The Pulpit Commentary — Mark — Volume 1 — Section 160

schola~ an~ the most_ eloquent theologians, it is better _that every one should be per- suaded m his own mind. We may, however, be permitted to state that view which has ~m?1end~d itself most _to our mind, and some grounds for the preference to which we think 1t entitled. The view held by the first class above mentioned appears to us on the whole the most tenable, for (1) it is most in harmony with the context ns it stands both in this Gospel and that of St. Matthew, The Pharisees had witness~d an undeniable miracle in the cure of a blind a.nd dumb demoniac ; but, instead of a.cknow- ledgi~g the_ finger of God in the miracul?us cure, they. ascribed it to complicity or ~llus1on ~th the power of darkness. This was a gratmtous and malicious calumny; 1t was a. sm of speech as well as of thought-a blasphemy, in fact, in the literal sense. The form which the sin is repres~nted as taking_ is that of speech, as appears plainly from the contrast between speakrng a word agarnst the Son of man and speaking against the Holy Ghost. Again, (2) the allegation of the second class, that the Holy Ghost was not given till after the Ascension, though quite true in reference to the disciples, does not apply to the Master, to whom the Spirit was given without measure from the first. Further, (3) the view of the third class, so ably advocated by Dr. Chalmers and ma.ny others, and which in substance was that held by Augustine appears too wide in extent and too general in its character; whereas the blasphemi against the Holy Spirit is something peculiar and special, and of rare occurrence. Besides, if the sin in question consisted in obstinate resistance to the gospel, continued till that resistance culminated in final unbelief, it would be little, if anything, different from sin in general which, by obstinate continua.nee therein, becomes unpardonable, and that, not from lack of cleansing power in the blood of Christ, nor from any peculiar aggravation, but solely on account of continued persistence therein. 5. Perilous approximations to this sin. That many have been unduly exercised and harassed by fancied guiltiness of this sin, is certain; that some have despaired or become melancholy on this account, is credible; that many have been driven to insanity by it we can scarcely believe. To a.ny who are troubled with anxious thoughts about the matter we may say that, according to the theories of the first and second classes, they could not have committed the same sin in kind,-a.s they did not, like the Pharisees, see the miracles wrought by our Lord, nor did they witness the supernatural operations of the Spirit aft.er his descent at Pent.ecost-whatever the degree of their sin may have been ; while, with respect to the third, the sin being that of continued resistance, they have only to abandon their dogged opposition, the abandonment of which their very anxiety proves to have become already a.n accomplished fact. To all, of whatever class of opinion, who a.re apprehensive-earnestly apprehensive and afraid of having committed this sin -their very uneasiness on that score is proof of their guiltlessness of the fancied crime, for these very upbra.idings of conscience prove incompatibility with commission of this sin. At the same time, there are approximations to this sin which we should most carefully guard against. A rejection of the truth of Scripture wilfully persisted in ; or trifling with the operations of the Holy Spirit in the heart; or ridicule of religion and opposition to its ordinances in genera.I; or hostility to Christianity in particular; or contempt, malevolence, and slander directed against God and the things of God, or against the Chnrch and people of God; or mockery of sacred things; or blasphemous suggestions harboured and indulged in-ea.eh of these involves an awfulness of crimi- nality and a fearfulness of guilt that betoken a considerable similarity or close approxi- ::nation to the heinousness of the unpardonable sin. We do not affirm that Bny of these is actually that sin, but only such an approach to the verge of the precipice 88 is sufficient to startle men to a sense of danger, and drive them back before they venture a step further. Alford, wbo makes the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost to be a state of wilful, determined opposition to the present power of the Holy Ghost, in which state or at least approaching very near to which the act of the Pharisees proved them to be, compares, among other Scriptures, Heb, vi. 4-8 and x. 26, 27. But the purport of the Iast-eited Scripture is that, in case the sacrifice of Christ is rejected, there is no other sacrifice available, all others having been done away, and consequently no other means of escape from the wrath of God ; while the former passage refers to apostasy so aggravated 88 to render restorati?n imP?ssible, because the persons guil~y. of it _fell away in spite of the clearest possible evidence to the truth of the Ohnstian fa.1th. Another Scripture frequently compared with that before us is 1 John v. 16. The sin cm, rv. 1--41,] THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MA.RK. 155