“And this is the confidence that we have in Him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, He heareth us: And if we know that He hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of Him. If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and He shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.”
1 Jn. 5:14-17
.
.
Subsection
Sin Against the Holy Spirit
Reformed vs. Aquinas: Sin unto Death
.
.
Order of Contents
What it is Not
Same as Sinning Against Holy Spirit 34+
Articles 6+
Books 3
Quotes 6
Early & Medieval Church
Westminster
Recognizing It 1
May Pray for Such? 4
Latin 6
Biblio 1
.
What the Sin unto Death is Not
This material supports the view that the sin unto death is the unforgiveable sin against the Holy Spirit (a dominant view amongst the puritans). Compare this with the section below, ‘On the View that one may Pray for one having Committed the Sin unto Death’.
.
Bible Verses
It is Not being a Viper, or the Chief of Sinners
Lk. 3:7-9 “Then said he [John the Baptist] to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, ‘O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father… every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.'”
1 Tim. 1:15 “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I [Paul] am chief.”
.
Not Ungodliness, being a Thief, Adulterer, Homosexual, Trans, Idolater, Alcoholic, etc.
Rom. 5:6 “For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.”
1 Cor. 6:9-11 “Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”
.
Not Presumptuous, High-Handed or Capital Crimes (Ex. 21:14; Num. 15:30; Dt. 17:12), or things Worthy of Death (Rom. 1:32)
Gen. 4:6-7 “And the Lord said unto Cain, ‘…If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.”
2 Sam. 11:14-15 “…David wrote a letter to Joab… saying, ‘Set ye Uriah in the forefront of the hottest battle, and retire ye from him, that he may be smitten, and die.'”
Ps. 51:1-2 “A Psalm of David. Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.”
Acts 8:9-13 “…there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria… of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries… Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized…”
1 Cor. 6:9-11 “Be not deceived: neither… idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind… shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”
1 Tim. 1:13 “[I Paul] Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.”
.
Not Living under Light & Leading in Rebelling against the Lord’s Commandments Most of One’s Life
2 Chron. 33:1-2, 9-13
“Manasseh… did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, like unto the abominations of the heathen… So Manasseh made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to err, and to do worse than the heathen… And the Lord spake to Manasseh, and to his people: but they would not hearken.
Wherefore the Lord brought upon them the captains of the host of the king of Assyria, which took Manasseh among the thorns, and bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon. And when he was in affliction, he besought the Lord his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, and prayed unto him: and he was intreated of him, and heard his supplication, and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord he was God.”
.
Not Living in Unrepentant Sin One’s Whole Life, or Serving other gods, even for Professing Believers
2 Sam. 5:13 “And David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David.”
1 Kings 11:3-10
“And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart… when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, for Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. And Solomon did evil in the sight of the Lord, and went not fully after the Lord, as did David his father.
Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon. And likewise did he for all his strange wives, which burnt incense and sacrificed unto their gods.
And the Lord was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel, which had appeared unto him twice, and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods: but he kept not that which the Lord commanded.”
.
Not Repeatedly Denying Christ with Swearing
Lk. 22:31-32 “And the Lord said, ‘Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.'”
Mt. 26:74-75 “Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew. And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.”
.
Not being Rightly Excommunicated
1 Cor. 5:4-5 “In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”
1 Tim. 1:20 “Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.”
.
Not the same as God telling the Prophets in the Old Testament not to Pray for Israel (e.g. Jer. 7:16; 11:14; 14:11)
Jer. 15:11, 19-20 “The Lord said, Verily it shall be well with thy remnant; verily I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of evil and in the time of affliction… Therefore thus saith the Lord, If thou return, then will I bring thee again, and thou shalt stand before Me… for I am with thee to save thee and to deliver thee, saith the Lord.”
Jer. 23:3 “And I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all countries whither I have driven them, and will bring them again to their folds; and they shall be fruitful and increase.”
Jer. 42:2-4 “And said unto Jeremiah the prophet, ‘Let, we beseech thee, our supplication be accepted before thee, and pray for us unto the Lord thy God, even for all this remnant… That the Lord thy God may shew us the way wherein we may walk, and the thing that we may do.’ Then Jeremiah the prophet said unto them, ‘I have heard you; behold, I will pray unto the Lord your God according to your words…'”
.
Not Persecuting the Church of God
Acts 8:1, 3-4 “And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem.. As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison. Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where…”
Acts 9:4-5, 17-18 “And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, ‘Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me?… I am Jesus whom thou persecutest…’… And Ananias… putting his hands on him said, ‘Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus… hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost…’… and he… was baptized.”
1 Tim. 1:13 “Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.”
.
Not Necessarily being Killed for One’s Sins
Num. 20:11-12 “And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also. And the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them.”
Num. 20:24 “Aaron shall be gathered unto his people: for he shall not enter into the land which I have given unto the children of Israel, because ye rebelled against my word at the water of Meribah.”
Ps. 99:6, 8 “Moses and Aaron among his priests… Thou wast a God that forgavest them, though thou tookest vengeance of their inventions.”
1 Sam. 2:27, 31 “And there came a man of God unto Eli, and said unto him, ‘Thus saith the Lord… Behold, the days come, that I will cut off thine arm, and the arm of thy father’s house, that there shall not be an old man in thine house.'”
1 Sam. 4:18 “And it came to pass, when he made mention of the ark of God, that he [Eli] fell from off the seat backward by the side of the gate, and his neck brake, and he died: for he was an old man, and heavy”
1 Cor. 11:28-30 “But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation [condemnation] to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.”
.
The View that the Sin unto Death is the Same as the Sin Against the Holy Spirit
See also ‘On the Sin Against the Holy Spirit’.
.
Order of
Quotes 30+
Articles 4+
Book 1
Latin 12
.
Quotes
Order of
Calvin
2nd Helvetic Confession
Beza & Gomarus
Ursinus
Perkins
Canons of Dort & French Reformed Churches
Piscator & Mayer
Ames
Adams
Dutch Annotations
Diodati
Gillespie
Leigh & Hildersham
Bridge
Hall
English Annotations
Dickson
J. Clark
Watson
Trapp
Manton
Millward
S. Clark
Turretin
Mastricht
Heidegger
Marck
Henry
Vitringa
Saurin
Gill
Haddington
.
1500’s
John Calvin
Commentary on 1 John, ch. 5, verse 16
“There is a sin unto death; I have already said that the sin to which there is no hope of pardon left, is thus called…
Moreover, as the sin and blasphemy against the Spirit ever brings with it a defection of this kind, there is no doubt but that it is here pointed out.”
.
2nd Helvetic Confession
Reformed Confessions of the 16th & 17th Centuries, ed. James Dennison, Jr. (RHB, 2010), vol. 2, p. 821
ch. 8
“we acknowledge that all other sins which spring therefrom [Original Sin], are both called and are indeed sins, by what name soever they are termed, whether mortal or venial, or also that which is called sin against the Holy Ghost, which is never forgiven (Mark 3:29; 1 Jn. 5:16-17).”
.
On Beza & Gomarus
Matthew Poole, A Synopsis of Interpreters, both Critical & Otherwise, of the Sacred Scripture in The Exegetical Labors of the Reverend Matthew Poole, vol. 79, 1, 2, and 3 John, Jude (VA: Master Poole Publishing, 2013), on 1 Jn. 5:16, pp. 173
“…which is also called ‘the sin against the Holy Spirit’ (Gomar, thus Beza, Castellio), an example of which we have in those concerning whom it is treated in Mt. 12:31, 32; Acts 7:51; Heb. 6 (Beza, Gomar).”
.
Zacharias Ursinus
Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, following his commentary on Q&A #7
“…the terms ‘mortal’ and ‘venial’ are ambiguous and obscure. All sins are mortal in their own nature. The apostle John also calls the sin against the Holy Ghost mortal, or unto death.”
.
William Perkins
The First Epistle of John in the Form of a Dialogue between John & the Church, ch. 5, pp. 26-27 in A Case of Conscience Resolved (Edinburgh, 1592)
“John: Verse 16, If a man see his brother sin a sin that is not unto death (that is, which may be pardoned), let him ask (pardon in his behalf) and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death: There is a sin unto death (after which, necessarily damnation follows, as the sin against the Holy Ghost): I say not that thou shouldest pray for it.
Church: But is not every sin, a sin to death?
John: 17. All unrighteousness is sin (and therefore deserves death), but there is a sin not unto death (namely that which is pardoned in Christ).”
.
1600’s
Canons of Dort (1618-1619) & the French Reformed Churches (1623)
Intro
The Canons of Dort below were approved by the French Reformed Churches in their national synod at Charenton (1623) and differ in a few variations of phrasing from James Dennison’s contemporary edition of the Canons of Dort quoted below:
ed. John Quick, Synodicon in Gallia reformata (London: Parkhurst, 1692), 24th Synod, ch. 31, Canons, ch. 4, Perseverance of the Saints, Errors Rejected, Canon 4, p. 150
.
Reformed Confessions of the 16th & 17th Centuries, ed. James Dennison, Jr. (RHB, 2014), vol. 4, 5th Head, Rejection of Errors, pp. 145 & 148-49
Canons of Dort
“Article 6
But God, who is rich in mercy, according to His unchangeable purpose of election, does not wholly withdraw the Holy Spirit from His own people, even in their melancholy falls; nor suffers them to proceed so far as to lose the grace of adoption, and forfeit the state of justification, or to commit the sin unto death or against the Holy Spirit; nor does He permit them to be totally deserted, and to plunge themselves into everlasting destruction.
…
Rejection of Errors
…the Synod rejects the errors of those:
…
Paragraph 4
Who teach: That true believers and regenerate can sin the sin unto death or against the Holy Spirit.
Since the same apostle John, after having spoken in the fifth chapter of his first epistle, vs. 16 and 17, of those who sin unto death and having forbidden to pray for them, immediately adds to this in vs. 18: ‘We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not’ (meaning a sin of that character), ‘but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not’ (1 John 5:18).”
.
On Johannes Piscator, John Mayer et al.
John Mayer, Ecclesiastica interpretatio: or the Expositions upon the Difficult & Doubtful Passages of the Seven Epistles called Catholic & the Revelation... (London: Haviland, 1627), on 1 Jn. 5, p. 218
“3. Some again understand the sin against the Holy Ghost, which is out of malice to impugne the known truth, when the Spirit enlightening the mind to understand the truth, yet it is of spight and malice impugned, as the scribes and Pharisees, contrary to their knowledge, did maliciously set themselves against Christ: when any commit this sin, they say we are not to pray for it, because our Savior Christ has pronounced that it shall never be forgiven. (Beza, Piscator, Carthus, Faber Stapul)
Near unto this exposition comes Hilary [c. 310 – c. 367], expounding it of sin committed out of certain knowledge and malice; and Chrysostom [c. 347 – 407].
And to this indeed do I subscribe, if a man sins out of infirmity, raise him up by prayer and by good counsel; but he that is a brother, and maliciously leaves his Christian calling, doing presumptuously contrary to his knowledge, deriding all admonitions and scorning them, cast not holy things to such dogs, neither admonish, nor pray for them anymore.”
.
William Ames
Conscience with the Power & Cases Thereof (d. 1633), bk 1, ch. 26
“14. The inward offer is a spiritual enlightening, whereby those promises are propounded to the hearts of men, as it were by an inward word. John 6:45, Whosoever has heard of the Father and has learned, comes to me. Eph. 1:17. That He might give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation, the eyes of your mind being enlightened, that ye may know what is that hope of your calling.
15. This also is sometime, and in a certain manner granted to those that are not elected. Hebrews 6:4 & 10:29; Mat. 13:20.
16. If anyone oppose himself out of malice to this illumination, he commits a sin against the Holy Ghost, which is called unpardonable, or unto death. Heb.6:6 & 10:29; 1 John 5:16; Matt 12:32.”
.
Thomas Adams
A Commentary or Exposition upon the Divine Second Epistle General... (London: Badger, 1633), on 2 Pet. 2:9, “to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished”, pp. 709-10
“Thus you have heard the nature and specifications of injustice; now look upon the continuance of it; for so much the word imports. God will not cast all sinners into Hell, who then should go to heaven? but ‘the unjust’: such as practice unrighteousness without any recovery of repentance. ‘The unrighteous shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ (1 Cor. 6:9; Eph. 5:6): it is the continuance in sin that excludes from mercy.
Two things throw men to perdition without the intervention of extraordinary favor: malice in sin and utter apostasy. These be the symptoms of that endangered disease for which there is no balm in Gilead; we call it the sin of the Holy Ghost. Not that it is against the third Person, as He is the third Person, more than against the first or second: but because it is against the function or operation of that Person, whose office is to illuminate the mind and mollify the heart with love: therefore Himself is called love. (Heb. 10:26) If men sin wilfully after that they have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for their sins: because they maliciously have sacrificed their sacrifice and split the only vessel that should save them. The iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be purged with sacrifice forever (1 Sam. 3:14): never expiated. There is a sin unto death, I do not say he shall pray for it. (1 Jn. 5:16) Every sin is unto death, but this emphatically, with a prohibition of interceeding set upon it, like the flaming sword that kept Paradise; Pray not for it.
