Potential Forgiveness in the Afterlife

[RICHinCHRIST]

I've often heard it argued on this forum that there is no passage of Scripture that unequivocally states that there is an opportunity for lost people to be forgiven or redeemed after death. It's also often said that there is no passage that unequivocally states that there is not that same opportunity after death. I read this today and thought that it may bring light on the issue, forgive me if it's been mentioned before.


Here Jesus states that the unpardonable sin will not be forgiven in this age or the next. Is Jesus therefore implying that forgiveness is then available in the afterlife for others who do not commit the unpardonable sin? It would appear so (otherwise, why would He even mention it if it is guaranteed that forgiveness is impossible after death?).

I have trouble reconciling this passage with ultimate universal reconciliation (since there will be some who remain unforgiven) but I can at least see the possibility for a great many people to have the opportunity to be saved after they die (if indeed Jesus is implying that it's possible).

[dwilkins]

This age is the one that they were living in (and that they expected to soon pass) and the one to come was the one in which the kingdom of God was fully operational. The age to come isn't necessarily residence in heaven or in the afterlife. It is the age in which some will have the option to finally be fully reconciled to God in heaven, but not everyone is there. I don't think he's saying anything other than that in that age and in the one they expected to start that sin wouldn't be forgiven.

Doug

[steve7150]

Matthew 12:32 "Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the [age] to come. (NKJV)

Here Jesus states that the unpardonable sin will not be forgiven in this age or the next. Is Jesus therefore implying that forgiveness is then available in the afterlife for others who do not commit the unpardonable sin? It would appear so (otherhink you bring up wise, why would He even mention it if it is guaranteed that forgiveness is impossible after death?).




I think you bring up a good point because the jewish understanding of the age to come is after the Messiah comes and Matthew is writing to a jewish audience. This "age to come" would be equivalent to after the second coming. Jesus is drawing a contrast between those who will not be forgiven and those that may, so i think he is implying postmortem repentence and forgiveness is in God's plan.

Also i have mentioned Paul said in Phil 2.10 that those under the earth should confess Jesus Christ is Lord which i believe is postmortem repentence.

[RICHinCHRIST]

This age is the one that they were living in (and that they expected to soon pass) and the one to come was the one in which the kingdom of God was fully operational. The age to come isn't necessarily residence in heaven or in the afterlife. It is the age in which some will have the option to finally be fully reconciled to God in heaven, but not everyone is there. I don't think he's saying anything other than that in that age and in the one they expected to start that sin wouldn't be forgiven.

Doug

Hi Doug, I think your view is acceptable in some passages, but others make me think otherwise.

for instance

This passage seems to make a clear distinction between this life and the next, especially since the disciples would have the most persecutions after Pentecost when the Jewish age was fast disappearing.


This may be speaking of the kingdom age, but I don't think an interpretation to the afterlife is beyond question, since the book of Hebrews is already declaring the previous age of the Jews and its covenant to be defunct.


This passage is also describing a scenario which would be hard to interpret in your way... I see how you could do it, but it is a bit of a stretch.

[dwilkins]

I'm not seeing where the verses you provided challenge my point. In "this age" (at the time of the writing of the NT) there was no eternal life, resurrection, or fully implemented Kingdom. The gifts that the believers were given were a down payment and part of the promise that they'd attain to eternal life, resurrection, and share in rule in the fully implemented Kingdom. At the transition to "the age to come" people who have died and been resurrected have eternal life in heaven and great reward. In addition, there is ongoing human history on earth.

It sounds to me like you are proposing that there is no ongoing human history on earth after the 2nd Coming. If this is your position, then I can see why you've come to that conclusion.

Doug

[psimmond]

I know that at least some commentaries say that "either in this age or in the [age] to come" was a common phrase used by Jews around the time of Christ to express something that couldn't change.

Maybe it's like the phrase "till hell freezes over" and shouldn't be taken literally.

[RICHinCHRIST]

I'm not seeing where the verses you provided challenge my point. In "this age" (at the time of the writing of the NT) there was no eternal life, resurrection, or fully implemented Kingdom. The gifts that the believers were given were a down payment and part of the promise that they'd attain to eternal life, resurrection, and share in rule in the fully implemented Kingdom. At the transition to "the age to come" people who have died and been resurrected have eternal life in heaven and great reward. In addition, there is ongoing human history on earth.

It sounds to me like you are proposing that there is no ongoing human history on earth after the 2nd Coming. If this is your position, then I can see why you've come to that conclusion.

Doug

I'm not really following you. According to my understanding, the resurrection occurs on the last day. The only ongoing human history that continues is on the new earth, not the version of our current world. At first I thought maybe you were a full preterist, but some of your comments seem to mean otherwise.

If the age to come means that individuals receive eternal life at the resurrection, then the implication of Jesus's statement sounds like there is potential forgiveness available after the resurrection, which occurs on the final day of human history, also known as the last day.

[steve7150]

I know that at least some commentaries say that "either in this age or in the [age] to come" was a common phrase used by Jews around the time of Christ to express something that couldn't change.











I do know that religious jews believe "the age to come" starts when the Messiah first comes, which to the Christian is Christ's second coming.

[psimmond]

It may refer to the second coming or some period after that, or as I mentioned before, it may be figurative speech.

The quoted material below is from John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible:

In short, the sense is, that the sin against the Holy Ghost never has forgiveness; it is not pardoned now, and consequently there will be no declaration of the pardon of it hereafter. The Jews use the phrase in the same sense (c); a certain sick man said to his son,

"give me water, and such certain food; but if not, I will not "forgive thee, neither in this world, nor in the world to come".''

That is, I will never forgive thee.

(c) Sepher Chasidim: num. 234.

[steve]

More than one explanation of this verse can be given by those who hold out a hope of restoration:

1) While most in hell will someday repent, there may be some (relatively few) who are indeed too recalcitrant ever to repent, and who will instead be annihilated.

It seems, though, that the wording Jesus used could have been better to suggest the idea.


2) If a person pays his full penalty in hell, and is then restored, then he was not forgiven. A criminal who is forgiven does not have to go to jail. If he is released after a jail term, this is not being forgiven, but it is paying his debt to society. Thus there may be those who never receive forgiveness, and must pay the full penalty for their sinful lives before being restored.

This is problematic (though perhaps not fatally so) in that it suggests the sinner can cover his own debt, and thus not require divine mercy. This suggests an economy that we evangelicals have been conditioned to find repulsive. How then would these people have benefited from what Christ did? On the other hand, I am not aware of any scripture that specifically precludes this.

3) To say that someone "will never be forgiven" (as per the idiom mentioned by psimmond) may be the actual import of the phraseology. But this does not preclude the idiom from being intended as a hyperbole—any more than when we say, "You will never learn!"

I can find no fatal flaws with this suggestion, though, of course, we could not affirm this with complete confidence.