach the guilt of, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, because it is treating the Holy Spirit as Beelzebub. Jesus did not expressly say that the scribes who put forward this Beelzebub theory of His work had actually committed this sin. He judged by thought and intention, not by outward utterance. A prejudiced, ignorant, hasty, superficial utterance of the calumny would not contain the essence of the sin. This must be a conscious, intentional insult. If one mistakes a saint for a knave, and addresses him accordingly, he is not really guilty of insulting him, for it is not actually the saint but the knave whom he has in mind. If the presence of the Holy Spirit was not recognized, there could be no blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. But when it was perceived and yet deliberately treated as evil, the action would indicate a wilful reversal of the dictates of conscience. Our Lord warns His hearers that such a sin cannot be forgiven either in the present age—the pre-Messianic, or in the age to come—the Messianic, that is, as we should say, the [[Christian]] age. The condition of such a person will be that he is guilty (ἔνοχος) of an eternal (αἰωνίου) sin (so Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 of &nbsp;Mark 3:29, following אBL, etc., ἁμαρτήματος; not ‘damnation,’ as in Authorized Version, after the [[Syrian]] reading ἁμαρτήματος;, A, etc.). This cannot well mean ‘a sin that persists, a fixed disposition,’ as Dr. Salmond understands it, because (1) the Greek word ἁμαρτήματος; stands for an act, not a state; (2) there is nothing in the context to indicate persistency in the blasphemy; (3) the [[Jewish]] current conception was that a sin once committed remained on the sinner till it was atoned for or forgiven. He had to bear his sin. Therefore one who was never forgiven would have to bear his sin eternally, and so would be said to have an eternal sin. Wellhausen understands it to be equivalent to eternal punishment (‘schuldig ewiger Sünde, d. i. ewiger Strafe,’ <i> Evang. Marci </i> , 28). </p> <p> At the same time, while this must be understood as the correct exegesis of the words, the saying should be interpreted in harmony with the spirit of Christ. Now it is characteristic of legalism and the letter to make a solitary exception, depending on one external act. The Spirit of Christ is concerned with character rather than with specific deeds, and it is contrary to His spirit that one specific deed should be singled out for exclusion from mercy. Then, elsewhere, the breadth of His gospel indicates that no genuine seeker would be rejected. Therefore we must understand Him to mean either (1) that to be guilty of such a sin a man must be so hardened that he never would repent, or (2) that such a sin cannot be overlooked, forgotten, and swallowed up in the general flood of mercy. It must come up for judgment. Against (1) and for (2) is the fact that our Lord says nothing of the offender’s disposition, but only refers to the sin, its heinous character, and consequent never-to-be-denied or forgotten ill-desert. See, further, art. Unpardonable Sin. </p> <p> <b> 2. The charge of blasphemy brought against Jesus Christ. </b> —This charge was brought against our Lord on three occasions—two recorded in the Synoptics and one in the Fourth Gospel. In all of these cases the alleged blasphemy is against God, actual blasphemy in our sense of the word. The first instance is at the cure of the paralytic who had been let down through the roof (&nbsp;Matthew 9:3, &nbsp;Mark 2:7, &nbsp;Luke 5:21). Jesus had just said to the sufferer, ‘Thy sins are forgiven thee.’ Upon this the scribes and [[Pharisees]] who were present complained that He was speaking blasphemies because only God could forgive sins, that is to say, that He was arrogating to Himself a [[Divine]] prerogative. In His answer He distinctly claimed this right on the ground of His enigmatic title of ‘the Son of Man,’ and held it to be confirmed by His cure of the paralytic. The second occasion is that recorded by St. John, where the [[Jews]] declare that their attempt to stone Jesus was ‘for blasphemy,’ adding ‘because that thou, being a man makest thyself God’ (&nbsp;John 10:33). This was just after He had said, ‘I and the Father are one (ἕν).’ The third occasion is at the trial of Jesus. According to &nbsp;Matthew 26:65 and &nbsp;Mark 14:63-64 when Jesus, after being adjured by the high priest to declare if He were the Christ, declared that they would ‘see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven,’ the high priest treated this as blasphemy, rending his garments as a token of honor at the words. Yet the claim was not for more than the Book of [[Enoch]] assigned to the Messiah. But the [[Messiah]] in that [[Apocalyptic]] book is a heavenly being. Such a being [[Caiaphas]] would understand Jesus to claim to be, and he reckoned the profession of such a claim blasphemous. This was the formal ground of the condemnation of Jesus to death by the Sanhedrin. The first charge, that of threatening to destroy the [[Temple]] and rebuild it in three days, had broken down because of the inconsistency of the witnesses. The second charge is suddenly sprung upon, Jesus by the high priest on the ground of His words at the council; and, on this account, as guilty of blasphemy, He was condemned to death, although it was useless to cite the words