Schoolmen give this reason why the sinne of malice is unpardonable: The defect may find remission where the will may pretend fear of excess. A sin of ignorance is often forgiven, as was Paul’s (1 Tim. 1:16), because a man may affect too much knowledge, as Adam did. A sin of infirmity is oft forgiven because a man may affect too much power and dominion, as did the angels. A sin of carnal fear is often forgiven because a man may affect too much zeal; as did two of the apostles. A sin of partiality is oft forgiven because a man may affect too much justice. (Eccl. 7:14) But not a sin of malice, because a man can never affect too much charity.
No less does apostasy and falling off from God; Totus, a toto, in totum. A man may sin beyond all comfort in his own conscience, till he cannot hope for himself, as did Judas. Beyond all interest in the Church’s devotion, till their prayers cannot help them: ‘Pray not thou for this people.’ (Jer. 7:16) Beyond all claim to Christ’s satisfaction; the blood of the Lamb shall not help them, Mt. 12:31. That which makes this sin past all cure is because it strives against the cure: as a mad man wounded will not suffer his wounds to be bound up, but rather seeks to wound the surgeon, God has mercy upon sinners, Christ came to call and die for sinners, there be none now in heaven but they were once sinners; which of all the holy patriarchs, blessed apostles, can excuse themselves that they never did act unjustly? But injustice was none of their trade; they did not live in it, not die in it. Zacheus was once unjust, but he testified his repentance by charity and restitution. But they that practise unrighteousness to the end, in the end shall find judgment.”
.
Dutch Annotations
On 1 John 5:16 (1637; 1657)
“‘there is a sin unto death’ that is, which certainly brings death with it, which is, the blasphemy against the holy Ghost, when any one denies the truth of the Christian doctrine, whereby he was enlightened and convinced by the Holy Ghost, and maliciously blasphemeth and persecuteth the same.”
.
John Diodati
Pious Annotations, upon the Holy Bible (1643), on 1 Jn. 5
“v. 16.
‘Which is not’
that is to say, which shall not by certain proofs appear to be a sin against the Holy Ghost, by which man falls into everlasting death, without pardon or remission.
‘And He shall give’
that is to say, God shall pardon him and so free him from everlasting death.”
.
George Gillespie
A Treatise of Miscellany Questions… (d.1648; Ediburgh: Lithgow, 1649), ch. 22, ‘Of the true, real and safe grounds of encouragement to believe in Jesus Christ’, pp. 280-81
“…before [in 1 Tim. 2] there is an exhortation to pray ‘for all men,’ verse 1, which, although the Arminians make an argument that ‘all men’ is meant of all persons and not only of all sorts, both in that verse and verses 4 & 6, because say they we ought to pray for all men universally pro singulis generum, and not only for all sorts; yet tis indeed an argument for the contrary. For to pray for all men without exception of any person is not commanded, but we find the contrary commanded.
Jeremiah was forbidden to pray or make intercession for the obstinate, incorrigible Jews, Jer. 7:16; 11:14; 14:11. God would not have Samuel to mourn for Saul after he was rejected of the Lord, 1 Sam. 16:1, and we ought not to pray for such as sin unto death, i.e. the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, 1 Jn. 5:16. Paul is so far from praying for Alexander the coppersmith that he imprecates the vengeance of God upon him, 2 Tim. 4:14. We may not pray for the Pope who is the great Antichrist and son of perdition; neither may we pray for, but against Babylon [Romanism], especially after the people of God are out of her. We are bidden pray for our enemies, but not for the malicious incorrigible enemies of Christ. Wherefore when the apostle bids us pray for ‘all men,’ his meaning is that we should exclude no degree nor kind of men, great or small, Jew or Gentile, bound or free, etc.”
.
Edward Leigh & Aurthur Hildersham
Annotations upon All the New Testament, Philological & Theological (1650), on 1 John 5, v. 16
“Verse 16.
‘If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask’
That is, which undoubtedly brings death, the sin against the Holy Ghost, for every other sin we may pray for forgiveness of it to others.
‘There is a sin unto death’
By which he means not that there is a sin that deserves death (for so every sin does), but a sin which, whosoever falls into and commits, he must needs die and perish everlastingly. (Hildersham)”
.
William Bridge
I. Scripture-Light the most sure Light… delivered in three Sermons on 2 Pet. 1:19; II. Christ in Travail... (London: Cole, 1656), ‘Of the Sin Against the Holy Ghost,’ p. 356
“…the work of the Spirit, or the Holy Ghost, [is] to sanctify. And hereupon some have thought that opposition unto holiness is the sin against the Holy Ghost: But you find here it is a ‘blasphemy,’ therefore not every opposition [is such].
And if you look into Acts 7, you find that Stephen speaking of the Jews says at verse 51, ‘Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ear, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost;’ yet they did not sin this sin against the Holy Ghost. Why? For Stephen prays for them, at the last verse, ‘Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.’ But now says the apostle John, in 1 John, 5:16, ‘There is a sin unto death, I do not say that ye shall pray for it.’ Had they in Stephen’s account sinned this sin unto death, he would not have prayed for them; but he did pray for them. So that this sin against the Holy Ghost does not consist in every opposition unto the work of the Holy Ghost, as it is distinct from the Father and the Son.”
.
Joseph Hall
A Plain & Familiar Explication: by Way of Paraphrase, of All the Hard Texts of the Whole Divine Scriptures of the Old & New Testaments (d. 1656), vol. 2, on 1 Jn. 5:16
“If any man see his brother fall into and continue in such a sin as may be capable of forgiveness, let him earnestly sue unto God, for pardon of that offender; and God, who is great, and infinite in mercy, shall graciously incline his ear to his prayers, give remission and life to such an one.
There is indeed a sin unto death, for which there is no forgiveness with God, because there is no capacity of repentance for it in the committer of it; I mean the sin against the Holy Ghost, when a man, having received the knowledge of the Gospel by the illumination of the Holy Spirit, and [has] professed the belief thereof, shall, in a devilish malice, wilfully blaspheme and persecute that known truth: I do not give you allowance to pray for the pardon of this sin.”
.
English Annotations
1 John 3rd ed. (1657), on 1 John 5:16 The author was possibly Mr. Reading or Downame, per Neal, History of the Puritans.
“{a sin which is not unto death} Which does not necessarily bring damnation (though it deserves it) as the sin against the Holy Ghost does, because God will not give repentance to any that commits that sin (Heb. 6:4, 6)…
{there is a sin unto death} The sin against the Holy Ghost, which is unpardonable (Mt. 12:31-32, Heb. 6:4, 6).
{I do not say that he shall pray for it} I do not advise him to pray for pardon for any that has committed that sin: or, I forbid him to do it.”
.
David Dickson
An Expositon of all St. Paul’s Epistles… (1659), 1 John, ch. 5, p. 316
“‘Not unto death.’
He excepts in case of the sin of the Holy Ghost, when a professor of the faith, or a brother, as to the external communion of the Church, falls into open apostacy from the Faith of Christ, and maintains cruel hatred against the Gospel and those that are faithful, against the light of conscience illuminated once by the Holy Ghost; he commands not to pray for him that commits this sin, when it may be discerned. It is called a sin unto death, because eternal death follows that sin, and he that falls into it, remains in it without repentance, until he is thrust down into Hell.
Verse 17. ‘All unrighteousness is sin, and there is a sin not unto death.’
He explains what he had said, that although all transgression of the Law is sin, wherefore it deserves the wages of death, yet death follows not all sin; because all kind of sin is remitted, except this sin, which is called blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which was never remitted to any, nor never shall.”
.
John Clark
A Brief & Pithy Treatise about Comfort which God’s Children have... (London: 1670), sect. 10, ‘Of the Sin unto Death’, p. 107
“Or whether any sin may become a sin unto death, or the sin against the Holy-Ghost, by reason of such circumstances as may attend it?”
.
Thomas Watson
The Beatitudes: or a Discourse upon part of Christ’s Famous Sermon on the Mount... (London: Smith, 1660), ‘The Soul’s Malady & Cure,’ pp. 493-94
“Some diseases are opprobria medicorum, the reproaches of physicians; but there’s no immedicabile vulnus, no disease can pose Christ’s skill; He can cure the gangrene of sin when it is come to the heart; He healed Mary Magdalen an unchaste sinner; He healed Paul who breathed out persecution against the Church, insomuch that Paul stands and wonders at the cure, 1 Tim. 1:13, ‘But I obtained mercy〈 Greek 〉; ‘I was bemercied.’ Christ heals head-distempers and heart-distempers which may keep poor trembling souls from despair.
‘O’ says the sinner, ‘never was any so diseased as I!’ But look up to thy Physician Christ, who has healing under his wings; he can melt a heart of stone and wash away black sins in the crimson of his blood; there are no desperate cases with Christ; He has those salves, oils, balsoms which can cure the worst disease.
Indeed there is one disease which Christ does not heal, namely the sin against the Holy Ghost; this is called a ‘sin unto death’; if we knew any who had sinned this sin, we were to shut them out of our prayer: ‘There is a sin unto death, I do not say that he shall pray for it,’ 1 Jn. 5:16. There’s no healing for this disease; not but that Christ could cure this, but the sinner will not be cured. The king could pardon a traitor, but if he will have no pardon, he must die. The sin against the Holy Ghost is unpardonable, because the sinner will have no pardon; he scorns Christ’s blood, despites his Spirit, therefore his sin has no sacrifice, Heb. 10:26, 29.”
.
Johannes Cocceius
All the Works, 3rd ed. (d. 1669; Amsterdam, 1701), vol. 6, separate pagination, on 1 John 5, sect. 18 on v. 16, pp. 10-11 Trans. Chatgpt-5
“John does not, indeed, wish us to be rash in judging who has committed such a sin; rather, he the more inflames us to pray for all, because it is not easy to say of whom God is unwilling to forgive. But this sin is without doubt the hatred of the gospel on account of lusts, after someone has heard it, been convinced of its truth, and even rejoiced because of that hearing.
John does not reproach compassion toward those who perish, but he wishes the godly finally to rest content with the judgments of God, and not to grieve and labor in vain. Yet he does not wish them to desist from praying, until that bitter root of an evil conscience—blessing itself, opposing the truth of the gospel, and attempting to drag back those who have been delivered into bondage—has manifested itself.”
.
John Trapp
Commentary on the Whole Bible (d. 1669), on 1 John 5, verse 17
“‘There is a sin not unto death’ — All sins and blasphemies shall be forgiven unto men, but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost… But the unpardonable sin is here distinguished from all other sins…”
.
Thomas Manton
A Second Volume of Sermons Preached… (London: Astwood, 1684), Sermons on John 17, Sermon 12, on Jn. 17:9, p. 106-7
“But here arises a doubt: Are we not to pray for wicked men, yea, the impenitent, the persecutors of the Church, contemners of the Word? I answer:
…
3… 1 Jn. 5:16:
‘If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death; I do not say that he shall pray for it.’
It is a tempting of God to intercede for that sin, seeing He has declared his will; the irremissible sin, is that sin, though it be hard to be found out. Therefore it is good to keep to the conditional form when a man, after the profession of religion, falls to an utter revolt and deadly hatred of it: it is a shrewd presumption they have committed that sin.”
.
John Millward
A Continuation of Morning-Exercise Questions & Cases of Conscience Practicaly Resolved... (London: Dunton, 1683), Sermon 19, ‘How ought we to do our Duty towards others, though they do not theirs towards us?’, p. 564 Millward (d. 1684) was an English puritan put out at the Great Ejection.
“It is good for us to mind what Christ says of great sinners, Mt. 12:31-32, ‘I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men.’ When Christ says, ‘all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men,’ and excepts none but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, no, not a word spoken against the Son of Man Himself, we may well think a word spoken or a deed done against ourselves may be pardoned; and that it may be so, [we] should pray for it; and we may hope for a good effect of it.
Stephen’s prayer, when he was stoned (Acts 7:60), probably had an influence on Paul’s conversion. St. John tells us, 1 John 5:16, ‘If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death.’ So that unless a man could be assured that another has sinned that sin which is unto death, he may, nay, he ought to pray for him: ‘He shall ask, etc.’
In any case where there is but an ‘if so be,’ or a ‘who can tell,’ or a ‘perhaps,’ there is room left for prayer. In that mighty tempest that arose in the sea to arrest Jonah as he was going to Tarshish, which was like to have broken the ship, he is called on to arise and call upon his God, Jon. 1:6, ‘If so be that God will think upon us, that we perish not.’ Their case was very doubtful, yet they pray.
So when Jonah had delivered his message to the Ninevites, ‘Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown,’ they cry mightily unto God, saying, ‘Who can tell if God will turn and repent?’ Jon. 3.9. Simon Magus was in a very bad state, in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity, and Peter perceived it; yet he bids him repent and pray, if perhaps the thoughts of his heart might be forgiven him; and can we think, that he who put him upon praying for himself, would not pray for him too, especially considering Simon requested it of him? Acts 8:21, 24. Calvin in location: Si fieri possit, ab ipsis inferis extrahendi nobis sunt homines. [“If it were possible, men ought to be drawn by us even from the very depths of hell.”]”
