B L A 



B L A 



It is mentioned, ana imply fiicli an opp<)fition as is both in. 

 tentional and malevolent. This could not have been the 

 cafe with refpc£l to all who difbclieved the miflion of 

 Jefus, and even deciitd his miracles ; many of whom, we 

 have reafon to think, were afterwards converted by the 

 apoftles. 



The learned Grotius, in order to mollify the feverity of 

 the fentence denounced againll this fin, futrgefts, that what 

 our l^oid cxprefles abfolutely, mnft be und^rftood compara- 

 tively : and tliat he only dcfigned to intimate, that it i:; very 

 difficult to obtain the pardon of this fin, bat not that it will 

 admit of no forgivenefs. But our Saviour here fays ex- 

 prefsly of this lin, whatever it was, both negatively, that it 

 {hall never be forgiven, and affirmatively, that the perfon 

 guilty of it firall be obnoxious to eternal judgment, confirm- 

 ing the wh(ilc v.ith an alieveration. Dr. Waterlaud (lee his 

 Scrm. vol. li. N^ 9. p. 177 — 18^.) feems to incline to Gro- 

 tins's opinion ; alleging that a^'vraloy figniiies only exceed- 

 ingly difficult. Dr. fianiniond comments upon the words 

 with obfcrving, that tlii^ fin (liall not be pardoned, but upon 

 a particular repentance ; but this is true of every fin as well 

 as of the blafphemy againft the Holy Ghoft. Some have 

 made this crime confilt in final impcnitency, becaufe that is 

 unpardonable ; but it is not eafy to affign a reafon why this 

 fhould be called the fin againlt the Holy Ghofi. Others 

 have reprefciited it as, in its fpecific nature, a wilful and 

 obltinate oppofition to the truth ; others again as a mali- 

 cious cppofition to the truth, on the part of thofe who 

 know and are convinced that it is the truth ; whilll fomc 

 have fuppofcd it to confift in a renunciation of the truth for 

 fear of luffering, which made Francis Spira think that he 

 had committed this fin. Mr. Wakefield, in his Notes on the 

 Tranfiation of the Gofpel of St. Matthew, p. 17S, is of 

 opinion, that what is meant by the blafphemy of the Spirit 

 appears from the context to be perverfely refifiirg and be- 

 lying with contumacy, againft plain and fatisfaitory evi- 

 dence, the operation and interference of the holy fpirit of 

 God ; and he thinks, that ihofe men who rejeft the Chrif- 

 tian revelation, without contemplating its claims with dili- 

 gence, candour, and exaftnefs, upon a precipitate prclump- 

 tion of its f.ilfchood ; and thofe, who rtfufe their aficnt to 

 that degree of m.oral evidence, of which alone thefe fubjefls 

 are capable, and which they would think fiifficiently (atis- 

 faftory in other cafes, and in the ordinary occurrences of life, 

 are as much guilty of the fin of blafphemy in our times, as 

 thofe cavilling and hypocritical Pharifees were in the davs of 

 Chrift. 



Dr. Tillotfon (vol. i. fcrm.xvii.) maintains, that this fin 

 of which the Pharifees were guilty coi'fifl:ed in malicioufiy 

 attributing the miraculous operations which Chrill performed 

 by the power of the Holy Gholl to the devil. This feiife is 

 adopted by billiop Pearce, in his Commentary on the four 

 Evangelifts, vol. i. p. 85. But Dr. Whitbv, with greater 

 probability, refers it to the difpenfation of the Holy Ghoft, 

 which commenced after our I^ord's rcfurrettion and afcen- 

 fion ; and thufe were guilty of the crime, who perfifted in 

 their unbelief, and blalpliemed the Holy Ghoft, reprelenting 

 him as an evil fpirit. The crime was unpardonable, becaule 

 it implied a wilful oppofition to the laft and moll powerful 

 evidence which God would vouchfafe to mankind, and pre- 

 cluded the poffibility of a recovery to faith and repentance. 

 Whitby's Fourth Appendix to the Gofpel of St. iSlatthew, 

 ill his Paraphrafe, vol.i. p. 2P9. 