before Pilate, who would have dismissed the case as [[Gallio]] at [[Corinth]] dismissed what he regarded as ‘a question about words and names’ (&nbsp;Acts 18:15). Therefore a third charge, never mentioned in the Jewish trial,— <i> laesae majestatis </i> , treason against Caesar,—was concocted for use at the Roman trial. </p> <p> It is to be observed that there is one common character in all these accusations of blasphemy brought against Jesus. He is never accused of direct blasphemy, speaking insulting words about God. The alleged blasphemy is indirect, in each case claiming more or less Divine rights and powers for Himself. </p> <p> Lastly, it may be noted that &nbsp;Luke 22:65 Authorized Version has the word ‘blasphemously’ for the way in which the mockers spoke of Jesus; but Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 has ‘reviling,’ which is the evident meaning. There is no reference to our narrower sense of blasphemy as insulting the Divine; the word (ἁμαρτήματος;) is used in the common wider sense. </p> <p> Literature.—S. J. Andrews, <i> Life of Our Lord </i> , 505–514; Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible, art. ‘Blasphemy’; Cremer, <i> Bibl.-Theol. Lex. s.vv. </i> βλασφημία, βλασφημὲω; and in particular on blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, Martensen, <i> Christian Ethics </i> , ii. p. 123ff.; Gloag, <i> Exegetical Studies </i> , p. 1 ff.; <i> Expositor </i> , 2nd ser. iii. [1882] p. 321 ff.; A. Maclaren, <i> Christ’s Musts </i> , 44–54. </p> <p> W. F. Adeney. </p>
<p> βλασφημια , properly denotes <em> calumny, detraction, reproachful </em> or <em> abusive language, </em> against whomsoever it be vented. That βλασφημια and its conjugates are very often applied, says Dr. Campbell, to reproaches not aimed against God, is evident from the following passages: &nbsp;Matthew 12:31-32; &nbsp;Matthew 27:39; &nbsp;Mark 15:29; &nbsp;Luke 22:65; &nbsp;Luke 23:39; &nbsp;Romans 3:8; &nbsp;Romans 14:16; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 4:13; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 10:30; &nbsp;Ephesians 4:31; &nbsp;1 Timothy 6:4; &nbsp;Titus 3:2; &nbsp;1 Peter 4:14; &nbsp;Judges 1:9-10; &nbsp;Acts 6:11; &nbsp;Acts 6:13; &nbsp;2 Peter 2:10-11; in the much greater part of which the English translators, sensible that they could admit no such application, have not used the words <em> blaspheme </em> or <em> blasphemy, </em> but <em> rail, revile, speak evil, </em> &c. In one of the passages quoted, a reproachful charge brought even against the devil is called κρισις βλασφημιας , &nbsp;Judges 1:9; and rendered by them, "railing accusation." The import of the word βλασφημια is <em> maledicentia, </em> in the largest acceptation; comprehending all sorts of verbal abuse, imprecation, reviling, and calumny. And let it be observed, that when such abuse is mentioned as uttered against God, there is probably no change made in the signification of the word: the change is only in the application; that is, in the reference to a different object. The idea conveyed in the explanation now given is always included, against whomsoever the crime be committed. In this manner every term is understood that is applicable to both God and man. Thus the meaning of the word <em> disobey </em> is the same, whether we speak of disobeying God or of disobeying man. The same may be said of <em> believe, honour, fear, </em> &c. As, therefore, the sense of the term is the same, though differently applied, what is essential to constitute the crime of detraction in the one case, is essential also in the other. But it is essential to this crime, as commonly understood, when committed by one man against another, that there be in the injurious person the will or disposition to detract from the person abused. Mere mistake in regard to character, especially when the mistake is not conceived by him who entertains it to lessen the character, nay, is supposed, however erroneously, to exalt it, is never construed by any into the crime of defamation. Now, as blasphemy is in its essence the same crime, but immensely aggravated by being committed against an object infinitely superior to man, what is fundamental to the very existence of the crime will be found in this, as in every other species which comes under the general name. There can be no blasphemy, therefore, where there is not an impious purpose to derogate from the [[Divine]] Majesty, and to alienate the minds of others from the love and reverence of God. The blasphemer is no other than the calumniator of [[Almighty]] God. To constitute the crime, it is as necessary that this species of calumny be intentional, He must be one, therefore, who by his impious talk endeavours to inspire others with the same irreverence towards the Deity, or perhaps, abhorrence of him, which he indulges in himself. And though, for the honour of human nature, it is to be hoped that very few arrive at this enormous guilt, it ought not to be dissembled, that the habitual profanation of the name and attributes of God by common swearing, is but too manifest an approach toward it. There is not an entire coincidence: the latter of these vices may be considered as resulting solely from the defect of what is good in principle and disposition; the former from the acquisition of what is evil in the extreme: but there is a close connection between them, and an insensible