.
Samuel Clark
The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with Annotations… (London: Simmons, 1683), on 1 John 5:16
“47. Num. 15:30; 1 Sam. 2:25; Mt. 12:31; Heb. 6:4 and 10:26; 2 Pet. 2:20. Viz. A total, malicious apostasy from the faith.”
.
Francis Turretin
Institutes of Elenctic Theology, tr. George M. Giger, ed. James Dennison Jr. (1679–1685; P&R, 1992), vol. 1, 9th Topic, ‘In what consists the formal reason of the sin against the Holy Spirit? Also why is it unpardonable?’, sections 1 & 13, pp. 647 & 650
“I… John speaks of a ‘sin unto death’ (1 Jn. 5:16) for which we are not to pray, which can be no other than a sin against the Holy Spirit…
XIII… And for this reason it is called a ‘sin unto death’ (1 Jn. 5:16, 17), not only because it deserves death in its own nature (for so all sins are unto death (which is the case with all the sins of reprobates), but because it is such as to be absolutely unpardonable in itself.”
.
Peter van Mastricht
Theoretical-Practical Theology (RHB), vol. 3, bk. 4, ch. 3, sect. 17, p. 497
“It is designated under another name as apostasy, that is, not common, but preeminent apostasy (Heb. 6:6). Likewise, the sin unto death (1 John 5:16–17), which in the idea is never forgiven, nor can be. But it is chiefly called blasphemy against the Spirit (Matt. 12:31–32; Mark 3:28–30; Luke 12:10). This is the denomination that is especially proper to it.”
.
Johann H. Heidegger
Body of Theology (d. 1698; Zurich, 1700), place 10, sect. 72 in Heppe, Reformed Dogmatics (Wipf & Stock, 2007), ch. 15, sect. 27, p. 353
“Scripture Mt. 12:31-32, Mk. 3:28-29 (which compare and see 1 Jn. 5:16 (the sin unto death)) both makes this one sin singular and eloquently opposes it to others for its singularity.”
.
1700’s
Johannes Marck
Biblical Exercitations on 50 select places of the Old and New Testament (Amserdam, 1707), Exercitation 50, ‘On 1 John 5:16-17’, pp. 1096-97, trans. ChatGPT-5
“[After quoting Mt. 12:31-32] For in reality there is no difference between the sin from which one is never granted truly to repent— for which no sacrifice remains, but only certain and severe vengeance, and which will never be forgiven— and that which is, and is called, ‘unto death.’
In this view not only have the greatest of our theologians gone before, but many others also, both of the ancients and of the Papists, who, however, have expressed their opinion less fully by various phrases, indeed interpreting somewhat differently the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and trying to distinguish this sin just as much as the one Paul [in Hebrews] describes from it.”
.
Matthew Henry
Commentary on 1 John, ch. 5, verses 14-17
“In case it should appear that any have committed the irremissible blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, and the total apostasy from the illuminating convictive powers of the Christian religion, it should seem that they are not to be prayed for at all. ‘For what remains but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, to consume such adversaries?’ Hebrews 10:27. And these last seem to be the sins chiefly intended by the apostle by the name of sins unto death.”
.
Campegius Vitringa
The Doctrine of the Christian Religion, Summarily Described through Aphorisms, vol. 2 6th ed. Martin Vitringa & Theodore Schelting (d. 1722; Arnheim: Moelemann, 1761), pp. 378 & 381
“29… which is called blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, 1 Jn. 5:16; Mt. 12:31-32; Dt. 29:19.
30… this is the sin unto death, which is not venial; 1 Jn. 5:16.”
.
Jacques Saurin
Sermons of the Rev. James Saurin... tr. Robinson, Hunter & Sutcliff, rev. Samuel Burder (NY: Harper, 1860), vol. 2, Sermon 89, ‘On the Nature of the Unpardonable Sin,’ pp. 329-30
“Between these two texts [at the beginning and ending of 1 Jn. 5], occur the words we wish to explain: ‘There is a sin unto death: I do not say that ye shall pray for it.’ Must not ‘the sin unto death,’ be that against which he wished to fortify the saints; I mean apostasy?
What! you will say, is a man lost without remedy who has denied the truth; and is every one in the sad situation of those for whom the apostle prohibits prayer? God forbid, my brethren, that we should preach so strange a doctrine; and once more renew the Novatian severity! There are two kinds of apostates, and two kinds of apostasies: there is one kind of apostasy into which we fall by the fear of punishment, or on the blush of the moment, by the promises Satan makes to his proselytes. There is another, into which we fall by the enmity we have against the truth, by the detestable pleasure we take in opposing its force. It were cruel to account the first of these offenses, ‘a sin unto death;’ but the Spirit of God prompts us to attach this idea to the second.
There are likewise two kinds of apostates. There is one class, who have made only small attainments in the knowledge of the truth; weak and imperfect Christians, unacquainted as yet with the joys and transports excited in the soul by a religion, which promises remission of sin, and everlasting felicity. There is another, on the contrary, to whom God has given superior knowledge, to whom He has communicated the gifts of miracles, and whom He has caused to experience the sweetness of his promise. It would be hard to reject the first; but the apostle had regard to the second. Those, according to St. John, who have committed the ‘sin unto death,’ are the persons who abjure Christianity, after the reception of all those gifts. In the primitive church, where some were honoured with the endowment of discerning spirits, there probably were brethren who could discern the latter apostates from the former.
…
Now, if you have been attentive to all the considerations we have just advanced: if you have understood the explanations we have given of the several texts, you may form a correct idea of the unpardonable sin. You may know what this crime was, at least, in the time of the primitive church. It was denying, hating and maliciously opposing the truth at the moment they were persuaded it proceeded from God. Two classes of men might commit this crime in the apostolic age.
First, those who had never embraced Christianity; but opposed its progress in defiance of rational conviction, and the dictates of conscience. This was the sin of the Pharisees, who maliciously ascribed to the devil miracles, which they knew could have God alone for their author.
Secondly, those who had embraced the gospel, who had been baptized, who had received the gift of miracles, and experienced all the graces enumerated in the text. This was the sin of those, who, after conversion, abjured the truth, and pronounced against Jesus Christ the anathemas which his enemies, and particularly the Jews, required of apostates. These St. Paul had in view, in the words of our text [Heb. 6:4 ff.], and in the tenth chapter of this epistle. Of this St. John also spake, when he said, ‘there is a sin unto death.’ Hence the sin described in these three passages, and the sin against the Holy Ghost, is the same in quality, if I may so speak, though diversified in circumstances: we have, consequently, comprised the whole under the vague appellation of unpardonable sin.”
.
John Gill
Commentary (d. 1771), on 1 John 5, v. 16
“‘There is a sin unto death;’
which is not only deserving of death, as every other sin is, but which certainly and inevitably issues in death in all that commit it, without exception; and that is the sin against the Holy Ghost, which is neither forgiven in this world nor in that to come, and therefore must be unto death; it is a sinning wilfully, not in a practical, but doctrinal way, after a man has received the knowledge of the truth; it is a wilful denial of the truth of the Gospel, particularly that peace, pardon, righteousness, eternal life, and salvation, are by Jesus Christ, contrary to the light of his mind, and this joined with malice and obstinacy; so that there is no more or other sacrifice for such a sin; there is nothing but a fearful looking for of wrath and fury to fall on such opposers of the way of life; and as the presumptuous sinners under Moses’s law died without mercy, so must these despiteful ones under the Gospel; see Mt. 12:31.
Some think there is an allusion to one of the kinds of excommunication among the Jews, called “shammatha”, the etymology of which, according to some Jewish writers, is שם מיתה, “there is death”.
‘I do not say that he shall pray for it;’
the apostle does not expressly forbid to pray for the forgiveness of this sin, yet what he says amounts unto it; he gives no encouragement to it, or any hopes of succeeding, but rather the reverse; and indeed where this sin is known, or can be known, it is not to be prayed for, because it is irremissible; but as it is a most difficult point to know when a man has sinned it, the apostle expresses himself with great caution.”
.
John Brown of Haddington
The Self-Interpreting Bible… (d. 1787; Edinburgh: Ireland, 1831), on 1 Jn. 5:16
“Now, if God so readily hear the prayers that are offered to Him with faith in the name of Christ, we ought to pray for forgiveness of sins of every kind to our Christian brethren and fellows of mankind, in hopes of obtaining it; except only the sin against the Holy Ghost, which God has fixed as unpardonable, and infallibly connected with eternal damnation.”
.
Articles
1500’s
Cartwright, Thomas – 3. (a) ‘[Letter] To a Godly and Zealous Lady’ in eds. Peel & Carlson, Cartwrightiana (London: Halley Stewart, 1951), 77-88
.
1600’s
Willet, Andrew – 3rd Confutation ‘Against Pererius that thinks none in this life to be without hope of grace and repentance’ in Ex. 11, 5. Places of Confutation in Hexapla in Genesin & Exodum... (London: Haviland, 1633), on Exodus, pp. 116-17
Gouge, William – pp. 70-84 of A Recovery from Apostasy, set out in a Sermon… (London: 1639)
Gouge was a Westminster divine.
Roberts, Francis – Believers’ Evidences for Eternal Life collected out of the First Epistle of John... (London: T.R., 1655), ch. 2, pp. 62-127
sect. 1, ‘Who, or what kind of persons, they are that are in danger of sinning this sin against the Holy Ghost’
sect. 2, ‘What the sin against the Holy Ghost is, and wherein it consists?’
“The sin against the Holy Ghost is an universal, final and wilfull falling away of hypocritical professors from the truth and common graces of the Holy Ghost once received and professed, to the blasphemous despiting of the Spirit of Grace, horrid contempt and malice against the Son of God and violent persecution of the way of Christianity.” – p. 95
sect. 3, ‘What a vast difference there is betwixt the sinning of regenerate persons and their sinning that sin against the Holy Ghost’
Cotton, John – ‘Doctrine: The Sin unto Death, or the Sin against the Holy Ghost, we have No Warrant to Pray for it’ in A Practical Commentary… upon the first Epistle General of John… (London: 1658), on 1 Jn. 5:16, pp. 428-31
Cotton was a New England, congregationalist puritan. See also Cotton, Christ the Fountain of Life (1651), sermon 16, pp. 240-41.
Jenks, Benjamin – Section 2, ‘The Liberty of Praying for Wicked Men’ in The Liberty of Prayer Asserted & Guarded from Licentiousness… (London: Roberts, 1696), pt. 1, ch. 6, pp. 122-24
Jenks (1646–1724) was an Anglican minister.
.
Book
1600’s
Bedford, Thomas – The Sin unto Death, or an Ample Discovery of that feareful Sin, the Sin against the Holy Ghost, together with the signs, degrees and preservatives thereof, in a sermon preached… (London: 1621) 86 pp. Synopsis
Bedford (fl. 1650), a theologian, was prominent in religious controversy between 1620 and 1650. In a letter to Baxter (1650) Bedford says that “he sat at the feet of Bishop Davenant”. Davenant’s successor in the professorship was Dr. Samuel Ward, and from these two Bedford affirms that his own theology was mainly derived.
.
Latin Articles
1500’s
Zwingli, Ulrich – pp. 598-99 of Exposition on 1 John in Annotations on the Evangelical History of our Lord Jesus Christ... (Zurich, 1539)
Oecolampadius, Johannes – 20th Homily, fol. 91-93 in 21 Homilies on 1 John (1525)
Pellican, Conrad – pp. 782-83 in 1 John in Commentaries on All the Apostolic Epistles of Paul, Peter, James & Jude (Zurich, 1532-42), Romans – Jude
Marlorat, Augustine – on p. 119 (lt col top) in 1 John in A Catholic, Ecclesiastical Exposition of the New Testament… or a Library of Exposition (Geneva, 1570), Catholic Epistles Abbr.
“A” designates Marlorat; “N” designates Thomas Naog, who also takes this view.
Gwalther, Rudolph – fol. 237-38 in 1 John in Homilies on the Catholic Epistles (d. 1586)
Aretius, Benedict – pp. 384-85 of 1 John in Commentaries on the Canonical Epistles (d. 1574; Morgi, 1581)
Snecanus, Gellius – ‘Of the Sin Against the Holy Spirit, or Unto Death’ in A Methodical Description, or Fundamental, Principal Common Places, or the Dogmas of Scripture… (Harlemum, 1591), pp. 373-80
Snecanus (c.1540-1596) was a reformer of Friesland and takes the view that the sin unto death is the same as the sin against the Holy Spirit.
.
