Jonas was; whereupon he tells them, ver, 38, &c. that that only sign more they should have, (though they were a malicious and adulterous generation,) and when that was witnessed by the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles, and the preaching, and miracles wrought by that descent, then they that come not in to Christ shall never be forgiven, nor be capable of any further means of working repentance in them, this being indeed the last that should ever be allowed them.' Annot. in loc.

'He that shall resist the Holy Spirit, (see note on Matt. xii. 32,) there is no pardon to be had for him without particular repentance and reformation.' Par. in Mark

iii. 29.

'Here are added by St. Luke words spoken by Christ on another occasion, Matt. xii. 32, and seem to be applied by him to the aggravation of the sin of the Pharisees, on occasion of whom this whole passage from verse 1, was delivered; that they that by the meanness of Christ's human appearance are tempted to deny him to be the Messias, and do accordingly oppose him, may have some place for pardon, and be in some degree excusable, but they that attribute his works of power, (his miracles done visibly by the finger of God,) to the working of the devil in him, there is no place of excuse and mercy for them, if they do not, upon the resurrection of Christ, and the Apostles preaching it to them, return and repent, and effectually receive Christ.' Par. in Luke xii. 10.

2. GILPIN. Nobody can suppose, considering the whole tenor of christianity, that there can be any sin, which on repentance may not be forgiven. This therefore seems only a strong way of expressing the difficulty of such repentance, and the impossibility of forgiveness without it. Such an expression occurs, Matt. xix. 24, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven; that is, it is very difficult. That the Pharisees were not beyond the reach of forgiveness on their repentance, seems to be plain from ver. 41, where the repentance of the men of Nineveh is held out to them for an example,' Note in loc.

3. GROTIUS. On ver. 31, Grotius says, 'This form of speech is a common Hebraism: the Jews often said, this shall be, and that shall not be; not intending however to affirm absolutely that the first should be, (and of course not affirming absolutely that the last should not be,) but merely to show that the last was much more unlikely or difficult, than the first. The sense,' says he, is this: any crime which may be committed, even all calumnies, (or blasphemies,) which hold the first rank among crimes, may be forgiven more readily than the calumny, (or blasphemy,) against the Spirit of God. See a similar comparison, 1 Sam. ii. 25.' Annot. in loc.

In the place here referred to, Grotius follows the reading of the Vulgate, (which is similar to that of the LXX., but different from our English version,) thus: 'If a man sin against man, God may be appeased towards him; but if a man sin against God, who shall pray for him?' This might seem to imply that all sins against men should be forgiven, while no sin against God could receive forgiveness; and in this respect the passage is similar to that which is the subject of this section. But Grotius expresses a different opinion of its import. He says

'All sins indeed are offensive to God, but chiefly those which are committed directly against his Majesty. See Acts v. 5, and what I have said on Matt. xii. 31. In relation to such crimes, however, God does not always hear (or regard) intercessions, as appears from chap. iii. 14, Ezek. viii. 18, Jer. vii. 16, 1 John v. 16.' Annot. in 1 Sam. ii. 25.

His meaning seems to be this;-God will more readily extend forgiveness to those who sin against their fellow men, than to those who sin directly against him. And the first member of the text is not to be understood as an absolute affirmation, nor the last, as an absolute negation; but a comparison between the two is expressed, after the manner of the Hebrews.

4. PEARCE. Neither in this world, &c. Rather,

neither in this age, nor in the age to come: i. e., neither in this age when the law of Moses subsists, nor in that also, when the kingdom of heaven, which is at hand, shall succeed to it. This is a strong way of expressing how difficult a thing it was for such a sinner to obtain pardon. The Greek word aion, seems to signify age here, as it often does in the New Testament, (see chap. xiii. 40, xxiv. 3, Col. i. 26, Eph. iii. 5, 21,) and according to its most proper signification. If this be so, then this age means the Jewish one, the age while their law subsisted, and was in force; and the age to come, (see Heb. vi. 5, Eph. ii. 7,) means that under the Christian dispensation. Under the Jewish law, there was no forgiveness for wilful and presumptuous sins: concerning them it is said, Num. xv. 30, 31, The soul, which doeth aught presumptuously, the same reproacheth the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from from among his people, because he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath broken his commandments. See to the same purpose, Num. xxxv. 31, Lev. xx. 10, 1 Sam. ii. 25. With regard to the seculum futurum, the age to come, or the Christian dispensation, no forgiveness could be expected for such as these Pharisees were; because, when they blasphemed the Holy Spirit of God, by which Jesus wrought his miracles, they rejected the only means of forgiveness, which was the merit of his death, applied to men by faith, and which, under Christianity, was the only sacrifice that could atone for such a sin: in this sense, (as things then stood with them,) their sin was an unpardonable one. But then it is not to be concluded from hence, that, if they repented of this blasphemy, they could not obtain forgiveness. The observation of Athanasius, vol. i. p. 237, Ed. Col. is very material. He says, Christ does not say to him that blasphemeth and repenteth; but to him that blasphemeth; and therefore he means, to him that continueth in his blasphemy; for with God there is no sin that is unpardonable.