gradation from the one to the other. To accustom one's self to treat the Sovereign of the universe with irreverent familiarity, is the first step; malignly to arraign his attributes, and revile his providence, is the last. The first divine law published against it, "He that blasphemeth the name of the Lord," (or <em> Jehovah, </em> as it is in the Hebrew) "shall be put to death," &nbsp; Leviticus 24:16 , when considered along with the incidents that occasioned it, suggests a very atrocious offence in words, no less than abuse or imprecations vented against the Deity. For, in what way soever the crime of the man there mentioned be interpreted,—whether as committed against the true God, the God of Israel, or against any of the false gods whom his [[Egyptian]] father worshipped,—the law in the words now quoted is sufficiently explicit; and the circumstances of the story plainly show, that the words which he had used were derogatory from the Godhead, and shocking to the hearers. And if we add to this the only other memorable instance in sacred history, namely, that of Rabshakeh, it will lead us to conclude that it is solely a malignant attempt, in words, to lessen men's reverence of the true God, and, by vilifying his perfections, to prevent their placing confidence in him, which is called in [[Scripture]] <em> blasphemy, </em> when the word is employed to denote a sin committed directly against God. This was manifestly the attempt of Rabshakeh, when he said, "Neither let [[Hezekiah]] make you trust in the Lord," (the word is <em> Jehovah, </em> ) "saying, [[Jehovah]] will surely deliver us. Hath any of the gods of the nations delivered his land out of the hand of the king of Assyria? Where are the gods of [[Hamath]] and of Arpad? Where are the gods of Sepharvaim, Hena, and Iva? Have they delivered [[Samaria]] out of my hand? Who are they, among all the gods of the countries, that have delivered their country out of mine hand, that Jehovah should deliver [[Jerusalem]] out of mine hand?" &nbsp;2 Kings 18:30; &nbsp;2 Kings 18:33-35 . </p> <p> <strong> 2. </strong> It will naturally occur to inquire, what that is, in particular, which our Lord denominates "blasphemy against the [[Holy]] Spirit," &nbsp; Matthew 12:31-32; &nbsp;Mark 3:28-29; &nbsp;Luke 12:10 . But without entering minutely into the discussion of this question, it may suffice here to observe, that this blasphemy is certainly not of the constructive kind, but direct, manifest, and malignant. First, it is mentioned as comprehended under the same genus with abuse against men, and contradistinguished only by the object. Secondly, it is farther explained by being called <em> speaking against </em> in both cases: ος αν ειπη λογον κατα του ανθρωπου ,—ος δ ' αν ειπν κατα του πνευματος του αγιου . "Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man."—"Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost." The expressions are the same, in effect, in all the [[Evangelists]] who mention it, and imply such an opposition as is both intentional and malevolent. This cannot have been the case of all who disbelieved the mission of Jesus, and even decried his miracles; many of whom, we have reason to think, were afterward converted by the Apostles. But it was the wretched case of some who, instigated by worldly ambition and avarice, slandered what they knew to be the cause of God; and, against conviction, reviled his work as the operation of evil spirits. This view of the sin against the Holy Ghost is confirmed by the circumstances under which our Lord spoke. </p> <p> If we consider the Scripture account of this sin, nothing can be plainer than that it is to be understood of the Pharisees' imputing the miracles wrought by the power of the Holy Ghost to the power of the devil; for our Lord had just healed one possessed of a devil, and upon this the [[Pharisees]] gave this malicious turn to the miracle. This led our [[Saviour]] to discourse on the sin of blasphemy. The Pharisees were the persons charged with the crime: the sin itself manifestly consisted in ascribing what was done by the finger of God to the agency of the devil; and the reason, therefore, why our Lord pronounced it unpardonable, is plain; because, by withstanding the evidence of miracles, they resisted the strongest means of conviction, and that wilfully and malignantly; and, giving way to their passions, opprobriously treated that Holy Spirit whom they ought to have adored. </p> <p> From all which it will probably follow, that no person can now be guilty of the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, in the sense in which our Saviour originally intended it; but there may be sins which bear a very near resemblance to it. This appears from the case of the apostates mentioned in the [[Epistle]] to the Hebrews, to whom "no more sacrifice for sins" is said to remain; whose defection, however, is not represented so much as a direct sin against the Holy Ghost as against Christ, whom the apostate [[Jews]] blasphemed in the synagogues. It implied, however, a high offence against the Holy Spirit also, with whose gifts they had, probably, been endowed, and their conduct must be considered, if not the same sin as that committed by the Pharisees, yet as a </p> <p> <em> consenting </em> with it, and thus as placing them in nearly, if not altogether, the same desperate condition. Even apostacy in the present day, although a most aggravated and perilous offence, cannot be committed with circumstances of equal aggravation to those which were found in the case of the persons mentioned by St. Paul; and it may be laid down as certain, for the relief of those who may be tempted to think that they have committed the unpardonable sin, that their horror of it, and the trouble which the very apprehension causes them, are the sure proofs that they are mistaken. But although there may be now fearful approaches to the unpardonable offence, it is to be remembered that there may be many dangerous and fatal sins against the Holy Ghost, which are not <em> the </em> sin against him, which has no forgiveness. </p>
          
          