1600’s
Tossanus, Sr., Daniel – pp. 705-7 in 1 John in Commentaries in that which Remains of Paul, the other Apostolic Epistles and the Apocalypse of John (d. 1602; Hanau, 1604)
Pareus, David – p. 928 of 1 John in Parts 3-4 of the Theological-Exegetical Works (d.1622; Geneva: Chovet, 1650)
Cameron, John – p. 91 in 1 John by Cameron in Annotations on the New Testament by Theodore Beza… to which is Appended a New Covenant Commentary by John Cameron (d. 1625; Cambridge, 1642), separately paginated
Piscator, Johann – pp. 774-78 in 1 John in Commentaries on All the New Testament Books, 3rd ed. (d. 1625; 1638)
Gomarus, Francis – pp. 477-79 in 1 John in All the Theological Works (d. 1641; Amsterdam: Janssoni, 1644)
.
Articles
1500’s
Viret, Pierre – ‘What mean it behoves to keep to fight against sin and to resist it, and to be delivered from it, and how every man ought to fear lest he should be hardened therein, and should fight against his own conscience, to the end that sin be not to death’ in A Christian Instruction… (London: Veale, 1573), The Exposition of the Preface of the Law, pp. 536-38
.
1600’s
Porter, Edmund – Theos anthropophoros, or God Incarnate... (London: 1655), bk. 4, ‘Of the Unpardonable Sin’, pp. 70-93
Porter (1595-1670) was reformed and was a doctor, “sometimes fellow of St. John‘s College in Cambridge, and Prebend of Norwich.”
Cotton, John – ‘Doctrine: The Sin unto Death, or the Sin against the Holy Ghost, we have No Warrant to Pray for it’ in A Practical Commentary… upon the first Epistle General of John… (London: 1658), on 1 Jn. 5:16, pp. 428-31
Cotton was a New England, congregationalist puritan. See also Cotton, Christ the Fountain of Life (1651), sermon 16, pp. 240-41.
Lightfoot, John – ‘A Sin Unto Death, a Sermon’ on 1 Jn. 5:16 (1666) in Whole Works, ed. Pitman (1822), vol. 6, pp. 331-45
“The sin against the Holy Ghost indeed is distinct and something different from this sin unto death that our apostle speaks of… It is true indeed that a sin in which a man continues unrepenting until his death and in which he dies, may very justly be called ‘a sin to death,’ that is, ‘a sin until his death,’ and it will prove a sin to death eternal, but that the apostle means here a particular sin, and that he estimates it not by its length but by its weight, not by how long the party continues in it, but by how grievous the sin is in itself, will appear as we go along, partly by discovery of the reason of the title he puts upon it, and partly by discovery of the very sin itself that is here intended…” – p. 1094
“And in this they [Jews] speak but the words of the Law, in Num. 15:27-28:
‘If any soul sin through ignorance, he shall bring a she-goat of the first year for a sin offering. And the priest shall make an atonement for him that sins ignorantly. But the soul that does ought presumptuously… the same has reproached the Lord: That soul shall be cut off from among his people.’
Now what is meant by ‘cutting off’?… ask the Jews to and among whom the thing was spoken, what it means in their common speech and acceptation, and they will tell you, ‘cutting off means’ [Hebrew], ‘Death by the hand of Heaven,’ death or destruction by the hand of God. Interpreting the matter to this purpose, that if a person sinned wilfully and presumptuously, there was no sin offering allowed in that case, but the party so offending fell immediately under liableness to divine vengance, to be destroyed or cut off by the hand of Heaven…” – p. 1095
“It [Heb. 10:26] tells you what sin it is, viz. ‘sinning wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth’: It limits to you why it is called a sin unto death, because there is no other way upon the committing of it, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment and fiery indignation. And it gives you some intimation why no praying for it: because [there is] no sacrifice for it…” – p. 1096
“Every presumptuous sin in the text [that] was cited in Moses, was a sin unto death, in the sense that the Jewish nation understood a sin unto death, viz. that brought to an immediate liableness to cutting off by divine vengeance. Now this was a sin of presumption, and despising the Word of God, as Moses explains what that presumptuous sinning is…
But why does not this our apostle speak out, and say, ‘I say he should not pray for it,’ but says only, ‘I do not say that he should.’…
He [John] takes care of the consciences of the people of God as well as he shows the two conditions of the sinner he speaks of. There were some that might be in a strait what to do in this case. They were commanded by their Lord and Master to pray for their enemies: these enemies of theirs were become so like their father the Devil that it might pose their consciences whether they should pray for them or no. Therefore this divine apostle uses a happy temper: that he will lay no charge on them, that are so pinched, to pray for them: nor indeed forbid those to pray for them that are more enlarged: for undoubtedly the indifferent expression of the apostle as I may call it, seems plainly to carry with it such a consideration…” – pp. 1097-98
“I shall not go about to define or circumscribe exactly the bounds wherin to conclude wilful sinning: I shall not confine this evil spirit with any circle: because I would have every one to look well about, lest the case be his own…” – p. 1098
“But wilful sinner, how actest thou? To oppose the counsel and command of the Lord with all the heart, and mind, and soul. To love and follow and commit wickedness with all the heart, and mind, and soul. If this be not a deadly wound under the fifth rib, a mortal plague at the bottom of the will, what can you call the plague of the heart?… Every wilful sinning does add more hardness and more wilfulness of sinning to the heart still. A hard heart does harden by sinning: and the more the sin is wilful, the more the heart gathers hardness… So do wilful sinnings draw on one another, and from one the heart is emboldened to another.” – p. 1099
Clark, John – sect. 10, ‘Of the Sin unto Death’ in A Brief & Pithy Treatise about Comfort which God’s Children have... (London: 1670), pp. 106-22
Poole, Matthew – on 1 John 5:16-17 in A Synopsis of Interpreters, both Critical & Otherwise, of the Sacred Scripture in The Exegetical Labors of the Reverend Matthew Poole, vol. 79, 1, 2, and 3 John, Jude (VA: Master Poole Publishing, 2013), pp. 169-75
Russel, Robert – Russel’s Sermon Of the Unpardonable Sin against the Holy Ghost, Or, The Sin unto Death, wherein is declared a plain Description of it, both Negatively what it is not, and also Positively what it is; and a plain Reason why it is Unpardonable. With a Word of Comfort and also of Counsel how to avoid it (London: 1692) 25 pp.
Russel was an English minister.
.
1700’s
Venema, Herman – p. 505, sect. 7 in Translation of Hermann Venema’s inedited Institutes of Theology tr. Alexander W. Brown (d. 1787; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1850), ch. 30
Venema takes the sin unto death to be, not the sin against the Holy Spirit, but in the same category as sins “which are committed insolently in the face of a well-known law… Num. 15:30.” Hence, “he does not desire us to pray for the forgiveness of such a sin in this life, seeing that God is wont to make a signal display of his vengeance against it even here.”
.
1800’s
Chalmers, Thomas – Sermon 6, ‘On the Nature of the Sin unto Death’ in Sermons & Discourses, vol. 1, pp. 43-51
Chalmers was a leading minister in the Free Church of Scotland
Bonar, Horatius – ‘The Sin Unto Death’ in Family Sermons 1863 reprinted in Fifty-Two Sermons Buy pp. 340-47
Bonar was a leading minister in the Free Church of Scotland.
Huther, John – on 1 John 5, vv. 16-17 in ed. H.A.W. Meyer, Commentary on the New Testament
Huther argues that spiritual death is being spoken of, not temporal death.
.
1900’s
Strack, Hermann & Paul Billerbeck – on 1 John 5:16 in A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud & Midrash (Lexham Press, 2021), vol. 3, p. 910
“Babylonian TalmudSotah 48A: (Yohanan the high priest = John Hyrcanus [135-104 BCE]) said to them, ‘My children, come, I will tell you something. As with the great heave offering (to the priesthood, about 2 percent of the harvest) there is a sin unto death [Hebrew], so too with the heave offering of the tithe (which the Levite had to render to the priesthood from the so-called first tithe) and with the fruits not yet tithed there is a sin unto death.”
.
2000’s
Ward, Tim – ‘Sin ‘Not Unto Death’ and Sin ‘Unto Death’ in 1 John 5:16′
Percer, Leo – ‘Confidence in Christ and the Sin Unto Death – When Should a Believer Not Pray?’
Busenitz, Irvin A. – ‘The Sin unto Death’
.
Books
1600’s
Bedford, Thomas – The Sin unto Death, or an Ample Discovery of that feareful Sin, the Sin against the Holy Ghost, together with the signs, degrees and preservatives thereof, in a sermon preached… (London: 1621) 86 pp. Synopsis
Bedford (fl. 1650), a theologian, was prominent in religious controversy between 1620 and 1650. In a letter to Baxter (1650) Bedford says that “he sat at the feet of Bishop Davenant”. Davenant’s successor in the professorship was Dr. Samuel Ward, and from these two Bedford affirms that his own theology was mainly derived.
.
1900’s
Rahfeldt, Daryl G. – “Sin Unto Death”: A Theological Study of 1 John 5:16-17 (Marquette University, 1987)
Smilie, Bruce Durelle – “Sin unto death”: a Structural & Exegetical Study of 1 John 5:16-7 PhD diss. Pre (Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1999) 230 pp.
.
Quotes
Order of
Luther
Tyndale
Calvin
Wolleb
Downame
Caryl
Mastricht
.
1500’s
Martin Luther
in Adam Melchior, The Life & Death of Dr. Martin Luther… (London: Stafford, 1641), pp. 106-7
“…I cannot but with great joy of heart laugh at Satan’s, the Pope’s and their complices’ hatred against me. God turn their hearts from their diabolical maliciousness. But if God decree not to hear my prayers for their sin unto death: then God grant that they may fill up the measure of their sins, and solace themselves to the full with their libels, full fraught with such like lies.”
.
William Tyndale
Expositions & Notes on Sundry Portions of the Holy Scriptures… (d. 1536; Cambridge: Parker Society, 1849), The Exposition of the First Epistle of St. John, on 1 Jn. 5:16-17, p. 212
“Whatsoever sin we see in the world, let us pray, and not despair; for God is the God of mercy. But for the sin to death, which is resisting grace, and fighting against mercy, and open blaspheming of the Holy Ghost, affirming that Christ’s miracles are done in Beelzebub, and his doctrine to be of the Devil, I think that no Christian man, if he perceive it, can otherwise pray than as Paul prayed for Alexander the coppersmith (2 Timothy, the last), ‘that God would reward him according unto his works.’
They that go back again after they know the truth, and give themselves willingly to sin for to follow it, and persecute the doctrine of truth by profession to maintain falsehood for their glory and vantage, are remediless: as ye may see: Heb. 6 and 10. Balaam sinned so; the false prophets in the Old Testament sinned so; the Pharisees sinned so; Alexander sinned so; and now many sin so, following their pride and covetousness.”
.
John Calvin
Commentary on 1 John, ch. 5, vv. 16-18
“‘A sin which is not unto death’… For he denies that sins are to death, not only those by which the saints daily offend, but even when it happens that God’s wrath is grievously provoked by them. For as long as room for pardon is left, death does not wholly retain its dominion…
What, then, is the meaning of the apostle?… There is a sin unto death; I have already said that the sin to which there is no hope of pardon left, is thus called. But it may be asked, what this is; for it must be very atrocious, when God thus so severely punishes it.
It may be gathered from the context, that it is not, as they say, a partial fall, or a transgression of a single commandment, but apostasy, by which men wholly alienate themselves from God. For the apostle afterwards adds that the children of God do not sin, that is, that they do not forsake God, and wholly surrender themselves to Satan, to be his slaves. Such a defection, it is no wonder that it is mortal; for God never thus deprives his own people of the grace of the Spirit; but they ever retain some spark of true religion. They must then be reprobate and given up to destruction, who thus fall away so as to have no fear of God.
Were any one to ask, whether the door of salvation is closed against their repentance; the answer is obvious, that as they are given up to a reprobate mind, and are destitute of the Holy Spirit, they cannot do anything else, than with obstinate minds become worse and worse and add sins to sins. Moreover, as the sin and blasphemy against the Spirit ever brings with it a defection of this kind, there is no doubt but that it is here pointed out.
But it may be asked again, by what evidences can we know that a man’s fall is fatal; for except the knowledge of this was certain, in vain would the apostle have made this exception, that they were not to pray for a sin of this kind. It is then right to determine sometimes, whether the fallen is without hope, or whether there is still a place for a remedy.
This, indeed, is what I allow, and what is evident beyond dispute from this passage; but as this very seldom happens, and as God sets before us the infinite riches of his grace, and bids us to be merciful according to his own example, we ought not rashly to conclude that any one has brought on himself the judgment of eternal death; on the contrary, love should dispose us to hope well. But if the impiety of some appear to us not otherwise than hopeless, as though the Lord pointed it out by the finger, we ought not to contend with the just judgment of God, or seek to be more merciful than He is.”
.
1600’s
Johannes Wolleb
The Abridgment of Christian Divinity... (d. 1629; London: Mab, 1650), bk. 1, ch. 26, ‘Of the outward administration of the Church,’ p. 177
“‘To bind’ is to denounce God’s wrath against impenitent sinners. ‘To loose’ is to pronounce remission of sins to repentant sinners; both which have certain degrees.
