Rosangela, thank you. To say Peter sinned unintentionally is hard to swallow. He knew perfectly well he was sinning. His sin was inexcusable. It was intentional. It was self-serving cowardice. Also, to say Lucifer was ignorant of wrongdoing or even partially ignorant is too far out there to accept. There is no way he was uncertain his course of action was contrary to God's will. Nor do I agree with Tom that he sinned willfully. I think his thoughts, words, and actions were pardonable without requiring the death of Jesus for the simple reason God did not consider them sinful. Otherwise, law and justice demand death for sin. But no provision existed to save angels the moment they choose to sin.

Mike, I gave examples in my earlier post. Nevertheless, Lucifer is guilty of the first point, and we can never be guilty of it, since we are ignorant, and are deceived by sin. The second point may apply equally to Satan as to us (although Satan's sin is already unpardonable per #1). We can ignore the voice of conscience to the point we do not hear it anymore. We then feel no prompting, nor desire, to repent and ask forgiveness. The sin is unpardonable, for we do not request pardon.

When we are genuinely penitent and feel prompted to confess, repent, and renew our allegiance to Christ, we have not committed the unpardonable sin. Well, this requires the working of the Holy Spirit as well.

There is one other class of "unpardonable sin" which deserves mention: sins unconfessed during one's period of probation. When probation closes, it's too late, regardless of one's desires at that point (although I tend to think that the Holy Spirit will have been withdrawn from the lost at that point, and they will not be truly penitent--only remorseful and fearful of the consequences).

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Mike, no sin is excusable. Yet it wasn't a premeditated sin. Under the strain of the moment he gave down. Peter didn't cherish evil; he didn't resist light, which Judas did. These characteristics define a willful sin.


As to Lucifer, one can only resist light after understanding it.
How can God not consider sinful something that is sinful? This is only possible if it is done in igorance or is an error of judgment.

GC, I hear you saying 1 applies only to evil angels, and 2 only applies to humans who harden their hearts beyond the point of no return. Everyone else sins ignorantly. What about people who die before they repent and before they reach the point of no return? Are they saved by default?

Rosangela, to say Peter didn't cherish evil or resist light is to say he had no idea he was sinning. Cowardice is choosing evil, rejecting light. And, as to Lucifer, what light did he lack while he was, as you say, sinning ignorantly? What was he thinking, saying, and doing that he was unsure was contrary to God's will?

Mike,

I'm not following you. What is your point? That there is no difference between Peter's and Judas' sin? That both are willful sins? Or what?

When one errs, others too often feel at liberty to make the case appear as bad as possible. ... Errors committed through ignorance, thoughtlessness, or weakness are exaggerated into wilful, premeditated sin. {PUR, April 10, 1902 par. 7}

How would you classify Peter's sin in view of the quote above?


Since he thought he was right, he probably believed that if he only kept on insisting about his point and was able to convince others to join him, he would be able to convince God that he was right and make Him change His mind, so that His will and God's will would again harmonize.

Now, about your view. You said God didn't consider Lucifer's thoughts, words, and actions as sinful. Could you present some plausible reason for this?

Rosangela, yes, both Peter and Judas knew they were sinning. Peter's was spontaneous, whereas, Judas' was premeditated. In fact, Judas was hoping Jesus would declare Himself king and appoint him as His right hand man. Peter simply lied to save his hide.

Regarding Lucifer, he was the highest ranking sinless angel, who knew God so well there was nothing he didn't know about Him. We have no way of relating or identifying with him. His experience was ground breaking and unheard of. He was dealing with and trying to understand things so strange that we cannot begin to imagine what it was like. His thoughts, feelings, strategies, and actions were awkward attempts at coping with something so foreign and so unfamiliar that it is impossible for us to grasp or comprehend.

Mike,

The first point is correct. On the second point, let me urge again that even those people who commit the unpardonable sin (working away of the Holy Spirit, until they no longer have sorrow, nor repentance, for their sin), do so ignorantly. Again, this is the broad sense of "ignorant," but I suspect in many cases it also is ignorant on the specific sense of realizing this sin is being committed. How many people, would you think, even suspect that they have committed the unpardonable sin? It seems to me that those who have would not realize it.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

GC, what about people who die before they repent and before they reach the point of no return? Are they saved by default?

I think I already answered this in an earlier post:

When one dies, that closes their probation, right?

God may save some who have unconfessed sins when they are suddenly cut down, but this is because He looks at the general trend of their life and character. Just because they have some fresh sins on their slate when they die does not mean they were purposefully unrepentant, nor does this mean those sins suddenly turn into "unpardonable" ones. The unpardonable sins would be those which have been deliberately cherished--where the sinner either refused to repent, or sought to delay repentance.

NOTE: There are few scriptures on the topic of the "unpardonable," so I count this as being more opinion than supportable fact.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.