The word here translated " eternal " (ala)vio<:) is the adjective formed from the word " age " or " world " (alcov) of the previous phrase. In a great many places where this adjective may be rendered " everlasting," it is impossible not to feel that this does not give the whole or the exact meaning. This is very notice- able in such profound sayings of our Lord as " Whoso eateth my flesh hath eternal life," " This is life eternal, that they might know thee " ; " He that hath my word, hath eternal life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death into life " ; " Thou hast the words of eternal life." All such expressions rather convey a thought somewhat like that of St. Paul's " Hidden with Christ in God," life not of the world, but above and beyond temporal and worldly things ; not so much the endlessness of eternity, as its apartness from time. Something in the same way, " an eternal sin " can hardly mean an everlasting sin, but rather a sin which has in it a living power of evil, the bounds of which cannot be prescribed.
^ We regard the argument against endless punishment drawn
I from a/wv and aluivwg as a purely verbal one, which does not touch the heart of the question at issue. We append several utterances of its advocates. The Christian Union : " Eternal ' punishment is punishment in eternity, not throughout eternity ; as temporal punishment is punishment in time, not throughout i'time." Westcott: "Eternal life is not an endless duration of • *'being in time, but being of which time is not a measure. We have indeed no powers to grasp the idea except through forms and images of sense. These must be used, but we must not trans- fer them to realities of another order."
Farrar holds that dldiog, " everlasting," which occurs but twice in the New Testament (Eom. i. 20 and Jude 6), is not a synonym of aiuviog, " eternal," but the direct antithesis of it ; the former being the unrealisable conception of endless time, and the latter referring to a state from which our imperfect human conception of time is absolutely excluded. Whiton, Gloria Patri, 145, claims
ST. MARK 123
that the perpetual immanence of God in conscience makes recovery possible after death ; yet he speaks of the possibility that in the incorrigible sinner conscience may become extinct. To all these views we may reply with Schaff, Church History, ii. 66 — " After the general judgment we have nothing revealed but the boundless prospect of seonian life and seonian death.^
III. The Meaning.
1. How is it that sin against the Son of Man may be forgiven, while blasphemy against the Holy Ghost may not ? The Son of Man, says Dalman,^ here refers to the Messiah in His estate of humiliation. " The primary form of the utterance is seen in Mark, who merely contrasts blasphemy in general with blasphemy against the Spirit which inspired Jesus (iii. 28 f.). Luke xii. 1 0 speaks of blasphemy of the ' Son of man ' and of the ' Spirit' ; Matt. xii. 32 is similar, but the statement to this effect is annexed to another, which corresponds to the form found in Mark. It is impossible that Matthew and Luke should here intend to make a distinction between two Persons of the
; JGodhead, as if it were a venial sin to blaspheme the ' Son.' The
distinction is between Jesus as man and the Divine Spirit working
■ ' j.«_(— — ~— — ^-„,__.<.^ •'- °
j '.through Him. Invective against the manJesus may be forgiven ; \ Iblasphemy against the Divine power inherent in Him is unpardon- ] able, because it is blasphemy against God."
2. How then may one be guilty of this unpardonable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost ? The conditions of obtaining pardon are three, namely — Confession, i.e. acknowledgment of sin ; Repentance, or hearty sorrow for sin ; and Faith, or trust in the sinner's Saviour. Now, how can these conditions be ful- filled ? How are we brought into a state in which we can realise the willingness to acknowledge our transgressions, the hearty sorrow which breaks us down on account of our sin, and the trust which helps us to believe that Jesus can .forgive ? We can be brought into this condition only by one Power, through the agency of one Person, the Holy Spirit of God. The Holy
^ A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology, iii. 1046. » The Words of Jesus, 254.
124 THE GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE
Spirit of God must teach our consciences, the Holy Spirit of God must gain control over our wills ; and only through the teaching of the Holy Spirit in our souls are we made able or willing to acknowledge our sin, repent of our sin, and believe in our Saviour. This Holy Scripture teaches us. But it is possible for us to reject and blaspheme the whole testimony of the Spirit of God ; it is possible for us, not only to reject what the Holy Spirit teaches us, but even to say, in the wilfulness of our depraved nature, that what the Holy Spirit says is truth is untruth, and what the Holy Spirit says is light is darkness. Progression along this awful pathway is marked in Bible language by three words. First, there is " Grieving the_Spint^of_God." The second / • ■, >