The degrees of binding are:
1. A severe exhortation and commination, after private admonitions have been rejected; this must be done by the presbytery. (Mt. 18:15-17)
2. A keeping off from the Lord’s Supper. (Mt. 7:6)
3. The greater excommunication, by which the sinner is cast out of the Church, yet not without hope of pardon and return, if he repent. (1 Cor. 5:5)
4. Anathema, or in the Syriac word, Maran-atha, when he is cast out without hope. (1 Cor. 16:22; 1 Jn. 5:16)”
.
George Downame
A Godly & Learned Treatise of Prayer... (Cambridge: 1640), ch. 32, ‘Distinctions of Prayer in regard of the Object,’ pp. 186-87
“The faithless are the enemies of God and some of them the enemies of our Church and country, and some enemies to ourselves; and shall we pray for such?
Although now they be the enemies of God, yet hereafter they may become friends and be reconciled unto Him: whereof our prayer may be a means: And therefore howsoever we are to pray against their wicked practices, we are to pray for their persons, that they of enemies may become friends; of infidels, faithful; of heretics and schismatics, sound Christians; of wicked and profane, religious and holy: ‘for this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who wills that all men should be saved and come unto the knowledge of the truth.’ (1 Tim. 2:4)
Examples of them who have prayed for the wicked are very many in the Word of God: As of Abraham, for the Sodomites, Gen. 18, Moses, for the rebellious Israelites, Ex. 32, yea, for Pharaoh and the Egyptians; Samuel, for Saul, the man of God for Jerdboam, 1 Kn. 13. But why seek [????] examples? We have a commandment to pray for such as have sinned not unto death, and a promise to procure mercy for them, 1 Jn. 5:16, and a complaint of God when this is not performed, Eze. 22:30. Prayers made for the wicked are many times without fruit.
If they be without fruit, though they be to them idle, yet not to thee: Thy prayer shall return into thine own bosom, Ps. 35:13, according to that, Mt. 10:13, ‘When ye come into an house, salute it, or wish peace unto it: if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it; but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.’
As for those that be our enemies, though the Schoolmen teach that we are not, or at least need not, specially to pray for them, yet our Savior Christ has commanded us to love our enemies, to bless them that curse us and to pray for them who despitefully use us and persecute us. So Jer. 29:7; Rom. 12:14. And this was practiced by our Savior, Lk. 13:34, by Stephen, Acts 7:60.”
.
Joseph Caryl
An Exposition with practical observations continued upon the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth chapters of the book of Job... (London: Simmons, 1650), on Job 16:17, p. 336
“All men (except such as have sinned unto death) are to be prayed for, but no man must be prayed unto…”
.
Peter van Mastricht
Theoretical-Practical Theology (RHB), vol. 5, bk. 6, ch. 9, sect. 18, p. 213
“Hence, (7) it is said that those born of God cannot sin (1 John 3:9; 5:18), namely unto death (1 John 5:16), because by the grace of God, before death they are certainly restored (Ps. 37:24; Prov. 24:16).”
.
On the Early & Medieval Church
Order of
Quotes 2
Article 1
Latin 1
.
Quotes
1600’s
John Mayer
Ecclesiastica interpretatio: or the Expositions upon the Difficult & Doubtful Passages of the Seven Epistles called Catholic & the Revelation... (London: Haviland, 1627), on 1 Jn. 5, p. 218
“This place, by the confession of saint Augustine (sermon 11, On the Word of the Lord) is one of the hardest of all the Bible: and therefore diverse expositors have expounded it diversely.
[1.] Augustine himself, after that he had delivered one exposition, that the sin unto death is the envying of our brother’s grace (Sermon on the Mount, ch. 21), retracts, giving another, that it is the finishing of this life in the wicked perverseness of his mind (Retractions, bk. 1, ch. 19, Siquis in scelerata mentis perversitate hanc vitam finierit.);
And this is followed by many, Jerome, on ch. 14, Jeremiah; Ordinary Gloss, interlinear, Lyranus; Magister [Peter Lombard], Sentences, pt. 2, distinction 43.
And hereupon some Popish writers infer prayers for the dead, that have not died in obstinacy, but showing penitence before their death. (Lorinus on 1 Jn. 5:16) But this collection is worthily rejected by one of their own side, because it is not spoken as of sins done heretofore, but now in doing, and therefore while a man lives. ‘If any man sees his brother sinning,’ not ‘has seen him to have sinned.’
2. Some understand by the sin unto death, a mortal sin; by that ‘not unto death,’ a venial [sin], that is, a smaller and lighter offence, such as idle words, vain behavior or wanton looks (Gloss of Cassianus, Coll. 11, ch. 10; Origen, Homily 12 on Exodus): and hereupon the Popish found the distinction of mortal and venial sins, teaching that some grosser sins only deserve death, and that lesser sins do not make the soul subject to death.
Now because it is absurd, the sin unto death being thus understood, to expound this sentence, as the words run, the glosses say that common persons are not to pray for such, but the priests only, to whose censure they are to be referred. But this also is worthily rejected by one of their own side (Lorinus on 1 Jn. 5:16), because it is added that he shall give life to those that sin not unto death; whereby is intimated that the sin to be prayed for, makes the sinner subiect to death also. And it is a poor shift to say that the priests might pray for such as sinned unto death, but not the common people, seeing saint John enjoins a vacation from prayer to all in this case. That there are some sins not worthy of death is also contrary to all true divinity: See Jm. 2:10; Dt. 27, verse last; Mt. 5:19; 12:36.
3. Some again understand the sin against the Holy Ghost, which is out of malice to impugne the known truth, when the Spirit enlightening the mind to understand the truth, yet it is of spite and malice impugned, as the scribes and Pharisees, contrary to their knowledge, did maliciously set themselves against Christ: when any commit this sin, they say we are not to pray for it, because our Savior Christ has pronounced that it shall never be forgiven. (Beza, Piscator, Carthus, Faber Stapul)
Near unto this exposition comes Hilary [c. 310 – c. 367], expounding it of sin committed out of certain knowledge and malice; and Chrysostom [c. 347 – 407].”
.
Anthony Burgess
145 Expository Sermons upon the Whole 17th Chapter of the Gospel according to St. John… (London: Miller, 1656), Sermon 41, ‘Of Praying both for the Godly & the Wicked,’ pp. 229-30
“2. The apostle, 1 Jn. 5:16, speaks of a sin unto death, that we are not to pray for one guilty of that; This has much troubled the learned; The ancients, they thought it was not an absolute prohibition of all [persons] to pray for such, but only that eminent men might do it;
They thought for an ordinary Christian to pray for such sinners, it would be high presumption; As it’s not for everyone in the court to speak for some heinous offender but a special favourite; When God said, though Noah, Job and Daniel should pray for that people, He would not hear them (Eze. 14:14); This implied that they were nearer to God’s ear and might prevail sooner than others;
Though this exposition be old, yet the text seems to be absolutely prohibitive; and so Augustine said that if we knew who had sinned that unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost, we were no more to pray for him than for one damned in hell:”
.
Article
400’s
Augustine – pp. 1233-35 of Homily 10 on 1 Jn. 5:1-3 in Homilies on the Gospel according to St. John, and his First Epistle, 2 vols. (Oxford: Parker, 1849), vol. 2
Augustine connects his view to the sin against the Holy Spirit, but he retracted at least part of this interpretation later; see the quote by Mayer above.
.
Latin Article
1600’s
Suicerus, Johann C. – col. 214 in Ecclesiastical Thesaurus out of the Greek Fathers in Alphabetical Order, new ed. (Amsterdam: Wetstenius, 1682), ‘Amartano
Suicerus (1620-1684) was a reformed Greek scholar.
.
Westminster Confession
For an anlysis of what views the Confession allows for, see the Intro to the section below, ‘On the View that, while One is Not Bound to Pray for One who has Committed the Sin unto Death, nor is Encouraged to do so with Confidence, yet One may Pray for the Salvation of such a Person’.
.
ch. 15
“VI. As every man is bound to make private confession of his sins to God, praying for the pardon thereof;[l] upon which, and the forsaking of them, he shall find mercy;[m]…
[l] Ps. 51:4,5,7,9,14. Ps. 32:5,6.
[m] Prov. 28:13. 1 John 1:9“
.
ch. 21
“IV. Prayer is to be made for things lawful,[n] and for all sorts of men living, or that shall live hereafter;[o] but not for the dead,[p] nor for those of whom it may be known that they have sinned the sin unto death.[q]
[n] 1 John 5:14.
[o] 1 Tim. 2:1,2. John 17:20. 2 Sam. 7:29. Ruth 4:12.
[p] 2 Sam. 12:21-23 with Luke 16:25,26. Rev. 14:13.
[q] 1 John 5:16.”
.
On Recognizing the Sin unto Death & Certainty about it
Quote
1600’s
Matthew Poole
A Synopsis of Interpreters, both Critical & Otherwise, of the Sacred Scripture in The Exegetical Labors of the Reverend Matthew Poole, vol. 79, 1, 2, and 3 John, Jude (VA: Master Poole Publishing, 2013), on 1 Jn. 5:16, pp. 173-74
“The recognition of this matter is twofold, one true and certain, by divine revelation given to the Prophets, as often was done in the beginning of the Apostolic Church, as it is evident from Acts; 1 Cor. 12; 1 Tim. 1:20; 2 Tim. 4:14, 15; the other likely and uncertain, through human experience, by a diligent observation of the words and deeds of the impious against Christ (Gomar), when the desperate impiety of some most clearly appears, etc. (Calvin), as formerly it was judged that the Emperor Julian† had sinned, etc. (Gomar).
† The Emperor Julian reigned from 361 to 363. Although trained up in the Christian religion, he apostatized from the faith, and endeavored, if unsuccessfully, to restore Rome to its ancient paganism.”
.
On the View that, while One is Not Bound to Pray for One who has Committed the Sin unto Death, nor is Encouraged to do so with Confidence, yet One may Pray for the Salvation of such a Person
.
Order of
Intro & Consistent with WCF
Quotes 3
Intro & this View is Consistent with WCF 21.4
.
Travis Fentiman
Sept., 2025
.
Intro
Biblical Considerations & Contexts
The matter of the “sin unto death” (1 Jn. 5:16, KJV) is set in the context of and in contrast to the “confidence… that, if we ask any thing according to his will, He heareth us,” just a few verses before in v. 14. If any sin the “sin unto death,” (v.16, KJV), this confidence (that one is praying according to the will of God and will receive the end of his prayers) does not pertain.
The apostle John does not give a flat prohibition of praying for the one who has sinned unto death,¹ as the influential Westminster divine John Lightfoot notes below, with contextual reasons in the passage. In addition, the prayer John does not encourage is not for the sinner, but for “it,” (v. 16, i.e. the sin): “I do not say that he shall pray for it.” (v. 16)¹
¹ John Gill also notes this, even though he took the view that the sin unto death was the sin against the Holy Spirit: “the apostle does not expressly forbid to pray for the forgiveness of this sin, yet what he says amounts unto it; he gives no encouragement to it, or any hopes of succeeding, but rather the reverse;” Commentary on 1 Jn. 5, v. 16; see his fuller comments for his own interpretation.
The sin unto death, or the consequence flowing from it, is associated with “the wicked one” touching the guilty person (v. 18, KJV), that is, the Devil (or his hosts) being allowed in some measure to afflict the person. The idea may be similar to 1 Cor. 5:5, where a believer, whose “spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (i.e. at Judgment Day), yet falls into such presumptuous, heinous and scandalous sin that he is delivered over “unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh.”
Such sins “leading to death”² (1 Jn. 5:16, NKJV, ESV, NASB) may include those that were presumptuous (so Lightfoot, citing Num. 15:27-28), or crying sins that forcefully called out for both human and divine vengeance, or incurred the death penalty (even on God’s people) in the Old and New Testaments (e.g. Gen. 19:13, Ex. 3:7; 32:8-11; Lev. 24:15-16; 1 Sam. 2:25; 15:23; 2 Kn. 21:6; 2 Chron. 26:16; Jon. 1:2; Jm. 5:4; Jude 4; Rev. 6:9-10; Hermann Venema below cites more).
² Lightfoot below interprets the phrase as “until his death”.
The strongest arguments for this view include the context of 1 Jn. 5 and that John does not forbid praying for the person outright (such as is implied in the view that the sin unto death is the sin against the Holy Spirit), but rather John’s language is notably qualified: “I do not say that he should pray about that,” (v. 16, NKJV) leaving the possibility of prayer in some respect open (as Lightfoot notes).
If the law of nature, an expression of the will of God, cries out against such a flagrantly culpable person,¹ the Christian ought not to have confidence in praying the Lord to spare his life (though God does sometimes yet extraordinarily spare such persons), and, if it is clear he or she is a believer, and it is the will of God that his “spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Cor. 5:5), then one may safely pray the will of God to so come to pass, concurring with it. If it is unclear the person is a believer, John does not forbid praying that the person may turn in repentance and faith (1 Tim. 2:1-6).
