14. But one may say, See I have admitted and understood that where the word “blasphemy” is used, and neither all, nor some certain blasphemy expressed, it may be understood either of all, or of some certain blasphemy, but not necessarily of all; but again if it be not understood of some, that that which is said would be untrue: so again if it is not said every or some certain word, it is not necessary that every word should be understood, but unless some word be understood, in no way can what is said be true. But when we read, “He that shall blaspheme,” how can I understand any certain blasphemy, when the word “blasphemy” is not used, or any certain word, when the word “word” is not used, but it seems to be said as it were generally, “He that shall blaspheme.” To this objection I reply thus. If it were said in this passage also, “He that shall blaspheme with any kind of blasphemy whatever against the Holy Ghost,” there would be no reason why we should think that some particular blasphemy was to be sought for, when we ought rather to understand all blasphemy; but because all blasphemy could not be meant, lest the hope of forgiveness in case of their amendment should be taken away from heathens, and Jews, and heretics, and all kinds of men, who by their divers errors and contradictions blaspheme against the Holy Ghost; it remains without a doubt, that in the passage where it is written, “He that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness,” he must be meant, not who hath in any way whatever blasphemed; but he who hath blasphemed in such a particular way, that he can never be pardoned.