6

And the truth of this observation will appear from the following instances: Jesus said, in Matt. x. 33, Whoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father, where the threatening is as strong as this in the

case of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost; and yet, when Peter shortly afterwards denied Jesus before men three times, joining oaths and curses with his denials, yet, upon his repenting and weeping bitterly, he was not only forgiven, but continued in his apostleship. Again, whenJesus was on the cross, some of the rulers derided him, saying, he saved others, let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God, Luke xxiii. 35. By which words, it appears that they acknowledged Jesus to have wrought miracles, and yet rejected him, denying that he wrought them by the holy spirit of God; and yet Jesus prayed to his Father that they might be forgiven, Luke xxiii. 34. To this may be added, that in this chapter, ver. 38—41, those Pharisees who had blasphemed against the Holy Ghost asked for a sign, and our Saviour gave one to them, viz., the sign of the prophet Jonas; and what could this sign be given for, unless for their conviction, and for disposing them to repent, and in consequence of this to be forgiven? From all which, it may (I think,) be concluded, that to speak against the Holy Ghost (as those Pharisees did,) was therefore not to be forgiven in that age, or in the age to come, because no means of obtaining forgiveness for it was to be found, either in the Jewish law, or under the Christian dispensation; but that, however, upon their repentance, they might be forgiven, and admitted to the divine favor.' Com. and Note in loc.

5. WAKEFIeld. 'Age; aioni; i. e., the Jewish dispensation, which was then in being, or the Christian, which was going to be established. But an attentive reader of the scriptures will perceive, that, under this sort of phraseology, a comparison is intended to be made, as if he had said-Though the Christian religion is a dispensation of mercy, this sin shall no more be forgiven by the laws of the gospel, that it is by the law of Moses, under which the punishment was death, Lev. xxiv. 16.' Note in loc.

6. ROSENMULLER. This author closes a long note on the passage thus::

The sense of these words of Jesus would be this :

I will rather endure any other injury whatever, than excuse and pardon this impiety.' Scholia in loc.

7. CLARKE. Neither in this world, &c. Though I follow the common translation, yet I am fully satisfied the meaning of the words is, neither in this dispensation, viz., the Jewish, nor in that which is to come, viz., the Christian. Olam ha-bo, the world to come, is a constant phrase for the times of the Messiah, in the Jewish writers. The sin here spoken of by our Lord ranks high in the catalogue of presumptuous sins, for which there was no forgiveness under the Mosaic dispensation. See Num. XV. 30, 31, xxxv. 31, Lev. xx. 10, 1 Sam. ii. 25. When our Lord says that such a sin hath no forgiveness, is he not to be understood as meaning that the crime shall be punished under the Christian dispensation as it was under the Jewish, viz., by the destruction of the body? And is not this the same mentioned 1 John i. 7, called there the sin unto death, i. e., a sin that was to be punished by the death of the body, while mercy might be extended to the soul? The punishment for presumptuous sins, under the Jewish law, to which our Lord evidently alludes, certainly did not extend to the damnation of the soul, though the body was destroyed; therefore I think that, though there was no such forgiveness to be extended to this crime as to absolve the man from the punishment of temporal death, yet, on repentance, mercy might be extended to the soul; and every sin may be repented of under the gospel dispensation.' Com. in loc.

The foregoing testimonies are sufficient to show that, orthodox commentators being judges, the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost does not necessarily involve the endless misery of the offender; but that, like other sins, it may be forgiven, on repentance.