¹ The Westminster divine Samuel Rutherford: “It is queried whether a magistrate is authorized to impose capital punishment on the exceedingly shameful and murderers?… We all affirm to authorize… 1. For Gen. 9:6, “Whoso sheds man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” Ex. 21:14, “But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbor, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die.” Num. 35:31, “Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death,” which is not a judicial law and temporary, but is clearly effected out of the Law of Nature, which innocent blood cannot be expiated as in the Ceremonial or Judicial Law [Dt. 21:1-9]. But it says ‘never’: Num. 35:33, “So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.”… 7. The Law of Nature is the force that repels in force, and, in protecting the right of life, it is better to kill than be killed.” An Examination of Arminianism (1638-1642), ch. 19, ‘Of the Magistrate’ pp. 728 & 732
This view, besides seeing praying in the passage as qualified, also sees “death” as qualified. The sin need not necessarily effectually bring on eternal death, but only have a nature greatly tending toward that (πρὸς θάνατον), and possibly bringing on or hastening physical death.
Support that the unforgiveable sin against the Holy Spirit is different from the sin unto death (as Lightfoot held) is that their contexts are different: John addressed a professed Christian “brother” (1 Jn. 5:16) whereas Jesus’s conext in Mt. 12:31-32 did not. John addressed a case of conscience that had arisen in the evolving circumstances that had not been addressed by Jesus (1 Cor. 7:12, 25): Whether the pardon of all sinning Christian brothers (1 Jn. 5:16) might be prayed for, even when they do not persecute the kingdom of God or blaspheme? Given the greater possibility of these Christian brothers being regenerate, in contrast to those who never had a Christian profession (as in Mt. 12:31-32), John gives a more conditioned and qualified answer, more similar to the evangelical counsels of advice given in 1 Cor. 7 (vv. 6-7, 16-17, 26, 35-36) than the absolute answer given by Jesus. Likewise, Jesus in the Greek speaks of “the” blasphemy of the Holy Ghost (a matter of emphasis and singularness), whereas there is no definite article in John’s phrasing, leaving “a sin unto death” to possibly refer to many various kinds of sin in contrast to the specific sin of blasphemy. John ends the passage, apparently alluding to what the sin unto death could involve, warning: “keep yourselves from idols,” which were all around them.
This view of 1 Jn. 5 entails that one can pray for the salvation of persons that commit the sin unto death, or sins leading to death, and for persons that are excommunicated from the Church. Many persons on death row who have committed crying, captial sins, as well as the excommunicated, have turned to Christ; if so, though one may not have confidence God will turn the person from being hardened, yet may not one be allowed to pray for what in fact happens, though it be for an extraordinary work of God?
.
Praying for the Papal Antichrist?
If this view of 1 Jn. 5 be right, it also is not necessarily wrong to pray for the repentance and salvation of the particular man serving as the Antichrist, that Man of Sin (2 Thess. 2:3-4), the current Pope in the Papal line,¹ though John gives no encouragement to do so and one cannot have any confidence in the prayer being answered.
¹ See ‘The Papacy is the Antichrist’ (RBO). A main argument against this, that Antichrist’s destruction is prophesied in Rev. 18 for the future is not conclusive. While Antichrist and his institution will be destroyed in the future, this does not necessitate the conclusion that every particular Pope, since their dominating rise in error and spiritual evil through Church history, must needs be damned. Reformed divines have maintained that even hardened heretics may yet be saved by Christ (see ‘Of Fundamental, Secondary & Tertiary Matters of Christianity’ and ‘On Heresy’) and it is possible some popes in Church history since their rise in tyrrany have been saved, despite what they submit to and exercise.
Martin Luther prayed for the Pope,¹ and the reformed Jerome Zanchi though it not unlawful to do so.²
¹ Luther: “…the Pope’s and their complices’ hatred against me. God turn their hearts from their diabolical maliciousness. But if God decree not to hear my prayers for their sin unto death: then God grant that they may fill up the measure of their sins…” Adam Melchior, The Life & Death of Dr. Martin Luther… (London: Stafford, 1641), p. 106.
² Edouard Bohl: “Marbach, the leader of the Lutheran party, was, for example, displeased with him because he [Zanchi] would not treat the pope as Antichrist, or as one for whom it was not lawful to pray.” “Separation of the Lutheran Church from the Reformed in the Sixteenth Century” in Presbyterian & Reformed Review, vol. 5, no. 19 (July, 1894), p. 419.
.
More Biblical Examples
How does this view of the sin unto death consist with the story of Cain murdering his brother Abel (Gen. 4), whose blood cried out for vengeance (Heb. 12:24)? God’s mercy and longsuffering with Cain in this example, in sparing his physical life, despite his heinous, capital deed, was plainly extraordinary (Gen. 4:15, Glory be to God’s extraordinary mercy). Yet there is also no doubt Cain’s sin led to eternal death. (1 Jn. 3:12-13; Jude 11)
In another example: Moses had been excluded from entering the promised land due to becoming angry with the mumbling Israelites and, in becoming incensed, publicly hitting the rock twice with his staff, beyond what God had directed, Moses not hallowing Him “in the midst of the children of Israel.” (Dt. 32:51) In Dt. 3:23-26, Moses pleads with the Lord to relent, but the Lord responds, “Enough of that! Speak no more to Me of this matter.” (v. 26) Thus Moses’s sentence to die outside the promised land was confirmed (cf. Ps. 99:6-8) and further praying to God about it was denied him, though Moses would die in the grace of the Lord (Dt. 32:48-52).
In view that Peter would publicly deny Christ three times (this being apostasy, the nature of which tends toward eternal damnation), Jesus yet told Peter, “I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail.” (Lk. 22:31)
.
Consistent with Westminster
Union in Biblical Langauge
Does this view of the sin unto death consist with Westminster Confession 21.4?:
“IV. Prayer is to be made for things lawful,[n] and for all sorts of men living, or that shall live hereafter;[o] but not for the dead,[p] nor for those of whom it may be known that they have sinned the sin unto death.[q]
[n] 1 John 5:14.
[o] 1 Tim. 2:1,2. John 17:20. 2 Sam. 7:29. Ruth 4:12.
[p] 2 Sam. 12:21-23 with Luke 16:25,26. Rev. 14:13.
[q] 1 John 5:16.”
Note the Confession simply repeats the Biblical terminology in 1 Jn. 5:16 in the Genevan Bible and KJV, that one is not to pray “for” such a person. There is no insurmountable objection why the confession’s language cannot be understood simply as bearing the meaning of that Biblical wording, however that be understood by each of the Westminster divines that voted for the confessional proposition. Each of them could have affirmed we are not to pray “for,” in the relevant, Biblically defined sense, persons known to have sinned the sin unto death.
This notion and strategy of uniting in Scriptural language where necessary (to prevent unnecessary division) was recommended by the widely influential early Church father Augustineª and was commonly known and practiced in Westminster’s era. The strategy was recommended in tracts by “some famous divines of the French [Reformed] Church”† and James Ussher (who was invited to be a member of the Westminster Assembly) and other Irish bishops‡ in a book published in London in 1643, the same year the Solemn League and Covenant between the English Parliament and Scotland bound persons to “the reformation of religion… according to the Word of God,” resulting in the Westminster Assembly and its productions. Richard Baxter and many English ministers and churches with him practiced this strategy with success through the 1650’s.º
ª See Ussher’s quote in the below footnote.
† “for those other points about which we differ, we may express them in such words and phrases as the sacred Scriptures afford us, and not suffer our men to enquire any further, or contest about them… Let therefore all the heads of matters in dispute amongst us be laid down and expressed in a certain and set form, such as may give satisfaction to both parties, made up wholly (if it be possible) of Scripture words: and let no man require from his brother any more besides it…” The Opinions of Certain Reverend & Learned Divines concerning the Fundamental Points of the True Protestant Religion, & the Right Government of Reformed Churches ([London & Oxford] Downes, 1643), “Opinion of some Famous Divines of the French Church,” pp. 26-27
‡ “…in divine matters, especially in such high and difficult mysteries as these are, which are rather to be adored than pried into, we ought to have a certain and set rule to speak by, as St. Augustine sometimes prudently and piously counselled: & therefore it would be a very safe and good course for us to refrain from all novel and new-fangled expressions, and to confine the liberty of prophesying to such forms and phrases as the holy Scriptures do furnish us withall.” Opinions of Certain Learned Divines, “The Opinion of… James Ussher…” (1634), p. 5
º Tim Cooper, When Christians Disagree: Lessons from the Fractured Relationship of John Owen and Richard Baxter (Crossway, 2024), pp. 88-101
.
Confessional Sentence Qualified
The allowability of this understanding of the confessional proposition is confirmed by the beginning of the sentence, which may be understood to qualify the rest: “Prayer is to be made for things lawful…” That is, lawful prayer, by definition, is not prohibited, even that which may apply to persons known to have committed the sin unto death, though one ought not to pray “for” them in the relevant, Biblically prohibited sense. When something is prohibited by an assembly of many persons, it is legitmate to ask in what sense, as, while a very relevant sense is no doubt intended, that all senses must have been so intended is not necessary or likely, or usually able to be proved.
.
Larger Catechism #183
Westminster Larger Catechism, #183 largely repeats the Confession’s sentiments and syntax on the sin unto death, but with some alternate phrasing at the beginning of the answer. While the Catechism answer does say we are not to pray “for those that are known to have sinned the sin unto death,” using the Scriptural term “for,” this phrasing may also be understood as qualified by what had come previously in Catechism answer #181:
“To pray in the name of Christ is, in obedience to his command, and in confidence on his promises, to ask mercy for his sake…”
and in answer #182:
“We not knowing what to pray for as we ought, the Spirit helps our infirmities, by enabling us to understand both for whom, and what, and how prayer is to be made; and by working and quickening in our hearts… those apprehensions, affections, and graces which are requisite for the right performance of that duty.”
Answer #183 itself starts with, and may be understood to be qualified by, “We are to pray for the whole church of Christ upon earth,” including the visible Church (it may be understood). In many of the Scriptural examples of persons sinning presumptious, death-worthy sins in the Old and New Testaments (e.g. Acts 5:1-11; 1 Cor. 11:27-32), these persons yet remained part of the visible Church of God.
.
Prohibiting Prayer for the Person or the Sin?
It might be asked why the confession does not prohibit prayer for the sin itself, as the second half of 1 Jn. 5:16 does (see the Greek), but rather the confession prohibits prayer for the person committing the sin unto death. While this may seem to give a bit of prominence to the dominant reformed view in that era, that the sin unto death was the sin against the Holy Spirit, yet the first half of 1 Jn. 5:16 does speak of praying for individuals (“he will ask, and He will give him life”), and the confession’s language did not exclude divines holding the view expounded here, they having been able to honestly vote for and affirm that same language.
Even in the case of the unforgiveable sin (Mt. 12:31-32), note that there is no prohibition of praying for the person, only, it is revealed that “it,” the unforgiveable sin, “will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come;” hence the correct inference that one should not pray otherwise, against God’s revealed will.
Yet this is not to say one cannot pray at all for the person in other ways, just as John does not encourage prayer to pardon the sin unto death itself, but also leaves it open that the person might be prayed for in other respects. Even Christ, knowing Judas, sincerely called him “friend” (Mt. 26:50; cf. Ps. 35:11-14; 41:9; Mt. 11:19; 22:12; see Fentiman, ‘Jesus the Friend of Sinners’). Blessing known reprobates not only brings judgment on them (Rom. 12:20), but the actions of blessing are good in themselves, especially as the reprobate persons are creatures and are benefited by blessings as creatures (1 Sam. 24:16-17; Ps. 35:11-14), even when these blessings are asked from and done by God in his common kindness and mercy (Lk. 6:35-36; Acts 14:16-17; see ‘Common Grace’). An English minister of that era, Joannes Thaddaeus, in a prominent work, instanced such a prayer from Scripture:
“Ex. 9:29 [see also vv. 27-28], Moses prayed for Pharaoh that the plagues may cease. We must not pray for any that sin unto death. (1 Jn. 3:4 & 5:16) Moses prayed not for Pharaoh, but for the taking away of the plagues, farther to declare the power of God and to overcome the wickedness and obstinacy of Pharaoh’s tyrannical heart.” The Reconciler of the Bible (London: 1656 [1655]), on Exodus, p. 29
Thomas Manton, who wrote the “Epistle to the Reader” to a later, influential published edition (1658) of the Westminster Standards, although not immediately addressing the sin unto death, preached:
“Partly because many wicked men are considerable in their station, therefore at least we pray for temporal blessings for them, though we have little hopes that ever they shall be gained to the knowledge of the truth. Thus we are to pray for wicked rulers, for the conservation of human society: they may serve as a thorn hedge about a garden of roses. Thus it is said, Ezra 6:10, that in the Temple they should ‘pray for the life of the king and of his sons,’ meaning the king of Babylon, Darius, at least for temporal favors.” A Second Volume of Sermons Preached (d. 1677; London: Astwood, 1684), Sermons on John 17, Sermon 12, p. 106-7
The language of numerous reformed divines in that era is consistent with only the sin unto death itself not being prayed to be pardoned, without saying that the person cannot be prayed for at all.¹
¹ For example: an influential London presbyterian minister, Francis Roberts, Believers’ Evidences for Eternal Life collected out of the First Epistle of John... (London: T.R., 1655), ch. 2, pp. 64-65, 95, 124
If the Confession does prohibit every prayer and manner of praying for the one who has sinned the sin unto death, disallowing a legitimate and plain reading of Scripture’s syntax in 1 Jn. 5:16, the Confession would run the risk of going beyond the Word, as well as being wrong.
