Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof - New Leaven

c. Remarks on the passages in the Epistles that speak of it. Except in the Gospels, this sin
is not mentioned by name in the Bible. Thus the question arises, whether the passages
in Heb. 6:4-6; 10:26,27,29, and I John 5:16 also refer to it. Now it is quite evident that
they all speak of an unpardonable sin; and because Jesus says in Matt. 12:31, “Therefore
I say unto you, Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy
against the Spirit shall not be forgiven,” thereby indicating that there is but one
unpardonable sin, it is but reasonable to think that these passages refer to the same sin.
It should be noted, however, that Heb. 6 speaks of a specific form of this sin, such as
could only occur in the apostolic age, when the Spirit revealed itself in extraordinary
gifts and powers. The fact that this was not borne in mind, often led to the erroneous
opinion that this passage, with its unusually strong expressions, referred to such as
were actually regenerated by the Spirit of God. But Heb. 6:4-6, while speaking of
experiences that transcend those of the ordinary temporal faith, yet do not necessarily
testify to the presence of regenerating grace in the heart.
QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY. What objections are raised to the idea of the federal
headship of Adam? What Scriptural ground is there for the imputation of Adam’s sin to
his descendants? Was Placeus’ theory of mediate imputation in any way connected with
Amyraldus’ view of universal atonement? What objection does Dabney raise to the
doctrine of immediate imputation? Is the doctrine of inherited evil the same as the
doctrine of original sin, and if not, how do they differ? How do Pelagians, Semi-
Pelagians, and Arminians differ in their view of original sin? How does the doctrine of
original sin affect the doctrine of infant salvation? Does the Bible teach that one can be
lost purely as the result of orginal sin? What is the connection between the doctrine of
original sin and that of baptismal regeneration? What becomes of the doctrine of
original sin in modern liberal theology? How do you account for the denial of original
sin in Barthian theology? Can you name some additional classes of actual sins?
LITERATURE: Bavinck, Geref. Dogm. III, pp. 61-120; Kuyper, Dict. Dogm., De Peccato,
pp. 36-50, 119-144; Vos, Geref. Dogm. II, pp. 31-76; Hodge, Syst. Theol. II, pp. 192-308;
McPherson, Chr. Dogma, pp. 242-256; Dabney, Syst. and Polem. Theol., pp. 321-351; Litton,
Intro. to Dogm. Theol., pp. 136-174; Schmid, Doct. Theol. of the Ev. Luth. Ch., pp. 242-276;
Valentine, Chr. Theol. I, pp. 420-476; Pope, Chr. Theol. II, pp. 47-86; Raymond, Syst. Theol.
II, pp. 64-172; Wilmers, Handbook of the Chr. Religion, pp. 235-238; Mackintosh,
Christianity and Sin, cf. Index; Girardeau,The Will in its Theological Relations; Wiggers,
Augustinism and Pelagianism; Candlish, The Bibl. Doct. of Sin, pp. 90-128; Brunner, Man in
Revolt, pp. 114-166.
279