Since He is not at work in modern-day Pentecostal/Charismatic prophecy/tongues/etc., I'm not concerned that I've blasphemed Him.
How arrogant of you to presume to feign omniscience regarding the Spirit's work. You say that the Spirit is not at work among Charismatics and Pentecostals. This makes no sense at all in light of scripture. Millions of Charismatics have faith in Christ, believe that Christ died and rose from the dead. There is no scripture that says that people who do not agree with you on every point of doctrine do not have the Spirit at work in their lives. Scripture does not teach it. So how do you claim to know that the Holy Spirit is not at work in them? Do you claim an extra-scriptural 'revelation'?
Millions who believe in the gifts have faith in Christ, and multitudes who have converted from false religions to Christ are involved in churches that are labelled as Pentecostal and Charismatic. Many of the Christians who are persecuted for their beliefs in China and elsewhere would be classified as 'Charismatic.' And you say the Spirit is not at work in them? The Bible teaches that the Spirit convicts even the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment. So why would he not be at work among brethren simply because they actually believe the scriptures teaching regarding the gifts of the Spirit.
You are reckless with your words about the Spirit. You should not be careful not to allow your pride in your knowledge of spiritual things outweigh your fear of God. If you fear God, you should not try to take credit from the Spirit for His work.
[quote about him not saying blasphemers had to meet certain criteria]
It is true that you did not mention all of those things. You are, however, asserting that the blasphemer of the Spirit has to meet certain criteria that the Pharisees met in order to be guilty of the sin, when Christ said that 'whosoever' spoke a word against the Spirit would not be forgiven. The problem is that the scripture does not tell us the level of knowledge of the Pharisees. We do not know that they were consciously rejecting the truth. Should they have believed? Of course, but shouldn't any believer who sees or even hears about a true miracle believe it is true, or at least not reject it out of hand? If he believes the scriptures, he should at least be open to the possiblity that it may be true.
I can understand why some theologians want to argue that one must blaspheme with full knoweldge to be guilty. Perhaps they are trying to make this into the same sin that the author of Hebrews mentions in Hebrews 10 when he says 'for if we sin wilfully after we have knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins..." They may also want to put this into the category of the 'high handed' sins of the Old Testament for which there was no sacrifice (as opposed to the unwilful sins for which one could offer a sacrifice.) But we cannot sacrifice the truth of the words of the text to make it fit comfortably into our understanding of things. Christ said that whoever spoke a word against the Spirit would not be forgiven. He does not
Quote
Which is precisely why Pentecostals and Charismatics love to abuse cessationists with it! It's a trump card. As long as they claim that their "gifts" are from the Spirit, they can accuse us of the unforgiveable sin.
Honestly, I have scarcely ever seen or heard a Charismatic mention the unpardonable sin to a cessationist. Maybe Charismatics mention this verse to you because they see how reckless you are with your claims about the Holy Spirit and His works. The fact is, there is nothing in scripture that teaches that gifts did not continue. Cessationist claims are based on human reasoning rather than on scripture. Scripture teaches us to despise not prophesyings and where does scripture say anything at all about signs ceasing? I Corinthians 13 does not even mention the idea, and nor do the other passages under discussion.
This is not a 'trump card' by the way. This is not a game. Perhaps you see it as one, and that may be the reason why you are so reckless regarding your broad sweeping conclusions about the Spirit. It is a logical conclusion based on the text of scriptures, and it is also consistent with early church interpretation of the unpardonable sin.
Quote
If we have committed the unforgiveable sin by attributing the modern-day manifestations of the sign gifts to over-active imaginations and devilish lies, you have no reason any longer to continue with us here. However, if we indeed have the Spirit, we need have no fear of blaspheming Him.
This is a reckless attitude toward the things of God. It reminds me of a misinterpretation of Predestination whereby someone thinks if he is predestined, God will just send him to heaven, and automatically make him obey the commands of God. He does not have to concern Himself with obedience, and just lives like the Devil. Here you reason that if you have the Spirit, you can't blaspheme anyway. What is the point of putting the warning in Matthew 12 and elsewhere if there were no way one could blaspheme the Spirit. The Bible tells us 'to pay the most earnest heed' in regard to our obedience to the Spirit. The idea that you can't sin against the Spirit, or if you can you are damned anyway is a dangerous attitude. You should be careful to obey God on this issue. Isn't that the attitude we should expect of the saints that persevere?