.
Westminster’s Consensus Context
Poole, Howe & Venema Later
Numerous more reformed divines of that era held that the sin unto death referred to sins bringing on death in this life and possibly the next, but Matthew Poole, John Howe and Hermann Venema below are the only further one’s this author has come across so far explicitly affirming prayer being permitted for such persons, or implicitly allowing this view.
Poole (1624–1679) and Howe (1630-1705) were both English presbyterian ministers. While both their ordinations, it seems, being in the mid-1600’s in England, probably did not involve swearing to the Westminster Confession, yet after the Great Ejection in 1662, and, for Howe, after the Glorious Revolution of 1689, they continued in the tradition of Westminster, further participating in the ordination of ministers (who may have been swearing to the Westminster Confession, though the details need to be confirmed). Venema (1697–1787) was Dutch reformed professor of theology.
Note, if the ambiguity of the confessional proposition ought to be understood as here argued, as is evident, and if (1) the confessional language and proposition may be interpreted as in accord with the Biblical language, whatever meaning may be held to be understood therein; and (2) the confession allows for praying in some respect for those who are known to have commited the sin unto death: then nearly any view of the sin unto death (there were many in that era) is allowed and not excluded by the Westminster Confession.
.
Confessional Context before Westminster
Two major, reformed, national (and international), confessional documents before Westminster address the sin unto death: the Swiss Second Helvetic Confession (1566) and the Dutch Canons of Dort (1619). The former, while giving a prominent place to the common reformed view that the sin unto death is the same as the sin against the Holy Spirit, yet allows for variation, as will be argued.
While the Canons of Dort do take the dominant reformed view, yet it will be shown Dutch subscription left the matter open. When the French Reformed Churches shortly thereafter sanctioned and finally subscribed the Canons of Dort in a less strict manner, there was plenty of room to take a differing view of 1 Jn. 5. Westminster (and significant confessions after it), it is put forth here, followed in this flexible, reformed trajectory on the topic.
.
2nd Helvetic Confession
The Second Helvetic Confession was “the most widely received of the sixteenth century Reformed confessions”. Besides the Swiss cantons and Palatinate, it was approved by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 1566,¹ was adopted by the reformed Churches of Hungary and Eastern Europe as a standard of their own in 1567² and sanctioned by the French Reformed Churches in 1571. “It was well received also in Holland and England.”³ The confession states in chapter eight, citing 1 Jn. 5:16-17:
“we acknowledge that all other sins [besides Original Sin]… are both called and are indeed sins, by what name soever they are termed, whether mortal or venial, or also that which is called sin against the Holy Ghost, which is never forgiven (Mark 3:29; 1 Jn. 5:16-17).”
¹ – The Works of John Knox, ed. David Laing (Edinburgh: Thin, 1846), vol. 6, Letter 80, “The General Assembly to Theodore Beza”, pp. 544-50
² Reformed Confessions of the 16th & 17th Centuries, ed. James Dennison, Jr. (RHB, 2010), vol. 2, p. 809
³ Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, 3 vols., 6th ed. (Baker, 1977), vol. 1, p. 394
The consensus nature† of this sentence is clear by the phrasing, “by what name soever they are termed, whether mortal or venial”. The reformed regularly affirmed the distinction of venial and mortal sins in sound protestant senses,³ which the confession does not deny here, but accommodates, as there is no sense in striving about names of terms if the substance be agreed on. 1 Jn. 5:16-17 was regularly proof-texted for “mortal sin” consistent with protestant theology.
† Seen also in the title it was published under: A Simple Confession and Exposition of the Orthodox Faith and Catholic Dogmas of the Sincere Christian Religion…
³ See ‘On the Classifications & Degrees of Sin, & the Distinction Between Venial & Mortal Sin’ (RBO).
Nonetheless, amongst Churchmen of different opinions, the confession’s citation of 1 Jn. 5:16-17 in the margin in the Latin,º need not be interpreted as referring to “that which is called sin against the Holy Ghost,” but may be understood to support other parts of the sentence.
º Confessio et expositio simplex orthodoxae fidei, et dogmatum catholicorum sincerae religionis Christianae… (Zurich: Gessner, 1672), pp. 39-40
The confession does not say that the person who has committed “that which is called sin against the Holy Ghost” is not to be prayed for (in any respect), but only that the sin “is never forgiven.” Likewise the confession does not say one cannot pray for the person committing the sin unto death. It would be strange if the widely accepted confession constrained many nations to take only one particular view of the matters.
.
Canons of Dort
The Dutch Canons of Dort were forged in response to what would come to be called Arminianism. The Arminians (or Remonstrants) commonly argued a Christian brother may lose their eternal salvation, using 1 Jn. 5:16-17 as a proof-text. The Canons responded in the 5th Head, “The Perseverance of the Saints,” article six. In the subsequent “Rejection of Errors,” “the Synod rejects the errors of those… Who teach: That true believers and regenerate can sin the sin unto death or against the Holy Spirit,”† citing 1 Jn. 5:16-17, using as an argument a certain interpretation of 1 Jn. 5:18.
† Reformed Confessions, 4.145 & 148-49
Tying a certain and exclusive exegetical view into a doctrinal standard can be risky business (if one turns out to be wrong or legitimate principles of exegesis allow for greater breadth).¹
¹ The later Dutch professor Peter van Mastricht, throughout his Theoretical-Practical Theology (1698), is precise and rigorous in doctrine, but allows for a surprising breadth of exegetical textual interpretations, so long as they do not necessarily contradict the analogy of Faith, or precise and rigorous reformed doctrine.
The form of ministerial subscription the Synod instituted, “which has been used through the centuries in the Dutch Reformed tradition,”² is very qualified. It only binds unto “all the articles and particular points of doctrine contained in” the Belgic Confession (1561) and Heidelberg Catechism (1563), but not the Canons of Dort (1619). The form of subscription does not even explicitly mention the Canons of Dort, but rather further binds unto “the declaration on some points of this doctrine made by the National Synod held at Dordrecht in 1619,” which could be understood as things other than the Canons. Even if the Canons are understood, those Canons are not said to add any doctrines to what was previously held, but only to declare on some points of the previously held doctrine in the Belgic Confession and Heidelberg Catechism (which do not mention the sin unto death).
² W. Robert Godfrey, “Subscription in the Dutch Reformed Tradition” in The Practice of Confessional Subscription, ed. David Hall (Covenant Foundation, 1997), p. 69
The form of subscription goes on to “reject all errors contrary to this [previous] doctrine which are condemned by the Synod of Dort…” While this certainly does encompass errors rejected in the Canons, it only encompasses those that oppose the doctrine of the Belgic Confession and Heidelberg Catechism, which do not mention the sin unto death. To misread this relationship of the Canons to the Dutch Church’s confession and catechism is to greatly misunderstand the nature of the Synod of Dort and its purpose, work and authority.³
³ W. Robert Godfrey’s full-subscriptionist analysis and summary of this Dutch form of subscription in Practice of Confessional Subscription, p. 70 is very inaccurate to the form’s very words he is seeking to represent. Godfrey concedes, “In practice the elders in the Dutch churches did subscribe to the confessional standards in a variety of ways.”
The long form of subscription reads in its most relevant, principal parts:
“We, the undersigned ministers of the Word… declare sincerely… by this our subscription, that we from the heart think and believe that all the articles and particular points of doctrine contained in this Confession and Catechism of the Dutch Reformed Church together with the declaration on some points of this doctrine made by the National Synod held at Dordrecht in 1619 agree in everything with the Word of God.
We promise therefore diligently to teach and faithfully to defend this very doctrine… We also not only reject all errors contrary to this doctrine which are condemned by the Synod of Dort, but we also want to refute and oppose them…” Practice of Confessional Subscription, p. 69
Hence when the later Venema was a professor of theology at Franeker from 1723-1774, he taught an exegetical view of 1 Jn. 5:16-17 at odds with the Canons of Dort, as found below. The synod also ordained: “Whether and in what way elders of the churches are to subscribe is left to the discretion of their individual classes [presbyteries] and synods.”†
† Practice of Confessional Subscription, p. 70 citing H.H. Kuyper, De Post-Acta (Amsterdam: Hoeveker and Wormser, 1899), p. 231
.
French Reformed Churches
The French Reformed Churches, in a national synod in 1620 enthusiastically “received and approved” the Canons “by a common consent, as conforming to the Word of God,” and instituted subscription to them for “all members of the French provincial synods” in a strict way.¹
¹ On this section, see Donald Sinnema, “The French Reformed Churches, Arminianism and the Synod of Dort” in The Theology of the French Reformed Churches... (Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), pp. 121-26
However, due to push-back on various issues from various quarters, the next national synod in 1623 loosened the subscription formula to:
“We, the undersigned pastors and elders… declare with all possible sincerity that the… Canons are grounded on the Word of God and conform to the Confession of Faith approved and received in the Reformed Churches of this Kingdom…” Theology of the French Reformed Churches, p. 126
Needless to say one could take an alternate view of 1 Jn. 5:16-17 while affirming the Canons to be “grounded on the Word of God”.
.
Confessional Context after Westminster
Westminster, it is put forth here, continued the flexible reformed tradition on the sin unto death.
After Westminster, showing the continuity of this tradition, the Savoy Declaration of Faith (1658), a product of Independents, with Thomas Goodwin, Philip Nye, William Bridge, Joseph Caryl, William Greenhill and John Owen being leading primary authors (all except Owen were Westminster divines), used the exact same language on the sin unto death (in ch. 22.4) as Westminster. A greater breadth of theological views and practices often tended to circulate and be tolerated among the Independents and those who had familiarity with them (which included even more radicalized groups).¹ It seems likely the Independents, in using Westminster’s language, thought this language was sufficient to encompass the greater breadth of views they tended to tolerate.
¹ Schaff, Creeds of Christendom 1.829-32 & 847-48
Likewise, the same language is also used in the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith (22.4), which theological group tended to have a greater breadth of diversity that ran with it than even the Independents.
.
Conclusion
That there were a variation of reformed views in that era will not come as a surprise to many, even with respect to the sin unto death. But why then should it be surprising that confessional language on a complex topic handled in the complex context of the Westminster Assembly may be nuanced and legitimately open to manifold interpretations when looked at closely? And if this be the case, should it be surprising Westminster’s wording on the sin unto death allows for many interpretations?
So far from this being unethical or loose, it manifests, as James 3:17-18 says, “wisdom that is from above,” which:
“is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.”
Westminster’s deliverances also exemplify the advice of bishop Joseph Hall, who would later address the Westminster Assembly in 1644:º
“if it may seem to make anything for the public peace, that we come as near as we can one to another in the forms and manner of expression;” Opinions of Certain Learned Divines, “To… John Dury…”, p. 16
º Hall, A Modest Offer of some meet Considerations tendered to… the Assembly of Divines met at Westminster, 1644… (London: Basset, 1660)
Quotes
Order of
Lightfoot
Poole
Howe
Venema
.
1600’s
John Lightfoot
‘A Sin Unto Death, a Sermon’ on 1 Jn. 5:16 (1666) in Whole Works, ed. Pitman (1822), vol. 6, pp. 331-45
p. 1,094
“The sin against the Holy Ghost indeed is distinct and something different from this sin unto death that our apostle [John] speaks of… It is true indeed that a sin in which a man continues unrepenting until his death and in which he dies, may very justly be called ‘a sin to death,’ that is, ‘a sin until his death,’ and it will prove a sin to death eternal, but that the apostle means here a particular sin, and that he estimates it not by its length but by its weight, not by how long the party continues in it, but by how grievous the sin is in itself, will appear as we go along, partly by discovery of the reason of the title he puts upon it, and partly by discovery of the very sin itself that is here intended…”
.
p. 1,095
“And in this they [Jews] speak but the words of the Law, in Num. 15:27-28:
‘If any soul sin through ignorance, he shall bring a she-goat of the first year for a sin offering. And the priest shall make an atonement for him that sins ignorantly. But the soul that does ought presumptuously… the same has reproached the Lord: That soul shall be cut off from among his people.’