==
== Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament <ref name="term_55177" /> ==
<p> (βλασφημία, vb. βλασφημεῖν, adj. and noun βλάσφημος; perhaps derived from βλάπτειν, ‘to injure,’ and φήμη, ‘speech’) </p> <
          
          
==References ==
==References ==
<references>
<references>


<ref name="term_55178"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hastings-dictionary-of-the-new-testament/blasphemy+(2) Blasphemy from Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament]</ref>
<ref name="term_80290"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/watson-s-biblical-theological-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_55177"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hastings-dictionary-of-the-new-testament/blasphemy Blasphemy from Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_17674"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/baker-s-evangelical-dictionary-of-biblical-theology/blasphemy Blasphemy from Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_49871"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hastings-dictionary-of-the-bible/blasphemy Blasphemy from Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_39064"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/holman-bible-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Holman Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_34578"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/fausset-s-bible-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Fausset's Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_47577"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/hawker-s-poor-man-s-concordance-and-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Hawker's Poor Man's Concordance And Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_18441"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/bridgeway-bible-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Bridgeway Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_19388"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/charles-buck-theological-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Charles Buck Theological Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_69695"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/people-s-dictionary-of-the-bible/blasphemy Blasphemy from People's Dictionary of the Bible]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_71743"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/smith-s-bible-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Smith's Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_30831"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/easton-s-bible-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Easton's Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_65348"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/morrish-bible-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Morrish Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_58654"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/king-james-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from King James Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_15612"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/american-tract-society-bible-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from American Tract Society Bible Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_93839"> [https://bibleportal.com/dictionary/webster-s-dictionary/blasphemy Blasphemy from Webster's Dictionary]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_25911"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/cyclopedia-of-biblical-theological-and-ecclesiastical-literature/blasphemy Blasphemy from Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_2036"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/international-standard-bible-encyclopedia/blasphemy Blasphemy from International Standard Bible Encyclopedia]</ref>
       
<ref name="term_15218"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/kitto-s-popular-cyclopedia-of-biblial-literature/blasphemy Blasphemy from Kitto's Popular Cyclopedia of Biblial Literature]</ref>
          
          
<ref name="term_25912"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/cyclopedia-of-biblical-theological-and-ecclesiastical-literature/blasphemy+(2) Blasphemy from Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature]</ref>
<ref name="term_69161"> [https://bibleportal.com/encyclopedia/the-nuttall-encyclopedia/blasphemy Blasphemy from The Nuttall Encyclopedia]</ref>
          
          
</references>
</references>
Retrieved from "http://wiki.bibleportal.com/page/Special:MobileDiff/374154"