Of this fin, it is faid, it fhall not be forgiven, either in this 

 world or in that which is to come. With regard to the 

 meaning of this expreffion, it is obferved both by Lightfoot 

 (Hor. Hcb.) ."Uid by Grotius (inloc), that througha fond 



imagination of the final happinefs of all the feed of Abra- 

 ham, the Jews fuppofed, there were fome fins that had not 

 been forgiven here, which would be expiated by death, and be 

 forgiven after it ; and that our Lord defigncd by this cx- 

 preffion to alTure them, that there was no forgivenefs for 

 thofe who Hiould be guilty of this fin, cither before or after 

 death, and that their expectations of forgivenefs then would 

 ■ prove no other than a deceitful dream. Dr. "Whitby, how- 

 ever, has clearly ihewn.that this was uled as a proverbial ex- 

 preffion, and that it only fignilied, " a thing {hould never 

 be," when it was faid, " It (hall not be, either in this world, 

 or in the world to come." Others, however, among whom 

 we may reckon biHiop Pearce and Mr. AVakefield, have 

 thought that the expreffions of '• this world," and " the 

 world to come," denote the Jewilh and the Chriflian difpen- 

 fatiors. 'O aiay, and i ivy aii'v, fay thefe writers, fignity in 

 the New Tellament the Jevvifh age or difpenfation, which 

 continued till the annihilation of the Jevvilh polity, civil and 

 ecclefiaftical, by the dellruftion of Jerulalem under Titus; 

 and iJ.iM.iiv Mut, or the future age, denoted the Chriftian 

 difpcnlation. Bilhop Pearce adds, that under the Jcwifh 

 law, there was no forgivenels for wilful and prefumptuous 

 fins; concerning which he refers to Numb. xv. 30, 31. xxxv. 

 31. Lev. XX. 10. and 1 Sam. ii. 25. With regard to the age to 

 come, or the Chriftian difpenfation, the bifhop obferves, that 

 m forgivenefs could be expedled forfuch finncrs as the Pha- 

 rifees were ; becaufe, when they blafphemed the Spirit of 

 God, by which Jefns wrought his miracles, they rejefted the 

 only means of forgivenefs, which was the merit ol his death 

 applied to men by faith, and which under Chriilianity was 

 the only facrifice that could atone for fuch a fin ; in thi» 

 fenfe, as things then flood with them, their fin was an un- 

 pardonable one. But, he adds, it is not to be concluded 

 from I'.ence, that, if they repented of this blafpiiemy, they 

 could not obtain forgivenefs. Mr. Wakefield obferves, that 

 the unreferved affirmation in Matt. xii. 32. muft be in- 

 terpreted, as well as the preceding verfe, with confidcrable 

 qualification. Oux K^sSno-slai, " will not be forgiven him," 

 mnft fignity, fays this writer, " will not /ri7<^:'/y be forgiven— . 

 will not be eltecmed a common and iicM/a/ fault," agreeably to 

 the eaftern mode of expicffion, which conft-intly requires 

 fuch limitation. Accordingly he thus gives tlie general 

 fenfe of this verfe. " Offences of the moft heinous nature, 

 even reproach and injuftice againft the anoir.ted prophet of 

 God, may more readily find pardon, than contumacious blaf- 

 phemy of the Holy Spirit." This aggravated fin, the rc- 

 lult of obftinaey, depravity, and malice in the extreme, vi'ill 

 have no title to forgivenefs, even from the clemency and 

 mercy of the Chriftian revelation, a revelation of pardon and 

 peace, in the iulleft feiiie, and to the whole race of man. 

 .See Heb. vi. 4 — 7." Neverthelefs, " will not any fins be 

 pardoned on fincere repentance, and ftcdfaft purpofcs of 

 amendment, underthat conioling difpenfation, which breathej 

 nothing but reconciliation and forgivenels — no'thing but 

 favour, m.ercv, and peace, from God our Father, and our 

 Lord Jefus Chrift ?" 



BL.ASQUES IsI..^^•D, in Geography, lies on the weft 

 coaft of Newfoundland, in about 47° 30' N. lat. 



BL ASS-ENT, in Qin'uhology. The common wild duck is 



calletl bv this name in the vicinity of the lake of Conftance. 



liLASSENTl'2, [Frifch. av.) a name lynonymons with 



antis Penelope of Linnxus, and common icigeon of F^nglilh 



writers. 



BLAST, flatus, in the Jlli/ildiy jirt, a fudden compreffion 

 of the air, caufed by the difchargeof the bullet out of a great 

 gun. The blaft fometimes throws down part of the cmbra- 

 iures of the wall. 



4A 2 Bl.\st 