Now what is meant by ‘cutting off’?… ask the Jews to and among whom the thing was spoken, what it means in their common speech and acceptation, and they will tell you, ‘cutting off means’ [Hebrew], ‘death by the hand of Heaven,’ death or destruction by the hand of God. Interpreting the matter to this purpose, that if a person sinned wilfully and presumptuously, there was no sin offering allowed in that case, but the party so offending fell immediately under liableness to divine vengance, to be destroyed or cut off by the hand of Heaven…”
.
p. 1096
“It [Heb. 10:26] tells you what sin it is, viz. ‘sinning wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth’: It limits to you why it is called a sin unto death, because there is no other way upon the committing of it, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment and fiery indignation. And it gives you some intimation why no praying for it: because [there is] no sacrifice for it…”
.
pp. 1,097-98
“Every presumptuous sin in the text [that] was cited in Moses, was a sin unto death, in the sense that the Jewish nation understood a sin unto death, viz. that brought to an immediate liableness to cutting off by divine vengeance. Now this was a sin of presumption, and despising the Word of God, as Moses explains what that presumptuous sinning is…
But why does not this our apostle speak out, and say, ‘I say he should not pray for it,’ but says only, ‘I do not say that he should.’…
He [John] takes care of the consciences of the people of God as well as he shows the two conditions of the sinner he speaks of. There were some that might be in a strait what to do in this case. They were commanded by their Lord and Master to pray for their enemies: these enemies of theirs were become so like their father the Devil that it might pose their consciences whether they should pray for them or no. Therefore this divine apostle uses a happy temper: that he will lay no charge on them, that are so pinched, to pray for them: nor indeed forbid those to pray for them that are more enlarged: for undoubtedly the indifferent expression of the apostle as I may call it, seems plainly to carry with it such a consideration…”
.
p. 1,098
“I shall not go about to define or circumscribe exactly the bounds wherein to conclude wilful sinning: I shall not confine this evil spirit with any circle: because I would have every one to look well about, lest the case be his own…”
.
p. 1,099
“But wilful sinner, how actest thou? To oppose the counsel and command of the Lord with all the heart, and mind, and soul. To love and follow and commit wickedness with all the heart, and mind, and soul. If this be not a deadly wound under the fifth rib, a mortal plague at the bottom of the will, what can you call the plague of the heart?… Every wilful sinning does add more hardness and more wilfulness of sinning to the heart still. A hard heart does harden by sinning: and the more the sin is wilful, the more the heart gathers hardness… So do wilful sinnings draw on one another, and from one the heart is emboldened to another.”
.
Matthew Poole
A Synopsis of Interpreters, both Critical & Otherwise, of the Sacred Scripture in The Exegetical Labors of the Reverend Matthew Poole, vol. 79, 1, 2, and 3 John, Jude (d. 1679; VA: Master Poole Publishing, 2013), on 1 John 5:16, p. 171 Note that Poole in this section cites Romanists and Arminians.
“He does not forbid the faithful to pray for such (Estius, similarly Hammond), but unto that he does not venture to urge them, that is, that they might pray for them with the confidence of obtaining (Estius); that is to say, I do not venture to create a certain hope of obtaining (Menochius). I do not command prayers to be poured out for them (Grotius, thus Hammond), for there is no promise upon which such prayers might depend. Here you have the mystical sense of the passages in Jer. 7:16 and Eze. 14:14 (Grotius).”
.
1700’s
John Howe
Annotations on the Three Epistles General of John, on 1 Jn. 5:16 in Works (d. 1705), vol. 5, pp. 340-41
“‘If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death;’ namely, that appears not obstinate and incurable. ‘He shall ask;’ that is, with ‘confidence.’
But ‘there is a sin unto death;’—that is, which does not barely deserve death, as all sin doth, nor which argues a person to be probably in a present state of death or unregeneracy, which, the sinful ways may do of many that never made profession; but of such as have apostatized from a former specious profession into heresy and debauchery, and continue obstinate therein against all methods of recovery; that are even ‘twice dead,’ (Jude 12) etc.
‘I do not say that he shall pray for it;’ that is, I do not give that encouragement to pray for such with that hope and expectation of success, as for others; though he does not simply forbid praying for them neither.“
.
Matthew Poole, Annotations, on 1 John, ch. 5, verse 16. Poole died previous to completing his Annotations; Howe was the continuator for 1 John.
“‘he shall ask,’ i.e. with confidence, as 1 John 5:14. But
‘there is a sin unto death,’ i.e… of such as have apostatized from a former specious profession into heresy and debauchery, and continue obstinate therein, against all methods of recovery; that are, as Jude 1:12, even twice dead, etc.
‘I do not say that he shall pray for it;’ i.e. I do not give that encouragement to pray for such, with that hope and expectation of success, as for others; though he does not simply forbid praying for them neither.”
.
The Redeemer’s Tears wept over Lost Souls… (London: Astwood, 1684), pp. 83-87
“But it may be said, when the apostle (1 Jn. 5:16) directs to pray for a brother whom we see sinning a sin that is not unto death, and adds, ‘there is a sin unto death, I do not say he shall pray for it,’ is it not implied that it may be known when one sins that sin unto death, not only to himself, but even to others too?
I answer it is implied there may be too probable appearances of it, and much ground to suspect and fear it concerning some, in some cases; as when any against the highest evidence of the truth of the Christian religion, and that Jesus is the Christ or the Messiah… do notwithstanding, from that malice which blinds their understanding, persist in infidelity or apostatize and relapse into it from a former profession, there is great cause of suspicion lest such have sinned that sin unto death.
Whereupon yet it is to be observed, he does not expresly forbid praying for the persons whose case we may doubt; only he does not enjoin it, as he does for others, but only says, ‘I do not say ye shall pray for it,’ i.e. that in his present direction to pray for others, he did not intend such, but another sort, for whom they might pray remotely from any such suspicion: viz. that he meant now such praying as ought to be interchanged between Christian friends that have reason in the main to be well persuaded concerning one another, in the mean time intending no opposition to what is elsewhere enjoined, the praying for all men, 1 Tim. 2:1, without the personal exclusion of any, as also our Lord Himself prayed indefinitely for his most malicious enemies, ‘Father forgive them they know not what they do,’ though He had formerly said there was such a sin as should never be forgiven, whereof ’tis highly probable some of them were guilty: yet such He does not expressly except; but his prayer being in the indefinite, not the universal form, ’tis to be supposed it must mean such as were within the compass and reach of prayer and capable of benefit by it.
Nor does the apostle [John] here [in 1 Jn. 5] direct personally to exclude any, only that indefinitely and in the general such must be supposed [that it was] not meant [of those] as had sinned the sin unto death; or [they] must be conditionally excluded, if they had, without determining who had or had not.
To which purpose it is very observable that a more abstract form of expression is used in this latter clause of this verse [1 Jn. 5:16]. For whereas in the former positive part of the direction, he enjoins praying for him, or them that had not sinned unto death (viz. concerning whom there was no ground for any such imagination or suspicion that they had). In the negative part, concerning such as might have sinned it, he does not say for him or them, but for “it” (i.e. concerning, or in reference to it), as if he had said the case in general only is to be excepted, and if persons are to be distinguished (since every sin is someone’s sin, the sin of some person or other), let God distinguish, but do not you: ’tis enough for you to except the sin committed by whomsoever.
And though the former part of the verse speaks of a particular person: ‘If a man see his brother sin a sin that is not unto death,’ which is as determinate to a person as the sight of our eye can be, it does not follow the latter part must suppose a like particular determination of any person’s case, that he has sinned it. I may have great reason to be confident such and such have not, when I can only suspect that such a one has. And it is a thing much less unlikely to be certain to oneself [about] than another, for they that have sinned unto death are no doubt so blinded and stupified by it that they are not more apt or competent to observe themselves and consider their case than others may be.”
.
Herman Venema
Translation of Hermann Venema’s inedited Institutes of Theology tr. Alexander W. Brown (d. 1787; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1850), ch. 30, sect. 7, p. 505
“(7.) In reference to God as the governor of the world and to his justice in the administration of his government, sins are distinguished into those which call for vengeance from God even in the present life, and into those which God in the exercise of his long-suffering bears, and which he does not punish except in the life to come.
The former are so heinous in their character that He cannot extend towards them his forbearance in this world. And hence they are called clamant or crying sins because they as it were call alone for the infliction of the divine vengeance. Some of these are recorded in Scripture.
The blood of Abel is represented as crying unto God from the ground, Gen. 4:10. So is th sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, Gen. 18:20-21; the oppression by the Egyptians of the children of Israel, Ex. 3:9; the covetousness of the Chaldeans, Hab. 2:11; and the fraud of those who kept back the hire of their laborers, James 5:4. Among these crying sins may be ranked also those which are committed insolently in the face of a well-known law, and which God will not forgive,Num. 15:30.
To the same class belongs that sin which an apostle calls ‘a sin unto death,’ (1 Jn. 5:16). This seems to be plain from the context in which he does not desire us to pray for the forgiveness of such a sin in this life, seeing that God is wont to make a signal display of his vengeance against it even here.”
.
Latin Articles
1500’s
Snecanus, Gellius – ‘Of the Sin Against the Holy Spirit, or Unto Death’ in A Methodical Description, or Fundamental, Principal Common Places, or the Dogmas of Scripture… (Harlemum, 1591), pp. 373-80
Snecanus (c.1540-1596) was a reformer of Friesland and takes the view that the sin unto death is the same as the sin against the Holy Spirit.
Bertram, Bonaventure C. – ch. 2, pp. 23-24 of On the Republic of the Hebrews (d. 1594; Leiden: Maire, 1651)
Bertram (1531-1594) was a reformed professor of law, oriental languages (in Geneva) and Hebrew (in Lausanne), and takes the view that the sin unto death concerns excommunication, as per Jewish precedent.
.
1700’s
Marck, Johannes – Exercitation 50, ‘On 1 John 5:16-17’ in Biblical Exercitations on 50 select places of the Old and New Testament (Amserdam, 1707), pp. 1082-1104
Marck appears to take the sin unto death as the sin against the Holy Spirit.
“[After quoting Mt. 12:31-32] For in reality there is no difference between the sin from which one is never granted truly to repent— for which no sacrifice remains, but only certain and severe vengeance, and which will never be forgiven— and that which is, and is called, ‘unto death.’ In this view not only have the greatest of our theologians gone before, but many others also, both of the ancients and of the Papists, who, however, have expressed their opinion less fully by various phrases, indeed interpreting somewhat differently the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and trying to distinguish this sin just as much as the one Paul [in Hebrews] describes from it.” – pp. 1096-97, trans. ChatGPT-5
Schöttgen, Johann Christian – on 1 John 5:16 in Hebraic & Talmudic Hours in the Whole New Testament… (Dresden & Leipzig, 1733 / 1742), vol. 1, p. 1076
Schottgen (1687-1751) was a German. Schottgen cites two places in the Talmud that use the phrase a sin unto death, Yoma 50.1 and Sota 48.1, and takes the view the phrase refers to crimes meriting death.
Werenfels, Samuel – ‘On 1 John 5:16-17’ in 15. Thoughts on some Obscure Places of sacred Scipture in Short Theological, Philosophical and Philological Works, 2nd ed. (Lausanne & Genvea: Bousquet, 1739), vol. 1, pp. 304-8
Werenfels takes the sin unto death to signify a sin unto temporal death, citing Jn. 11:4 about Lazarus: “This sickness is not unto death…” and bringing in other Scriptures.
Wolf, Johann Christoph – pp. 315-17 in Philological & Critical Exertions in the New Testament (d. 1739; 1741), vol. 5
Wolf (1683-1739) was a German, Lutheran, Hebraist, polymath and collector of books.
Wolf references Schoetgenius, who gives the Hebrew phrases the Jews used for sins unto death and not unto death, taking such to refer to the Mosaic capital penalties. Wolf gives references to Lutherans addressing the specific point of whether one may pray for those sinning unto death. He also gives more references of the reformed (and others) on the general topic.
Wolf says he follows Joachim Lange in taking the sin unto death as the sin against the Holy Spirit.
Wettstein, Johann Jakob – on 1 John 5:16 in The Greek New Testament… (Amsterdam, 1751-1752), vol. 1, p. 728
Wettstein (1693-1754) was a Swiss Arminian and best known as a New Testament critic.
He quotes similar phrases from Petronius, Satyricon, 130; The Shepherd of Hermas, bk. 3, similitude 6, ch. 2; Jamblichus, Of the Pythagorean Life, 74, as well as the Bible verses Jer. 7:16; 11:14; 14:11-12; Eze. 14:14; Num. 18:22.
.
1800’s
Rosenmuller, Johann Georg – on 1 John 5:16-17 in Scholia on the New Testament, 5 vols (Nuremberg, Germany, 1808-1830), vol. 4, pp. 570-73
Rosenmuller (1736–1815) takes the sin unto death to be a capital crime.
.
Bibliography
Latin Article
1700’s
Schelting, Theodore – ‘The Sin unto Death’, pp. 381 rt col bot in Campegius Vitringa, The Doctrine of the Christian Religion, Summarily Described through Aphorisms, vol. 2 6th ed Martin Vitringa & Theodore Schelting (d. 1722; Arnheim: Moelemann, 1761)
Schelting especially gives references on the debate on whether the sin unto death is the same or not with the sin against the Holy Spirit.
.
.
.
“Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Korah. These are spots in your feasts of charity… feeding themselves without fear… trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots, raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame, wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.”
Jude 11-13
“For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame… But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.”
Heb. 4:6-8
.
.
.
Related Pages
Classifications & Degrees of Sin, & Venial vs. Mortal
Common Operations of the Spirit
General Equity of the Old Testament Civil Laws & the Judicial Laws